Change is opportunity, right?
But what enables people to take advantage, as opposed to being swept aside – as sadly some will, in the coming technological storm?
We focus on 21st Century Skills – and rightly so. But let us not forget to focus on even more fundamental, vital prerequisites; those things that enable and empower: namely a sense of place, a sense of belonging and a sense of self. In that vein, I recommend a recent blog post by Professor Kathryn Riley to you. Her work shines an important light on this essential topic.
When children come up with the right answer, is it because they actually understand / comprehend the reasons why their answer is right? Do the highest scoring students actually understand the concepts behind their success?
Frequently not, it turns out. When asked “could you light a bulb with a battery and one wire?”, even at some of our most esteemed STEM graduates, from MIT and Harvard revealed some surprising cognitive dissonance.
In this series of online documentaries, (entitled Minds of our Own) researchers from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics delve in to the thinking behind students answers. This thinking is often erroneous, with odd concepts constructed to make sense of learners’ experienced worlds. Such thinking is tenacious and learners are heavily invested in not adapting… and learning environments may not facilitate such adaption. This is true for even the highest scoring pupils… and highlights deficiencies in learning experiences.
This underscores the need for pupils to think about thinking, and for learning experiences to expose these thought processes – whether it be through inquiry learning, dialogue, problem based learning or moderated peer instruction
With over 14 million views, Shawn Achor is on to something – he’s really caught people’s attention.
Put simply, he turns the happiness paradigm on it’s head. Instead of success making us happy, he shows how happiness makes us successful.
The good news is that there are easy ways to build and strengthen happiness.
Why is it that complex things – like learning to drive a car – can be much easier and quicker to manage than, say learning a vocabulary in a foreign language?
It’s because the brain has different memory systems.
Our brains weren’t designed to remember vast quantities of factual knowledge. Hard wiring this knowledge is tough work – but, understanding how our brain’s memory systems work, can make things easier.
In one year, Josh Foer became a memory champion – His TED talk explains how he used ancient methods from early Greek times. On an earlier project, he learnt enough of a rare African language in 22 hours to converse and make himself understood.
Some of these principals are applicable across many subjects. A core concept is that of spaced repetition. If we revisit knowledge, it’s the equivalent of putting our brain through a gym workout. Get the timing right and the growth gains are impressive. This was first realised by a Dr Ebbinghaus – who observed the benefits of correctly spaced repetition – get it right and your memory lasts longer and fades more slowly.
But does this mean we should relentlessly be copying out our notes, again and again, time after time?
No – learning that’s easy, isn’t really learning. There’s little need to practice things that come effortlessly. The challenge is to focus learning on things that are difficult. A little bit like tennis practice. At the end of both, you should feel a satisfying sense of exhaustion!
Project based learning is learning by:
- Improving and refining
- Experimentation and Inquiry
Despite this type of learning going back centuries, it doesn’t seem particularly in vogue. Instead we have a system which is accused of being too much ‘work today’, ‘jam tomorrow’ … Has learning fallen in to a ‘linear trap’?
Take Bloom’s Taxonomy. No one would sensibly suggest it’s components were bad or harmful. However, why should learning only progress up through these stages? Supporters of PBL say this is an inefficient way to learn and real learning is far messier than this. Learning by a mixture of thinking and making, collaborating and experimenting, designing and theorising – applied to real world problems is said to lead to better understanding, long term retention and motivation. As pupils iteratively grapple with messy reality, their knowledge, comprehension and understanding grows too.
This tends to match what the teenage polyglots say about learning languages
One group of schools in the UK have set themselves up along these methods. They are called Studio Schools.
What does this mean for our learning? Should we better just roll up our sleaves and get stuck in? That’s what Tim Doner says:
What does it mean for you?
Peer Instruction has been getting rave reviews. Eric Mazur, a Harvard Professor of Physics, holds that learning proceeds at (up to) triple it’s normal rate! And, with very little input from him… he’s even known students to feel it unfair that they’re doing all the work.
How does it work?
- Students must do prep work before the their lesson
- There is a short opening plenary of 5 mins or so
- A probing ‘concept’ question is asked by the teacher
- Students must think on this by themselves
- After thinking, students then vote on the right answer – showing a distribution of responses – perhaps using a PRS or something like plickers. The teacher does not give any indication which answer is correct.
- Now students can see the distribution of responses, and must next discuss – trying to convince each other.
- Finally and after discussion, students vote again.
Something to get you thinking: oddly enough, classes typically arrive at the right answer – why might that be?
Does it help learning? When done correctly, repeated studies have shown a large effect size equal to moving your GCSE grade up an entire grade – e.g. from an A to an A*. Some studies show even greater gains.
But better than exam results, Professor Mazur has show many other benefits too. Communicating complex ideas, working in teams, developing flexibility in thinking and also a deep understanding of complex theories. Moreover, it’s fun.
For more information: https://blog.peerinstruction.net/
Singapore, Australia, Shanghai, Korea, Finland and Ontario – What do top performing education systems all have in common? One thing really stands out. One thing which would be easily transplanted, at almost no cost. It is the power of ‘Not Yet’ as Carole Dweck calls it… a pervasive belief that failure is not permanent and that success comes with effort.
In her ground breaking research she finds that young people respond to failure in two ways:
- some become demoralised, give up, shift blame, cheat, or worse
- others learn from their mistake, redouble their efforts and make progress
It shows in their brain scans:
source: Moser et al. (2011: 1487)
But can we cultivate a growth mindset? YES. A large number of studies have now shown the positive impact of:
- Process Praise: praising effort, diligence and similar qualities and skills (not actual results)
- Use the word “yet”
- Teach ‘brainology’ – an understanding of how neurological networks grow and respond to experiences, stressors and growth mindsets. Redefine ‘effort’ and ‘difficulty’.
Fascinatingly, Dweck found a growth mindset enabled impoverished pupils to overcome disadvantage with highly unexpected results.
Her talk is an exceptionally good use of 10 minutes.
Jason S. Moser, Hans S. Schroder, Carrie Heeter, Tim P. Moran and Yu-Hao Lee (2011). Mind Your Errors : Evidence for a Neural Mechanism Linking Growth Mind-Set to Adaptive Posterror Adjustments. Psychological Science 2011 22: 1484