Ok, it's kind of last minute but you can join me at noon eastern tomorrow for a fun little one hour webinar on brushing up your cold call. If you use the technique and want to study a few videos and get a little better, come join me:
https://t.co/1E6VZiNP3g
On 1 September, we’re hosting a big online curriculum inset day for schools using The Teachers’ Collection.
9.30–3.30.
Schools with a subscription can send as many staff as they like.
A strong start to a richer, more text-led curriculum.
https://t.co/QNFKScaTQT
زار طلابنا في الصف الحادي عشر والثاني عشر جامعة الملك فهد للبترول والمعادن وتعرفوا فيها على المجالات المهنية والأكاديمية. جمعت الزيارة بين دراسة الكيمياء في مستوى A-level والتجارب العملية في المختبر وأتاحت فرصة لاكتشاف مجالات STEM والحياة الجامعية. 🧪✨
#مدارس_مسك
Coaches help identify real classroom challenges by offering an additional perspective: observing where students are struggling, offering practical tools for visits, data and videos to build insight, test hunches and explore learning problems.
@WALKTHRUs_5
Are you or do you know a Primary subject leader looking for practical guidance from experts?
@BloomsburyEd is hosting a free webinar series by the authors of How to Lead It, bringing ideas for impactful curricula.
Join the first webinar tomorrow: https://t.co/5y3Pd5CEvy
To wrap up #DyslexiaAwarenessWeek, here’s a reminder of how to support learners with dyslexia 💡 These strategies don’t just help those with dyslexia — they make learning better for everyone. 💬✨
@DyslexiaScotlan
2 interesting reads re: AI & education:
1) new data: better performance but worse learning when Ss use a GPT tutor--"students use it as a crutch" https://t.co/UOmPyuzWVj
2) @benjaminjriley is nodding--he warns here to resist the hyped promise of AI in edu https://t.co/d0OvnH2dUk
I see a lot of schools, and in many of them behaviour is below what it could and should be. Very often I see some of the most common strategic mistakes in these schools:
1. Vague expectations of behaviour
2. No staff training in implementing the school behaviour policy
3. A belief that teachers should ���own’ the behaviour (which usually means in essence that they shouldn’t bother anyone else with it)
4. Gaseous boundaries that can be crossed without consequence
Inconsistent consequences
5. An emphasis on restorative and purely therapeutic techniques over clear routines
Some of these strategic errors are believed to be virtues, eg ‘we believe that children must only behave because they want to, because extrinsic motivators are immoral.’ A lot of these mistakes stem from a Progressive view of the child, and how they behave in classrooms.
1. Children are naturally inclined to be good
2. Children are naturally curious about school work
3. Children will learn by themselves how to behave if we let them
4. Children will do things correctly as long as we ask them nicely
These are lovely but deeply flawed premises. Basing your institutional system of behaviour on these will lead to sub-optimal outcomes, very often disastrously so.
And when they don’t work, the most common reason cited for why is an appeal to society: these kids are poor, these kids are disadvantaged, what can you expect from kids like this? Too rarely do people reflect that it may be the strategies of the school, powered by the assumptions of helplessness mentioned above this sentence, that are the major factors in their outcomes.
Demographic disadvantage is a powerful thing, but it is not destiny, and I’ve seen hundreds of schools ignore the temptation to settle for less, and build cultures where everyone flourishes, not just the fortunate recipients of privilege.
Education professors scored no better than physics or business faculty on basic learning science, raising serious questions about teacher preparation programmes.
Many of use have been saying this for a long time after discovering cognitive science 5 years into our teaching careers. At any rate, it should be concerning to all that education faculty (whose professional remit centres on teaching/learning and training teachers) performed no better than colleagues from other disciplines.
https://t.co/Hwj30PDd9l
This one is surprising - a new article (in press) challenges aspects of cognitive load theory by examining the effectiveness of different instructional sequences (explicit instruction before problem-solving vs. problem-solving before instruction).
HEre's the really odd thing: it suggests that problem-solving first benefits novices, while explicit instruction first benefits more advanced students. 🤯
So I think this is a solid study by @Logan_Fiorella conducted in an authentic classroom setting with a relatively large sample size for this kind of research (n = 367). However, a major limitation for me is that instruction was delivered via asynchronous videos - (how engaged were the students?) A more controlled, in-class environment might have produced different results.
Either way, always good to look at well designed evidence that challenges assumptions https://t.co/nyq3fnRDhw
Want to know how bad the overreliance on tech in the classroom has become?
Parents complain when they get calls about their kid's poor attendance because, with everything posted online anyway, their kids are still getting good grades.
Many teachers are making themselves functionally obsolete by just uploading their class onto Google Classroom.
What I do in my class? It can't be done via computer. Make yourselves more valuable, teachers; ditch the online surrogate.
Latest from us: Feedback should be a thermostat, not a thermometer.
There's a lot of effort going into producing AI-generated comments on student writing.
The problem with this is that even the very best human comments are not great at helping students improve.