Group items tagged

always evolving

We have to keep developing our capabilities and avoid falling behind.

no matter how well prepared people are in their formative years, few can achieve and maintain their best performance on their own.

outside ears, and eyes, are important

For decades, research has confirmed that the big factor in determining how much students learn is not class size or the extent of standardized testing but the quality of their teachers.

California researchers in the early nineteen-eighties conducted a five-year study of teacher-skill development in eighty schools, and noticed something interesting. Workshops led teachers to use new skills in the classroom only ten per cent of the time. Even when a practice session with demonstrations and personal feedback was added, fewer than twenty per cent made the change. But when coaching was introduced—when a colleague watched them try the new skills in their own classroom and provided suggestions—adoption rates passed ninety per cent. A spate of small randomized trials confirmed the effect. Coached teachers were more effective, and their students did better on tests.

they did not necessarily have any special expertise in a content area, like math or science.

The coaches let the teachers choose the direction for coaching. They usually know better than anyone what their difficulties are.

teaches coaches to observe a few specifics: whether the teacher has an effective plan for instruction; how many students are engaged in the material; whether they interact respectfully; whether they engage in high-level conversations; whether they understand how they are progressing, or failing to progress.

must engage in “deliberate practice”—sustained, mindful efforts to develop the full range of abilities that success requires. You have to work at what you’re not good at.

most people do not know where to start or how to proceed. Expertise, as the formula goes, requires going from unconscious incompetence to conscious incompetence to conscious competence and finally to unconscious competence.

The coach provides the outside eyes and ears, and makes you aware of where you’re falling short.

So coaches use a variety of approaches—showing what other, respected colleagues do, for instance, or reviewing videos of the subject’s performance. The most common, however, is just conversation.

“What worked?”

“How could you help her?”

“What else did you notice?”

something to try.

three colleagues on a lunch break

Good coaches, he said, speak with credibility, make a personal connection, and focus little on themselves.

“listened more than they talked,” Knight said. “They were one hundred per cent present in the conversation.”

coaching has definitely changed how satisfying teaching is

trying to get residents to think—to think like surgeons—and his questions exposed how much we had to learn.

a whole list of observations like this.

one twenty-minute discussion gave me more to consider and work on than I’d had in the past five years.

watch other colleagues operate in order to gather ideas about what I could do.

routine, high-quality video recordings of operations could enable us to figure out why some patients fare better than others.

I know that I’m learning again.

It’s teaching with a trendier name. Coaching aimed at improving the performance of people who are already professionals is less usual.

modern society increasingly depends on ordinary people taking responsibility for doing extraordinary things

coaching may prove essential to the success of modern society.

We care about results in sports, and if we care half as much about results in schools and in hospitals we may reach the same conclusion.

discussing how

not solve as many

Does discourse result in deeper processing?”

focused engagement

“Children need to learn how to read a book,” he says. “They need to learn how to ask questions.”

social networking, playing video games, tinkering with digital media

Upon hearing someone castigate students for being insufficiently motivated, a noneconomist might be inclined to ask two questions.  The first is:  “Motivated to do what, exactly”?  Anything they’re told, no matter how unengaging, inappropriate, or, well, demotivating? 

Whenever I see students made to cram facts into their short-term memories for a test, practice a series of decontextualized skills on yet another worksheet, listen passively to a lecture, or inch their way through the insipid prose of a corporate-produced textbook, I find myself thinking of a comment made by Frederick Herzberg, a critic of traditional workplace management:  “Idleness, indifference, and irresponsibility,” he said, “are healthy responses to absurd work.”

The more you reward people for doing something, or for doing it well, the less interest they typically come to have in whatever they had to do to get the reward. 

People who blame students for not being “motivated” tend to think educational success mean little more than higher scores on bad tests and they’re apt to see education itself as a means to making sure our corporations will beat their corporations.  The sort of schooling that results is the type almost guaranteed to . . . kill students’ motivation.

one thing that’s happened is a concatenation of rewards and punishments, including grades, which teach students that learning is just a means to an end.

Another thing that’s happened is teaching that’s meant primarily to raise test scores.

inner-city kids get the worst of the sort of schooling that’s not about exploring and discovering and questioning but only about working hard (often at rote tasks) and being nice (read: obedient).

“Motivation is weak because more students…don't like school, don't work hard and don't do well.”  But why don’t they like school (which is the key to understanding why, assuming his premise is correct, they don’t succeed)?  What has happened to their desire to figure out how things work, the hunger to make sense of things, with which all children start out? 

if you want to see (intrinsically) motivated kids, you need to visit classrooms or schools that take a nontraditional approach to education, places where students are more likely to be absorbed and frequently delighted, where what they’re doing is not merely “rigorous” (a word often applied to very difficult busywork) but meaningful.

“Make a concerted effort to raise the status of the teaching profession”

University teaching programs in the high-scoring countries admit only the best students, and “teaching education programs in the U.S. must become more selective and more rigorous,”