Stationary bikes are now appearing in Canadian classrooms in the latest wave of the North American “self-regulation” movement. Frustrated , angry and fidgety kids and stressed-out parents are driving many teachers almost crazy and they are grasping for life preservers in today’s classrooms. That may explain why principals and teachers in the Halifax Regional School Board and far beyond see spin bikes as almost magical in their powers.
Is this becoming the latest ‘cure-all’ and where’s the scientific research to support its widespread use in regular classrooms? Since the publication of British teacher Tom Bennett’s book Teacher Proof, more and more classroom teachers are raising a “skeptical eyebrow” and confronting the succession of teaching fads that have come and gone over the past twenty years. It’s becoming acceptable to ask whether “self-regulation” with or without bikes is destined for the same fate.
The current expectations for Self-Regulation and Spin Bikes are sky high. Discovery of the latest ‘cure-all’ has sparked incredible media interest with recent CBC-TV short documentaries and CBC Radio The Current feature interviews.
The sheer excitement created by spin bike frenzy is captured well in Aly Thomson’s March 9, 2016 Canadian Press story: “Frustrated at her inability to draw a sofa, five-year-old Mylee Lumsden began to cry. She liked her drawing of a TV, but the couch confounded her, and so she grew increasingly upset. Her teacher, Mary Theresa Burt, looked at the brewing storm, and suggested the little girl take a turn on the bright yellow stationary bicycle at the centre of her primary classroom at Ian Forsyth Elementary School.” Within minutes, Mylee was “bright again, cheerful, and smiling widely.”
That tiny yellow bike was simply working miracles — calming rambunctious kids down, quietening the class, getting restless boys to sit still, and making teaching life liveable again. “Now, amid a shift in how educators shift and embrace various styles of learning,” Thomson wrote, “such bikes are helping to boost moods, relieve stress and regulate energy in students of all ages.”
“Learning styles” simply won’t go away long after it has been exposed as fraudulent educational practice. It’s the best known of the myths recently exposed by Tom Bennett, co-founder of ResearchED and Britain’s 2015 Teacher of the Year. A year ago, in the Daily Telegraph, he pointed out that many such theories that fill classrooms in Britain have little grounding in scientific research.
“We have all kinds of rubbish thrown at us over the last 10 to 20 years,” he stated. “We’ve been told that kids only learn properly in groups. We’ve had people claiming that children learn using brain gym, people saying kids only learn when you appeal to their learning style. There’s not a scrap of research that substantiates this, and, unfortunately, it’s indicative of the really, really dysfunctional state of social science research that exists today.”
Bennett is far from alone in challenging the research basis for a whole range of initiatives floating on unproven educational theories. According to a research scan by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), trillions of dollars are spent on education policies around the world, but just one in 10 are actually evaluated.
Commenting on the research, Andreas Schleicher, OECD director of education and skills, said: “If we want to improve educational outcomes we need to have a much more systematic and evidence-based approach.” Speaking at the 2014 Education World Forum in London, Schleicher added: “We need to make education a lot more of a science.”
Cutting through the hype surrounding Self-Regulation, it’s difficult to find independent, validated research support. A very perceptive October 2012 feature in The Tyee actually bore down into the British Columbia self-regulation movement looking for the research basis while 3,000 teachers were being taught the strategy.
While much of Dr. Stuart Shanker’s work is compromised by his promotion of his own particular program, Kimberley Schonert-Reichl, of UBC’s Human Development, Learning and Culture research unit, has studied MindUP , an alternative approach to teaching self-regulation as the basis for Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). Over a period of six years, she only found one large-scale independent research study, a CASEL study of 270 programs, that documented its actual benefits.
“So little(in education) has actually been formed by rigorous research, as opposed to the medical field, Schonert-Reichl claimed. ” I heard someone compare where we are with understanding well-designed educational studies to where we were with clinical drug trials in the early 1900s.”
Self-regulation definitely holds promise, but the research basis is quite limited and teachers are wise to be skeptical until there’s more evidence that it actually works and is sustainable in the classroom. A new study by Shanker and his associates, Child Development (September/October 2015), may add to the puzzle by demonstrating the the meaning of the term ‘self-regulation’ is still unclear and therefore expandable to accommodate an array of some 88 different concepts, including self-control, self-management, self-observation, learning, social behavior, and the personality constructs related to self-monitoring.
Who is really being served by ‘self-regulation’ is particularly unclear. Much of the rationale has its underpinning in neurocience and that’s what is being debated rather than its efficacy for the majority of students. Some like former BC Education Minister George Abbott see it as a way of serving severely learning-challenged kids and getting rid of the extensive, expensive Special Education system with all those individual program plans.
Child psychologist and elementary teachers, as The National Post columnist Marni Soupcoff anticipated three years ago, are latching onto self-regulation believing that you can ‘teach kids to behave properly in schools’ because the job is not being done in today’s family homes. The real reason it’s needed, in other words, is because too many kids aren’t getting the “psychological stability and support” they need from their own families.
Is Self-Regulation — with or without Spin Bikes – another unproven educational initiative that will come and go without a discernable impact on students? Should researchers marketing their own programs be relied upon to provide the supporting research? Will ‘self-regulation’ end up resembling mother’s version of “sit in the corner,” “go to your room” or “get down and do five push-ups, now” ? Should we intervene if kids riding those bikes ever come to look like hamsters on wheels in the Cage?
Educhatter 
It boggles the mind to see how much wasteful spending goes into education these days. I suppose taxpayers must all be rich, otherwise we’d be hearing an enormous outcry about this.
Stuart Shanker dazzled his audience at the education conference last year in Vancouver, which was sponsored by the BC Ministry of Education. He along with Yong Zhao, another dazzling speaker who believes Kim Kardashian is a great role model, really wowed the audience with their innovative edubabble about what’s best for our kids. I tried listening in as it was made available through a live feed, however I started feeling nauseous after a mere few minutes and had to go do something more meaningful shortly thereafter. I think I ended up scrubbing the bathroom, as it was a much more satisfying use of my time rather than trying to listen in to what these “experts” had to say.
Our kids are in trouble. More trends, and fads, means less time for learning. Just don’t let anyone accuse the government of underfunding the education system. This latest trend in education surely exemplifies the unlimited amount of spending that goes into this “profession”. Sad that it has nothing to do with effective learning, or offers any meaningful resources for our frontline teachers. Best to purchase Kumon stock. It’s about to get a whole bunch more popular.
I have definite thoughts about this topic, Paul and I will try to express them later. I do, however, want to jump in and try to put Yong Zhao’s position on Kim Kardashian in a different context. I’m not sure that Tara’s read on his thinking was quite accurate if this transcript from another speech is similar to the one that was delivered in Vancouver.
https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/yong-zhaos-npe-speech-transcribed-part-v-all-done/
The ironic thing, I believe, is that our world, included the nested education context, is full of people misreading, misrepresenting and mis-reporting things. This only serves to cloud the conversation and make it more difficult to engage in productive debate.
For now,
Stephen
Actually you’ve made my point quite clear Stephen; thank you for finding that transcript. He’s rather glowing about Kim, as you can see in his analysis. And he’s also very glowing about how creativity trumps those crushing skills such as using memorization of facts in the classroom. Perhaps you can look up the transcript from the education conference held in Vancouver last year. He was specifically asked that question, and he was very specific with his answer. He was asked by a participant, if creativity was more important than memorizing basic facts of reading, writing and arithmetic. His answer was a resounding “yes”. Hmmmm…how do we inspire kids to be creative if they don’t have foundational knowledge first?
Between that, and his inaccurate depiction of a business analysis of Nokia, it’s quite evident that Zhao, like so many of these ivory tower academics, would be sitting in an unemployment office, waiting for his cheque.
Here’s a brief synopsis of this horse and pony game http://www.bclocalnews.com/opinion/290668361.html\
sorry I wrote that last paragraph wrong. It should read…it’s quite evident that Zhao, like so many of these ivory tower academics, would be sitting in an unemployment office, waiting for his cheque, if he was asked to perform a real job.
So the child who is co-operative and doesn’t have meltdowns doesn’t get to go on the bike?
Christina, common sense doesn’t apply in today’s classrooms. Didn’t you get the memo? Rewarding students for good behaviour and excellent student performance died out a long time ago. Honour Roll and trying your best are a thing of the past. The only ones who are punished, are those hardworking students…again.
Stephen:
Look no further for an example of misreading, misrepresenting and misreporting than the CEA article on Self Regulation.
Do you mean the interview with Stuart Shanker, himself?
I’m coming to this topic from a few different perspectives. First, as an educator (retired, but still active in the discourse). Second as a parent of two growing boys. Finally, as someone who is deeply interested in the role of schools and formal systems of education within a world that continues to develop. Admittedly, I can’t always separate the three perspectives, but I do “try” to understand which of the three is most influential at any given time.
I tell you this because this is one issue that bothers me no matter how I look at it.
I can recall the very first time that I heard the term “self-regulation” used in the context of working with young children. (The only other time that I heard it was in relation to the establishment of the Ontario College of Teachers, and it had to do with the teaching profession having a “self-regulating” body.
From what I’m able to gather, self-regulation is a term that is used mainly when speaking about the behaviour of younger children. I don’t think that you’ll find much talk of it in middle or high schools, but I may be wrong.
It seems to relate to children being able to become mindful of stressors that might be affecting their ability to function within the classroom environment and to be able to enact strategies to deal with that stress.
Here are a few questions that I would love others’ insight on:
First, why are young children experiencing undue stress in the first place. And why when we talk about self-regulation, do we talk mainly of schools and classrooms? Are the stresses a “fact” of the classroom, itself, or are they carried into the classroom from the outside. Or is it a combination of the two?
We used to talk a great deal about classroom management. This was usually a teacher-centred conversation. In teaching at a Faculty of Education here in Ontario, it was one of the things that new teachers worried about the most.
Has the focus now shifted to the student? I know that Shanker and others will want to distance self-regulation from “self-control”, but I’m wondering if there is a shift in focus of responsibility for management—from the teacher to the student.
Should we not be also be looking more carefully at the sources of the stresses in the life of a 5 or 6 year-old. Is there a chance that teachers, themselves, are feeling more stressed about their work these days (for whatever reason) and that this is being translated into stressful classroom environments? What stresses from outside the classroom are students bringing to school with them? Could there be things about life in the classroom that is causing the level of stress that requires a sense of urgency around regulation.
These are the questions that I have in my attempt to better understand why this has become such a common part of the way that we talk about primary education.
I admit that the field of neuroscience has opened up all sorts of new ways for us to understand brain function and the connection with learning. I also admit that stress affects the way that we learn and the way that we approach learning.
It’s true that part of growing up is learning to manage the various dimensions of life so that we can properly function in the world. But a part of me wonders whether the current conversation about self-regulation is really about managing (and surviving) in the classroom.
Thinking out loud on a Saturday morning.
(I realize that I didn’t touch the bike issue at all)
There are many teens and adult who become disregulated. Their behavoiurs may well be more subtle and difficult to identify, but disregulation can certainly be found at all ages. Most of us eventually learn to self -regulate, but there are certainly those who don’t. The calm attitude,patience, redirection and identification of strong emotion that help small children to self-regulatecan . be used at all ages. Many of us, who are parents, have dealt with our own disregulated teens.
Teresa, can you say more about what you mean by disregulation. Interested.
Littlr kids by their very nature haven’t learned to regulate their emotions. So we teach them,make allowanes as necessary.
I have 2 adopted kids, one with severe neglect. So she would get extremely disrwgulated (sp) all the time, still does,but now its subtle. Huge emotion that she can’t articulate. In her case, at 15 she would still be that 2 yr. old with no ability to regulate her emotions. No it wasn’t pretty. She has done extremely well however. I am no expertj here, but I suspect we all have our particular moments of disregulation. I suspect there are many elementary and secondary students who are frequently or chronically disregulated as many have encountered major difficulties in their lives. Typical response is to judge , see as bad behaviour.
There may or may not be poor behaviour , but is necessary to deal with fear, strong emotion, confusion to get person to self regulate. My daughters behaviour was quite fine the other day, but she could not think in a rational or logical way at all.
In my daughters case — Her brain would have been drenched in cortisol from birth,if not before. Difficulty with self control of any type. Frontal cortex/ amaglydia not being used properly.She was very severe, but many degrees of this .With toddlers and preschoolers we expect certain behaviours as brain, language, vocab experience atill developing.
Teresa, I could not seem to find a reply option next to your comment below, so I will place it here.
Your story resonates with me very much as I try to understand some of what my youngest son experiences, not only at school, but at home as well.
My questions to you: Is self-regulation something that can be taught? Is it something that, for some, will always require intervention from someone who sees what is happening “from the outside”—someone who is able to step in and help direct them towards a possible solution.
In neurological terms, we hear about the frontal cortex “going off line” temporarily. Is there something about the idea of self-regulation that assumes that the individual can learn to bring things back “online” on their own?
I think that I should have written “prefrontal cortex”?
When I was a kid in the 1950s and 60s most students who started school did not finish senior high. It was OK then since in the postwar western world there were lots of jobs, most of which did not require high school, let alone post secondary. The 3 Rs were sufficient.
The world has changed. We cannot afford to have 20-30% of students “fall through the cracks”.
Besides, when you ask parents what they want of schools they want it all, to quote John Goodlad’s study A Place Called School from the early 1980s. “All” includes
– what we have called the 3 Rs
– citizenship behaviours to work within the pluralistic, increasingly global, multicultural society we have now
– vocational skills, including creativity, initiative, teamwork, organization and work habits
– physical and mental well-being
While there is an increasing consensus on research that promotes all of these things it is akin to scientific consensus in the late 16th early 17th century. Among the challenges we face are
– magic bullets and the fact that among policy makers beliefs often trump facts
– evidence by anecdote: a particular sin of the media
– oversimplification and overgeneralization of research results, including a lack of replication studies to support or refute early claims
– our sloppy language used to describe learning that lacks the precision and clarity it does in medicine;
e.g. we confuse
– direct instruction with lectures
– group work with co-operative learning
– self-regulation and self-control
– while the medical research model is something to strive for, it costs money; moreover, it is easier to see patients get sicker or healthier than to see a mind wither or blossom
– false dichotomies and the confusion between “necessary” learning and “sufficient” learning; e.g.,
– yes the 3 Rs are necessary but students need much more in 2016
– yes, direct instruction is powerful (BTW I teach this at my faculty of education and I teach it FIRST) but so are a number of other models of teaching which, when properly done, have their place for certain outcomes of learning
We as teachers have to deal with the kids, teens and adults in our classrooms as best we can. We in North America and the UK do not seem to get sufficient quality professional learning or support in doing it in our classrooms or tools to evaluate its effects on our students as they seem to get in parts of Asia and Finland (BTW power point presentations and rousing speeches do not equal quality PD). Yogi Berra has been said (unproven) to utter the following: “theorists assume that theory and practice are the same; practitioners know better”.
How do we clarify the power and limits of theory/research and classroom practice? (I need a book on this and fortunately there are such books; e.g. Arthur Ellis’ Research on Educational Innovations)
In summary, Paul’s initial point is largely valid. Will evidence come to refute it? Maybe but it may take years, just as it took decades for “learning styles” to be refuted and for the I.Q. theory for a general intelligence to have been shown to have serious limits.
My advice, try things out if you have a learning issue. Take off your blinkers, preferably with the help of trusted colleagues, and evaluate the effects. My next post shall offer an example from my early teaching, based on working in an urban high school with a substantial ELL population (though it was only just becoming identified as such).
Excellent John.
In this discussion, I think we should be considering the high levels of stress these spin bike candidates cause in teachers and fellow classmates, who then take their unhappiness home, stressing out their families. This a serious problem today.
And spin bikes are the best solution the system has to offer?
Just when I think the education system can’t possibly get nuttier, someone proves me wrong.
I would like to hear about solutions that you might have for dealing with this, Christine.
She has learned to self regulate and I expect she will continue to improve. Therapy, myself as parent were 2 main factors. She was very very severe. International adoption can be very challenging.
You might want to look at some of the principles of cognitive behaviour therapy. We did not do that, but I am very casually trying to introduce them to my 16 yr. old. i.e. We have certain thoughts and can learn to identify emotion and alter self talk. For a 6 yr. old I bet there is info around for parents. Puppets, monster voices, different characters spring to mind as wats to get it across.
Some kids have small amaygldia; my daughter might,but she has made wonderful progress. I rarely get behaviour now.
She did neurofeedback and it was very very helpful and very interesting to watch. The psychiatrist I presently speak to was fine with it
.
Children with on-going disruptive issues don’t need to be put on a spin bike in the regular classroom. Those bikes are noisy, and the child on the bike can easily continue to disrupt the class while spinning. This will become very evident when the gimmick gets ho-hum.
The solution for how to deal with these kids is neither complicated nor novel. If a child is chronically disruptive, stressing out his/her teacher and fellow classmates and hogging the teacher’s attention, It’s time to say ‘uncle’ and get them out of the classroom. Of course their parents will object, but the cold hard fact is that they need something, and somewhere different. In the past, behaviour classes outside the classroom setting were quite successful. And I’m not talking about those ghastly reform schools. Staffed by extra EA’s, supported by mental health professionals, and taught be teachers with the right personalities and skills, (and they are out there), and with mandated parent involvement, these children might actually have a real chance. They have to ‘earn’ their way back into the regular classroom and that is a motivator, and there needs to be a probation period too.
Of course, this is expensive. So here’s how we find the money. The Ministries of Education need to stop funding various sundry organizations that have little relevance to classrooms. Get rid of the ridiculously costly EQAO testing, and hand over testing to a company who can do it at a reasonable cost. Eliminate consultants at the Ministry level. Eliminate expensive consultants at the board level and replace them with teacher-consultants on regular salary and on contract. Let teacher’s assess their performance. A poor rating means you are out. Quite hiring these expensive, insular ivory tower academics to provide PD and and hire relevant professionals and exemplary teachers at a portion of the cost. Quit sending officials off on jaunts to Timbuktu or where-ever. Pare down the Ministries by at least a half and get rid of useless departments, like the Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat (?) who have failed utterly. I could rattle on for a long time but you get my drift.
Let’s start investing our money in our children, instead of propping up endless education hangers-on and pontificators. That’s what real change could look like.
Again, there doesn’t seem to be the ability to reply to replies, so I’ll post this here and hope that it makes sense.
Christina, while I agree that there are likely many, many places where resources can be used differently in our current system, I don’t necessarily agree with your motivation for doing so in this case.
That said, I think that your suggestion that disruptive children be, at some point, removed from the “regular classroom” and be required to “earn their way” back in points to another issue—inclusive education.
What does it mean to say that our schools and, indeed, our classrooms are inclusive? From “Inclusion BC”:
“Inclusive education means that all students attend and are welcomed by their neighbourhood schools in age-appropriate, regular classes and are supported to learn, contribute and participate in all aspects of the life of the school.”
I think that you’ll find similar visions in all provinces.
So, I would argue that excluding children until they deserve to be included in the regular classroom is not the answer.
But I DO agree that diverting more resources to being able to do this effectively is well worth more conversation. If we maintain the idea that classrooms mean 1 adult and 30 children, then the vision of inclusion will continue to elude us. If, however, we are able to use the challenges and tensions that come from trying to put “new wine in old skins”, then there might be hope.
While ideas should be accepted out of hand, neither should they be rejected. In both cases we need proof. And the more “out of the ordinary” an idea seems to be, the greater the burden of proof. This is one of the rules of scientific evidence.
Whether bikes work or do not work- need proof not blind accetance or blind dismissal.
I agree, John. Unfortunately, we tend not to give new ideas the opportunities to prove or disprove themselves!
While ideas should NOT be accepted out of hand, neither . . .
Christina. Thank you. I’ll put you in charge any day.
BTW, Christina, I’m curious to know what an education “hangers-on” might be?
Worst Hanger-On Award goes to David Booth at OISE who was instrumental in bring in the disastrous Whole Language that scarred legions of people. We were forced to use his Impressions, the worst reading series ever.
Seeking A Reading Garelick
The two education skills that are foundational are Math and Reading. The “craziness” of Math derailment is being, IMO, satisfactorily exposed by Barry Garelick and his books, the latest — Math Education in the US: Still Crazy After All These Years. Now we need a “Garelick” who will tackle Reading and bring us up-to-date on the disasters sown in this derailment. I see that Christina’s experience with whole language has been painful and before the UN initiatives to teach reading to the “underdeveloped” world proceeds full-scale, we need popular materials to help sort out the issues. Thanks Christina for heads-up about OISE.
To Christina: Please contact me via my blog site — http://www.parentsteachingparents.net/contact-me/
I mean “acceptance”
I think that we also need to be very clear about what would count as evidence and proof. In this case, is it higher test scores, calmer children, more orderly classrooms? Or is there something else that we’re going for in exploring the self-regulation path?
ultimately, though a challenge to do this directly- student ;earning
if classes are “calmer” we might get more focus / fewer interruptions and distractions; i.e. time on task; thus improved learning
I know that my six year old could use a nap in the afternoon. That would do it for him!
Stephen,
Inclusion for all children isn’t working, is it? Time to think outside that box. I’m not talking about putting all handicapped children into special classes here. That’s where the big push for inclusion came from. I’ll bet most parents would be quite OK with behaviour classes. Children with significant behaviour classes are simply not ready to be in the mainstream. Perhaps there is a middle ground, and these kids could return for non academic class – art, phys ed, etc. That could be negotiated and worked out. We really need to ‘tweak’ the inclusive policy so it meets individual students needs, that’s all. Right now, the options are either pathetic (spin bikes) or dismal (naughty rooms), and it seems everyone is just doing a lot of hand wringing. The system could try out pilot projects and assess the benefits for all students and teachers, then move forward from there.
Yes, but the kids that are accessing the bikes are cognitively capable of being in a mainstream class. In fact, I would venture to say, that many of them would be high functioning. Behaviour should not be a criteria for exclusion, in my opinion.
Perhaps we should be taking a closer look at the design of our mainstream classrooms—scheduling, physical environment, curriculum—especially at the earlier grades so that we flip the question. I’ve long believed that it is not a question of whether my child is ready for school. The question might, in fact, be, “Is school ready for my child?”
Goes back to my earlier questions about probing more deeply into why some kids have difficulty coping in the classroom.
Bikes might not be the answer, but the research and “brain science” that led to the bike idea may provide some clues and some other solutions.
A few Random Thoughts — to add to the discussion:
Can youngish children do this or should they be kids doing it. If they are disregulated they aren’t thinking clearly. Who helps them identify all this? Kids get bored and restless in a day, so the teacher likely should make schedule so everyone gets a turn.
Parents will certainly expect their child to have a turn. Bike is expensive, glitzy and novel and should be used. Back to tchr. organizing schedule.Children will realize very quickly learn to wriggle and be disruptive to get their turn.
Safety Kid fools around, pushes and falls on head, Needs supervision.
Exercise good for everyone. Class can take a walk around school, block. Move in class, extra 20 mins in gym a few extra mins of rescess. All free, simple and useful for everyone, especially teacher who is becoming dysregulated.
Many techniques can be developed. There are certainly times when firm words and time by self are appropriate. Context is very important. I certainly have my times when I say enough and do not do the ideal things. I deal or have dealt with severe disregulation from my children. Many times my survival was vastly more important than their challenges. And they need to know that.
My kids have point person to help ground them. This is designed not to overburden a teacher and can be a simple as hi. how are you.
But the relationship is key. I. not an inanimate object. Consequences also part and parcel of learning to self regulate, but important to do maintain relationship.
My daughter was also taught to make me a cup of tea or be kind to me after things had settled down.
Also very important to try and make sure child not manipulating, because triangulation and manipulation part and parcel of all this.
Firm words, redirection, humour, the word NO, attempts to teach different self talk all useful. Desperation was often there too. Patience, calmness, bribery, paradox all have a role. . No magic bullet.
All human and cheap, excepting all the broken items in my house. Believe you me there would not have been a bike.
I read article again; the final tip off — the glowing remarks. So typical and happens all the time. Sure the kids love it. But the adults in charge don’t know what questions to even consider. This is what I have seen repeatedly and I see an expensive and harmful fad. No mental health worker would ever ever allow themselves to be put in this position. Teachers are dealing with the general public, children who have to be there and are often instructed to try half baked, pop psychology Often parents do not know what is happening. . Teachers may or may not know details about children. Do you think a social worker with actual knowledge would ever do this stuff. Not on your life.
There are children who come from difficult backgrounds where parents don’t know what do and there are also disruptive children who have excellent parents. All parents should be fully informed and and consulted about all of this. Without revealing personal info. this kind of nonsense could be very dangerous/ My children might appear ok at school, but things would have been taken out on me. I was already dealing with all the typical school stuff, arguments, frustrations, friends, teacher stuff. Throwing in overburdened teachers doing this kind of stuff could have had very very serious consequences for me at home. Zero overexaggeration here.
I have found that Humour, in fact, is a great tool for redirection and self reflection!
Spin Bikes are, according to child behaviour experts, supposed to be just one strategy among many in the elementary classroom. The initial over-the-top response of teachers worries me because it sounds like they are touting this strategy as a curative. Thank you, England 101, for providing an insight into the complexities of raising and teaching young kids. It’s doubtful if anyone has all the answers.
And I think that you’ve hit upon an interesting (and very important) challenge in today’s world of thinking about education, Paul. We know inherently that our attempts to remain committed to a system of public education places us smack dab in the middle of this complexity. But, quite often, our proposals and solutions come off as being simple, if not simplistic.
I think that part of the “quick jump” that we often see stems from our lack of willingness (or capacity?) to stop and think more deeply about what we are doing and why?
The resulting polemics that characterize so many online discussions are confounding, but understandable.
Agree
England 101 is Teresa Murray. Technical difficulties.
Teresa Murray Retired teacher.
Mother of adopted kids, one off the scale. My child was prepared for school by me. Definitely not schools and systems should have to change for vagaries of a 6yr. old. Responsibility, accountability on kid’s part is essential. Despite her disastrous start in life she knew how to behave in public, far better than some of her middle class peers and has grown to be less entitled than some of them. I could have easily given her more slack, but she sat in restaurant quietly, didn’t run around in wrong places etc. At home, my parenting was therapeutic and often counter intuitive for very good reason. But the long term goal was achieved and not by expecting systems to change for her . Reasonable accommodations as necessary, but no teacher or other adult should be burdened because of what happened to her. We are one single family in the school and community, and all other families and adults must be completely respected.
Teachers,like Christina, are the people whom I depended on. And Christina, I wouldn’t go as far with comments about certain families and their disruptive kids, Some parents have very few skills, but do truly care about their children and I know you know this too. But I completely understand the feelings behind this statement. You are a sensible, overwhelmed teacher who has been utterly devastated and completely shackled by nonsense from outside the classroom and your outrage is more than justified.
Yes, educational research is in infancy and it is vital, but it should not be harming other people as it presently is. And yes there must be good research. The ethics of this research need to be examined. The general population, children, parents, teachers should not be harmed; transparency and consent should be required. I think lab rats are given more legal protection than many people currently receive.
England 101 is Teresa Murray. Retired teacher and adoptive parent. Apologies for technical sifficulties
There is no such word as ‘self-regulation’. This is just another example of edubabble, cooked up by some ivory tower academic, trying to find a way to make a name for him/herself. . I suggest we trash the term.
Actually the term has a long history in the organizations and institutions where self-regulation has been one of the features of many professional bodies.
Don’t know whether Walter Mischel was trying to make a name for himself or not, but he’s the guy (of marshmallow test fame) who began looking more closely into this stuff back in the 60’s.
I don’t like the term, but you have to admit that it has a great deal of sway in communities of research and practice.
Mother of adopted children, one off the scale. My child was prepared for school by me. Definitely not schools and systems should have to change for vagaries of a 6yr. old. Responsibility,accountability on kid’s part is essential. Despite her disastrous start in life, she knew how to hehave in public, far better than some of her middle class peers and has grown to be less entitled than some of them. I could have esily given her more slack, but she sat in restauarant quietly, didn’t run around in wronf places etc. At home, my parenting, was therapeutic and often counter intuitive for very good reason.. But the long term goal was achieved and not by expecting systems to change for her. Reasonable accomodations as necessary, but no teacher or other adult should be burdened because of what happened to her. We are a single family in the school and community, and all other families and adults must be completely respected.
Teachers, like Christina, are the people whom I depended on. And Christina ,I wouldn’t go as far with comments about certain families and their disruptive kids. Some parents have very few skills, but do truly care about their children and I tou know this too. But I completely understand the feelings behind this statement. You are a sensible, overwhelmed teacher who has been utterly and completely shackled by nonsense from outside the classroom and your outrage is more than justified. You know and live the reality, but of course are unable to even use your full name.
Yes educational research is in its infancy and it is vital, but it should not be harming other people as it presently does. And yes there must be good research. The ethics of this reseach need close examination.The general population, children, parents, teachers should not be harmed; transparency and consent should be required. I think lab rats are given more legal protection than many people currently receive.
On the “vagaries” of a 6 year old, I understand your perspective, but I do think that there is a whole lot we can learn from the kids who struggle with the system. There are many reasons that could be cited, and there is probably validity in looking at all of them.
But, if we’re committed to education for all—and quality education at that—we can no longer ignore the struggles that kids have in the classrooms. Those struggles could be seen as the problem, but they could also be seen as a symptom of something else. We owe it to our children (and our educators) to take a close look.
Many children are dysregulated and this can manifest itself in many forms. They definitely do need to learn self regulation. Educational research needs far far more knowledge and clear ethical standards that protect all. It is still in its infancy, I completely agree with this statement. The dates mentioned, 1600s 1700s and early 1900s make absolute sense to me. John Myers, I think your post giving this background was excellent. Trouble is, infants, by their very nature, lack knowledge and responsibility.Christina is one of the people who is being harmed and is scared to even use her full name. There are thousands more, many who daren’t even speak. Teresa Murray
Teachers already use the aforementioned techniques – humour, walks, runs, games, changing up the activity, developing personal relationships, free time breaks, talking to the child to try to figure out that child’s needs, etc. Let’s give teachers some credit here. I assumed we were talking about disruptive students who do not respond to any of these obvious tactics.
Sorry Paul.
Many children are dysregulated and this can manifest itself in many ways. They definitelty do need to learn self regulation. Educatiomal research needs far far more knowledge and clear high ethical standards.John I thought your post re. stae of educational research was excellent. And your comments about consensus at 1600 -1700 s stage seemed very accurate. Also your comments about being at early 1900s. made much sense. Trouble is infants , by their very nature, lack knowledge and responsibility. Christina is one of the people who is being harmed and is scared to even use her full name. There are rhousands more who daren’t even speak. We also live in 2016 and while I agree that ed. reseach is still in its infancy and will gradually develop, citizens of 2016 face huge difficulties coping with research that still at a much earlier stage of development. A century or two or three back as a stage of development is jarring to the general population , who rely on education.
Thank you, Teresa. Your comments are very much appreciated.
Christina I am a retired teacher and give you full and complete creit all the time. My posts got mixed up and came under different bames. One got lost so the organization of ideas was lost. Please re read few of last posts and you might make more sense. if it. I am Teresa Murray, retired teacher adoptive mother and due to my technical problems I posted under england 101..
Steven With an abundance of caution, I do take your point. We can learn from challenging kids and outliers. However, the realities Christina faces should not be happening and end up benefitting no one.
Teresa,
Actually, I’m not afraid to use my name, I just thought it didn’t matter. But you are absolutely correct that most teachers dare not attach their full name for fear of reprisals.So here it is.
Christina Dowell
Literacy Teacher
Kinomaugewgamik School
Shawanaga First Nations Reserve
Formerly taught for The Wast Parry Sound Board of Education and The Parry Sound Separate School Board.
I appreciate this conversation. I am also a retired teacher, but have two young boys moving through the system. Most of my teaching years were spent at Grade 7 and 8 level and, over the years, learned so much about working with this age group. Contentious at times. Difficult learning, but my last years in the classroom were definitely the highlights of my career.
That said, in the last couple of years at a K-8 school, I was required to cover planning time in some primary classes and I saw first hand what it means to have just one or two students that aren’t coping—for a variety of reasons. I also saw a huge difference in the way that some classroom teachers handled the situations. In all cases, it was stressful for all involved including, I daresay, the children and their parents.
My youngest has faced some challenges in moving from a play-based Kindergarten program to a more formalized Grade 1/2 classroom. Lots of factors involved. He’s a really creative kid who loves to be active. He loves learning and is happy at school—really happy. But there seems to be a point in the day—usually in the last 10-20 minutes when he’s just had enough. This is when we see some different behaviours.
We’re trying to get him to become aware of what is happening, when and why, but, at the same time, this is not something that a 6 year-old is capable of doing all that well. At least, not all 6 year-olds.
Would a bike work for him? Probably not? Would a change of scenery in the last 30 minutes of the day work? Maybe.
So all I’m saying is that we(as his parents) need to be open to lots of conversations and not get locked into just one way of thinking about things. We’re working closely with the teacher to ask questions about when he is really at his best—and what conditions allow those times to really take flight.
It’s a very personal journey at this point, and one that has me on the other side of the room!
An interesting book that offers some insights though the example come from the US and Japan is Elizabeth Green’s (revised edition) How to build a Better Teacher.
The beginnings and ends of the book offer summaries of attempt to promote sound teaching through better school “infrastructure” more of a reality in Japan than in the US (or Canada IMHO).
As per this thread, imagine if teachers regularly got to share insights and experiences-need BOTH- as is happening in this thread over the issue Paul presented.
Thanks John, just bought the book!
I agree with Biesta when he expresses concern over the loss of a focus on teaching, in favour or the “learning narrative” that is so commonplace in our schools.
The “facilitator-guide-on-the-side” aphorism, placed along side the rhetoric around “life-long learning” makes me wonder whether there is really room or need for the type of teacher that so many of us long to be. Combine all of this with “best practice” and “evidence-based” strategies and you might just be sidelining that core dimension of schools: that relationship (sometimes scary) between teacher and student.
A little off-topic, but perhaps not!
I noted above the sloppiness of language in ed and the lack of a consistent and clear vocabulary of teaching. Green notes this too.
Plumbers have it, doctors have it. Why don’t those of us in education?
in favour *of
Just a shout out to John Myers who, for many years, has offered one of the most popular courses in the teacher education program at OISE/UT. His “Models of Teaching” course allowed teacher candidates to reflect deeply on their practice the variety of strategies and approaches available to them. He knows of what he speaks!
You are too kind.
I am trying to get that elective course back into the program.
Probably need lobbying.
I would be interested in Johns commnts re. accountability, issues of consent and safeguards for children parents teachers pricipals with regards to ed. research and its application.
Parents and teachers from many countries and continents make coomon complaints. Definitely progress has been made in the last 50 yrs on a number of fronts, but fads far too prevalent. We see expensive boondoggles, poor leadership, lack of accountability, political interference, simplistic approaches, misunderstood and mis interpreted research. I come back to the issues of consent accountability protection for families and teachers at a much much higher level. People are harmed far too much and families struggle with all of this in an individual basis. Teachers are not being allowed to speak or have enough autonomy. This problem must be actively prevented at a high level. You did state earlier many of the problems with application of ed. research and they seemed very acvurate. If consensus is still at a very early level on much of the research; where are all the safeguards for front line workers and families. I have many concerns with the ed. of my younger child and like thousands of parents see minimal safeguards and too many problems. I go back to my statement about the lab rat getting far more built in protection than children recieve.
You would like Green’s account on accountability and its history.
You also might want read the work of Daniel Pink on motivation
and the Heath brothers on change.
The research on the use of “carrots” and “sticks” is disappointing. NCLB turned out to be a failure, in part because we don’t have a clearly defined benchmark or benchmarks, since we want schools to do many things.
What to do when a kid is a jerk to his peers but gets A+ on a math test?
Black and Wiliam note the black box of teaching. We dump lots of mandates into schools and assume they will be met, but we fail took at what REALLY goes on in classrooms and why. Green’s book touches on this. She is a big fan of “lesson study” as am I.
And what if parents in a community disagree? Democracy is messy.
I agree reality is hugely messy. I am driving at huge clearly stated warnings from researchers, akin to cigaarette packages. Do not try this unless …….Do not attempt unless following 4 main conditions are met.
I realise that this is a gross iversimpliication, and that plumbing is far less complex than education.
I think there a massive problem with intellectual vision at higher levels of ed. admin and bureacracy.By the time it gets to school level there is nonsense.
I realize I am being ludricous at some level, but children families and teachers get zero protection
i think warnings in bold bright letters and some legal protection is needed. at spot between research and its applucation. Doctors are higly trained and standards iiresearch are high,, safeguards are built in. Do not attempt unless …People will be harmed if…… You will face legal liability if…..Big bold and brighr for all those who dont read the details of book.
Even highly researched/tested new medicines come with long lists of possible side effects pointing to the fact that they aren’t going to work ideally in all contexts and with all people. What list of side effects might we include for some of our “evidence-based” breakthroughs in education?
This is why Hattie’s notion of
visible learning
and the importance of observing and offering quality feedback are SO important.
“teach, test, and hope for the best” never worked.
Re. ed. research with regards to teaching I have never been given warnings or at PD even balance, pros and cons. ever. So already the whole thing was suspect.
First large scale replicated studies with control groups
Move from academic research to
broad statements for a certain initiative
teacher of at least 7 yrs. experience
10 pilot studies in urban setting
75 % success rate
students must have auch and auch a resource
or. for next initiative
1 teacher has volunteered and read.. certain info. reading material should be excellent summaries of research and there must be differing viewpoints
2. no more than 3 students with ieps
3 we have done15 pilot studies minimum 15 000 students 3 in low income schools 2 in high income schools. and the rest mixed overall 80 % success rate according to such and such test
4 teacher must adhere to rules and provide pd for certain colleagues and be alloiwed to provide evaluation strengths and problems.
Do not attempt unless:
all students speak English
and can sit for work for 20 mins.
teacher must volunteer and work with a partner. -must then teach grade 2 after school blah blah
Teachers are not academics and are busy
parents must have some safeguards
1 such and such xhild will be integrated
If other children are scratched and bitten by such a child specialized tchr. will be sent for next 5 mths. instead of using an e.a. or class will be divided into 2 for rest of yr.
School must have walls.
There must be a room for quiet time on same floor or we will not go ahead.
The quality of ed. research ranges from suspect to excellent and the safeguards must be built into system
If expense ia problem research no matter how good cannot be used
Teachers do not need carrots and sticks to change. That is a condescending attitude.The problem lies far above teacher and principal. with major safeguards for families and front line workers completely non existent. Teachers and families are being duped and used and they know it.And this is happening on several continents.
I agree the medical model of research in ed. extremely expensive and ed. research is really at an early stage. Fine. Make that very clear to families and teachers . Be honest and think about the lab rats
I apologize: when I use my phone I make many errors and I don’t find them all.
I was trying to give 4 separate scenarios that would build in some safeguards. And the post is not clear re. these scenarios.
Unfortunately, workshop seldom if ever point put challenges with the benefits.
I try whenever I present to
– present pros and cons;e.g., effective vs ineffective groupings
– or a variety of approaches – a menu- from which teachers can use their professional judgement to select what they think works for them; e.g., the many ways we can provide quality feedback for students
.
What about safeguards built into system?
Teachers do use professional judgement obviously, however. this lack of balance speaks volumes about source and is indicative of poor professional judgement somewhere along the food chain. It is this lack of knowledge which confounds the system and is indicative of lack of accountability and transparency that i keep speaking of.. The system is to support teacher and child and is doing opposite. You may well be balanced but certainly pd at board level wasnt and this is not acceptable at all. Too much money spent and too much harm is being done. Slow progress made, minimal to no safeguards.
As a public system we have the messiness of options in any democracy- OK to the larger population
but for individual cases?
Not indiv. cases really.
Do researchers have more responibility to general public about reasonable use of their research and reasonable conditions that should exist? Since govt can misuse research, what can and should researchers do to protect the general public and the integrity of their research?
Do researchers speak up anywhere if they have have auch concerns.
Thank you for your time and answers. I have just been thinking out loud. I guess scientists tried to speak to Harper, ao I am guessing this is my answer. Thanks for your replies.
Please Stephen’s comment about warnings on medicines.
NOTHING works equally well for all learners all the time.
That is why teachers need to watch students as they learn. It’s called formative assessment. Once again the issue, as Elizabeth Green notes is
implementation.
The one thing you’re missing in your assessment John, is how governance and direction has changed in the ed system. Once upon a time, teachers were mostly left on their own, to figure out how best to teach their students. It took a lifetime, as with other professions, to learn their craft, but many had a great deal of life experience and took their profession very seriously when teaching children. Many called it their calling, and they were very respected citizens in their community. Now the system has betrayed teachers. The direction comes from the top down. Unions have twisted the message to teachers, pitting them against the government in charge, making their own grievances more important than what happens in the classroom. It’s become a much more litigious (sp?), narrow minded profession, and the frontline teacher has very limited opportunity to actually just teach. So enter the premise how education is now a business, where Districts and Ed Ministries buy the latest gimmick (i.e. exercise bikes) without using any common sense, budgetary constraints, or research to see if it’s even valid. It’s sheer lunacy.
So if this is the system that’s in place today, there absolutely, without a doubt, must be methods utilized that have common sense and validity in their effectiveness. We know personalized learning styles are a myth, so let’s just allow teacher colleges the research and knowledge about what really does work when it comes to teaching kids. Get some child psychology classes in their training. Why don’t we have mentoring programs for new teachers? Children can NOT be used as guinea pigs in experiments, just because the DIstrict ed consultant wants to try out the latest gimmick! No other profession would allow this. Why do we allow it for education? There must be stiffer rules and/or penalties to occur if we let this crap in the classroom. Some have called these gimmicks child abuse in the classroom, and I’d agree with them. Those working in academia don’t see it that way, because they’re not in the classroom. But parents do, and so do hundreds of thousands of frontline teachers. Why are our opinions and experience being ignored?
Get some meaningful evidence behind teacher training, and get it done right. And then just let teachers teach. And leave them alone to do their job, and to work with other teachers to perfect and hone their craft. It’s not rocket science, and for all we know about cognitive science and children, one thing is clear: they’re still kids. After all these years. They’re not lab rats, they’re not mini adults, they’re children. Still the same. So best we, as the adults, know what’s best for them using common sense and proven methodology. Surprisingly, those that are best, are those methods that our grandparents’ teachers also used. Best we get over ourselves, and understand that very simple (yet incredibly significant) point.
In too much of your post, things are overstated. Reference to the entire thread might have helped form a better case.
for example
“Once upon a time, teachers were mostly left on their own, to figure out how best to teach their students. It took a lifetime, as with other professions, to learn their craft, but many had a great deal of life experience and took their profession very seriously when teaching children. Many called it their calling, and they were very respected citizens in their community.”
This is still largely true. If there is less deference than in the past, teachers share this with doctors and other professionals. It is a price of democracy.
“Now the system has betrayed teachers. The direction comes from the top down. Unions have twisted the message to teachers, pitting them against the government in charge, making their own grievances more important than what happens in the classroom. It’s become a much more litigious (sp?), narrow minded profession, and the frontline teacher has very limited opportunity to actually just teach”.
Once again this is overstated. Compare to other countries such as the US teachers are not hobbled by narrow tests. What happens inside the classroom door may vary from official policy- real or imagined. I see this in the hundred of classrooms I visit over the years and with the hundreds of colleagues in several provinces I keep in touch with. We have no “curriculum police”!.
As for what ministries of education want; for example in Ontario curriculum expectation as to what is to be learned in a course are deliberately vague to give teachers latitude. Some of us think they are too vague in some cases.
“So enter the premise how education is now a business, where Districts and Ed Ministries buy the latest gimmick (i.e. exercise bikes) without using any common sense, budgetary constraints, or research to see if it’s even valid. It’s sheer lunacy.”
Note previous posts above.
“So if this is the system that’s in place today, there absolutely, without a doubt, must be methods utilized that have common sense and validity in their effectiveness. We know personalized learning styles are a myth, so let’s just allow teacher colleges the research and knowledge about what really does work when it comes to teaching kids. Get some child psychology classes in their training. Why don’t we have mentoring programs for new teachers? Children can NOT be used as guinea pigs in experiments, just because the District ed consultant wants to try out the latest gimmick! No other profession would allow this. Why do we allow it for education? There must be stiffer rules and/or penalties to occur if we let this crap in the classroom. Some have called these gimmicks child abuse in the classroom, and I’d agree with them. Those working in academia don’t see it that way, because they’re not in the classroom. But parents do, and so do hundreds of thousands of frontline teachers. Why are our opinions and experience being ignored?”
Much truth in this though I am in academia and am carefulwith my claims (see above posts).
“Get some meaningful evidence behind teacher training, and get it done right. And then just let teachers teach. And leave them alone to do their job, and to work with other teachers to perfect and hone their craft. It’s not rocket science, and for all we know about cognitive science and children, one thing is clear: they’re still kids. After all these years. They’re not lab rats, they’re not mini adults, they’re children. Still the same. So best we, as the adults, know what’s best for them using common sense and proven methodology. Surprisingly, those that are best, are those methods that our grandparents’ teachers also used. Best we get over ourselves, and understand that very simple (yet incredibly significant) point.”
Some truth in this though
– the world and its demands have changed since grandparents went to school
– this includes what we want schools to do (see earlier posts)
– no magic bullets, including “proven methods from the distant past” (see earlier posts)
To end in some agreement I wish more groups of teachers collaborated. The days of the solitary teacher should end since the job is tougher than it used to be.
I agree that Tara’s claims are somewhat overstated, but they do present some interesting threads for future conversation—threads that are out there in our schools, and in the public discourse about public education.
I don’t begin from the “lunacy” narrative that forms the starting point of some thinking here. I believe that our systems are well-positioned to meet many of the challenges of the current age.
There is an inherent (and historical) contradiction between “common sense” and modern scientific thought. We still want science to stand outside of knowledge of the world that comes through our “senses” in order that we might be provided with some sort of “truth” that we can take to the bank and apply in all situations.
Education research operates within strict ethical boundaries/restrictions and we will never be able to come up with something that is universally applicable. Long-standing discussion on whether teaching is an art, craft or science.
Our love affair with the scientific approach to the world sometimes forces us to actually use other ways of knowing. And I think that this is part of the challenge in education.
At best, education research can provide us with some new signposts and directions in which to look. Currently, it seems to be all about neuroscience and what new insights in brain research can provide for life in schools.
Magic bullets, quick fixes or universally applicable strategies are not (or should not be) the goal of education research.
As with all types of research, what we discover has a lot to do with the questions that we ask.
So what questions are we asking and, more important, why are those questions important to us? That’s where this whole discussion has led me.
So given the role and capabilities of research, I return to my questlon. Do researchers have more responsibility to the general public to make this point clear?
No, there is nothing that will always work for everyone. However, I have lived the opposite and I am certainly not alone. During the last 10 yrs I worked, organizational systems pushed me and others in a single direction all the time, so it became extremely difficult to use professional judgement. When resources,PD paperwork,visits by higher ups, subtle and not so subtle pressure to use certain materials and methods all the time do researchers have a responsibility to say that their research is being misused?That it ,it is not meant for every circumstance and every child all the time. Teachers can be encouraged to reflect, but when an organization is forcing a single viewpoint, do researchers have a responsibility to the general public and an interest in protecting their own work. I helieve Dweck and Gardner have both made comments and expressed concerns about misinterpretation of their research. This helps the general public and teachers. I am not questioning the ethics they follow when doing their own research. Yes, democracy is messy,but accountability, reason and clarification can modify overly extreme positions.Dweck and Gardiner seem to be taking a very ethical and responsible position when they make such comments.This is the point I have been trying to make. I am quite aware that nothing works all the time for everywhere, but it became and more difficult to voice that simple truth and professional judgement was increasingly lost. Tara’s children must have experienced some of this and parents,not only Tara, find their families hitting a brick wall.I had the same experience as a parent, particularly with my younger daughter.
I should have said, “Our love affair with the scientific approach to the world sometimes forces us to actually resist or sideline other ways of knowing.” It’s the caffeine!
Science does not answer all important questions though it offers useful directions since it largely consists of a bunch of rules that keep us from lying to each other-aadapted from humorist Dave Barry.
Otherwise we are stuck in the quicksand of opinion- adapted from songwriter and singer Michael Franks.
Barry and Franks represent other ways of knowing.
Also important that while we are entitled to our own opinions, we are not entitled to our own facts.
Michael Franks? Didn’t he write pospicle toes!
Interesting to look at the Greek origin of the word, opinion!
Franks did write that song.
If this was a debate regarding an untested medicine to be launched on an unsuspecting public, there wouldn’t really be much of a discussion. All would be in agreement that this would be unethical and it would not be allowed. Funny though, when it comes to education, where young children are involved, why is it that untested fads are allowed to be used on them. We know what works, so let’s use it. Teaching has lost its focus as our teachers are now being asked to be psychologists, social workers and parents…and teachers. And schools have lost their way. Public education is supposed to be using public money to educate children; that is the number one priority. And along the way that priority has been lost, by introducing convoluted learning strategies as well as expensive exercise bikes in the classroom. If the priority for teaching children is no longer valid, then shut the system down, give parents their own money to teach children how they see fit, and be done with it. But if we want the taxpayers to continue to fund this public institution, we need to do a much better job about ensuring standards continue to be upheld, and that our teachers be allowed to use proper instructional techniques in the classroom. As Teresa has remarked here, valid researchers ensure there is evidence behind their findings and they also have a decent set of ethics to ensure it’s efficient for children. These are the types of protocol which must exist if we are to use techniques in our publicly funded schools, so that the general public can have their faith restored in the system, knowing that there might be some accountability behind where all their tax dollars are being spent on. I wonder if the same debates are occurring in those countries whose academic standards are so much better than ours?
“If this was a debate regarding an untested medicine to be launched on an unsuspecting public, there wouldn’t really be much of a discussion.”
Actually other fields such as medicine are subject to misleading ideas
– vaccines and autism
– the nature and source of food allergies
– diets
– even exercise routines have changed as a result of new findings, some of which are trial and error
If we privatized education like medicine was hundreds of years ago we would have, among other things
– very uneven results
– even more conspiracy theories than we do now (killing cats to get rid of witches resulting in more rats and the plague: a situation to which I would not want to return.
As I noted much earlier, education to moving towards a more evidence- based endeavour though we are centuries behind medicine.
And medicine is far from perfect.
Yup! These conversations are happening everywhere. The body of research is international in scope.
But its not medicine, Tara, and its not business. It’s a human enterprise and it is not simple. We can’t keep going back to the same old analogies that just don’t work.
Schools have not lost their way, but they do stand at a place where new directions are possible. We’ve created this place of discernment, partly because of perspectives like yours (valid and important to understand) and perspectives that call for a different future for public education.
What we do in this time and place is important, but it is not necessarily self-evident.
Lots to agree here, Stephen. For example, take the role of new tech.
What promotes learning and what detracts from it? Jury is still out, though in my experience and the experiences of several hundred student teachers who have been investigating this in classrooms over the past five years, a mix of good and not so good.
There were similar debates in the 1500s when books were first being mass produced.
Even 300 years later we still had slates for student writing of notes.
And we still have lexctures, even when disguised as power points 😦
Ok Stephen. Then please send me your email address. I’ll be sure to forward it along to the hundreds of parents and teachers who have contacted me over the years, despairing how their students/children are falling through the cracks based on the bunk they’re learning in schools these days. You go right ahead and tell them they’re wrong to think that way. It’s clear that those who like to profess what a wonderful job they’re doing, are far from the realities of the classroom. As for education being a business, this latest post is yet another example about how it absolutely has become just that. No clear evidence about this bike’s efficiency, just more trends and fads that ed consultants and District Staff are pushing on schools based on a gimmicky sales pitch.
You know how schools work? If parents and students are benefitting from it. And right now, the answer is no. When we have upwards of 30-50% of schoolkids turning to tutoring/learning centres just to learn how to read or their times tables, that’s not a successful system Stephen, that’s a failing one. The other thing that is clear, is that several people who have commented here, are both current and past frontline teachers. They have indicated their dismay about this latest gimmick, and their concerns have been ignored. What does that say about acknowledging the realities of today’s classrooms, and where the real deficiencies lie?
For all the comparisons you’re trying to make between the inadequacies of the medical profession and the education one, it’s simply a false argument. Doctors do not prescribe medications which have not already been tested thousands of times prior to their release on the general public. But no such system exists in education. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. I am not interested in “opinions” here when it comes to educating my kids properly, I am only interested in allowing teachers to teach effectively. But in the name of profit, and slick business campaigns, and a huge over abundance of ed consultants at School Districts and beyond, it’s very clear that education most definitely has become a business. The very idea of our children being given anything resembling a decent education, in a public school, is also a relic of the past. Pity. Once upon a time the education system was designed and it set about to educate the masses. Now it’s only those that have the wherewithal, or the money for extra tutoring, that can benefit from the same public system.
I did have a question or two at about post 74 78 that I wss wondering about.
Medicine with its high standards is a different enterprise from education in many ways. Hard science is less crucial to the human enterprise of education.
Most of us dont interfere in the process of medical research and many of us are fortunate enough to be free of many of the diseases studied and tesearched, so may have a more indirect or passing interest in complex medical research.
Education is a much more human, local community based enterprise and families have more direct and long term involvement. Certainly mistakes and errors, huge ones at times, are found in both. Litigation and financial awards are certainly, part of the accountability system of medicine. The high life and death stakes of medicine, the litigation,room for serious error force doctors to be precise and at times overly defensive.
Education is different from medicine in many ways. Research is at a different stage of development and no one is afraid to voice an opinion about school.
A couple of points. Parents feel left out,: they are not academics, but are directly impacted by research and its many grey areas. My reading of Tara’s posts is that her family has been harmed and not mildly, but in a more serious way. I have experienced that exact pain, as have countless other families. If it is truly a human enterprise, more people should be included, not as academics, but as parents. Academics understand the grey areas, the ambiguities, the long term picture, the questions. Families are being harmed in quite serious ways, now, yesterday and tomorrow. Yes many were left out before and walked all over, we all understand that.The pain today , the outrage, the financial burden, the lost opportunity, the confusion of their children is what parents and teachers see. Vague academic statements, that we are moving forward into evidence based education and helping those who have been walked on before is ignoring the elephant in the room. The academics may or may not be accurate, but my question remains what can academics do to prevent or lessen todays problems.What should they do? It is in no way acceptable for families to be spending their own money to provide the very basics of a primary education. I paid money (as well as doing my own teaching at home). and I was very angry. Any sensible parent can easily detect the massive problems in math and they do recognize them instantly. If this is truly a human enterprise, we need to include many more participants and ask some different questions Now! A parent may or may not have a solid argument, but they are repairing the damage with their own money.
Stephen,as a father of young children, prepare yourself now for the shock of grade 9, when you may find yourself with mess to clean up.
I hear you Teresa! Seat belts fastened!
Ok get out your wallet.
Make sure they know fractions.
lol
Read Green’s book as noted above.
and
remember that
– Canada does better than the US in math- but not as well as Japan (also see Green)
– you cannot generalize for all provinces an experience based on one part of one province
Having taught in several provinces I can attest that curricula differ, even in math
“Most of us dont interfere in the process of medical research and many of us are fortunate enough to be free of many of the diseases studied and tesearched, so may have a more indirect or passing interest in complex medical research.” Unfortunately, as noted earlier this is not always so.
Public education is subject to democratic impulses, for good or ill. International comparisons have for years noted that in Canada’s case, this have worked out better than average. It is NOT the disaster portrayed in the previous post.
Is it perfect? no
Can it / should it improve? yes
Can governments do a better job in education policies? yes
Can governments do a better job in medical, transportation,legal, etc. policies? yes
If we want perfection, count on our faith traditions to guide us. Democracies can improve but never be perfect: merely better (to paraphrase Churchill) than any other system.
John I believe you’re comparison between the medical and education profession is off base. The medical profession goes through thousands of test trials and years of research before releasing new medicines on the general public. That does not occur with education. That is the point to what Teresa is saying. Do not confuse this with debates around vaccinations, or other subjective topics. Medicine is far from perfect, but the standards and evidence they have to support their findings, is much higher than we currently employ in our education system. When it comes to education, there has been absolutely zero evidence that the “experts” can provide, to suggest these newer products actually work and that they should be used in classrooms. And without this evidence in place, those in charge of implementing these products should be held liable if they are to be unleashed on unsuspecting children. This isn’t about debating whether or not these are good for children…this is about reviewing the evidence about if it works. And in the absence of that evidence, we should not be pushing this crap on our kids.
And in terms of perfection, that is a utopian vision. But in the absence of decent evidence behind effective instruction, what we can rely on, are those systems that have already been successful thus far. Those methods need to be acknowledged, and they need to be implemented with greater frequency, rather than spinning the proverbial wheel, looking for a quick fix solution.
BTW, Green’s NYTimes article comparing Japanese and American math is filled with inadequacies. However that is another topic, Just please stop pushing her book. And I look forward to debating the math question with you – at a later date.
Im not generalizing in the way you said. I am very familiar with issues in Ontario and beyond. i am not overly interested in intl scores and comparisons withU.S.
I am concerned about the struggles and real pain families are facing , the costs they incur, the possible solutions and the problems faced by families who have little money or opportunity.. I am unsure why you assume I am simply generalizing from my particular spot in the province.
Vaccination in medicine is not subjective though debates about its effectys are often subjective due to “political” or quack claims.
Many of your other points have been acknowledged earlier in this thread.
Familiarity with various jurisdiction includes curriculum comparison and classroom comparison. This is rarely done.
For all sakes we should be doing all we can to improve situations,let’s find stuff 5that is proven to work, but let’s not just throw accusations around- even if accurate they do not change things.
And in many cases; e.g. the new elementary sex ed curriculum in Ontario, accusations are unfounded on many levels.
No accusations here John, just facts. If you state you want evidence, then stick to that. Parents and teachers are up to their eyeballs with opinions and so-called quasi experiments gone awry. That is why so many parents are now taking on the education responsibility themselves by forking out big bucks for private tutors so their kids can actually learn. The system has failed them, and they are looking to fix it for their kids. Is that an illustration of an effective system working? How does that even remotely resemble the same flaws in the medical profession? I am within my right to be angry, and incredibly frustrated at those who have put this massive burden on parents, and frontline teachers, and whose children have suffered because of this educational malpractice. What’s it going to take to prove my point? A huge lawsuit against education ministries for failing to provide proper instruction for our children? Or how about starting legal action against those for interfering with teacher’s abilities to teach properly in the classroom?
I am not asking the system to be perfect, but I am asking that it be competent enough to provide a basic education for my children. Up until now, which has been 10 years for us, the only person who’s made that happen thus far, has been me…the parent, and a few very dedicated teachers who refuse to acknowledge the faddish trends which interfere with their teaching (at their own peril, I might add).
Discussions are always “subjective”. Facts aren’t. We’d be best to stick with what can be proven to be reliable, and effective, and leave the rest for the amateurs, not for the “professionals” involved in educating our children.
I await seeing facts
– how many / what percentage of dissatisfied parents and students?
– sources of dissatisfaction? note the controversy over sex ed curriculum in Ontario
– how many parents are dissatisfied but for a variety of reason put up with things?
How does this compare with other countries?
Was there some golden age when all was right with schools? Evidence says NO.
Nothing was ever 100% all right with schools John, but there sure was a great deal more satisfaction and confidence in the system previously than there is today. At its most basic level, it provided a decent education without having parents prop it up with extra funding via tutoring centres, or hours of teaching them at home in the evening. Not anymore. Kids can’t even count or read properly without parental intervention. That’s pretty poor.
If you have to ask these questions about parents’ dissatisfaction with our school system, it’s evident how out of the loop you might be. There are plenty of initiatives and advocacy groups speaking out against the same issues as I have; one only needs to pay attention. A suggestion might be to get out of the office more often, ask parents on school playgrounds (or soccer fields) about their thoughts on their child’s experience at his/her school, and instead of responding all the time, just listen to what they have to say, and encourage them to be honest. Perhaps that’s what our educrats are the most afraid of: the truth, which is why they’re constantly bombarding us with fads, and trends, rather than actually doing anything productive to solve the real issues in today’s classrooms.
If you’d like more evidence, here’s another place to start: Daisy Christodolou’s “7 Myths of Education” and Tom Bennett’s “Teacherproof”. Based on their own backgrounds (Daisy was once heralded as the smartest student in the UK; Tom was given the award as being the best teacher in the UK), I think they might actually know a thing or 2 about what might work with our kids.
As for ignoring the silent majority, that in itself should speak volumes to you John. Finding the facts behind my statements aren’t too hard to find. I’m just a lot more vocal than most, but there’s nothing new in what I’m saying. The system needs a serious overhaul, and Spin Bikes ain’t gonna do it.
Daisy and Tom are UK not Canada. They can validate some points but not all; e.g., they fail to distinguish between effective and ineffective groupwork.
I am both a parent and grandparent.
Spin bikes may NOT do it- I await evidence too.
Yes these authors are from the UK John but they expertly explore the same major issues confounding education that is evident in both the UK and Canadian systems. Former teacher/author Marc Lapointe also wrote an excellent book, and writes in a more frank way to help parents navigate the pitfalls of our education system https://www.amazon.ca/Standing-Education-Gap-Commonsense-Approach/dp/149170120X/183-7050693-6353363?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0. Just in case you were wanting a Canadian book.
Interesting that you brought up a topic that is completely irrelevant to the discussion, but because you asked… groupwork is highly ineffective in the formative years. Just ask the smarter kids in class. They all hate group work because all the other kids get to benefit from their work. The stronger students don’t benefit, and the weaker ones don’t either, because the workload is unevenly distributed. It should only be used sparingly, and even then, not until the kids are much older, and have a much firmer grasp of knowledge that they can share, rather than simply copying from the smart kids in the group.
Congrats on being a parent and a grandparent. My advice still stands. Get to know the truth by speaking to a lot more than your own sphere of influence. One thing is clear: experimenting with our children in the classroom needs to end. And if we do not have anything more to add in terms of making the system better, we need to rely on those techniques that have proven to be successful thus far.
The research base on what makes effective groups is powerful.
You need
– a common goal in which all must contribute in order to be successful
– individual accountability
The term used for such groupings- determined 50 years ago is co-operative learning.
Yes it is good for some outcomes, not all.
Sorry the UK class and private school system is very different there than here
and when comparisons are made internationally- Canada comes out ahead.
Yes, awards like “educator of the year” are far from being accurate barometers of what ought to happen in schools.
I learned in grad school that anecdotes + a tooney got me a coffee.
So
back to bikes and self regulation
– the need for self regulation is quite apparent in 2016 and it helps students, among other things to self assess in order to self adjust
– bikes as a tool? maybe but I await evidence
as i do for other innovations like the wholesale use of tech.
I recall folks ridiculing the idea that the earth revolved around the sun since common sense and our eyes seemed to indicate otherwise.
In the meantime I hope you have read the entire thread, most of which has been quite informative.
The % of Canadians who have completed post secondary education is way over 50% and in Ontario it is 66%. No jurisdiction on Earth can come close to this and this is BEFORE we made Ontario tuition free for our poorer students. I expect this will drive the total well over 75%. Everybody is calling this a “game changer”. Those critics who persist in saying that this is a bad system look increasingly foolish.
The stationary bike solution sounds like another fad so, if it is, the bikes will be sent to the gym and we will move on to the next “brain wave”.
Oh man! We almost got to 100 comments without the conversation turning south. Oh well. I’ve appreciated the insights expressed here.
BTW, Tara, I was named Educator of the Year once. John Taylor Gatto was named Teacher of the Year once. Not sure that it’s “necessarily” the best criteria for authority on education.
Again, Stephen and John are completely missing the point here. It’s a shame that neither have paid attention to Paul’s post, which refers to the work that Tom has done on Research Ed. It’s more about writing books, but knock yourself out with your own assessment. The fact that neither of you have heard, or even bothered to familiarize yourselves with the work that either Tom, or Daisy have done on evidence based instruction, is indicative of why education is such a mess these days.
I also find it rather amusing about how little John knows about what is going on across the pond, and his unfamiliarity with the changes that the UK is implementing with their new curriculum. It reinforces my argument about why there’s such dissatisfaction with the status quo here. It’s no different here than the UK. The public system in the UK is the same as here. Those who can afford it go to the private system. Those that can’t, use the public system. Does the UK still have a class system? Sure. But so what? Why is that even relevant to this discussion when discussing fads in classrooms?
And this blog entry is about the public system. Those higher up really have no idea about the large degree of dissatisfaction that parents and frontline teachers experience on a regular basis. This is troubling, yet not surprising. It speaks volumes about the state of our education system. And the disconnect about what needs to occur in order to make it better.
UK, England in particular has a teaching crisis on its hands. There is a severe and growing teacher shortage with huge numbers leaving before retirement often in the 1st 5 years.
When asked why they left, many said money but most said “accountability”. Teachers are fed op to their eyeballs with ever changing expectations, rubrics, scaffolding, 150 hours worth of demands to fit into 110 hours, differentiated instruction…
They have thinly veiled contempt for the MoE who they consider fad followers, rank careerists, incompetents, paper pushing bureaurcrats, and fawning sycophants of hack politicians.
They truly believe that government accountability demands are destroying professional judgement and autonomy.
These demands and the failure to raise wages in years have turned off teachers who recheck in their pensions for the earliest possible exit.
And so it seems like this is how most conversations here end up–with the assumption that someone just doesn’t get it! A real discussion-stopper.
I will say that I traveled to the UK in the fall to better understand the changes there, particularly through the eyes of arts education. I’ll admit to not fully comprehending the context but I do know that, according to educators on the ground, it mght not be the system to whch you want to be pointing for advice and example right at the moment.
I don’t know about you but I would prefer to be spend my remaining time on working for needed changes in the system with whch I’m most familiar.
It seems a little contradictory and more than a little presumptuous to assume that anyone sitting in an online environment (myself included) can make judgments about who is in the loop and who needs to get out more! We probably all need to do just that!
I am a member of a UK teacher’s association and have been for 30 years. When I first began teaching I was involved with a history curriculum reform begun in the UK. I have been published in a UK journal and have worked with people very familiar with the UK’s efforts in citizenship education.
Oh yes, Scotland;’s ed system is different.
I have also presented in international conference and no one from Hong Kong, Australia, Scotland, New Zealand (where I have also worked) said i did not know whereof I spoke.
I almost did grad school in the Uk both choose UBC in the mid 1980s in part because I knew I would get a solid foundation in quantitative and qualitative research with people who valued evidence over opinion, even when their views were challenged.
Stephen’s last two posts are so apropos.
Given what happens too often in blog threads it is not just children who need self regulation.
We need to be vigilant in citing evidence and not letting our (sometimes justified) righteous anger get in the way. Emotion counts, but it must be worked with, not dismissed, yet not be allowed to control the agenda. The Heath brothers’ work on promoting change speaks to this as does the nobel laureate Dan Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow.
I write on this blog because
– Paul’s post are thought provoking
– some threads force me to rethink things (a good thing) and in response I strive to cite powerful sources. It is not my place in this blog to offer a layperson’s guide to ed research though those who wish read Ellis’ book cited earlier.
I avoid other blogs because
– bloggers want to make points rather than engage in reasoned critical thought
– such mean-spirited and personal attacks based on NO proof strain one’s ability to self regulate.
Think about successful teachers (choir directors, acing teachers, and coaches) who can encourage students to try harder and not give up without heaping shame and humiliation or false praise.
Like Stephen it would be a shame to me if this conversation turned south.
I only get a little perturbed when the more conservative posters venture into their basic thesis that the Canadian system is not the world’s best system (it is), that teachers are not actually professionals like doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, …, (they are professionals), I could go on private good public bad, (nonsense) unions hurt education ( the opposite cn be proven)….
Stick to the issue of stationary bikes and related.
I don’t recall asking for anyone’s experience or credentials here, what’s important, is the topic of discussion. Regardless of a person’s background, unless they’re willing to cross over to the other side, and get to know the full extent of the discussion, it doesn’t improve anything to be surrounded by the same groupthink mentality. That’s why facts and evidence are important. And upon reading Paul’s latest entry here, he refers to Tom Bennett’s Research Ed, and looking at the requirement for evidence based instruction based on the fads and trends which have permeated our education system. Let’s stick to the discussion please. Which is this.
Unless the education system is willing to adopt the same strict standards about learning strategies that other professional organizations have, like law, medicine, engineering, etc., it will only continue to deteriorate. We’ve heard from teachers in this discussion that this latest fad is just dumb, and stricter standards need to be implemented to help support frontline teachers and prevent harm from children. There’s been countless examples of why parents have lost confidence in the system. I could go on here, but it seems nobody is interested in a parent’s point of view, because if they did, they might actually ask me how to make it better.
I have every right to be part of a discussion when it involves my own children. My own experience, where I’ve done my schooling (which included the UK by the way), what I have done with my own career and elsewhere, all contributes to a very involved experience in education, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest we are failing our kids by continuing to implement these hairbrained fads in the classroom.
Edubabble can only get a person so far. I’m the one paying for the system to exist, and I have every right to criticize ridiculous notions if there’s no evidence to support its existence in my kids classroom. And I have every right to call foul against those wanting to implement them. Evidence, facts, and meaningful resources for our teachers is what I support. Opinions are a waste of my time.
I am a teacher and I did a research study on the effectiveness of bikes in the classroom. Based on survey results, the principals and teachers who tried out this tool found it to be effective in improving classroom atmosphere which helped to create a more positive learning environment. Bike use in the classroom is based on research that shows that physical activity has a positive effect on brain function. Kids need to move and according to the Participaction research done in 2015, only 10 % of Canadian children between the ages of 6 and 11 are getting the required 60 minutes of daily physical activity. Schools need to promote healthy initiatives and the bikes represent one small way to show children that physical activity has an effect on their ability to calm down and feel better. This is an effective life lesson and personal wellness is one of our education system’s essential outcomes.
So then, in the case of bikes, we need to give it time, design some good research methodology and see where it takes us. We tend not to give things very long to take root before we move onto something else, so the chances of the education community building a solid research base on this particular implementation is in doubt.
I don’t think that this is a “high stakes” issue, but the underlying conversation about the value of research, what counts as evidence and how best to design research protocols in systems with strong ethical protections (and rightly so) is important to have—in all circles.
I still believe, however, that we need to put aside our personal beliefs about whether the system is currently in disrepair or the healthiest in the world. That clouds the conversation and prevents us from maintaining the momentum of the discussion.
I didn’t spend thirty years working in a crappy system. It’s not a helpful starting point, in my opinion.
Agree.
As for stating my credentials, it was done in response to
” The fact that neither of you have heard, or even bothered to familiarize yourselves with the work that either Tom, or Daisy have done on evidence based instruction, is indicative of why education is such a mess these days.
I also find it rather amusing about how little John knows about what is going on across the pond, and his unfamiliarity with the changes that the UK is implementing with their new curriculum.”
As for Daisy’s “myths’ taken from a UK context
namely,
“Facts prevent understanding
Teacher-led instruction is passive
The 21st century fundamentally changes everything
You can always just look it up
We should teach transferable skills
Projects and activities are the best way to learn
Teaching knowledge is indoctrination.”
These are “straw people”.
My decades of experience, including research in my own classrooms + now research in hundreds of other classrooms lead me to Stephen’s conclusion above. Daisy’s myths do not describe what we see in schools.
And Stephen , I come back to this again. Research ranges from poor to excellent. In the bike instance, issues of consent,transparency, accountability,even liability, particularly as relates to front line-staff and parents.And what responsibilities do researchers have to general public? the integrity of their own work., to speak up to govt and those who use their research? Once politicians and various levels of food chain get hold of research it can be mangled beyond recognition. I dont know if research has ever taken place in my kids classes, with the exception of agencies outside ed. I once participated in a study from MacMaster and signed protocols and got full information; that was done via school. I have some serious concerns about education research, which is still at a very early stage.and can often lack rigor. I do know that there have been teachers who have participated in studies and “research” , were given time free from class and had various sessions to plan and discuss. I only know this because I was a teacher. To me that it is highly concerning and I would not involve myself. Protocols?????
Teresa, your comments about education-based research are valid. Frustrated by the sense that we are, perhaps, trying to paint all ed. research with the same brush, I spent some time with this article, which may prove helpful in framing the conversation. Not sure, but it helped me in terms of categorizing the types of research that I consume and in which, at different times in my career, have been involved.
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Educational_research
Not all research is going to find its way into the field, and not all field-based research will capture the attention of academics.
But I think that the issues of “interest”, purpose and application are important ones to explore.
So, where best to place the research on self-regulation and, more specifically, spin bikes. I know someone that runs a company that sells this product and he reports being held to a very high standard of “claim” with Health Canada when advertising the advantages of this type of device.
Paul, I realize that this conversation runs the risk of going off in a different direction, it may eventually work its way back to the original questions that you posed.
Stephen, I agree that talking about a crappy system isn’t the point of any conversation, but it has to be acknowledged. I believe that when you started your career in education, it was a much better place than it is today. It’s deteriorated since that time, and now if it wasn’t for parents’ intervention, there would be even more kids falling through the cracks. I don’t offer this as an opinion, I offer this as evidence, based on the hundreds of emails, letters and comments I’ve received by parents AND frontline teachers throughout the last few years…telling me their stories. Are you to suggest all of us are wrong in our experience?
I don’t utter personal beliefs; I state my experience, as well as the evidence to support my statements. And my evidence is empirically based. However it is not up to me to state the evidence…it’s up to those to provide the same level of evidence to support their implementation of fads and trends into the system, morphing it into something that’s become a whole bunch dumber for our kids. That’s the issue here, not my belief system.
You said you have a 6 year old son. Be sure to insist he knows how to read properly, and master his times tables at the elementary level (long division and mastery of fractions is crucial at this level as well). Cracks usually start to occur in Gr.3. Insist he masters the fundamentals, inside and out, otherwise he’ll fall further behind and never have a chance to catch up. Hope he’s successful, be sure to stay involved with his education.
Thanks for the advice. Both my 9 and 6 year old have a love of learning and a innate curiosity that have enabled us to engage in rich conversations. They both attend a great school with wonderful teachers and a powerful admin team. They also have a great school council (Full Disclosure: I’m the Chair).
I don’t know whether the system was that much better when I first began in the profession or not. We certainly had more freedom for creativity and personal autonomy. But, at that time, we didn’t have official policies around inclusivity, special education. Nor did we have a “success for all” narrative running through the system as we do now.
What I can clearly identify over the years is a growing sense of distrust within the system. And that’s what bothers me the most. In Ontario, we saw it in the establishment of EQAO testing—the only change in education that has really stuck here. We have seen it in the deterioration of relationships between teachers associations and government. And we’ve seen it in a difference in the tone in conversations with many groups of parents.
I think that the system has changed, but I think that our view of public education has also changed. And that also concerns me—a great deal. But that, perhaps, is a topic for another time—with some red wine…
There is a study taking place at Dalhousie University right now testing the effect of the bike on brain function. Dr. David Westwood in the dept of kinesiology I believe.
Good to hear
Thanks for the comments here Jane. A tough thread to join after over 130 posts, but I would appreciate knowing more about David’s research!
You have just validated my point John. Thank you. Your utter disdain for people that challenge your own belief system is unsurprising. No, you don’t see it in our schools, because you’re not looking in the right places. The ivory tower mentality prevails. Good for you. The rift between reality and ideology in our school system continues to grow wider.
Self congratulating yourself on a job well done isn’t productive. I started and will now end my comments on the same point. Buy Kumon stock. It’s about to get a whole bunch more popular.
Experience + data + understanding and conducting quality research studies working with hundreds of teachers- still being a teacher+ challenging assumptions, even my own when they fail to match with reality.
Where do you get evidence of “distain” on my part? I could cite my life history and you would dismiss it out of hand. That is NOT what teachers should do.
There is no evidence of a general deterioration in Canada.
And as evidence? I cite research and publications that can be checked and verified or refuted. It would be nice if we all did that rather than state a claim and back it up with a stated claim by someone else in agreement with our original view.
This thread
taken as a whole
especially in the beginning
is reasonable
but
when motives are ascribed based on no evidence, conversations, as in real classrooms,
conversations deteriorate.
Knowing when one is starting to lose it
is a sign of self regulation.
There is evidence that exercise helps relieve stress.
If the stationary bike is an example of “exercise” then Stephen has a point when he says
“So then, in the case of bikes, we need to give it time, design some good research methodology and see where it takes us. We tend not to give things very long to take root before we move onto something else, so the chances of the education community building a solid research base on this particular implementation is in doubt.”
Stephen is also right in the tendency of jurisdictions not to give ideas long enough time to be properly implemented and evaluated.
– Co-operative group learning and direct instruction needed several decades to prove their worth empirically
– even the scientific revolution took a century
– medical research also takes decades (usually) to be accepted; even fast developments such as the use of drug combinations to treat HIV Aids took a decade, with modifications and revisions going on all the time.
Why does this not happen in schools? Because, among other things, the conditions underlying teaching are more chaotic than seeing patients one at a time in a doctor’s office. Teaching is more like being in an emergency room during a natural disaster- to quote psychologist Lee Shulman who has studied conditions in teaching and medicine for decades.
Self regulation among professionals means, among other things, always checking to see the impact we make on students is the desirable one.
This is the mantra of researcher John Hattie based on thousands of studies involving millions of students in several continents over three decades.
As for Kumon? one on one tutoring is powerful but hard to do in a typical classroom. And predicting the future of any stock can be disappointing?
History is full of examples of this.
As for the world getting worse . . .?
A useful scholarly analysis of our real world today compared to the “good old days” is Stephen Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature.
Time to take a breath and return to marking.
Tara
The Canadian system has never been better than it is today.
The Canadian system is the world’s greatest system in terms of post secondary graduation rate. It is not even close.
The prime directive of the education system is to graduate the highest % of students it can .
Nobody can touch this. Not Finland not Korea and certainly not the USA or UK.
Your core thesis that the Canadian system is not as good as it can possibly be is a dog that just won’t hunt.
No system is as good as it can possibly be, Doug. Tara and I disagree on our current state and trending patterns.
Even as I post there are a number of jurisdictions taking a closer look at how well post secondary education works. I think it works well, but NOT as well as it could.
I don’t doubt the quality of the bikes themselves;I am concerned with issues of supervision,space, consent, ‘chaos’ within a school or class. Exercise is crucial; as Paul said though , the literature mentions other factors. I would expect assistance and knowledge from an adult to be another; but over focus on one factor leads to fads, waste and cynicism, The anger on the front lines and expressed by many parents is palpable and seems justified. Once you have opened your wallet and spent a few thousand dollars of your own cash that anger intensifies even further. Of course, teachers are becoming scarce in England. The culture is different and more hierarchical than here, but many of the complaints made by teachers are the same as here.Yes,I was born there and went to school there until 12yrs so do keep an eye on current developments.
Some aspects of school seem to have vastly improved ; others tread water and I have seen deterioration in other areas. Expectations are extremely high and much of teaching is akin to emergency rooms dealing with a panic
I do have concerns about classroom management, which with a reasonable class should be perhaps better than it is.. I will sound like the old timer here, but in my tchr. training I was expected to have more techniques and ability than present day students. Yes this is personal experience only.
I am not blaming the ed. students, but they dont seem to get the same level and depth of official teaching and evaluation re. handling management of individuals and classes as in the ‘good old days.’I attended Queens in 1973 and it was quite liberal place at the time and I got some very thorough training in this area, which stood the test of time. I am talking from college and associate teachers. I have frequently wondered to what extent we create our own problems by ignoring more simple management methods. I do perceive a lack of knowledge of basic class management techniques, which then creates further problems which need to be fixed in overly complicated ways.And I think that the comments made by Tara that we are treating children in early grades as mini adults have much validity. Methods espoused and vigourously promoted in early grades , could be left until later, particularly given the vast range of ability and maturity found in early grades.There are thousands of families who have paid for basic math skills for their own children The anger is real, the emotion is very strong and it is totally unacceptable for parents to have to pay such costs. Observations only..(made over 34 years.) Data none. Experience and good instincts, yes.
Lots to agree with here. I teach class management techniques through my modelling in my curriculum course. Some folks just lecture about it- not the same as doing it.
+ my students debrief after practicum
I wish we knew more about what makes teacher education effective- too little research evidence here.
Date counts
so does experience – even better if data matches though in individual cases and classes it may not
instincts- not sure, hence self regulation
In my teacher training in 1970- not as strong on classroom techniques as today.
It may be that the demands of the profession have outstripped our progress in schools. In the old days you could let kids drop out. Not now- see earlier posts.
yes when i say instincts I mean experience, really. Often good experience aligns with good research and data. I do sense that experience is being pushed aside too much. Would like to see experience and good research complement each other more
agree, Teresa, especially since there is good research and “research” that is not sound
This conversation, in all of its diversity and richness, has led me to do some more thinking (and reading) about the nature, value and process(es) of educational research.
Read this earlier today; it captured some important points about the field, its importance and its future.
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ766608
Article raises issues I see here (in Canada and elsewhere).
In earlier posts I have suggested Arthur K. Ellis’ book as a guide for teachers and parents
as well as some outsiders (Heath brothers, Dan Pink and Dan Kahneman) to
inform discussions on change
Reblogged this on The Echo Chamber.
Reblogged this on The Echo Chamber.
Hi Mr. Bennett, Thank you for writing this article. Please have a look at my online petition to remove Mindfulness Meditation and Mindfulness-oriented programs from Canadian public schools. I hope you will report on it. https://www.change.org/p/minister-of-education-please-remove-the-mindfulness-program-from-canadian-public-schools
I’m a little perplexed that using exercise in the classroom is so controversial. We were meant to move and we are seeing the effects of a sedentary lifestyle. I don’t believe the spin bike is considered to be some uniquely special way of exercising but its relatively small and safe for the setting. As for self regulation, as we gain new understanding from the field of neuroscience we will have new ways of helping children learn. Surely we don’t believe that our learning institutions are not in need of improvements?