Professor in Mathematics Education, Director of Research,
@MASEsoton
, TIMSS+PISA, Research Methods, R, School Mathematics Project, Crazy in An Endearing Way
Alright, let’s do it.
See
Click ‘Access to SMP’.
Read and register.
Presto: access to dozens of pdfs of SMP books.
If you want more, RT, like and love....
Tx to Frances,
@chilledmaths
,
@stevejodwin
,
@MrBlachford
,
@splashpedaltri
and Helen.
It's important, in my opinion, that teachers *do* get more grounding in research, and researchers engage more with practitioners, just to make sure we don't get a group of in-between brokers incorrectly and onesidedly 'simplifying' complex ideas for others as snake-oil for £
This paper will receive enormous scrutiny, more than Sweller's 80s papers or one of the author's (Koedinger) learning rate regularity papers. Why? Because they disagree. 😎 -> The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction.
Reading the Ofsted maths review a bit more. I really think the categorisation of knowledge is very limited with declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge. The latter is not used a lot afaik but is metacognitive and strategic in nature (but metacognition not mentioned).
With very few exceptions those talking about a 'knowledge curriculum' are citing very limited references, like Hirsch, chess research, the word gap etc. Can we have a bit more critical engagement as part of being 'evidence-informed'?
When you use statistics, it's important to be aware of the distribution of your data. Mathematics teachers for GCSE need to teach this, for example, in the context of when to use mean, median or mode. Let's use an adaptation of a recent example that imo was misleading.
It's strange some see majority of CPD in weekends and breaks as positive for a profession. I would think that professional development is part of your job, not your free time. Together with 'I care for the disadvantaged' it's the new virtue signalling...
I don't understand we still haven't received evidence for "the quality of ITT is too low for too many teachers" (although 'too many' is nice and vague of course) - also bit childish to call it 'histrionics'
This is a great thread about the (new) ITT criteria. It amazes me that England has let a handful of semi-informed people 'reform' ITE in the way they did.
@educationgovuk
have now published the
#ITT
criteria for 2024-25. There are some big changes which come from the market review. Some of these really risk the quality of ITT provision and creating further problems for recruitment and retention. Someone needs to get a grip. 🧵🪡
Has anyone already seen robust blogs explaining why world outside England copes quite nicely with fair education systems with good performance, without formal teaching from the age of 4?
It would be nice if the 'evidence informed teaching' movement would realise a bit more that the institutions producing their evidence, mainly universities, are under fire from the very same government that purportedly 'loves' evidence.
I would really like to speak my polite mind about some of the popular 'evidence-informed' topics to edutwitter but professional offense-taking (not seldom by those who complain about other's offense-taking) just makes me think life's too short...
Edutwitter is so so flexible with ‘evidence’. One monent they can criticise a randomised controlled trial for 20% attrition, the next they quote unrepresentative polls done by advocacy organisations.
Played some chess with my son and thought the Evand Gambit would be nice (tx
@agadmator
). Of course I underestimated a surprising counter and was crushed.
These were the slides I used for my talk yesterday in Oxford. Let me give it some colour in a thread ->
From novice to expert: A critical evaluation of direct instruction by
@cbokhove
This is good, but I would like to point out that if edutwitter claims "we were nuanced like this all along", maybe some folk were, but by-and-large edutwitter wasn't...
Explicit instruction is not a one-sided process but a complex social interaction requiring mutual adaptation from teacher and learner, explain neuroscientists
@utafrith
and
@cdfrith
Too many people who know a little bit about cognitive science but almost nothing about mathematics education....pontificating about how mathematics should be taught....
Prior knowledge is front and center of many edutwitter discourses but it’s interesting that if you demonstrate it in the field of (education) research some just dismiss it as arrogance, pedantry or bias.
Schools already have a 'trip advisor' like stars/reviews system on google maps...I think the quality of those reviews shows it might not be a good idea. This is the school my kids go to.
Ebbenhaus. Not trendy still useful.
Thorndike on transfer. Not trendy still useful.
Bloom on instruction. Not trendy still useful.
Bruner on scaffolding. Not trendy still useful.
Brophy, Good, Carroll. 60s/70s. Not trendy still useful.
Sweller. 80s work. Not trendy still useful.
I will indulge in another personal tweet cos today is exact day 20th wedding anniversary. Photo 12 October 1998 in Purmerend, the Netherlands. In back kids from school wife was at.
The 'science of...' narratives, as if decades of education research did not include cognition or instructional science, are tiresome. They negate decades of good (and I'm sure less good) education research. It's a misleading narrative. It also cherrypicks particular 'science of'.
Just finished
@daviddidau
's book. It's good. Very strong 'chain of reasoning'. Some parts I would have loved some time to further elaborate (eg Geary) but that's just me. In my opinion, on balance (pun intended), one of best edutwitter books around.
The problem with teacher shortages is that they always are 'solved' by lowering standards, cancelling groups, asking others to do more. It's in educators' nature. As a result govt thinks the shortage is not so bad.
“Qualitative interviews from two schools…how can you generalise across that…you see education research is bad.”
“Now apply this RCT with primary private school students to this secondary school in a different country cos ‘cognitive architecture’”
Has someone formally looked at the effectiveness of watching Horrible Histories. I love it and the 'fun' does not seem to be in the way of learning. Memorable. I often sing Born 2 Rule.
I have mentioned before that one criticism I would place with Rosenshine is that I thought that for a 2012 publication, having more than 80% references from before 1997 isn't very impressive when it comes to being 'current'.
I have retired from prog/trad discussions because I never had the sense those ‘discussing’ it really want to further understanding, rather wanted a stick to beat others (‘othering’) and make easy generalisations. Plus ça change.
Super interesting. And shocking.
It also was interesting that, although non-significant, with no financial incentives published was quite a bit more negative.
This is a pretty shocking finding from the
#GrowthMindset
meta-analysis:
"Authors with a financial incentive to report positive findings published significantly larger effects than authors without this incentive."
I know it’s en vogue to say ‘you haven’t taught in a challenging school’ and yes that might mean you understand their challenging less than if you have. But what if you *only* taught in challenging schools, might you perhaps miss out on some experiences as well?
If someone proposes that ‘achievement leads to motivation’ and not ‘motivation leads to achievement’, can you please (1) correct that error and posit it’s bi-directional (2) ask for source of claim, likely to be one cherry picked study (3) ask ‘what if someone performs badly?’
Listening to
@TWPerry1
talk through the cogsci systematic review…
The basic science is sound, but there is a lack of ecological validity in the studies. Studies of applied practice are inconsistent.
Very low confidence in many areas….
Interesting. Not surprised ‘differentiation’ term so diverse that hard to draw conclusions. Doesn’t prevent some people to call it 👍 or 👎 -> A scoping review of 20 years of research on differentiation
Some ppl seem surprised I 'like' and RT tweets from ppl who could hardly be called constructive.
It is because I judge on substance, not some tribal 'feels' that compel me to idolise what my friends do and thrash or ignore my foes.
I try to sometimes counter overly onesided and ‘certain’ tweets about evidence, but if the ones doing it keep muting me...it will be to no avail. You can defend muting by suggesting it is *me* doing something wrong (tone? Oh irony) all you want; I suggest it’s your bias.
I see lots of things I like and don't like at conferences, be they BERA or researchEd, ICME or ICTMT. I still support all of them though, and gladly present. The moment you curate away all that what jars, you are missing out, in my opinion. ✌️
The main purpose of my sarcastic diagram has always been to highlight double standards. If you dismiss fairly rigorous studies for some flaw when we all know you disagree with the outcome, then it is a bit opportunist if you then ignore flaws when you support the outcome.
I know I can’t expect everyone to studiously analyse every graph they encounter, but if you make a big claim, I think you should. The fact that not many seem to ask themselves what the provenance of Hirsch’s data for this graph is, is worrisome.
We have now digitised the three oldest
#smp2
series and are looking into the best way to distribute them. It’s 28 Gb. That will be great.
Even better...if we can get funding to make a new set of book of the old books, fit for the current curriculum, at low cost.
"Our job as a review group was to use the evidence to make recommendations" - well, we're some time in and that evidence about the insufficient quality of ITE not delivered yet. Just increasingly vocal anecdote.
CESE stuff on Cognitive Load Theory best stuff around on it cos it uses correct wording *optimise* load and includes limitations. Note, though, that many of findings predate CLT for example strategy 3, which is basically Bruner’s scaffolding
Just posted our, me,
@JohnPeterJerrim
,
@DrSamSims
1st working paper from Nuffield funded project 'Inspecting the Inspectorate'. The paper is called 'Are some school inspectors more lenient than others?'. Find the paper, press release, and other sources on
There are 17 principles of Rosenshine but only 10 in the publications (UNESCO and American Educator) are somewhat explained. Some you see seldom mentioned, in my opinion several points are underspecified.
In Singapore the curriculum approach is a spiral curriculum. The pedagogical approach is one using the Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract, based on Bruner (if you want to know current psychological research on this, search for Fyfe et al.)
#bcme9
I understand some of the skepticism re ‘metacognition’. Like terms like ‘explicit instruction’ it is awfully broad and covers a range of ages, subjects and what all. However, doing the review for the EEF did convince me that there are a lot of good ‘metacognition’ studies.
"Avoid using single-item measures of complex constructs (eg, motivation, confidence, satisfaction, resilience)" -> 7 Deadly Sins in Educational Research -
The total amount of (education) research we produce is enormous, too much in my opinion. Obviously that means there's a lot of research of every quality. I think it's ludicrous to generalise about the quality of (education) research.
“Cognitive load effects that are found for ill-designed
instructional materials (e.g. split attention) are not found
when learners are explicitly taught how to reduce the
associated extraneous load.”
I have analysed Sweller et al (1982) in so much detail, and it would be so complex to *write* a clear blog on it, that I’m considering doing a vidcast, narrating my thoughts while going through the paper....
It can't be surprising that if a closely knit echo chamber on edutwitter pumps round edu clichees, these don't resemble the views of a representative sample of teachers.
‘High and dry’ in England includes a meaning of ‘being in a helpless or abandoned position’. In Dutch ‘hoog en droog’ often means you’re safe (high) and dry. Probably represents our different ‘water’ contexts.
@MrSmithRE
I don't know who told you that ITE doesn't get high level scrutiny. Without at least a 'good' they are closed down. I also don't think there is a 'weight' of anecdotal evidence, given that at least 30,000 trained per year. What 'weight'? Other sources like the NQT survey..
I really try to do my ‘outreach’ best by -as researcher (but also former teacher)- contributing to researchEd, the chartered college, TES, but sometimes it just feels pointless.
One interesting thing in the recent phonics trial, which also happened with an assessment for learning trial and a mindset trial, is the issue that we often want trials for phenomena that already have become popular and pervasive.
Already bit nervous. Thursday leave for Shanghai with my daughter. First time mainland China. Invited talk for the new Asian Centre for Mathematics Education at East China Normal University, a panel and co-chairing a session at the Third Chinese Congress on Mathematics Education.