Like everyone else at Research ED Auckland #rEDauck yesterday, I was swept up and inspired by the presentations and conversations. Here are the patterns/themes I for one noticed, in no particular order.
I'm pleased to be spending my Saturday at the #rEDAuck Conference thinking about how we can become a more evidence-informed teaching profession with @tombennett71 and about 150 others pic.twitter.com/KO4swYGUFW— Jay allnutt (@MrJayall) June 1, 2018
1. Resentment toward the Ministry of Education for seemingly forcing open-plan 'Modern Learning Environments' on schools. (Reading further, the MoE denies it is 'pushing' MLEs.) And more generally for 'implementing policies not based on high quality evidence'.
Key points heard include:
2. Not enough management expertise among school leaders, as teachers rise through the ranks to become managers.
3. Bring back expert knowledge and overlearning/automaticity.
4. Don't be afraid of measuring how students are going.
- Is there a research base to support pouring so much money into these? (After a quick search, I can't find any research base cited on the MoE website about these.) If not, are children in MLE schools being treated as guinea pigs?
- The effectiveness of MLEs could plausibly come down to how teachers use them - so what evidence gathering has been done to support teachers to use these spaces?
- (In the meantime, press reports re MLEs are talking about some teachers saying they are struggling in MLEs, and there appears to be push-back by some schools, unions and parents.)
Real anger from several people at #rEDauck re the MoE's rush to Modern Learning Environments. Cited by speakers as example of how NOT to do evidence-based policy.— Adam Jang-Jones (@adamjangjones) June 2, 2018
2. Not enough management expertise among school leaders, as teachers rise through the ranks to become managers. - School leaders need to champion research-informed practice. (Or teachers need to mobilise to push leaders toward this point.)
- To deal with behaviour issues and 'optimise' student behaviours for learning, you need a system - clear and agreed processes - that everyone follows. Creating a Culture (right) is recommended.
- Get your skills and processes in place first.
3. Bring back expert knowledge and overlearning/automaticity.
- Recognise that teachers know more about their area of expertise than the students.
- Leaving children to work in self-directed groups or explore self-selected topics is failing to teach most children, especially those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds or most limited experiences.
- Some knowledge needs to be practised and revisited to the point it is stored in long-term memory. Only then can it be retrieved quickly to help solve more-complex or different-context problems later on.
Knowledge in the curriculum should not be based on student experience, it should take them beyond their experience - Elizabeth Rata #rEdAuck— Jennifer Buckingham (@buckingham_j) June 2, 2018
‘Knowledge is not at odds with creativity, it enables creativity.’ #rEDAuck pic.twitter.com/vmDF0zWc42— Peter Sherwin (@petesherwin) June 2, 2018
4. Don't be afraid of measuring how students are going.
- Celebrate progress (as well as achievement). A 70% mark for one student might represent slow progress but for another a huge leap.
- There are so many ways to effectively check students have understood and are learning.
- Teaching isn't about making an impact, but the maximum possible impact. (cf, John Hattie's work)
‘We want 80% of hands up. Less than that, and you have to re-teach it.’ #rEDAuck— Peter Sherwin (@petesherwin) June 2, 2018
Watching @ta_hughson and @sonya_NZ talk plenty of sense about assessment #rEdAuck - the future is safe in their hands.— Benjamin Evans (@thingsbehindsun) June 2, 2018
5. Why on earth aren't all teachers already using evidence-informed practices? How can we bridge the research-practice divide before we fail more students?
- Why are so-called 'Learning Styles' still a thing? There was never any evidence for them.
- Take the basics of teaching a child to read in English, one of the most widely researched topics in Education: few NZ teachers appear to be using what the research tells us works best (and which has been mandatory in the UK since 2007).
Standing room only at @buckingham_j talk on phonics and the evidence on effective reading instruction #rEDauck pic.twitter.com/ZYYiRvQbuU— John Walker (@SWLiteracy) June 2, 2018
So who are the criminals who are still use Learning Styles?? And have you or anyone else who debunks them actually looked at the research? Learning preferences exist (fact), teaching to learning styles is not supported by evidence that it makes any difference to learning outcomes. So learning styles per se are not the bad guy. Just saying.
ReplyDeleteKia ora, Cindy. Firstly to clarify: the above is almost wholly a summary of themes I heard at several times at the Research ED conference, in the tone expressed.
ReplyDeleteThat said, if you are interested in exploring the research on this, the only rigorous meta-analysis of 'learning styles' methods is the work of four researchers led by Frank Coffield in the mid 2000s. You can read some of this here: http://vital.new.voced.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/ngv:12401/SOURCE2 .
Coffield gives a more readable summary of his work and the views it led him to here: http://www.learnersfirst.net/private/wp-content/uploads/Opinion-Piece-Learning-styles-time-to-move-on-Coffield.pdf
Also, this is the most recent research I've seen on the topic and the methods appear sound: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ase.1777
Best regards.