Dear fellows, 

 

praise is, as far as German research tells and as John B. says, good as long
as it provides detailed information about the quality of performance (i.e.
studies from Falko Rheinberg 1980). But there is more research on feedback
out there, I suppose?

 

Class size was a topic in (oh oh) PISA. There is no correlation between
Class size and Pisa Score. But of course this says nothing about the
teachers work load, headaches and so on. And the study was made in schools
which probably provide 90% frontal transmission. 

 

Best regards

Anke 

---

Anke Grotlüschen

Juniorprofessur für Lebenslanges Lernen

Universität Bremen

Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaft

Institut für Erwachsenen-Bildungsforschung

Tel. 0421 218 3083

Fax 0421 218 7219

Mobil 0176 2384 7995

Bibliothekstr. 1

28359 Bremen

www.ifeb.uni-bremen.de

 

 

 

  _____  

Von: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov]
Im Auftrag von John Benseman
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Februar 2008 05:38
An: specialtopics at nifl.gov
Betreff: [SpecialTopics 779] Re: EducationGuardian.co.uk: Smaller
classsizes'not cost effective

 

I don’t know the specific words that Dylan Wiliam uses about class size, but
I am guessing that what he says is that there is no authoritative research
that shows that class size is irrefutably related to student learning. This
is not to say that class size doesn’t matter, it merely says that the
research over many 100s of studies is inconclusive to date.

 

As I am sure that the great majority of people on this listserv will attest,
we all feel intuitively that class size DOES matter – it’s just that there
is no research to back this conclusion. The jury, so to speak, is still out
on this dimension of teaching (as it is in many other areas).

 

The second point re saying that ‘praise hurts students’: I couldn’t find the
specific reference, but again interpreting what I think Wiliam would say is
something along the lines of: just praising students for the sake of
praising does them little good. What is needed however is clear and
realistic feedback on where they are at in their learning. If that comes
with a dollop of praise, then that’s great, but praise per se is not
sufficient.

 

I think that we can fall in to a trap of thinking that learners invariably
want/need support (which they do at times), but they also need to be
challenged, which means that we need to give them realistic feedback on how
they are progressing (or not).

 

Regards, John

 

PS I am not a paid servant of Dylan Wiliam, but I am a fan of his research


 

John Benseman

*   john.benseman at criticalinsight.co.nz

*   641 9 627 1882  Cell  027 454 0683

* 52a Bolton St, Blockhouse Bay, Auckland 0600, NZ

  _____  

From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of Bruce C
Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2008 11:29 a.m.
To: specialtopics at nifl.gov
Subject: [SpecialTopics 777] Re: EducationGuardian.co.uk: Smaller classsizes
'not cost effective

 

Regarding small class size....

 

Excuse my language, but regarding the comments of regarding class size
attributed to Prof Dylan Wiliam, Deputy Director and Professor of
Educational Assessment at the Institute of Education, University of London,
I say ...

 

"BALDERDASH!!! and HOGWASH!!!!" 

 

I can't believe anyone who has been a teacher would ever say "...as long as
pupils are well-behaved, then what you can do with a class of 20 is
generally possible with a class of 30." 

 

Maybe this was taken out of context. Prof. Wiliam (yes it's only one "L"--I
checked.) says some interesting things about formative assessment and
personalized learning on this "Learning About Learning" website: 

 

http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/learningaboutlearning/aboutlal/biogs/biogdylanw
iliam.asp

 

He does say a few wacky things--like that praise hurts students. 

 

Prof. Wil.i.am. says that formative assessment "encourages teachers to take
constant readings about where students are." He says it's important to do
this "minute by minute, day by day."  That's why I can't believe this dude
really thinks that class size doesn't matter. I think a teacher with 20
students in his/her class can get a better sense of where everyone is than a
teacher with 30 students. 


Sure there may be things we can do that are cheaper than reducing class
size...

 

But so what?

 

If that is how we define "cost effectiveness" why not TRIPLE class size and
save tons of money? 

 

You get my point, right? 

 

from Bruce Carmel

 

 

 

 

 

Prof Dylan Wiliam, deputy director of 
the Institute of Education says, 

 
<http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/learningaboutlearning/aboutlal/biogs/biogdylan
wiliam.asp>  


"David J. Rosen" <djrosen at comcast.net> wrote:

Colleagues,

Tom Sticht spotted this on the EducationGuardian.co.uk site and sent 
it for our formative assessment discussion.

-------
Note from Tom Sticht:

This article about formative assessment appears in todays (2/25/08 
Education Guardian online.
-------

To see this story with its related links on the 
EducationGuardian.co.uk site, go to http://education.guardian.co.uk

Smaller class sizes 'not cost effective'
Anthea Lipsett
Monday February 25 2008
The Guardian

Reducing school class sizes in an attempt to raise pupil achievement 
is a waste of money for all but the youngest children, one of the 
country's leading experts on assessment said today.

Cutting class size by 30% gives children the equivalent of four extra 
months of learning a year, but costs around £20,000 for each 
class every year, according to Prof Dylan Wiliam, deputy director of 
the Institute of Education.

He said the more effective method of "formative assessment" - where 
teachers monitor their pupils' progress continuously and provide 
appropriate feedback - could provide eight extra months of 
educational development for only £2,000 per classroom per year.

"It can therefore be 20 times as cost-effective as reducing class 
size in terms of pupil achievement," he told the annual Chartered 
London Teachers Conference today.

"Smaller classes do confer a benefit if pupils are unruly, because 
fewer pupils in a class means less disruption. But as long as pupils 
are well-behaved, then what you can do with a class of 20 is 
generally possible with a class of 30.

"Smaller classes can also be more cost-effective for five to seven- 
year-olds, but research suggests the class size needs to be reduced 
to 15 or less," he said.

Wiliam added that investments in information communication technology 
have also shown a poor return. But international studies have 
confirmed that formative assessment can double the speed of pupil 
learning.

Some teachers use a "traffic light" system and ask pupils to hold up 
different coloured cards to show whether they have understood what 
they have been told. Red means "no", amber means "partly", and green 
"yes". Pupils are also encouraged to evaluate their own work and 
advise their classmates on how they can improve.

The English, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish education departments 
have all provided varying degrees of backing for formative assessment.

After three years of research in both the UK and the US, Wiliam 
concluded that the approach would only take off properly if teachers 
work together in school-based groups to refine their classroom methods.

Wiliam and his co-researchers found that groups of eight to 10 
teachers who meet once a month for at least two years can be most 
effective. "It takes time to change teachers' ways of working, 
particularly if they have been in the classroom for many years," said 
Wiliam. "Simply telling teachers what to do doesn't work."

"For example, most teachers have heard about research from the 1980s 
which shows that if they wait three to five seconds after asking a 
question their pupils' performance improves because they have been 
given some time to think.

"Even so, many teachers are still allowing less than a second for 
pupils to respond. The conclusion we can draw from that is that 
knowing what to do is the easy part of teaching. Actually doing it is 
what's hard."

Wiliam told EducationGuardian.co.uk that teacher quality was key to 
any improvements.

"To reduce class size from 30 to 20 would need 150,000 more teachers 
and that would dilute the quality of teachers," he said.

"We need to change what teachers do day in day out in the classroom 
and we need to get better teachers into the profession."

Martin Johnson, acting deputy general secretary of the Association of 
Teachers and Lecturers, said the research should encourage the 
government to "put its money where its mouth is".

"Staff need to work together to learn how to teach more effectively, 
but schools will need more resources to do this. [Wiliam] reminds us 
that this would be very cost-effective.

"Schools have benefited hugely over the last decade from having more 
classroom based staff but much more training is needed to make their 
deployment fully effective.

"And while the government says it encourages assessment for learning, 
its testing policies have stolen teachers' self-confidence so new 
training must be provided and resourced.

"School staff desperately need a contractual entitlement to training 
which meets their individual needs."

Copyright Guardian News and Media Limited



David J. Rosen
Special Topics Discussion Moderator
djrosen at comcast.net



-------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Special Topics mailing list
SpecialTopics at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/SpecialTopics
Email delivered to bcarmel at rocketmail.com

 

  

  _____  

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http:/www.yahoo.com/r/hs>  your homepage.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20080227/b0cf8230/attachment.html