Modsu: Welcome to the 2nd week of Evidence in the classroom. It would be really useful if we could introduce ourselves – share a little bit about our research or our teaching background, or other areas of interest 🙂
Courtney: Hi Everyone, I’m Courtney – currently a postdoctoral researcher in the US. I study numeracy and mathematics learning, and have education research and math teaching experience. I focus on adolescents and young adults. I’ve taught middle school, high school, and college math content.
abena baiden: Good evening. I started teaching in EFL, then in England, Malaysia and Vietnam. On a break at the moment, and returning to Asia later this year. Studying Psychology in prep for conversion course (MSc) in September. Find ed neuroscience fascinating. Currently an English and Drama teacher but also do a lot of Digital Literacy.
Carolina: Hello, my name is Carolina and I’m a lecturer in Psychology at the University of Dundee. In my research I focus in learning and memory. Thus, I’m a Cognitive Psychologist. I apply findings from cognitive psychology to education to improve learning and teaching. I’m also part of the scholarly outreach project The Learning Scientists and recently have founded the Teaching Innovation and Learning Enhancement (TILE) network at the University of Dundee: https://learningspaces.dundee.ac.uk/tile/
Brian: Hi everyone. I’m happy to answer questions on typical and atypical maths learning, on the brain, and on genetics.
MrsTulloch: I am a science teacher in Shetland. I have been doing a couple of action research tasks in school although pretty rusty at research.
Modsu: That sounds really interesting. What was the focus of the action research tasks?
MrsTulloch: Just been giving feedback using iPads, sending a video and airdropping to pupils at the start of the following lesson, I got positive feedback from pupils – they actually listened to it and responded, much better than written feedback!
Modsu: Great! Has anyone seen any research findings that they’ve found really surprising or unexpected, or super-interesting recently?
abena baiden: I found the research on the role of forgetting in long-term memory really interesting. I’m getting on and always worried about my capacity to remember things long-term (as well as for my students) so very interested.
Modsu: I think memory is really interesting. Is there anything in particular that you apply from research with your students?
abena baiden: Interleaving and spaced practice, but I find it’s really hard to plan it systematically without collaboration.
Carolina: How do you apply spaced practice?
abena baiden: Typically at the start of – or during – a longer lesson. I’ll review content from the recent and far past and try to connect it with the current focus, though it isn’t always possible. It can be pretty random, which is something I’d like to change.
Carolina: How do you review previous content?
abena baiden: It depends. Could be through a quiz, a performance task, a game (like Kahoot tho it’s falling out of favour with me because of the time element), a mindmap of all you can remember etc. I’m aware it could be better, but I need to work with others to ensure it’s more robust. I hope I have that opportunity in the future.
Carolina: I think one relatively surprising finding of a recent study was that lecture recordings do not affect lecture attendance. I blogged about it here: http://www.learningscientists.org/blog/2017/12/07-1
abena baiden: Carolina, did you see the research on how providing recordings resulted in a drop in attainment in one university? Can’t remember the name but sure it was in the UK, and recent…
Carolina: That study I blogged about was conducted with multiple year groups and in an authentic educational setting. Another interesting finding is that the mere presence (sight) of your cellphone can decrease your cognitive capacity – even if it is turned off: http://www.learningscientists.org/blog/2017/10/12-1
abena baiden: Carolina – not hard to believe at all!
Carolina: Follow up research is needed to understand the exact mechanisms, but it is a pretty important finding – particularly for classroom instruction.
abena baiden: As a parent, how can I best support my children’s math development? Is there a particular resource I could refer to? One is in primary and the other starting secondary (8 and 11).
Courtney: Some strategies for helping children at math are keeping a positive attitude toward the material (even more advance/difficult material) and activating prior knowledge that might relate to the current topic. For example, it could be asking what a student knows already about a math concept or related concept.
Mrs Tulloch: OK, so the more we are strengthening the white matter (connections in the brain) the better they will remember?! Is that true for everyone?
Courtney: In terms of prior knowledge, I think of it as helping students see connections across math problems and concepts.
Paula: In our intervention work we encourage the activation and sharing of prior knowledge to support comprehension.
abena baiden: I do this (APK) at the start of topics and try to do throughout units when introducing new concepts. Is there hard evidence to suggest it really is worthwhile? It’s one that I picked up before understanding the implications of research and evidence.
Paula: The National Reading Panel includes evidence relating to activating prior knowledge to support comprehension https://www1.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/ch4-II.pdf
abena baiden: My kids are quite good at math, but I’ve heard some math teachers (esp those that have done further study) say it is being taught ‘wrong’ and that’s why it’s so inaccessible to many. I’d like to make sure they are learning concepts in the best way. However, I’m not sure if that means directing them to something like Khan or Bitesize is best when they do struggle.
Courtney: That’s very interesting. What do teachers say is the ‘wrong way’?
abena baiden: As an English teacher, I honestly have no idea. It’s usually secondary teachers and I came across this (https://goo.gl/oQbh5r) recently too which made me wonder what the ‘secret’ is.
Courtney: I would have to look a bit more closely at the content of the materials in the link you sent re: division. But at first glance I am a bit skeptical. It may be helpful to think about multiple ways to do math problems, rather than one best way. There is some literature on developing students’ ability to use multiple strategies, and develop flexibility. That is, to choose the best strategy for a problem depending on the problem characteristics.
abena baiden: Unfortunately, I learned math one way so can’t always see the answer. I also worry about confusing my explanations with the teachers’. They seem to do division (for example) differently than the way I was taught.
Brian: It depends on the stage your kids are at and the concepts they are learning. I’m depressed that the current government is focussed on rote learning. The best practice here and in Singapore focuses on understanding.
abena baiden: Ah Singapore – well you certainly have a rep for doing it the ‘right’ way! You don’t believe rote learning has any role? What about times tables?
Brian: Absolutely not. You learn 3×6 and 6×3 as separate facts, not their relationship. That means you miss the chance to get an early understanding of the commutativity of multiplication. Also tables to 10 means learning 81 separate facts!
abena baiden: What’s a better way? Do you have any links?
Brian: In China they don’t learn 1x anything, as I did, and once the learn 6×3 in the 3 times table, they don’t learn it again in 6x table, which starts with 6×6. Only 36 facts to learn, and commutativity comes free!
Courtney: I wonder if it’s helpful to think about fluency with times tables versus how fluency is achieved. For instance, simple memorization without conceptual understanding is problematic, as in Brian’s example.
abena baiden: Can you expand a bit on that? I’m not sure I understand, though I agree that conceptual understanding is essential.
abena baiden: Do you have suggestions for other ways to do spaced practice?
Carolina: Spaced practice works great through homework.
abena baiden: Thanks. I saw that’s what Michaela (@mcsbrent) do along with their knowledge organisers. I’d like to try it.
Paula: We use distributed practice approach in our reading and language interventions. We tend to have short 5-7 minute activities spaced over three or four sessions a week.
abena baiden: What kind of activities do you do? And is it for all students? One to one?
Paula: We use elements of reciprocal teaching, and robust vocabulary instruction. Also work on narrative, inferencing, figurative language and metacognitive strategies. We run some sessions one to one and others with pairs of pupils. It is a Wave 2 catch up intervention approach.
abena baiden: Sounds really interesting. Do any of your team blog about it?
Paula: Not currently blogging about it. We have written about it in our book. If we manage to get more funding then hope to develop a stronger web presence. https://www.wiley.com/en-gb/Developing+Reading+Comprehension-p-9781118606759
Carolina: I use distributed practice in the 4 quizzes that students need to do during a semester. I add questions from topics that were taught weeks earlier.
Carolina: What are the biggest challenges in applying research findings to teaching practice?
abena baiden: Feeling like you’re using the kids as guinea pigs for the latest fad. But with sites like this and the learningscientists, it’s easier now to distinguish between ‘fad’ and something that might actually work.
Carolina: Exactly. Plus, you are genuinely interested in improving their performance and learning.
abena baiden: Thanks. From now on, I should start collating evidence for as much as I can when it comes to my classroom practices, and if I can’t find any – seriously question it.
MrsTulloch: Is there a key to learning the skill of blending letter sounds to make a word? My son, who is 5 can blend really well, but my niece who is also 5 cannot blend at all!?
Paula: Blending is cognitively demanding and can be challenging – we tend to recommend the Sound Linkage materials to assess and support specific phonological skills.
abena baiden: Do you agree with Hattie’s ‘hinge point’ of 0.4 as an effect size to pay attention to? Are there any caveats to consider in this?
Courtney: I’ve never heard of this – is there an easy reference to share?
abena baiden: See the first paragraph here: https://goo.gl/dPuIx3
Carolina: Depending on the changes you wish to see, you would not want to settle for an effect size of d = .4…if you want to see bigger changes, you may want to look at strategies with larger effect sizes.
abena baiden: But you wouldn’t want to settle for anything *less* as a general rule?
Carolina: It is the first time I’ve heard about this rule of thumb. I’m sure Hattie has his reasons why he suggested this and not – say – .5, but I don’t know what the reasons are.
Courtney: It seems restrictive to me to only pay attention to effect sized of .4 or greater.
Carolina: Yes, and rules of thumbs sometimes uninvite (is that a word?) criticial reflection.
abena baiden: Fair point!
Courtney: And by my (very quick) read, it seems Hattie determined this hinge point because it was the average effect size across a large set of intervention studies.
Carolina: That’s a bit unsatisfying.
Courtney: So I guess that “what works best in education” (which was the question Hattie was trying to answer) really means what is better than average. That’s not good/bad necessarily, just how he chose to address the question.
Carolina: Yes, and that is why it is important to think about how this rule of thumb came about. Thanks for checking.
abena baiden: But he does make the important point that almost any intervention will have a positive effect, so I liked the idea there was a point at which you could say something was worth the time, effort and cost.
Carolina: “But he does make the important point that almost any intervention will have a positive effect,” Ehm, no. I would never ever sign this statement. This statement is so general and does not seem to allow for an exception, that it must be scientifically wrong.
abena baiden: This is where it becomes *really* challenging as a teacher to know where to put your trust. ‘Almost’ – he does include interventions that have negative effects, but seems to say that the vast majority of initiatives (traditionally tried) have a positive effect. Would you disagree?
Courtney: One thing that’s tricky about this statement is whether we’re considering only published studies. Studies that do not find an effect may not get published, creating a bias.
Carolina: Yes, this is a huge problem indeed. Only today I answered a question here on the platform about this: /learning-zone/2018/03/12/how-common-is-it-for-researchers-to-replicate-their-own-work/
abena baiden: I suspect he is indeed including only published studies, but would have to go back and re-check.
Carolina: “This is where it becomes *really* challenging as a teacher to know where to put your trust.” I know, but that’s why it is good to have a group like The Learning Scientists or other researchers who are doing outreach. You can ask them and they can share their knowledge.
Brian: There’s controversy about his meta-analytic methods. Anyway, what works well on average, may be detrimental to a substantial minority.
abena baiden: Thanks for pointing that out. This is why I’m trying to understand research methods, so I can be more critical. Still a work in progress.
alice-bell: Didn’t Hattie’s research base have a very large sample size over all the studies. Surely this would change the most appropriate effect size?
alice-bell: Hi, I was interested in you mentioning Singapore. I teach Maths at a sixth form college and we are doing loads on all the cognitive stuff but how does this fit alongside the mastery techniques? Have you seen this working anywhere?
Brian: I am currently working with three schools that use Maths Mastery. The outcomes couldn’t be more different between schools. Cognitive tests – WM or IQ – are a relatively poor guide to attainment in the early years. The ability to subitize is a better predictor. We’re keen on using our own adaptive digital games to promote understanding of basic arithmetic. Early days, but they seem to work for Year 1s, esp kids who are struggling.
alice-bell: Is Maths Mastery less well evidenced by research currently then? Could it be another “fad”? It is not very prevalent in my sector (yet).
Brian: Maths mastery: small effect. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/mathematics-mastery/ Big sample in the RCT, so a small effect could be significant. Small effect means that lots of kids are not helped by it. Interesting to find out why not.
MrsTulloch: What are the most effective ways you have seen of assessing and capturing understanding in children?
abena baiden: Great question. I wonder if it is at all possible without a long-term view.
MrsTulloch: Do you just keep varying it until you find a way that suits an individual pupil and then continue on with that method for that child or should we look for multiple ways of assessing each child?
abena baiden: I’d say multiple ways, and in my area we also want transferability. I’d also say I don’t think it’s sustainable to explore multiple ways for each individual student unless working in a team. Teacher burnout.
Paula: With regards assessing understanding I think using multiple methods is key. Providing pupils with different ways to express their understanding is important. Very often standardised tests rely on a oral response. I think with comprehension there is the added challenge of determining a ‘correct’ interpretation – as potentially all interpretations are valid.
MrsTulloch: Yes the ‘correct’ interpretation is what will get them a pass in an exam, whereas the ‘incorrect’ interpretation as seen by the marking team will mean they will fail – not exactly fair I guess.
Paula: When we support comprehension skills we encourage pupils to consider multiple perspectives, interpretations and viewpoints – however some forms of assessment the goal is the ‘correct’ interpretation (that of the test author).
abena baiden: Is there any leeway in the marking? Can markers accept a response if it’s well supported for example?
Modsu: Thanks everyone – hope you found it an interesting and useful discussion. If you have any further questions that haven’t been answered this evening, do feel free to add them to the ‘Ask’ tab.Join us next week for the next live chat!
Carolina: I hope it was a bit helpful for the teachers!
abena baiden: Thanks. It’s always helpful to tap into the experts, even if it leaves me with more questions. Good learning!