Another school year is just beginning. This year for the first time since 1995 we haven’t had a ‘back to school’ routine happening in our house at the end of January. While I wont be seeing anyone off to school this week, last week I still found myself holding my breathe when my youngest started school half a world away in Turin in northern Italy. Not only is she on the other side of the world, she is coping with school and learning in a language she barely knows and with coming and going in the snow and cold. What ever her motivation, she has spread her wings and this will no doubt be a year of amazing experiences.
The world is a much smaller place than it was when I was her age. Technology allows us to keep in touch with ease, to talk to her and even see the world she sees via Skype, email, FaceBook, Photo Bucket and a whole host of others services so familiar to our children born squarely in the land of Digital Natives. I am not expecting to find a hand written letter in the mail any time this year…………..
Having recently become the owner of an iPad (something that I hope my children wont ‘out know’ me on, at least for a little while), I have been discovering all manner of new ways to become immersed in a digital world. The array of apps is quite astounding and amongst the frivolous are some great opportunities, particularly for young learners. But how do you identify the good amongst the less good?
Some searching turned up Planet App: Kid’s Book apps are everywhere. But are they any good? . This article suggests some possible criteria for selecting picture book apps and includes some pointers which look useful. It is worth a look if you have young children and are interested in ways smart technology can provide opportunities for parent child interaction and immersion in literature.
Over the past few year I have observed young children happily occupying themselves with their parent’s Smart Phone while the adults talked during consultations. One 4 year old boy I met a couple of years ago stands out in my memory. He was busy typing and sending emails to his grandmother while we talked, checking on spelling now and then and contributing to our conversation as well. Up to that point I had been impressed by my young niece who had inadvertently phoned me while her mother was driving…….
Clearly I am a bit of a late comer to the world where there is an app for just about anything you can think of. I knew this for sure this morning when I came across an article titled Preschoolers better at navigating iPhone than tying their shoes.
That made me think. Maybe we need an app for learning to tie shoe laces............
Monday, January 31, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
I did it in my head..........
About 6 or 7 years ago my daughter insisted she had done her music practice. We were discussing the issue because as far as I could see her guitar had not come out of its case for days. She insisted that she had done her practice in her head. Although she still seemed to be making progress in her music learning, perhaps you can understand my scepticism!
Not long afterwards when I was talking to my brother in California I mentioned the discussion about the music practice which my daughter insisted she had done in her head. I know my brother and my daughter share a very similar visual approach to the world and learning but I was puzzled to hear him reply ‘Of course, I did it that way too.’
Over the years as I have watched and listened I have come to appreciate the great benefits strong visual spatial skills can bring to learning but I still hadn’t quite come to terms with mental music practice.
A few years ago I read about a study which showed the brain activity of a monkey watching another peel and eat a banana (or something along those lines) was very similar to the monkey performing the task. At this point I began to wonder whether watching her teacher demonstrate a new skill was actually a form of ‘practice’ which might explain the continued learning with so little evident practice…….. I had also read about elite gymnastics and their coaches who used visualisation to assist them in mastering new and complicated skills, but didnt link this to learning music.
Just recently I read of another study in which brain scanning techniques have demonstrated that mental rehearsal or practice does actually have a learning effect on neuronal pathways in the brain. Although the ‘learning’ was not quite as marked as in those who had done actual physical practice, it was quite a bit better than no practice at all. It also seemed to have a priming effect so that a practical session or lesson following mental rehearsal resulted in almost the same degree of learning overall as continual physical practice.
The mental music practice has come up for discussion again recently and I now have to conceded that perhaps the practice I had been sceptical about had actually been done and that the value of this visual, mental rehearsal was something that my daughter instinctively knew about years ago.
Not long afterwards when I was talking to my brother in California I mentioned the discussion about the music practice which my daughter insisted she had done in her head. I know my brother and my daughter share a very similar visual approach to the world and learning but I was puzzled to hear him reply ‘Of course, I did it that way too.’
Over the years as I have watched and listened I have come to appreciate the great benefits strong visual spatial skills can bring to learning but I still hadn’t quite come to terms with mental music practice.
A few years ago I read about a study which showed the brain activity of a monkey watching another peel and eat a banana (or something along those lines) was very similar to the monkey performing the task. At this point I began to wonder whether watching her teacher demonstrate a new skill was actually a form of ‘practice’ which might explain the continued learning with so little evident practice…….. I had also read about elite gymnastics and their coaches who used visualisation to assist them in mastering new and complicated skills, but didnt link this to learning music.
Just recently I read of another study in which brain scanning techniques have demonstrated that mental rehearsal or practice does actually have a learning effect on neuronal pathways in the brain. Although the ‘learning’ was not quite as marked as in those who had done actual physical practice, it was quite a bit better than no practice at all. It also seemed to have a priming effect so that a practical session or lesson following mental rehearsal resulted in almost the same degree of learning overall as continual physical practice.
The mental music practice has come up for discussion again recently and I now have to conceded that perhaps the practice I had been sceptical about had actually been done and that the value of this visual, mental rehearsal was something that my daughter instinctively knew about years ago.
Friday, December 24, 2010
It's finally here! Gifted Children : Resource for parents and teachers in WA
Just in time for Christmas............ copies of the new Resource Book finally arrived a couple of days ago!! More information can be found on the website if you are looking for some holiday reading, or getting in early planning for the coming year.
I hope you all have a safe and happy holiday season and I will look forward to seeing many of you during next year.
Merry Christmas
I hope you all have a safe and happy holiday season and I will look forward to seeing many of you during next year.
Merry Christmas
Friday, December 10, 2010
Are You Gifted? More thoughts on mixed messages
Think for a moment about how you would respond if someone asked you “Are you gifted?”.
Judging by the responses of the many families and teachers I have worked with over the last 10 years the chances are that you would squirm a bit and your answer would probably be a bit evasive. Only about 10% of those who are gifted answer positively with a ‘yes!’
What does this tell your child?
What does it say about how you define giftedness?
Does it communicate that it is OK to be gifted??
I think it would be fair to say that most parents see giftedness as a positive attribute. Yet many are reluctant to talk about it openly, even within their own family. Few talk about the implications, both positive and negative of being different, thinking faster, being more aware.
Sometimes parents have not come to terms with their own giftedness, sometimes they worry that mentioning it will encourage their child to become ‘big headed’ or conceited. Some worry that mentioning it might make their child ‘feel different’. (The reality is that many gifted children are aware of a sense of difference often from a very young age but can’t put their finger on ‘why’, especially if it is not talked about)
Would we worry in the same way about the possibility of an inflated ego if the child was highly skilled in sport, or music or dance?? Discussing these abilities surely also carries the chance that other children might feel bad if they aren’t as capable.
Being gifted doesn’t make someone ‘better than’ anyone else. They are simply ‘better at’ some things than most other people are going to be.
By not mentioned giftedness, or discouraging your child from mentioning it, you send a confusing message. That being gifted is a good thing and you should be proud of your abilities but don’t let anyone know too much about them….
Judging by the responses of the many families and teachers I have worked with over the last 10 years the chances are that you would squirm a bit and your answer would probably be a bit evasive. Only about 10% of those who are gifted answer positively with a ‘yes!’
What does this tell your child?
What does it say about how you define giftedness?
Does it communicate that it is OK to be gifted??
I think it would be fair to say that most parents see giftedness as a positive attribute. Yet many are reluctant to talk about it openly, even within their own family. Few talk about the implications, both positive and negative of being different, thinking faster, being more aware.
Sometimes parents have not come to terms with their own giftedness, sometimes they worry that mentioning it will encourage their child to become ‘big headed’ or conceited. Some worry that mentioning it might make their child ‘feel different’. (The reality is that many gifted children are aware of a sense of difference often from a very young age but can’t put their finger on ‘why’, especially if it is not talked about)
Would we worry in the same way about the possibility of an inflated ego if the child was highly skilled in sport, or music or dance?? Discussing these abilities surely also carries the chance that other children might feel bad if they aren’t as capable.
Being gifted doesn’t make someone ‘better than’ anyone else. They are simply ‘better at’ some things than most other people are going to be.
By not mentioned giftedness, or discouraging your child from mentioning it, you send a confusing message. That being gifted is a good thing and you should be proud of your abilities but don’t let anyone know too much about them….
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Actions Speak Louder Than Words
What message do we give gifted children?
Consider for a moment a local school. It is much like other schools you might encounter, with mixed ability classes but this one does have some pull-out opportunities for gifted students (or perhaps for talented students – see a previous post from Aug 30 ).
Now consider another school, also fairly typical of other schools you might find nearby where you live. Classes at this school are also mostly mixed ability groups, with a little more challenge offered to the highest performing students in some subjects. A wide array of co-curricular opportunities are offered after school for students. Many of these involve competition at some point against other schools or teams.
Now think about yet another school. Like the ones already mentioned, it has mixed ability classes. A parent of a child who has been identified as gifted talks to the teacher about her child’s need for greater challenge and complexity to re-engage him in learning. The teacher responds with a well thought out package of work to be completed at home over a number of weeks.
Whether they are aware of it or not, each of these schools is giving a clear message to their gifted students. Although they recognise that their gifted students need something different which is positive, they are communicating the message that it is not important enough or perhaps that it is inconvenient to meet those needs during the school day.
While you think about what message your child might be picking up from the setting they find themselves in, here is one last (local) school to consider. What does a school communicate when the out of class opportunities are held in a building called "The Learning Centre"?? That ‘learning’ happens here, but not in the classroom? (while I first heard about this Learning Centre from a parent, the final comment was made by a student who told me she had figured out why she didnt seem to learn much most of the week)
Consider for a moment a local school. It is much like other schools you might encounter, with mixed ability classes but this one does have some pull-out opportunities for gifted students (or perhaps for talented students – see a previous post from Aug 30 ).
Now consider another school, also fairly typical of other schools you might find nearby where you live. Classes at this school are also mostly mixed ability groups, with a little more challenge offered to the highest performing students in some subjects. A wide array of co-curricular opportunities are offered after school for students. Many of these involve competition at some point against other schools or teams.
Now think about yet another school. Like the ones already mentioned, it has mixed ability classes. A parent of a child who has been identified as gifted talks to the teacher about her child’s need for greater challenge and complexity to re-engage him in learning. The teacher responds with a well thought out package of work to be completed at home over a number of weeks.
Whether they are aware of it or not, each of these schools is giving a clear message to their gifted students. Although they recognise that their gifted students need something different which is positive, they are communicating the message that it is not important enough or perhaps that it is inconvenient to meet those needs during the school day.
While you think about what message your child might be picking up from the setting they find themselves in, here is one last (local) school to consider. What does a school communicate when the out of class opportunities are held in a building called "The Learning Centre"?? That ‘learning’ happens here, but not in the classroom? (while I first heard about this Learning Centre from a parent, the final comment was made by a student who told me she had figured out why she didnt seem to learn much most of the week)
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Motivation and performance pay for teachers
During this year I have read a lot about motivation, initially as part of a project I was undertaking but also because I find if fascinating understanding what makes us behave the way we do.
Periodically I get a newsletter from Dan Pink, the author of Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us (and another book worth reading called A Whole New Mind). Today’s newsletter included a snippet about motivation and ‘merit pay’ for teachers, specifically looking at whether we should link teacher pay to test scores. I had followed the discussion earlier in the year on this topic and at time Pink had commented the he ‘couldn't see a way to construct a so-called "merit pay" scheme that was good for students, fair to teachers, and consistent with what we know about motivation’.
So when the latest newsletter moved from conjecture to mentioning the results of a 3 year study, the first of its kind to systematically examine the effects of merit pay on student achievement, it had my attention.
The study was conducted in the USA at Vanderbilt University's National Center on Performance Incentives. The purpose of the Centre is to address what it believes is one of the most contested questions in public education:
Just because performance based reward systems are common in the workplace, it does not mean they are effective, or that they lead to the desired (or expected) result. Some of the most effective workplaces (in terms of results and staff satisfaction levels) have in place systems that seem at odds with the popular perception of how to get the best out of people.
Perhaps the important thing is to be clear about what we want (or expect) as a result of rewarding teachers (or students for that matter, but that is a topic for another day). If it is ‘better’ teachers, greater commitment to or ongoing development within the profession, that is one thing. If it is to see an increase student’s achievement level that may well be another.
While the Fact Sheet on performance pay for teachers in Australia mentions assessing a teacher’s contribution to the school community, support for other teachers, teamwork, involvement in extra curricular activities and further professional development as well as student achievement, it is easy to see how the media attention generated by the My Schools website might actually give the community the impression that it is all about student results, that better results indicate better teachers.
It strikes me that the ability of any single teacher to ‘add value’ (show improvement in student achievement) might be influenced by all the teachers the child has had previously. A child does not arrive in a new classroom as a clean slate. They bring attitudes, level of engagement, learning habits and patterns of skills that have been built up over time. They also bring the influence of their circumstances outside of school, the family relationships, home environment, the value that is placed on education in their culture or community, and even their economic circumstances.
Some of the best work teachers do isn’t evident straight away. If merit pay becomes tied to achievement, we might be missing the mark and overlooking some of the best teachers.
If you are intersted you will find the Vanderbilt report here and an Australian report on performance pay for teachers here. This one distinguishes between merit pay, knowledge- and skills-based pay, and professional certification.
Periodically I get a newsletter from Dan Pink, the author of Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us (and another book worth reading called A Whole New Mind). Today’s newsletter included a snippet about motivation and ‘merit pay’ for teachers, specifically looking at whether we should link teacher pay to test scores. I had followed the discussion earlier in the year on this topic and at time Pink had commented the he ‘couldn't see a way to construct a so-called "merit pay" scheme that was good for students, fair to teachers, and consistent with what we know about motivation’.
So when the latest newsletter moved from conjecture to mentioning the results of a 3 year study, the first of its kind to systematically examine the effects of merit pay on student achievement, it had my attention.
The study was conducted in the USA at Vanderbilt University's National Center on Performance Incentives. The purpose of the Centre is to address what it believes is one of the most contested questions in public education:
Do financial incentives for teachers, administrators, and schools affect the quality of teaching and learning?What did the study find?
Overall, performance bonuses for teachers had no effect on student’s achievement. (p 36)‘Merit pay’ is currently on the agenda for Australian teachers. I am not a political creature as a rule and this occasion is no different. My interest is in providing information and encouraging people to think, ideally with some soundly based information to start from.
Just because performance based reward systems are common in the workplace, it does not mean they are effective, or that they lead to the desired (or expected) result. Some of the most effective workplaces (in terms of results and staff satisfaction levels) have in place systems that seem at odds with the popular perception of how to get the best out of people.
Perhaps the important thing is to be clear about what we want (or expect) as a result of rewarding teachers (or students for that matter, but that is a topic for another day). If it is ‘better’ teachers, greater commitment to or ongoing development within the profession, that is one thing. If it is to see an increase student’s achievement level that may well be another.
While the Fact Sheet on performance pay for teachers in Australia mentions assessing a teacher’s contribution to the school community, support for other teachers, teamwork, involvement in extra curricular activities and further professional development as well as student achievement, it is easy to see how the media attention generated by the My Schools website might actually give the community the impression that it is all about student results, that better results indicate better teachers.
It strikes me that the ability of any single teacher to ‘add value’ (show improvement in student achievement) might be influenced by all the teachers the child has had previously. A child does not arrive in a new classroom as a clean slate. They bring attitudes, level of engagement, learning habits and patterns of skills that have been built up over time. They also bring the influence of their circumstances outside of school, the family relationships, home environment, the value that is placed on education in their culture or community, and even their economic circumstances.
Some of the best work teachers do isn’t evident straight away. If merit pay becomes tied to achievement, we might be missing the mark and overlooking some of the best teachers.
If you are intersted you will find the Vanderbilt report here and an Australian report on performance pay for teachers here. This one distinguishes between merit pay, knowledge- and skills-based pay, and professional certification.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Quote
"The biggest mistake of past centuries in teaching has been to treat all students as if they were variants of the same individual and thus to feel justified in teaching them all the same subjects the same way." Howard Gardner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)