The science of education module at Bangor university.

This module is quite unlike any others within the university. It’s design of using no lectures and instead requiring the student to do weekly blogs and talks, at first seemed quite a scary concept. Scary because the lack of guidance in this course is unlike any other, and it seems we’re creatures if habit and don’t like change!

However throughout the module i became able to appreciate he benefits of self-directed learning. Both my blog content and my opinion concluding that it is indeed the best type of learning, as it gives the learner freedom to explore what they are interested I’m and display their intelligence how they do it best. Obviously this module has guidelines to follow eg must be related to education and psychology but other than that we have been able to talk about whatever we want.

Personally from this module I can’t recall a big list of required facts and definitions but I could talk in detail about a range of things I’ve researched, commented and blogged about. I feel this module has developed my confidence with public speaking and resulted in more creativity than any other module, letting my mind flow and really think about things rather than store facts. The module has allowed me to focus on something I am interested in and tell others about it (through blogs), it takes the pressure off the student by not having exams and not really worrying about grades too much which allows the leaner to focus on what they should be doing, learning.

My major concern with the module however is that it is too short. As when you stop being sceptical about the method and what is expected and just allow yourself to discover new things and get creative the module is nearly over!

Therefore to conclude if you feel a good module is one which prepares students to recall information in exams then the science of education is a rubbish module. However if you feel a good education involves creativity, critical thinking, discovery and originality then this module is the one for you. It’s a shame other lecturers and universities don’t see it this way and are not prepared to introduce self-directed learning allow creativity into the classroom.

Don’t just listen- Self-direct!

Throughout my weekly blog topics I have discussed different aspects of this course including lectures, video talks, feedback and self-regulated learning. Although each blog has resulted in its own conclusions regarding the methods’ success within education, an underpinning theme has occurred throughout. Student direct learning has become the prevailing theme, with each blog naturally identifying the success of the students taking the initiative and responsibility for their own learning and demonstrated how this can be used to enhance learning.

As a result of the identification of the success of self-directed learning, I feel students should be allowed more freedom to manage their own learning, particularly at university level. Just one example of a way of doing this was identified within my blog on Video Talks which demonstrates how students can either produce or watch talks that they are interested in, rather than being limited to just one lecture (an issue which arose within my blog on lectures), they have the freedom to choose their own topic and have the opportunity to spark debate. However, a major issues which is associated with self-directed learning is the heavy requirement for the individual to be motivated, although this is solved within the method itself! Give the individual the opportunity to explore the resources out there and find a topic they are truly interested in and they will gain motivation, whether it be trigonometry or how to build a motorbike – it’s all learning. Their passion for their topic will make them want to produce talks, they’ll be enthusiastic to express their opinions and inspire their peers. What is the chance of the information in a lecture inspiring 300 students in this way? As my blog suggested, lectures are an ideal way of spoon feeding vast amounts of information, but do they inspire creativity or do they just bore students and tell them what to recall for exams? I propose that, in line with self-directed learning, we should focus on each student as an individual learner, and that they should be allowed to lead their own learning experiences, to discover information that fascinates them, not what a lectures wants to stand on a stage and talk about for 2 hours.

A process involved in self-directed learning is self-regulation, which involves the learner managing each stage of the learning process from planning and performing a task to evaluating their performance. Research such as that conducted by Zimmerman (1990) demonstrated success of self-regulatory practices, particularly at a young age therefore I believe self-regulatory skills such as the ability attribute success and failures should be introduced and practiced within schools, in order to create a basis of skills essential for self-directed learning.

Another blog within the topic on feedback identified how despite formative feedback being the most preferred feedback, summative grading could be used as a method to encourage self-regulation, encouraging the learner to self- evaluate their own and peers work, attributing their performances strengths and weaknesses, acting as a learning technique within itself, therefore demonstrating the usefulness of self-regulation and its role within the self-directed learning process. As a result of this I recommend that the focus should be on developing self-directed learning skills and allowing the learner to evaluate their own and peers work to provide detailed feedback and enrich their understanding. This could be positively implemented within the education system as it reduces the teacher’s feedback workload whilst enhancing the individuals learning process.

My blogs highlighted that all too often we demand that teachers ‘do their job’ and provide the information and feedback to allow us succeed in exams, but does this help us succeed in learning? No, it may help for exams, which unfortunately is the focus in the current grade driven education system, but it doesn’t inspire students, it doesn’t lead to creative thinking or enhanced understanding. Blogs written by both myself and fellow classmates (eg Craig, Tristan or Ellen) and even external wordpress users, have demonstrated how self-direction enhances learning, therefore I propose implementing techniques which enable students to have control over what and how they to learn, providing students with freedom will allow them to release their individuality whilst discovering information that inspires them and motivates them to continue, unlike creativity killing exams and lectures.

“Do not train children by force and harshness, but direct them to it by what amuses their minds, so that you may be better able to discover with accuracy the peculiar bent of the genius” Plato

“Study hard what interests you the most in the most undisciplined, irrelevant and original manner possible” – Richard Feynman

Is feedback really all that important?

A quote by Phil Beadle (2012), who won secondary school teacher of the year, describes marking and giving feedback as

“The most important thing you do as a teacher. All the other stuff is of no use whatsoever if you don’t mark your books properly.”

Personally I feel this is a bold statement to make, this blog will address the use of marking and feedback within education, and whether it actually is as vital as most people perceive it to be. In addition to this, throughout my blogs the topic has been focused on methods of teaching and learning throughout this module, and this blog is no exception, I plan to address the methods of feedback used within this module.

The common view of feedback is inline with Beadle’s opinion that feedback is important as without it students do not know if they are correct and therefore require feedback to further develop their learning and understanding.
It is widely appreciated that there are two main types of feedback; formative and summative. Ronayne (2001) suggests formative feedback expresses progress and is used to increases student motivation whilst improving both the teacher and learner. Black and Wiliam (1998) suggest that this method of assessing students is often referred to as assessment for learning as they provide inform ion to assist improvement rather than grades. Summative assessment however is unfortunately more common and is an evaluation of learning often based on examinations and therefore in the form of grades or scores.

Black and Wiliam (1998) indicate that there is too much emphasis on grades often derived through summative evaluations within the education system, whereas providing constructive advice to enhance learning is often lacking. Marking students work through summative methods and providing a grade can have negative consequences on the learner, Black and Wiliam (1998) imply that poor grades can reduce motivation in students who felt they tried as hard as they could. They further this by suggesting all too often grading results in the comparison between students, rather than striving for personal improvement they are focused on beating their class mates, perhaps instead the focus should be on how to help each other develop and improve. One way this can be done is through peer assessment, which as suggested by Bostock (2000) can benefit both the learner and the assessor as it provides feedback whilst demanding evaluative and analysis skills. Black and Wiliam (1998) imply that peer assessment results in disscusiom and the formation of debates, thus leading to an expansion of knowledge.

This module provides students with nothing but a grade each week. But why is this? Perhaps because as customers of education we demand to be provided with guidance and prompt feedback from our lecturers, and as a society we demand that teachers can provide accountability for their work. But realistically does this grade provide an explanation of how to improve or does is it just a way of comparing how you and your friends have done? It is important to appreciate that merely providing feedback isn’t always successful, research by Maclellen (2001) found that over 30% of the university students asked felt thy feedback did not enhance their understanding, therefore is it worth having feedback for the sake of it?
However the main focus of evaluation in the module is peer assessment, throughout blog comments each week, fellow students can provide feedback on our work, which in turn produce discussion. It’s through this concept that Black and Wiliam (1998) propose students can improve, cooperate and become involved in their own learning. Bostock (2000) demonstrated that like within this module, having multiple students assessing each other’s work and using internet based feedback enhance the success and management of the method.

My blog last week on self-regulation indicated that reflecting and assessing our work is an important part of the learning process (McCrae, 1993). Nicols and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) suggest that formative feedback can be used to support self-regulated learning and help the individual control their learning as long as it abides by 7 principles, one of which is facilitating self-assessment, therefore indicating self-assessment is needed in addition to feedback. Although students don’t need to be spoon fed feedback, we gain a better understanding and develop motivation and evaluation skills through self-assessment.

A research study conducted by Stefani (1994) compared self, peer and tutor ratings of work completed by 80 students. Results indicated that although self marks were slightly lower than that of their tutors, and peers rated the work slightly higher, overall student assessments are reliable and represent the views of the tutor. The paper also established the positive effects of both peer and self evaluation, indicating that it results in increased motivation and allowing the individual to appreciate their strengths and weaknesses.

I think it’s fair to conclude that detailed formative feedback can help direct a student to improve, but simply marking work doesn’t particularly benefit them, and therefore I disagree with Beadle’s (2012) statement that marking is the most important role of a teacher. Merely knowing they’ve got 7/10 correct or a B on a piece of work doesn’t show them where they went wrong, it sets a comparative level, and perhaps something to strive to beat, but it doesn’t explain the strengths nor weaknesses of their performance. Often the concentration is put on the quantity not quality of feedback, the NSS asks student whether their feedback has been prompt but this isn’t a measure of useful feedback, does the speed of feedback significantly impact learning more than detailed applicable quality feedback?
I appreciate the current education system relies on grades as a method of determining students ability and a way for accounting for teaching, therefore cannot be abolished, instead I propose more time should be spent helping students develop analytical skills so they can provide feedback on their own and peers work as this helps produce discussion, motivation, thorough understanding and evaluative skills.

References:

Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998), ‘Assessment and Classroom Learning’, Assessment in Education.

Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998), Inside the Black Box.

Bostock, S. (2000). Student peer assessment. Learning Technology.

Phil Beadle (2012). The importance of marking. New Teachers.

Maclellen, E. (2001) Assessment for learning: the different perceptions of tutors and students, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 307-318.

McCrae, J. (1993). Self-assessment: An essential learning key. The higher eduction academy.

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D., (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice.

Ronayne, M. (2001). Marking and feedback. Journal Issue, (2).

Can we learn entirely through self-regulation?

This week’s blog is going to be based on self-regulation, a process used within this module. Zimmerman (2002) describes self-regulation as the process of transferring mental abilities into skills that are essential for learning, it relies on high self-efficacy and motivation towards learning.

Furthermore much research has devised three elements of self-regulated learning (SRL):

Zimmerman (2002) suggests SRL involves:
1. Planning.
2. Performance.
3. Self-analysis.

Pintrich and DeGroot (1990) indicates that:
1. The learner initially uses metacognition to analyse the task.
2. The learner must use self-motivation to develop learning strategies to perform the task.
3. The learner must self-reflect on their achievements, attributing success or failure to the strategies they used.

Bandura (1991) stated SRL involves:
1. The individuals behaviour (including the causes and consequences).
2. Assessment of our behaviour in accordance to own standards and environmental conditions.
3. The affective response from the behaviour assessment.

From the different descriptions of the three elements I feel that it is fair to conclude that self-regulation is a proactive procedure, where the learner manages every stage of their learning from the strategic organisation and motivation to the actual action and the reflection of their performance, therefore SRL is very much a student led learning process.

Research conducted by Hiebert and Wearne (1996) suggested that instruction which promotes self-regulated learning, also endorses greater levels of understanding. Similarly Zimmerman and Schunk (2013) highlighted how successful self-regulatory practices can be within schools, although despite this the education system rarely encourages such learning processes. Instead the focus is on how much information students can remember and regurgitate in an exam, rather than integrating skills into the learning process to enhance engagement, motivation and understanding.

Research has demonstrated how self-regulation is a vital component throughout the education system from preschool to university level. Anderson (2002) established that skills associated with the self-regulation such as attention and memory are essential for providing a basis for appropriate classroom behaviour. Having the ability to self-regulate lesson engagement at a young age has been found to have positive long term effects on learners self-efficacy and academic performance (Fantuzzo et al, 2007). The development of appropriate learning styles and the ability to assess these to determine success and attribute failure is necessary for future academic achievement.

Duckworth et al, (2009) indicate that self-regulation is effective in enhancing children’s academic achievement as well as contributing to their behaviour, self-efficacy and motivational discipline, however, my evidence for successful self-regulated learning in university is a bit less scientific. It’s based on personal experience from this module. Through the minimal guidance approach I have had to self-motivate myself to organise my time, thoughts and ideas, using strategic methods to research and produce a blog. I then have reflected on the processes I used to gather research, whether I presented my argument as clearly as I could and determining the strengths and weaknesses in my performance. This module demonstrates significantly higher levels of self-regulation than the typical university module which involves the lecturer providing students with information to recall in an exam, instead this student led module encourages metacognition, creative thinking and the analysis of both our own and other class members work.

It is widely agreed that self-motivation and self-efficacy are vital components of self-regulated learning. Zimmerman (1990) suggests that when an individual engages in self-regulated learning both their self-efficacy and motivation increases and they demonstrate greater academic ability. This therefore implies that self-regulating methods not only increase academic ability, but also enhance the essential components of the process, consequently advancing the individuals self-regulating ability. Although it would be interesting to see whether personality traits influenced module choices and whether those with high-efficacy and self motivation were more likely to choose a module which involves self-regulation.

However, if we can truly learn through self-regulation, where is the need for teachers? If we don’t require guidance or feedback from lectures, if we know we are capable therefore have the self-efficacy and we’re motivated to learn as were interested in the subject, could we not learn independently without coming to university? Can we learn by self-regulation alone or are we all just here for that one piece of paper. The degree.

References
Anderson, P. (2002). Assessment and development of executive function in childhood. Child Neuropsychology, 8, 71-82.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 248-287.
Duckworth, K., Akerman, R., MacGregor, A., Salter, E., & Vorhaus, J., (2009). Self-regulated learning: a literature review. Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning, Institute of Education.
Fantuzzo, J., Bulotsky-Shearer, R., McDermott, P., McWayne, C., Frye, D., & Perlman, S. (2007). Investigation of dimensions of social-emotional classroom behavior and school readiness for low-income urban preschool children.
Hiebert, J. and Wearne, D. (1996) Instruction, understanding, and skill in multidigit addition and subtraction. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 251–83.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulating academic learning and achievement: The emergence of a social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 2(2), 173-201.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview.Theory into practice, 41(2), 64-70.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2013). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives. Routledge.

Should we bother with lectures?

For this weeks blog I am going to examine another teaching methodology commonly used in Bangor University: Lectures.

Lecturing is the most popular methodology of teaching adults, used by universities worldwide to transfer knowledge and stimulate student thought (Bligh, 1998). Kowalski (1987, as cited in Bligh 1998) found that 73% of students felt the aim of lectures was primarily to transfer facts – but is this the main aim of education? – Do lectures actually satisfy the aims of education?
Charlton (2006) implies that lectures are an effective method of teaching students, suggesting that learning through direct speech is natural and encourages attention whilst enhancing how memorable the information is. A common argument against lectures is that they are ‘Spoon-feeding’ students, however Charlton (2006) addresses this by suggesting that it does not matter how students acquire knowledge, its more important that they know and understand it.

In relation to early learning theories, lectures could be seen as a product of the behaviourist learning theory. The behavioural theory has significantly impacted education, developing programmes, approaches and methodologies in teaching, such as lectures, which provide information from an expert, through structured guidance, a component of education that Dewey (1938) considers necessary. Although this methodology results in the development of knowledge, methods such as lectures generally do not result in high levels of engagement or in-depth perceptions of information (Austin, Orcutt & Rosso, 2001).

Michaelsen, Knight and Fink (2002) highlighted two major disadvantages that occur as a result of lectures, they suggested that students feel anomalous and are passive in lecture settings. To address this they promote the success of small group work indicating that participation and activities within a group eliminate both the feeling of anonymity and students passive behaviour, whilst ensuring students understand the applications of concepts rather that just knowing them. Carbone (1999) highlights a further disadvantage of lectures, implying that lectures generally have poorer attendance, more distractions and disruptive behaviour than smaller classes, thus indicating issues associated with lectures.

Many theories of learning such as that constructed by Thorndike (1927) describe the necessity of active learning within education, a concept which university lectures often ignore. But is there a way of making lectures more interactive? Huxham (2005) found that when ‘interactive windows’ involving debates, discussion and challenges were introduced into lectures, student evaluations found these to be the most preferred feature within the lecture. Therefore interactions could be added to enhance student involvement within lectures to enhance engagement and inspire critical analysis.

Overall I consider the evidence supporting lectures to be quite weak, as it only focuses on how to increase students knowledge of facts. Rather than endorsing in depth explanations, independent researching and true understanding of concepts, lectures provide students with information which they attempt to recall for exams – this is not learning, this is merely memorising information, and the education system should be based on more than this.

Vast amounts of evidence have suggested that small groups are more successful than lectures (Michaelsen, Knight & Fink, 2002) but despite this universities are still using lectures as a main method of learning. But why are they so stuck in their way? Research conducted by (Lake, 2001) compared 170 students performance and achievement perceptions of both lectures and group based teaching methods. They found that although students actually performed better in active group work condition, they perceived a higher sense of learning from the lecture condition. Thus indicating that students believe lectures to be better, therefore perhaps explaining why university’s still use them; as they are more preoccupied with giving students what they want, to ensure student satisfaction is high, rather than what is actually best for their learning.

Therefore I would conclude that lectures are not necessarily “the best teaching method” as suggested by Charlton (2006) they may be successful in spoon-feeding students but it does not endorse in-depth understanding or learning. Research indicates that small group work is a more successful method of teaching, although it has demonstrated that lectures could be enhanced by adding interaction such as questions or discussions. Perhaps the educational system, in particular universities, should focus on applying the best educational techniques rather than what the students want, find easiest or consider to be best technique merely to ensure satisfaction.

References:

Austin, K., Orcutt, S., & Rosso, J. (2001) How people learn: Introduction to learning theories.

Bligh, D. (1998). Whatas the use of lectures?. Intellect books.

Carbone, E. (1999). Students behaving badly in large classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1999(77), 35-43.

Charlton, B. G. (2006). Lectures are such an effective teaching method because they exploit evolved human psychology to improve learning. Medical hypotheses, 67(6), 1261-1265.

Dewey, J. (1938). The Experience of education. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster

Huxham, M. (2005). Learning in lectures Do ‘interactive windows’ help?. Active learning in higher education, 6(1), 17-31.

Lake, D. A. (2001). Student performance and perceptions of a lecture-based course compared with the same course utilizing group discussion. Physical Therapy, 81(3), 896-902.

Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (Eds.). (2002). Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups. Greenwood Publishing Group.

Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. The American Journal of Psychology, 39(1/4), 212-222.

Why am I talking: The video talk

Why am I talking?

I have chosen to focus my topic on examining the different teaching methods used at Bangor University. My initial blog will explore one of the methods used within this module; the talks.

In this module we are expected to make fortnightly talks, all of which are recorded so we can transform them into videos and upload them onto sights such as YouTube and post the link back into our blog. At first I thought, why do we do this? Surely no one’s actually going to watch my talk. Actually, 7 people already have! Granted I’ve had no comments on it, but realistically it’s a poorly circulated five minute long talk by a nervous speaker, which probably doesn’t inspire that many comments, but imagine the potential to strike debate on a really interesting topic by a great speaker. Sir Ken Robinson’s TED talk (on changing education paradigms, 2010) has had 10,799,326 views and resulted in 8,625 comments as a result (YouTube, 23/10/13) thus implying this method of demonstrating your learning or research can result in debate which enriches learning as it allows the individual to appreciate different points of view.

A TED talk by Chris Anderson, discusses how the internet can be used as a tool to evolve skills, he demonstrated the example of how dance videos can be used as to show revolutionary talent, as well as a method of teaching and inspiring dance moves to others. Anderson described that when the TED talks went viral in 2005, their popularity dramatically increased indicating a benefit of providing global access. It is apparent that internet videos can become an excellent archive of resources for education, forming part of the information abundance provided by the internet (DiMaggio, Hargittai, Neuman & Robinson, 2001) by providing essentially an infinite source of knowledge and discussion opportunities. Carter and Arroyo (2011) proposed that online videos are a culturally inspired concept that is becoming increasingly common within classroom settings, they proposed the concept of ‘participatory pedagogy’ demonstrating the ability to involve the class within the talks, and proving them to be a valuable method of teaching.

Research conducted by the Home of National Statistics (2012) stated that 21 million homes in the UK have access to the internet, therefore technological advances are adapting to allow for the concept of online talks within education as 80% Britain has access to an abundance of information created as a result of online video talks.
Video talks serve as an effective way of enhancing learning through listening to others or global discussion, but also an incredibly effective way of reaching large crowds of people, to portray your message to vast audiences, therefore becoming a successful teaching method. When a video talk goes viral it can attract thousands of interested individuals from anywhere in the world in comparison to an essay assignment, which is likely to be only viewed by the author and the marker. Video viewers act as critics, evaluators or supporters, contributing to the subject, a concept that Anderson (2010) describes as ‘crowd accelerated innovation’ as they share ideas, providing motivation for further research and responses. Siemens (2008) demonstrated this, suggesting students could develop on the curricula through video talks, providing different perspectives, indicating that comments and critical analysis to enhances understanding.

Although an additional bonus of video talks is that they can provide better explanations than their written equivalent, allowing passion, gestures and a better understanding of the audience engagement and understanding. Castellano et al (2008) for example, found that video speeches provide a unimodal method of recognising emotional content, therefore indicating that additional aspects such as facial expressions and hand gestures allow viewers to gain a deeper understanding of the passion behind a speech.

To conclude, it is apparent that technology is continuously expanding, with more people accessing the internet each day, therefore uploading video talks, like we do in this module, not only results in the quick and efficient expansion of knowledge to a global audience, contributing to information abundance and a wealth of accessible resources for schools, but for the individual it provides opportunities for feedback on our own work, encouraging motivation and providing discussions which contribute to finding suitable solutions and conclusions.

So why am I talking? Because it’s a valuable way of displaying my ideas and gaining your insight and opinions!

References:
Carter, G. V., & Arroyo, S. J. (2011). Tubing the future: Participatory pedagogy and YouTube U in 2020. Computers and Composition, 28(4), 292-302.
Castellano, G., Kessous, L., & Caridakis, G. (2008). Emotion recognition through multiple modalities: face, body gesture, speech. In Affect and emotion in human-computer interaction (pp. 92-103). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Chris Anderson (2010) –http://www.ted.com/talks/chris_anderson_how_web_video_powers_global_innovation.html
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual review of sociology, 307-336.
Siemens, G. (2008). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. URL:(http://www. itdl. org/Journal/Jan_05/article01. htm),[Accessed August, 2011].

Is intelligence in the classroom?

Firstly I will focus on what is intelligence, there are multiple subjective, layman opinions on what constitutes intelligence, and after much research into different definitions I concluded that Sternberg (1997) had a reasonable representation of intellectualism. He suggested that intelligence was the cognitive ability to adapt to different situations, he furthers this by implying that although behaviors may be deemed intelligent in a certain scenario, they may be displayed differently in another situation, although, the mental process remain the same. Therefore intelligence is the ability to generalise to other situations, and in some cases, schools are able to do this, for example generalising the ability to perform mental arithmetic’s in a maths exam, then using the same mental concept to perform the task when adding up the total to a shopping basket. However, in many aspects of education, this does not occur.

Goddard (1946) implies that merely having the knowledge (that most subjects are based on) does not result in intelligence. Therefore even if an examination was a reliable or successful way of measuring knowledge, as it is often suggested it is not (Wolfe, 1938), it still fails to measure true intelligence of an individual, therefore receiving an A grade is not an indicator of intelligence. An example of this could be that knowing Henry the 8th had 6 wives may provide the necessary knowledge for a history exam, but this knowledge can not necessarily be generalised to other contexts and therefore make up a part of the individuals intelligence?

Weinstein (2001) supports this concept and proposes that the legal academia relies too strongly on exams as a predictor of intelligence, as they fail to accurately assess students lawyer’s legal intelligence. He implies that using other modes of examination such as replications scenarios of court cases would be a better predictor, identifying whether or not students knowledge was generalizable to their ability to perform as lawyers, thus assessing intelligence much more accurately than a knowledge based exam.

However, it could be argues that most intelligent students have the ability to perform well at school. Deary, Strand, Smith and Fernandes (2007) compared the psychometric intelligence of over 70,000 eleven year old students and their educational ability 5 years later at GCSE age across 25 subjects. They found a strong correlation (of 0.81) between the two measurements. This indicated a strong link between intelligence and academic success, suggesting that perhaps intelligent students were able to generalise their cognitive abilities to succeed in education.
Despite this, McClenlland (1973) suggests that most research demonstrating the correlation between intelligence tests and school performance fail to account for confounding variables such as social class. He also indicated that neither intelligence tests nor academic grades were accurate predictors of future life outcomes such as occupational success. Therefore implying that other confounding factors such as social background may affect school and job performance more significantly than intelligence.

To conclude, despite there being many subjective definitions of intelligence, I consider Sternberg (1997)’s perspective, which states intelligence is the ability to adapt to different situations, to be a fair representation of intellectualism. Although schools do provide students with some intellectual skills such as mental arithmetic, which can be generalised into other aspects of life, the majority of teaching focuses on building knowledge which is then tested by exams. Goddard (1946) stated that this isn’t a factor of intelligence, as there is no application of the knowledge and therefore examinations are merely a measure of recall not intelligence. Furthermore, research shows there is a correlation between academic success and measures of intelligence, although as scientists we cannot take this as a causation. Therefore can we really suggests a student who gets all A’s is intelligent or are they just good exam performers?

References:
Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P., & Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35(1), 13-21.

Goddard, H. H. (1946). What is intelligence?. The Journal of social psychology, 24(1), 51-69.
McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than for” intelligence.”. American psychologist, 28(1), 1.

Sternberg, R. J. (2000). The concept of intelligence. Handbook of intelligence, 3-15.

Weinstein, I. (2001). Testing Multiple Intelligences: Comparing Evaluation by Simulation and Written Exam. Clinical L. Rev., 8, 247.

Wolfe, J. B. (1938). Intelligence and Educational Achievement.

Can we save religious education?

A video of my talk on this subject can be found here.

The BBC (October, 2013) recently reported that over a half of schools are failing at religious education. They also suggest that only 40% of schools are realising the subject’s real potential, therefore isn’t this an ideal opportunity to change?

“Religious education (RE) should make a major contribution to the education of children and young people. At its best, it is intellectually challenging and personally enriching. It helps young people develop beliefs and values, and promotes the virtues of respect and empathy, which are important in our diverse society. It fosters civilised debate and reasoned argument, and helps pupils to understand the place of religion and belief in the modern world.” (Ofsted, 2013)

In my opinion, this quote from Ofsted seems somewhat idealistic compared to the uninspiring textbook reality occurring in many of our schools. Giving students a book and telling them to read, or adopting a simple question/answer based teaching style doesn’t result in creativity, it isn’t challenging or enriching, it doesn’t create debates and evidently, it doesn’t provide good grades either! Why shouldn’t this be a catalyst for change?

The psychological principle of motivation is a key concept within education. Psychologist considers lack of motivation and inspiration within he current curriculum, to be one of the major factors resulting in education failure (Ames, 1990), therefore it must be addressed. Murphy and alexander (2000) suggest motivation within the education system is a product of goal and interest. Within religious education, the goal is naturally motivating and consists of both academic success (GCSE’s etc) and personal enrichment, discovering their own beliefs and values. Whereas interest can be personal, but is often something that has to be inspired within young children. Therefore, the curriculum must provide stimulation and inspiration to produce motivation.

As a result of this I propose providing a range of inspiring sources and experiences to motivate students to learn about different religions would not only vastly expand their knowledge but also give them the opportunity to discover other options, to choose the direction they want to go in, inspiring true engagement within the subject.
Psychologists such as Harris and Alexander (1998) suggest this can be done through constructivism, they state constructivists suggest learning is enhanced by a range of practical yet inspiring and thought-provoking contexts and experiences. Whether it be discussion, school trips, educational videos, internet or books there is a wide range of learning opportunities and experiences out there which should be explored, why restricted all students to the same text book?
Warner (2006) implies that to become motivated, pupils need the ability to explore and to be allowed to take risks whilst learning whereas teachers and the curriculum need to take a more flexible and understanding approach to allow this to occur, although this idealistic concept is likely to result in concern regarding student engagement.

An example of a motivational teaching method being implicated is the case study provided by Ofsted (2011) of Smannell and Enham primary school, which used the Philosophy for children (P4C) scheme, which aims to motivate the class to develop children led discussion, inspiring personal inquiries and evaluations whilst developing critical independent thinking in children as young as 7. The study resulted in increase understanding and developing of ideas, they also found it inspired children to participate in discussion of religious education, and that children were able to apply skills they’d learnt to other aspects within school. This indicates the motivational success of the methodology, as it provokes interest, enhances understanding and is a sustainable learning technique.
Ofsted (2013) reported that in primary schools RE was unsatisfactory due to the lack of knowledge the teachers had on the subject, how can teachers without adequate and accurate information inspire and motivate children to learn? I personally would consider myself not to be religious, coincidentally, I also consider my RE classes in school to have been a failure, watching irrelevant DVDs as the teacher made no attempt to teach religious education and essentially babysat the class for an hour did not inspire me about religion nor motivate me to learn. Although perhaps if I’d had the opportunity to really use those lessons effectively to gain more understanding of the different religions I may feel differently.

Overall it is clearly demonstrated by the statistics provided by Ofsted, that the under the current curriculum, religious education isn’t successful and based on this evidence, a change needs to occur. I argue that in order to develop beliefs and values within pupils, the approach to RE must change. I propose ensuring teachers have extensive knowledge on the subject and use a range of inspiring sources, constructive experiences and allowing children the freedom to discover information both independently and through discussion will address the cognitive psychological principle of motivation, currently lacking within the subject.Thus producing a more engaged student with the critical ability to produce personal beliefs and values, as well as a better understanding of the diversity within the subject. Adopting this approach and applying it to a currently failing subject, could be an ideal demonstration of how the entire education system and curriculum could be adapted to incorporate more motivationally inspiring content, to capture motivation and inspire students to really engage with a subject, hopefully reducing the number of failing schools as a consequence of this.

References
BBC – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24399813
Ofsted – http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/religious-education-realising-potential
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/good-practice-resource-enquiry-based-religious-education-%E2%80%98philosophy-for-children%E2%80%99-practice-smannell
Ames, C. (1990). Motivation: What teachers need to know. The Teachers College Record, 91(3), 409-421.
Harris, K. R., & Alexander, P. A. (1998). Integrated, constructivist education: Challenge and reality. Educational Psychology Review, 10(2), 115-127.
Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2000). A motivated exploration of motivation terminology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 3-53.
Warner, D. (2006). Freedom to Learn. Schooling for the Knowledge Era, 54.

Discovery learning.

As demonstrated by Castronova (2002) the education system requires changing. Employees are no longer looking for students with the ability to recall unrelated facts and figures, the demand is for candidates who have skills further than repetition, who are able to demonstrate their adaptability to the task, to use initiative and provide innovative ideas (Shontz & Murray, 2012).

Rice and Wilson (1999) suggest that the sought after qualities such as the ability to independently source and asses information are lacking in the current graduates, thus despite being highly qualified, they lack the employability skills sought after by potential employers. But is it the responsibility of the education system alone to produce such skills in students? If so is what methods could be used within the curriculum to obtain these skills?

A potential method of producing some of the desired skills within the education system is discovery learning, a psychological principle focusing on a learner-centred approach, requiring the student to use self-exploration, with minimal guidance allowing them to independently explore contexts. Piaget and Roberts (1976) implied that gaining knowledge through methods such as discovery learning allows thorough understanding of the concept. It is further suggested that without such methods, students are unable to understand and creatively expand upon the information, instead they are merely able to repeat it. Bruner (1966), also demonstrated that to learn, an individual must expand from the ability to remember information by engaging in problem solving, experiences and deeper thinking, all features within discovery learning, allowing for the invention of prediction, problem solving and thorough understanding (Takaya, 2008).

Thus suggesting that discovery learning is a successful method for an individual to develop the skills sought by employers. However there are mixed reaction as to whether the principle would successfully fit into the current education system.

The method of discovery learning has obvious advantages, allowing greater understanding of the information (Bruner, 1966) whilst building research skills required by future employers (Shontz & Murray, 2012), and much research, such as that conducted by Anthony (1973) suggests the success of the method within the educational setting. Anthony (1973) constructed an experiment to see whether discovery learning enhanced student’s ability to learn rules. The results confirmed the hypothesis identifying that the method was a successful method of learning, however it was also added that additional guidance aided discovery learning and therefore some assistance should be offered to students. Kirschner, Sweller and Clark (2006) suggest that with the sufficient level of internal guidance (brought by with age), discovery learning was more beneficial and had greater effect on the individual.

However, despite research identifying its success, there remains a lot of skepticism about the discovery learning method. It was suggested by Ausubel (1964) that learning through true discovery would create a great deal of commotion and therefore not be suitable within the classroom setting. Whilst describing the method as containing no crucial advantages over the current methods, Ausubel (1964) continues to recognise the impracticalities of the method such as the time involved and how context may not necessarily fit within the current curriculum. A further issue to raise is how the method could be impartially tested, due to the lack of conformity regarding exactly what the student would learn.

Although there is mixed opinions on the success of discovery learning, it is unanimous that the education system must change, it must adapt to the needs of the employers, allowing the students the best chance of success. The discovery learning method does provide students with some of the skills desired by employers, including the ability to interpret research and create innovative ideas. The method may still be deemed inappropriate within the current school environment due to impracticalities and the enormity that would be involved in changing the entire curriculum system currently in place. However, the success of the method, particularly in higher levels of education such as universities has been identified and therefore perhaps should be used more to aid the development of employability skills rather than relying on being spoon fed facts and figures in lectures.

Anthony, W. S. (1973). Learning to discover rules by discovery. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64(3), 325.

Ausubel, D. P. (1964). Some psychological and educational limitations of learning by discovery. The arithmetic teacher, 11(5), 290-302.

Bruner, J. (1966).Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Castronova, J. A. (2002). Discovery learning for the 21st century: What is it and how does it compare to traditional learning in effectiveness in the 21st century. Action Research Exchange, 1(1), 1-12.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Piaget, J., & Roberts, G. A. (1976). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Penguin Books.

Rice, M. L. & Wilson, E. K. (1999). How technology aids constructivism in the social studies classroom. Social Studies. 90(1), 28-33.

Takaya, K. (2008). Jerome Bruner’s theory of education: From early Bruner to later Bruner. Interchange, 39(1), 1-19.

Shontz, P. K., & Murray, R. (2012). What Do Employers Want?. ABC-CLIO.