Effective teaching practices: a key to efficiecy in education

Beograd, 14. februar, 2009

Tinde Kovač-Cerović 1

Preliminary remarks 1.School

School networkMaintenance

Where the action is

National level

Municipal level

School level

Curriculum, textbooks, teachers, evaluationFinances, management

How big an action?

• Salaries: 96% of the education budget

Hours in school annually:• Students’ time (in Serbia): 1 million students x 9 months x

24 days x 5 hours = 1.080.000.000 hours• Teachers’ time (in Serbia): 100.000 x 9 months x 80 hours

= 72.000.000 hours

How is all this time spent?

What kind of action?

Place of human interaction:

Teacher/studentStudent/studentTeacher/teacherTeacher/parentParent/parent

Place of intimatesocial experience:

– Learning – Deep understanding– Creativity – Respect – Values

Place of development of the Self-concept:

Self-regulationSelf-efficacySelf-esteem Self-description/attribution

All depend on thequality of IA in school

4

Preliminary remarks 2. Type of investment in human resources

Known obstacles for education policymaking

1. Enormous system of human interactions (roles, negotiations, human nature, conflicting interests)

2. Lay theories of education based on personal experiences

3. Features of human development and learning are not immediately observable

= an inert system (2-3 yrs reaction time)= postponed effects of new initiatives (12-15 yrs)

= return of investment 20-30 yrs(what on earth were we doing in the 1980’s? 1990’s? 2000’s?)

Attended ...

Listened ...

Heard ...

Understood ...

Remembered ...

Will apply ...

Preliminary remarks 3. Learning as a rare event

Due to 1 + 2 + 3 “effective teaching practices” are not rethorics but an important component of efficiency in education.

In order not to become rethorics research-based evidence is crutial.

Due to 1 + 2 + 3 both schools and teachers need guidance from empirical evidence

Overview

• 4 topics: how to ensure for learning to become more frequent?– Teaching strategies of learning and motivation

motivacija– Assessment and feedback– Expectations – Teaching methods

• Reflected in education research

8

Research

• “effective teaching”, • + 100 x 10 x 12 studies each year• + meta-analyses (Johnson and Johnson, 1983, 2000) • + meta-meta-analyses (Hattie, 2007, Earli, on 750+

meta-analyses, 50,000 studies, and 200+ million students)

Main factors

Percentage of Achievement Variance

StudentsTeachers

HomePeers

Schools Principal

Source: Hattie: Developing Potentials for Learning, Earli, 2007

Influences on Achievement

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVERSE

Developmental

Effects

Typical

Teacher

Effects

ZONE OFDESIREDEFFECTS

Source: Hattie: Developing Potentials for Learning, Earli, 2007

John Hattie: Developing Potentials for Learning: Evidence, assessment, and progress, Stockholm, 2008; 12th Biennial Conference, Earli, 2007

http://edu.stockholm.se/upload/Bedömning/JohnHattie%20konf08liten.pdf

(slides 13-22)

Teaching or Working Conditions? (Hattie)

Source: Hattie: Developing Potentials for Learning, Earli, 2007

Teaching ES Structural/Working Conditions

Quality of teaching .77 Within class grouping .28

Reciprocal teaching .74 Adding more finances .23

Teacher-student relationships .72 Reducing class size .21

Providing feedback .72 Ability grouping .11

Teaching student self-verbalization .67 Multi-grade/age classes .04

Meta-cognition strategies .67 Open vs. Traditional classes .01

Direct Instruction .59 Summer vacation classes -.09

Mastery learning .57 Retention -.16

AVERAGE .68 .08

Teaching of learning strategies

Effects of emphasis on learning strategies

NS NE ES

Creativity Programs 658 814 .70

Teaching student self-verbalization 92 1061 .67

Meta-cognition strategies 43 123 .67

Problem solving teaching 221 719 .61

Study skills 656 2446 .59

Concept mapping 91 105 .52

Motivation on learning 322 979 .48

ES 0.20 = 9 months ES 1.0 = 3 yearsSource: Hattie: Developing Potentials for Learning, Earli, 2007

Learning strategies – flip side

• Teachers?• Parents?• Peers?• Private tutors?

Interpretation

Assessment

Assessment

ES

Self-report grades 1.44

Structured feedback .72

Providing formative evaluation to teachers .70

Frequent/ Effects of testing .46

Teaching test taking skills .22

ES 0.20 = 9 months ES 1.0 = 3 years

Source: Hattie: Developing Potentials for Learning, Earli, 2007

Clarification

Purpose of testing – to help teachers know:

• Whether their teaching methods

have been successful or not

• Whether their learning intentions

are worthwhile & challenging

• Where teachers can capitalize on

student strengths & minimize gaps

• What is optimal to teach next...

Purose of feedback – to help students know:

• Whether they are progressing

• Provide alternative strategies to understand material

• Increase effort, motivation or engagement

• How to arrive to deep understandings v

• Point to directions that could be pursued

Superior effect of self-report grading

Assessment – flip side• Objective?

– Oral examination: not objective, not reliable, rare

• Relevant? – Includes irrelevant variables: verbal fluency,

sensitivity for non-verbal signalisation...

• Informative?– For teachers?– For students?

Interpretation

Teacher/student interactions

Research shows that quality of interaction matters, school can create barriers or support:

Hierarchy of motives –Students’ memories

Expectations of teachers function as self-fulfilling prophecies:

–Capacity development (Rosenthal & Jacobson)–Motivation (Pelletier & Vallerand)

Academic self-expectation best predictor of school success (Wigfield)

Self’efficacy and internal locus of control the strongest predictors of school success after abilituies (Pajaros i Miller; Zimmerman i Bandura; Bandura)

Self-actualization

Esthetic needs

Knowledge and understanding

Respect

Belonging

Safety

Physiological needs

23

Teacher/student interactions - flip side

• Lack of praise and

awards

• Disregard

• Students struggle for

getting motivated to

accomplish non-

challenging tasks

• Teachers’ expectations

uninformed

Teaching methods

• Johnson & Johnson, 1983; 2000

• 158 studies on the effects of cooperative learning

Effective teaching methods for different goals

Goal Ind Comp Coop Knowledge of specific info

Training specific skills

Rehersal and practice

Use of knowledge and transfer

Understanding complex concepts

Developing positive attitude for sch

Developing a positive self-concept

Effective cooperative teaching methods

Method Coop v Comp

Method Coop v Ind

LT .85 LT 1.04

AC .67 AC .91

STAD .51 GI .62

TGT .48 TGT .58

GI .37 TAI .33

Slag .29 STAD .29

TAI .25 CIRC .18

CIRC .18 Slag .13

Source: Johnson &Johnson: Cooperative learning methods, 2000

Cooperative learning – flip side ?

• Wide offer• Slim practice

• Emphasis on knowledge of specific information • Loss of possibility to gain complex learning

outcomes

Based on impressions Based on evidence

lowquality

high quality

30

Conclusion 1.: Which path?

input process outcomes

Learning outcomesSocial outcomes

StructuresFinancingManagement

Concusion 2: Finding connections between input and process variables which maximize learning and social outcomes

31

Revisit all 3Evidence-BasedTeaching

Conclusion 3: Schools need a conducive and rich context …and strong connections

Research Education Developmental priorities

International instruments

Education system solutions in other countries

32

Social benefits

Personal benefits

teachers

efficient

equitable

accountable

regulated

participatory

textbooks curriculum

financing managementassessment evaluation

SCHOOL

Research

Development Policies

2025

33

Thank you!

34