teachered

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, International Education

What fewer women in STEM means for their mental health

Jennifer Drake, University of Toronto

“You’re in engineering!?! Wow, you must be super-smart…”

It has been over 10 years since I was a first-year engineering undergraduate student; but when I remember the time a fellow female student made this comment, I can still feel a visceral, bodily reaction: my muscles tense, my heart rate increases, my breath quickens.

Comments like these on the surface appear as compliments. But when unpacked, they reveal subversive attitudes about women in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math).

As I think back to this encounter, there are two aspects that stay with me. First was the surprised, skeptical tone of the other student’s voice that conveyed it was surprising and unusual (or, to put it more crudely, freakish) that I was in engineering. Second was the attitude that since I was in engineering, this could be explained only if there was something exceptional or outstanding (or, once again, freakish) about me. Women remain an underrepresented group in STEM. In Canada, women account for 23% of engineering graduates and 30% of mathematics and computer graduates. In the United States, women are 12% of the engineering and 26% of the computing workforce.

The reality is that STEM professions are most commonly male and it remains surprising when these professional roles are held by women. The large gender imbalance means that women may naturally feel they’re outsiders at school and at work. This situation is often uncomfortable and mentally demanding, when even just showing up and doing your job comes with constant social stresses and anxiety. Ironically, the difficulties that they (we) encounter often dissuade the next generation of women from joining us. It’s a self-reinforcing cycle that we need to break.

Fight or flight, designed for quick response

Because of their underrepresentation, women in STEM often regularly question their place in these professions. When things feel uncomfortable – like when I was confronted with that comment a decade ago – our brains can overinterpret the situation as an imminent threat. And there’s an evolutionary reason for that physical response.

Stress is an adaptive response to perceived threats. It’s how the body reacts to these situations. Anxiety is stress that lingers after the immediate threat is gone; it’s experienced as a feeling such as embarrassment, fear or worry.

Fight-or-flight is a physiological response.
Jvnkfood, CC BY-SA

This stress response evolved in human beings to help us navigate a wild, dangerous and unpredictable world. When faced with imminent danger, like a pouncing tiger, our bodies have evolved an automatic reaction to help us react fast. Stress hormones are released, the heart beats harder and faster, breathing becomes rapid and muscles tense, ready for action.

This automatic response prepares our bodies for possible actions: fight or flight! From the perspective of evolutionary adaptation, it’s in our best interests NOT to distinguish between life-threatening and non-life-threatening dangers. Act first, think later. In the African wilds in which early humans roamed, the consequence of underreacting could mean death.

Good during lion attack, less good during daily life

In modern life, we don’t have to worry much about attacks from lions, tigers or bears. But adaptive mechanisms are still very much a part of our brain’s biology.

The flight-or-flight response is intended to be short-term. The problem comes in when stress becomes a daily part of life, triggering a physiological response that’s actually detrimental to health over the long term. Repeated and long-term releases of the stress hormone cortisol cause changes in brain structure that leave individuals more susceptible to anxiety and mood disorders, including depression. When exposed to long-term stress, the brain structure called the hippocampus shrinks, affecting one’s short-term memory and ability to learn.

Subtle cues can make female students feel marginalized.
World Bank Photo Collection, CC BY-NC-ND

Messages you don’t belong can be stressful

These physical stress responses can unfortunately run at a constant low level of activation in people who are made to feel like they don’t belong or aren’t good enough – such as women in STEM. Social situations like my undergraduate encounter – and their ramifications – are a part of day-to-day life.

The effects of stress on women in STEM fields are often already obvious during their undergraduate studies. A study of women in engineering at the University of Waterloo has shown that female students tend to have lower overall mental health. Women in STEM fields are more likely to report higher levels of stress and anxiety and higher incidences of depression.

Sadly, the percentages of women working in these fields have remained stagnant for decades. In 1987, women represented 20% of the STEM workforce in Canada. In 2015, their numbers remain unchanged at 22%. In the United States, the reality is very similar, with women representing 24% of the workforce. Confrontational reactions like “You’re in engineering!?!” communicate the message that as a woman, one may not belong in the social group of engineering. The brain perceives these kinds of social interactions as threatening, dangerous and stressful.

The social cues that women may not belong in male-dominated STEM fields can often be subtle. For example, researchers have shown that the presence in labs of objects considered stereotypical of computer science, such as Star Trek and video game posters, are perceived as stereotypically masculine and can dissuade women from expressing interest in topics like computer programming.

Moreover, seemingly complimentary “Wow, you must be super-smart!” comments also communicate an even more troubling possibility that, in order to belong in this group (of men), as a woman, one must be exceptional. Women + Engineering = Super Smart.

But what if a female student is not exceptionally intelligent? What if she is only ordinarily smart? Or, even more troubling, what if she does not believe that she is smart at all? In her mind, she becomes a sheep in wolf’s clothing, an impostor who has tricked those around her into accepting her into a group where she does not belong. From the brain’s perspective, this is literally interpreted as being in the lion’s den.

Women can flourish in STEM, but it can mean shutting out the noise.
USAID Asia, CC BY-NC

STEM should welcome everyone

So what can be done? If we are to increase the participation of women in STEM fields, we must make workplace and educational environments inclusive. In order to thrive, female students need to believe that they belong in technical professions, in both academia and the private sector.

The social marginalization caused by gender imbalances in STEM programs can be mitigated. Targeted intervention programs that foster social belonging and coping mechanisms to deal with stress and threat can help women develop skills to handle the mental challenges caused by gender inequality and help women integrate into their male-dominated environment.

Connecting female students with female professional role models such as mentors or instructors has also been extremely effective at improving women’s self-concept and commitment to STEM.

Finally, campaigns like the #Ilooklikeanengineer hashtag disrupt our common stereotyping of STEM professionals and help support a cultural shift.

The rates of female representation in STEM will not change overnight. It will probably be at least another generation before parity becomes an achievable target. But it’s through changing these attitudes and stereotypes that we will reduce some of the social stresses on women in these fields, helping women choose STEM as a career path, stay in these fields, and most importantly, remain healthy and happy.

The Conversation

Jennifer Drake, Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

Well, What Do You Know? A Discriminating Look at the No Child Left Behind Act

By David Moscinski

The prime expectation of the No Child Left Behind Act is that all students become proficient in Reading and Mathematics. It mandates annual student testing, along with a comparison of the results obtained by majority and minority students. This mandated comparison has revealed the existence of an “achievement gap” between and among student sub-groups. This article looks at what we “know” about this gap and how our knowledge may unintentionally support it.

What is the relationship between knowledge and expectation? Does what we know determine what we expect? The obvious answer is “Of course it does.” Pragmatically speaking, isn’t that the purpose of knowledge – to tell us what to expect? Let’s take a closer look at this relationship.

In 1686 Sir Isaac postulated the Laws of Motion, the third of which is “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Nearly three hundred years later knowledge of this law and what to expect because of it ultimately put an astronaut on the moon. Feeling safe in expectations based on this knowledge, people will enter long cylindrical tubes that propel them six miles into the sky at speeds in excess of five hundred an hour to destinations thousands of miles away, usually without hesitation. Expectation based on knowledge is deeply ingrained in our psyche.

It may not even be unusual for expectation to take on a life of its own. The ancient Roman poet Ovid in his work Metamorphosis records the tale of the Greek sculptor, Pygmalion who fell in love with a beautiful statue he had sculpted. He petitioned the gods to give him a spouse as lovely and as perfect as his statue of ivory and according to the legend they did. Pygmalion’s man-made expectation thus became reality.

Eliza Doolittle and Learning Expectations

A wonderful artistic example of expectation comes from the words of Eliza Doolittle, the Cockney speaking flower girl in the 1964 Learner and Lowe musical “My Fair Lady.” In the musical, based on the novel Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw, a prominent elocutionist, Professor Henry Higgins places a bet with his friend, Colonel Pickering. He wages the Colonel that with three months of his training he can expect a lowly flower girl, played by Audrey Hepburn, to become a society accepted lady. Professor Higgins does succeed and wins his wager, but not for the reason he believes. In a poignant scene Eliza states the real reason behind her transformation:

I should never have known how ladies and gentlemen really behaved, if it hadn’t been for Colonel Pickering. He always showed what he thought and felt about me as if I were something better than a common flower girl. You see, Mr. Higgins, apart from the things one can pick up, the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves, but how she is treated. I shall always be a common flower girl to Professor Higgins, because he always treats me like a common flower girl, and always will. But I know that I shall always be a lady to Colonel Pickering, because he always treats me like a lady, and always will.

In education, the work of Rosenthal and Jacobsen in the 1960’s established the relationship between expectation, whether real or perceived, and student performance. In their book Pygmalion In The Classroom published in 1968, Rosenthal and Jacobsen described the results of an experiment in which children were pre-tested with I.Q. tests before the start of the school year. Teachers were then given the names of 20% of students who had tested as being “latently gifted.” The teachers were told these students could be expected to “blossom” in the coming school year.

Unknown to the teachers however, the students had been not been selected based on test results, but rather had been assigned at random. When post-tested at the end of the year, students who had been expected to blossom scored significantly higher on the I.Q. test. Rosenthal termed this the Pygmalion Effect. It occurred because in his words :“When we expect certain behaviors of others, we are likely to act in ways that make the expected behavior more likely to occur.”

The Iowa Lighthouse Study, conducted by the Iowa Association of School Boards and published in September of 2000, further supported the importance of knowing what to expect, this time at the school board level. The purpose of the study was to determine what influence, if any, school boards could have on student achievement. For the study test districts were matched on as many variables as possible, then divided into “high” and “low” achieving districts based on their students’ test performance on annually administered state tests.

The study found that board members in high-achieving districts had significantly different knowledge and expectations than those that existed among board members in low-achieving districts.This knowledge and expectation set the tone for the district’s culture. Board members in high-achieving districts:

Consistently expressed the belief that all students can learn and that the school could teach all students. This “no excuses” belief system resulted in high standards for students and an on-going dedication to improvement. In low-achieving districts, board members had limited expectations and often focused on factors that they believed kept students from learning, such as poverty, lack of parental support or societal factors.

Looked at another way, board members in high achieving districts became The Little Engines That Could that pulled all the girls and boys of their district over any potential “gaps” in their learning.

A final thought on the subject of expectation comes from the recently published book The Social Conquest of Earth by biologist Edward O. Wilson. In his book Wilson states:

Experiments conducted over many years by social psychologists have revealed how swiftly and decisively people divide into groups and then discriminate in favor of the one to which they belong. Even when the experimenters created the groups arbitrarily, prejudice quickly established itself. Whether groups played for pennies or were divided by their preference for some abstract painter over another, the participants always ranked the out-group below the in-group. They judged their “opponents” to be less likable, less fair, less trustworthy, less competent. The prejudices asserted themselves even when the subjects were told the in-groups and out-groups had been chosen arbitrarily.

How does all this relate to the NCLB and closing the “achievement gap”?

If we “know” that minority students do not test as well as their counterparts in the majority, does this imply anything about our expectations for them? Like Pygmalion does our knowledge sculpt what we come to expect? Does our knowledge form our expectation? If it does, how does this help eliminate the “achievement gap”? Would education be better off simply expecting that all children can lean regardless of any cultural, ethnic, racial, income or any other quantifiable variable? Does saying that that all children are created equal, but then sub-dividing them according prescribed variables result in treatment like Eliza Doolittle received, as the instructional equivalents of Cockney flower girls? Or, are they treated like the majority students, as respected members of society?

Based on the results of Rosenthal’s study, what are the instructional behaviors likely to produce results which close the gap or even prevent it from forming? The Iowa Lighthouse Study suggests closing or preventing the gap starts at the top with the Board of Education and the firm belief that all children can learn and can be taught in their schools, regardless of circumstances. These school board members and their instructional staff have expectations for all students and excuses for none. Led by this attitude of expectation for all, they get what they expect.

And what about Edward Wilson’s findings described in The Social Conquest of Earth?

Experiments conducted over many years by social psychologists have revealed how swiftly and decisively people divide into groups and then discriminate in favor of the one to which they belong.

This is perhaps the greatest caveat concerning NCLB, the required disaggregation of data by minority groups with the resulting “achievement gap.” Taken together, do they form a self-fulfilling prophesy that is the basis for a new, but subtle form of discrimination? If we truly believe that all are created equal and that all children can learn, let’s begin by examining our expectations based on these beliefs.

_____________

David Moscinski is the District Administrator for the School District of Stockbridge in Stockbridge, Wisconsin. Stockbridge Middle School has been identified as “Exemplary” by the Association of Wisconsin School Administrators for five years. Student proficiency results there have been in the upper 10% of all middle schools in the state. In 2014 Newsweek named Stockbridge High School to its “America’s Top High Schools 2014” list as well as to its “Beating the Odds: America’s Top High Schools for Low Income Students.”

Mr. Moscinski has also had articles published in the “American School Board Journal,” the American Association of School Administrators “School Administrator” and the Wisconsin School News. His article “Proficiency For All?” was selected for inclusion in the 09-10 McGraw Hill Annual Editions – Education.

 

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch

New Teacher Tip: The Teacher Evaluation Process

Each school system has a process for measuring and evaluating their teachers. In most districts, all teachers are evaluated by an administrator and provided feedback at least once annually. New teachers, however, typically have more than one evaluation. This section will give you an overview of what to expect before, during, and after an evaluation, as well as how to prepare for each.

Prior to an evaluation

Before an evaluation, most administrators will schedule a time with you, and some of those administrators will even let you choose the class that you know will be the most likely to shine the best light on your skills as a teacher. Here is a quick checklist of ways to prepare for the evaluation.

• Ask for the rubric they will be using. The rubric allows the administrators to score each teacher equally and accurately by looking for specific skills and dispositions during the lesson. Knowing what they will be looking for will allow you to cover all of you bases.

• Consider the audience before choosing a topic. Know the educational interests of the administrator. Were they a math teacher? Or a special needs teacher? Are they a proponent of technology? Think about what you know about them personally and professionally and consider their interests when selecting a subject, a topic, and a time of day.

• Choose an easy topic. You do not want to choose a topic that you know is difficult for some students to grasp. For example, introduction to long division may not be the best topic, because you know that it is a multi-step process that is difficult to grasp for some students.

• Prepare a detailed lesson plan. The lesson plan for an evaluation is not your typical everyday lesson plan. It is the extended version that includes details, commentary, and all of the bells and whistles that go along with it. Be sure to include the objectives, materials needed, an introduction, developmental activities, a closing, accommodations, an assessment, etc.

• Prepare your class. Talk to your students about what to expect. Let them know who is coming and explain why. Let them know that they will be rewarded for their good behavior. It might not be a bad idea to do a practice run and pretend that you are being evaluated prior to the scheduled evaluation. This may all seem like window dressing, but it will help to put your mind at ease.

• Prepare your classroom. De-clutter, decorate, and clean everything. Be sure to have your desk cleared in case she wants to sit there to evaluate.

• Be flexible. Administrators are always busy. In addition, unexpected meetings come up, students misbehave and must be attended to at inopportune times, and some type of paperwork is always being thrown at them. If she must reschedule, just simply put aside your prepared lesson until another day.

During an evaluation

If you are thoroughly prepared for your evaluation as described above, the evaluation itself should be a breeze.

• Remember that they have probably already figured out that you are an effective teacher. They want you to do well. They want the students to do well. They are not out to get you or hurt your career.

• Relax! Again, they are not looking for an excuse to fire you. Just relax and do the best you can do.

• Write your objectives on the board. Self explanatory.

• Have fun! Having fun yourself will engage the administrator and the students alike.

• Discipline as you always would. If a student misbehaves, be careful not to overreact. You will not get a lower score because your students are children and occasionally misbehave.

After an evaluation

Be prepared for feedback and constructive criticism. Administrators do not intend to tear you down and are not out to get you.

• Thank them for their feedback and honesty.

• Never argue! It will only lessen their opinion of you.

• Sincerely apply their suggestions to your teaching styles.

If you follow my advice, the teacher evaluation process will be a breeze. Remember, evaluations are meant to gauge your teaching effectiveness, not as a pretense to get rid of you. Even if you score poorly during your first year, your evaluations will be used by your administrator to help you create an improvement plan. Also Well, good luck to you and remember, relax!

Check out all our posts for First Year Teachers here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, First Year Teachers, Teachers

The First Year Teaching: The self-discipline approach to classroom management

By Matthew Lynch

As your journey as a teacher starts to finally take shape, you will find that there is no single method to use to manage a classroom effectively. As different situations arise, you will discover that different approaches need to be taken. The root of the problem should be the key factor in deciding on which approach should be utilized.  Many teachers find that self-discipline approaches work the best for their students and there are several different sub-versions that you may find work the best for your particular classroom. The self-discipline approach is based on the belief that students are responsible individuals who can assess and correct their own misbehavior, and that teachers and students have trusting relationships built on respect. With its self-governing style, the self-discipline approach has four models:

Reality therapy

Developed by psychiatrist William Glasser in the 1960s, reality therapy is used to guide students in becoming responsible individuals who are able to satisfy their own needs for the benefit of themselves and others. Despite its maturity, this approach has stood the test of time and is still very relevant today. This approach was developed with the idea that students know their own needs and wants, and will make changes accordingly to get closer to where they want to be. Teachers are supposed to help students with making the right choices, while avoiding the wrong choices and rational students should make the final decision themselves. If students happen to opt for the wrong choice and misbehave, teachers and students work together to first evaluate the misconducts. They should then devise an applicable plan for students to make amends.

As trust and responsibility are given to students, students should work on their own to correct their misbehavior. If students fail and break the trust, engaging in misbehavior, teachers should remove them from the class until the students are committed to trying again to earn back the trust. This approach says that the different styles of parenting should not be the acceptable reasons for misbehaving. When misbehavior occurs, ask what the students are doing instead of asking the students for reasons, because students should be trusted to analyze their own misbehavior and seek plans to correct their bad behaviors.

In this model, holding classroom meetings and discussions are necessities. Students should participate to develop the class rules and determine the consequences for breaking those rules. When students agree, the rules will be adhered to at a higher level. When holding these meetings, you should ensure that students understand that the meetings are held for everyone’s benefit because rules and consequences might require adjustments, which all students should be aware of. As trust and responsibility are the essential components of the self-discipline approach, teachers and students should be able to communicate without barriers.
This approach implies that the parties who are unable to adhere to the rules are the cause of receiving the consequences. In a case where students are not prepared when they are expected to be, students are the cause for their receiving consequences. Given that this approach respects everyone, and encourages students to be responsible individuals, if unsatisfactory action takes place, anyone and everyone should express their opinions and dissatisfaction accordingly. Possible solutions should be decided upon by open discussions.

Inner Discipline

Developed by Barbara Coloroso, this discipline takes a longer route in correcting student misbehavior. As the name says, the goal here is to help students develop inner discipline. When they have self-discipline, students will have control and responsibility for their own actions. Whether it is a choice with a positive outcome or not, if there is no threat to the student, teachers should let students make their own choices.

In this discipline, when students misbehave, teachers should ask what students and teachers could do together to change. Students and teachers cooperate to build a community where they share the power. An underlying premise of this approach is that students do not have lasting discipline when quick-solutions such as reward systems are used.

Coloroso believes that there are three types of teachers: brick-wall, jellyfish and backbone. As the names suggest, “brick-wall” teachers are strict, demanding students to follow the rules without questioning and there are no exceptions. “Jellyfish” teachers enforce the rules like the way jellyfish moves. The rules are not clear and teachers often change the rewards and punishments, so students cannot expect consistency from these teachers. Lastly, “backbone” teachers give strong support, but allow students the opportunities to make their own behavior choices.

The Kounin Model

Research by Jacob Kounin in 1970 who was inspired by William Glasser, found that the difference between teachers is not how they deal with misconduct, but how they prevent it in the first place. His conclusion drew four factors that explain the classroom management success.

First is “with-it-ness” which refers to the teachers’ alertness and awareness of the classroom at all times. Teachers should let students know that they have the full view of the classroom, and as soon as the teacher spots a misbehavior, the teacher indicates visually (facial expression) to the student that he or she has seen the misbehavior, and this is usually enough to stop the behavior without the rest of the class being aware. Although such a look is enough in many cases, obviously some cases will require more action than that, with the teacher addressing the situation with everyone who was involved in the misconduct.

The second factor is “overlapping” which really is just another word for “multi-tasking.” When the teacher has divided the class into working groups to look at different topics and activities, this allows teachers to have easy access to every student, provide specific help if needed, and at the same time, keep an eye on the other students. The “overlapping” of activities in the classroom allows efficiency, and these activities are all controlled by the teacher.

The third factor is “group focus” which means getting every single student involved and concentrating on the classroom activity. One way of doing it is by having a portion of students’ grades attributed to participation. Teachers can ask students questions that are up for anyone to answer, then students will all be concentrating and thinking about the questions, eager to respond for good grades. Another method that is often used is randomly selecting students to answer questions. To avoid embarrassment, and not knowing who will be the next selected one, students’ focus is on their teachers.

The fourth and last model is “movement management” which includes momentum and smoothness. Teachers have to ensure that students are continually working and are not sidetracked or distracted. Students can raise their hand if they have questions, and this ensures the smooth flow of the class without interruptions. If the class is held often, another way could be for students to write down questions and/or concerns about the class materials on pieces of paper and turn them in at the end of the session. In the next class materials can be reviewed, with assistance from the questions previously written down by students. Teachers may also prepare more challenging questions.

The Jones Model

In an historical 1979 study, Frederick Jones found that nearly 50 percent of teaching time is wasted due to children’s misbehavior, of which approximately 80 percent is talking in class. Jones’ argument is that teachers can work on not losing the valuable time by implementing these techniques: limits, effective body language, incentive systems and resourceful help.

Setting limits will help students know what to do in every situation, from small matters like pencil sharpening, to big matters like being ill. By doing this, teachers are able to have students find their own ways of dealing with situations, without major disruptions to other students. Body language is very effective, and easily implemented, and students usually stop the misbehavior with mere eye contact from teachers. An incentive system concentrates on taking away benefits from students when they misbehave.

Efficient help is important as students start to misbehave when they start to fall behind. In Jones’ study mentioned earlier, he found that teachers use an average of four minutes to discipline students when they misbehave, and that, he says, can actually be reduced significantly. One of the ways to do this is getting others who are more settled to help the students who are struggling.

None of these methods will work in all cases, so teachers should always have back-up plans, such as isolation from class.

photo credit: ilmicrofono.oggiono via photopin cc

Check out all our posts for First Year Teachers here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Teachers

Emails and Teacher Morale

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest post by Megel Barker

I overheard a conversation a few days ago between two of my colleagues. The text of the interchange was the concern with the frequency of emails and more importantly there was some doubt about the relevance of most of them. The conclusion centered round the idea that emails were a major distraction to the serious issue of teaching. One colleague signed off with a retort that maybe we were all better before emails.

This final utterance really made me think. I pondered what the world of teaching was like before emails became the daily deliverer of information. How did we get by? A cursory check with other teachers conveyed a similar annoyance with the uninvited intrusion of email on their daily duties. Another task added to the ever burgeoning list of ‘to-dos”.

Twilight Zone

But how could we arrive at this place? How is it that in the age of information, teachers are feeling overwhelmed, confused, tensed and lost when confronted with an inbox of school e-mails? Rather strangely, we seemed to have entered a twilight world of either under-information or over-information. The former, occurs when important emails become swamped or lost in your inbox, while the latter manifesting as being told everything happening in school. So where did we go wrong? Do we all need to know that someone’s goldfish died? Do we all need to know that a new student has joined the school, when I won’t teach him this year?

A quick survey among my colleagues, gleaned a similar sentiment. Emails are the bane of teacher communication in fact it is even being touted as having significant contribution to teacher morale. How could such a technological improvement, one that enhances the sharing of information and is proven to improve time become the sore thumb in a school environment? I have even heard the words “detest” and “hate’ being associated with some teachers’ feelings toward this mode of communication.

Staff Morale

Knowing that email must be a good thing, I decided to look at email from a purely mathematical perspective and see if it was possible to determine an optimal solution to this dilemma. The common thread that I identified from my simple survey was that email had two variables affecting the environment in which it operates. These variables were Email Volume (EV) and Email Relevance (ER). Email Volume was literally the number of emails received daily, while relevance referred to the impact the email had on the teacher carrying out their daily functions effectively.

The graphic shows four possible situations that teachers can encounter in their work environment. Each scenario has, I believe, a tremendous impact on teacher morale.

Situation A

Situation A is the case where there is a high volume of emails in the school environment. Everyone emails and everything is emailed. All important documents are shared by emailed and all official communications are disseminated by this medium. Staff is expected to read emails but is also expected to read and respond in this way. The reality of this is that the emails are all important! They have high relevance to staff’s daily work but the volume is quite high. This type of environment is quite pressured, where staff feels compelled to read emails but is strapped for time. The morale in that environment is

Situation B

A full inbox is the daily expectation. In this scenario, everything is shared and important emails get lost in the traffic. Teachers are constantly informed about every event in school with numerous follow-ups and communiques that involve issues that require no action. Social events and social notes are posted without concern for who might want to know. The bulk group “all teachers” is used with impunity. This creates an environment that makes teachers disconnect from the emails. They adopt a system that involves requiring them to be reminded that an email was sent. This disconnection can lead to a level of apathy among teachers and paradoxically also a level of tension. This tension, coming from the sensation, that they might be missing something that has great importance.

Situation C

An almost empty email inbox is the daily fare. Numbers of messages in your inbox is small and is irrelevant. This is not a common scenario for most teachers however it is an all too familiar experience for new teachers. This situation plagues the newcomer mostly and can be traced to not being added to main mailing lists. The natural outcome of this is that the teacher is less informed about important and relevant issues and is constantly left to find things out at the coffee bar or in the staff room. Teachers can either disengage from the system or they can complain that they do not know what is going on. Morale is indeed low here; a feeling of detachment persists and can affect performance especially if high relevance information is not shared.

Situation D

The only emails received have high relevance to the teacher’s practice. There is a very low volume of email but each email is entirely impacting on daily practice. Even though the volume is low, the information shared is current, composed and clear. In this scenario, it would be expected to have other means of sharing information such as Google Drives or folders kept on a local server with vital forms and archived information. Essentially, there is an expectation that the only people who get the emails are the ones who will be able to do something about it. Morale here is high and teachers feel valued, they feel their time is being recognized as truly important and so they respond by being energized and motivated. Work gets done and communication is valued.

The table above shows my summary of the four potential dimensions of email in the workplace and the prevailing morale. Despite the clear cry from all I interviewed for situation D, none of my respondents felt they had experienced this Utopian world. In fact they feel it is impossible to have this outcome at their current workplace. This is worrying. Emails should make us more efficient. I propose that Situation D is the optimal solution and I believe that schools should strive for this to materialize. So how do they do this?

An email protocol?

While there will be positives and negatives regarding this, schools should engage with their staff and collaborate on an email protocol. Some key features of this would include:

  1. Clarity on who is copied on emails
  2. Who uses the bulk email features such as “allstaff@….com
  3. The frequency with which emails are shared from admin
  4. Other means of sharing information such as cloud drives
  5. Use of “reply all”
  6. The frequency of social emails
  7. How the subject line of the email is worded

So, which of these scenarios best describe your current email climate? Is my description of staff morale correct? Please respond to my survey by clicking on the link: http://goo.gl/forms/I7y6P9hPXh.

____

Megel Barker is a Google Certified Educator that has taught mathematics for 21 years. He’s currently Assistant Principal at an International School in Oman and has written two workbooks that support the Oman GED Exams. You can follow him on Twitter @mathter.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch

New Teacher Tip: Getting Ready for the First Day of Class

Okay, so now you have decided on the layout of your classroom and feel that you are ready for the new a new batch of students. Not really! There are many other things that you need to prepare before you can feel comfortable about welcoming your new students. Use the checklist below as a guide to make sure you have taken care of all the aspects of classroom preparation that need to be addressed prior to the first day of school.

Teacher Supplies

Being an organized teacher will make your life a whole lot easier; trust me. If you have your materials and supplies in one place, you will not have to frantically look for folders or paper clips at the last minute. It will also help your classroom management efforts and decrease the frequency of classroom disruptions and misbehavior. You should also make sure you have adequate numbers of the following items:

• Textbooks
• Plan books
• Classroom reading books
• Attendance register
• Paper clips
• Grade book
• Rubber bands
• Stapler and staple pins
• Tissue
• Pencil, pens, erasers and pencil sharpeners
• Tapes of different kinds
• Folders and folder tags

Take Home Packets for New Students

Take home packets are a must for students at the start of the New Year. This packet helps you communicate the objectives of the class for the year to students and their parents. It also helps you communicate important information concerning rules and consequences, the school calendar, special events, and any new activities or changes that have been made over the summer months. If you keep parents informed from the beginning, you have made the first step in building strong parent-teacher relationships. Make sure that you include the following in the take home packet.

• Welcome message to parents
• School rules
• Supply list
• Emergency and approval forms to be signed by parents
• Transport rules and bus route

Additionally, you may want to accomplish the following activities during the first week of the new academic year.

• Prepare class rolls and records
• Create nametags for each child
• Get to know the schedule for each student, including gym, art, library and lunch
schedules
• Create a folder that can be used by a substitute teacher in case you are unable to
make it to the school; this should include the daily schedule and seating chart
• Create a file for each student that contains information about the child and
• correspondence from parents
• Develop tentative lesson plans for the next week and place them in a folder

Completion of items on this checklist will surely help you feel more comfortable, organized, and in control when the horde of excited students appear at your door on the first day of school! Also, by starting the year off with a bang, you are setting the tone for the rest of the school year. Instead of dealing with classroom management issues, organizational issues, and disgruntled parents, you will be able to enjoy a relatively stress free year. Good luck to you and I hope you have an outstanding year.

 

 

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers

A winning formula: how to pick the best teachers

John Hattie, University of Melbourne and Terry Bowles, University of Melbourne

It’s one of those debates that has seemingly gone on forever. All the way back to the ancient Greeks, people have been trying to figure out the best way to choose teachers.

Australian governments, most notably the NSW government and their commonwealth counterparts, have made “lifting the bar” to entry into the teaching profession a priority. Most recently, education minister Christopher Pyne announced plans to have aspiring teachers sit exams before getting into the classroom. While other states are trying to set university entrance score cutoffs for teaching.

These governments are seeking to tackle the perception (and, in some cases, reality) that there is a decline in the standard of entry into the teaching profession. Indeed, it is true that the average Australian Tertiary Admission Ranks (ATAR) for undergraduate teacher education have been slipping year on year, with some universities accepting applicants into teaching with ATARs below 50.

But ATAR cutoffs aren’t the best measure for the quality of pre-service teachers, and they would only likely affect the 40% of people who use ATARs to get into teaching in the first place.

But with quality teaching having such a big impact on student achievement, we should be looking at ways to better select teachers before they enter the classroom. If not, just to address the problem of so many new teachers dropping out.

The question is: how?

TeacherSelector

We, along with colleagues at the Melbourne Graduate School of Education (MGSE), have developed one tool that could be used, called TeacherSelector.

A web-based tool, TeacherSelector is comprised of a battery of tests and is now used by a number of education institutions in Australia and overseas to help with their selection processes. We are also using it, along with a student’s academic record, to better select students into the Master of Teaching from next year.

TeacherSelector sees students complete a series of questionaires online, over a period of about one to one and a half hours. These questionnaires are based on what qualities we know excellent teachers have; factors like achievement, experience, motivation and personal attributes. The aim is to select people into teacher education programs who will suit the teaching profession.

After all, there’s more to being a great teacher than getting high academic scores. They also need relationship skills, communication skills and sensitivity to others. We know that previous academic achievement and experience as well as certain aspects of personality, can give us a pretty good picture of an individual’s future success in teacher education and their teaching career.

Using a Five Factor Model, we look at key personality traits, including emotional stability, conscientiousness, perseverance or grit, openness to views of others. We also ask open-ended questions about how individuals engage with others, apply themselves to tasks and manage emotion under stress when there are many competing demands on their time. This information can tell us a lot about an individual’s ability to self-regulate, their resilience, their communication style and other personal attributes.

There are also sections asking for transcripts of academic performance, but to complement this, TeacherSelector also measures general cognitive ability, including numerical, verbal and spatial reasoning. This is because general cognitive ability has been shown to be a good predictor of high performance as a beginner teacher.

Finally, the test also covers the individual’s motivation for, understanding of and experience with teaching, through a series of written responses; highly effective teachers are known to be passionate about teaching and learning, and show a deep understanding of their content area.

What we’re finding out

Our findings about TeacherSelector to date generally confirm what we already know, but we are also finding that candidates have a strong interest in using their individual results as as way to become a better teacher. They can identify their own strengths, as well as areas they would like to work on, and take proactive steps to address these, with the support of academic staff.

We are also interested in the predictive capacity of the tool and have embarked on longitudinal studies to establish which factors predict prolonged career engagement and service.

TeacherSelector is not dissimilar to other selection processes that have been used for many years in disciplines like business and medicine, as well as professional career selection. Given the high stakes involved in recruiting the right candidates into teaching, it’s wise to introduce similar measures in education, for the good of our teaching students and, ultimately, students in schools.

The Conversation

John Hattie, Professor, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne and Terry Bowles, Academic, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education

While rethinking admissions process, consider creativity

James C. Kaufman, University of Connecticut

The Turning the Tide report released last week by the Harvard Graduate School of Education has colleges and universities across the country taking a hard look at what many believe is a deeply flawed admissions process.

A number of colleges have already been reexamining their admissions process. In September last year, more than 80 leading colleges and universities announced the formation of the Coalition for Access, Affordability and Success, so as to make changes in the admissions process and diversify student bodies.

The new report characterizes the message being sent by colleges to high schools “as simply valuing their achievements, not their responsibility for others and their communities.” It asks college admissions officers to take the following three primary steps to improve the admissions process so that it is fairer and inculcates a concern for others:

  • promote more meaningful contributions through community service and other engagement for the public good
  • assess how students engage and contribute to family as well as community across race, culture and class
  • redefine achievement in ways that level the playing field for economically diverse students and reduce excessive achievement pressure.

However, what often gets left out of admission criteria is a student’s creativity. As a creativity researcher, I have studied many aspects of creativity that reinforce the idea that creativity is a valuable and necessary attribute for students in the 21st century.

Why measure creativity?

Creativity can be seen at all levels – from young children to geniuses. Creativity can help us discover new things, from the next generation of smartphones to new ways of recycling our trash.

It enables us to make art, tell stories, design buildings, test hypotheses and try new recipes. Indeed, creative people have been found to be more likely to succeed in business and be happier in life.

There is a growing volume of research that shows putting greater emphasis on creativity assessments in the college application process could provide a more holistic impression of students’ potential. Right now, we look only at a narrow range of abilities, which means that we over-reward people with certain strengths and penalize people with other strengths.

SAT is a better predictor of success for white students.
Dennis S. Hurd, CC BY-NC-ND

Studies have shown that the most widely used standardized performance tests for college admission, the SAT, is a better predictor of college success for white students than African-American and Hispanic-American students.

However, creativity assessments are more likely to be gender- and ethnically neutral, thereby avoiding the potential for bias.

A study we conducted recently on more than 600 college applicants compared applicants’ performance on a series of online tests assessing various forms of creativity to application data, which included SAT scores, class rank and college admission interview scores.

We found that traditional admissions measures (SAT scores and GPA) were only weakly related to the creativity measures. Further, people with high creative self-efficacy (i.e., people who think they are creative) did slightly worse on some admission tests.

We are continuing to capture data about students over the course of their college careers to assess whether including creativity tests with traditional admissions measures can better predict student outcomes such as retention, college success and graduation rates.

Assessing creativity makes a difference

We do understand that assessing students’ creativity would not be easy. But that is not to say it is impossible.

As part of the admissions process, students could be asked about how they would solve world problems or what their dream job would be or how they would spend lottery winnings; these responses could then be rated for their creativity by admission officers or trained raters. Many studies have shown that this is a reliable and valid way of measuring creativity, although it can be resource-intensive.

Students participate in creative teamwork. Can creativity be measured?
Creative Sustainability, CC BY-SA

Some universities may ask such questions in current admissions, but most do not actually score answers for creativity. In fact, being creative on admissions essays can actually hurt students.

If there are concerns about adding too much stress on students during applications, schools could use a portfolio approach in which students could simply upload a poem, drawing, movie, invention or science experiment that they have already produced.

The fact is that using creativity as a criterion in admissions has been done before. At one point, Cornell University Professor of Human Development Robert Sternberg and colleagues included creativity and practical intelligence as an optional part of college admissions at Tufts University. What Sternberg and colleagues found was that students enjoyed the application process more and the average SAT score of all applicants increased from previous years.

In an equally important outcome, differences on these new measures showed reduced or no ethnic differences, and minority admissions increased.

Such results are typical in creativity studies. Whereas many standardized or intelligence tests show ethnic, cultural or gender differences, creativity measures tend to produce no differences – everyone has the same potential to be creative.

Creativity is more important than ever as college and universities try to both emphasize diversity in their student population and seek future innovators in science, technology, engineering and math, otherwise known as the STEM fields. Including creativity helps accomplish both goals.

If early impressions of the Turning the Tide report are any indication, we could be heading into a pivotal time for college admissions. Such changes should not be limited to the scope of this landmark report. We need to be creative.

The Conversation

James C. Kaufman, Professor of Educational Psychology, University of Connecticut

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

The Master List of Interview Prep for Teachers

While the precise format for an interview may vary from site to site, no matter where you are, there are some general tips and tricks for succeeding in your interview. Remember to:

1. Smile. Teachers are expected to be good-natured, friendly people; you can convey this by smiling during your interview.

2. Listen. Make sure that you listen very closely to what the interviewer is saying. Maintain eye contact, pay close attention, and be sure to ask pertinent questions.

3. Pause before answering. You don’t have to give
a quick answer. Take a few moments to collect
your thoughts and reflect; then give a well-thought response.

4. Don’t filibuster. Although some people would disagree, admitting that you Add New don’t have all the answers can be a positive trait and not the end of the world. If you’re stumped by a question, let the interviewer know that you don’t have a clear and concise answer. Tell the interviewer that you would probably seek the advice of a veteran educator, especially if it’s in the best interest of your students.

5. Dress to the nines. Like the old adage says, “always dress to impress.” Women should wear slacks or a nice suit and closed-toe shoes; men should always wear a business suit or at the minimum slacks, a shirt, and tie.

6. Participate in a mock interview. Before the interview, have someone from the field of education (friend, family member, professor) conduct a mock interview using a list of commonly asked interview questions. If this is done correctly, then the interview should be a breeze.

7. Break out the portfolio. The majority of teacher education programs require students to begin creating a portfolio beginning with their introduction to education and culminating with their student teaching experience. Ask your interviewer if you can showcase your portfolio during the interview.

8. Research. Make sure that you take the time to learn as much about the interviewing district as possible. Demonstrating a thorough understanding of the mission and vision of the district can really impress interviewers.
Remember, practice makes perfect! It’s a good idea to practice answering questions you think you might face in your interview before you have to answer them in the moment. Practicing what you’re going to say ahead of time can help you sort out your thoughts and sharpen your diction. Common interview questions include:

1. Education and Background
Briefly describe your education background and explain how it has prepared you to teach.

2. Work Experiences
What work and volunteer experiences have you had, and how have they helped prepare you for teaching?

3. Strengths and 
Weaknesses
What do you consider to be your particular strengths as a beginning teacher? What are your weaknesses, and how do you plan to strengthen them?

4. Teaching
Why did you select teaching as a profession?

5. Meeting Diverse Needs
How do you plan to meet the diverse needs of students in your classroom? Give an example of how you would plan to meet the special needs of a student in your classroom with a disability.

6. Curriculum
What kind of curriculum do you think is appropriate for the students you will teach? What was your most successful lesson?

7. Preparation and 
Planning
What are things you will do to prepare and plan for instruction? What kind of planning have you done?

8. Instruction
What instructional strategies do you think are most effective? How will you meet the individual needs of your students?

9. Evaluation
What techniques will you use to evaluate student learning?

10. Classroom Management
What kind of classroom management techniques do you plan to use?

11. Parent/Family/ Community Involvement
Describe how you plan to involve and communicate with parents.

12. Philosophy/Beliefs
What are your core values and beliefs about education? About students? What is your philosophy of education?

13. Collaboration
Do you get along well with others? What are some people skills that you use when collaborating with others?

14. Extracurricular Activities
What extracurricular and community activities have you participated in? What extracurricular activities would you be able to supervise?

Practice answering these questions while watching yourself in the mirror, or have another person act as an interviewer. Learn what it feels like to say your answers out loud to another person, and you’ll ace your interview when you have to say the words for real!

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education

Are lectures a good way to learn?

Phillip Dawson, Monash University

Imagine a future where university enrolment paperwork is accompanied by the statement: Warning: lectures may stunt your academic performance and increase risk of failure.

Researchers from the United States have just published an exhaustive review and their findings support that warning. They read every available research study comparing traditional lectures with active learning in science, engineering and mathematics. Traditional lecture-based courses are correlated with significantly poorer performance in terms of failure rates and marks.

The study’s authors boldly compare our new awareness of the harm done by lectures to the harms of smoking. Their article – they claim – is the equivalent of the 1964 Surgeon-General’s report that led to legislated warnings about smoking in the United States. The renowned physics education researcher Eric Mazur has described continuing with lectures in the face of this new evidence as “almost unethical”.

This paper is so important because it combines 225 individual research studies through a technique called meta-analysis. So although individual studies published over the past 70 years may have occasionally found lectures to be better, we now know that the collective evidence is in support of active approaches.

So what’s the alternative?

Rather than the perfect lecturer performance or PowerPoints, active approaches privilege “what the student does”. Courses built around active learning require students to spend class time engaged in meaningful tasks that lead to learning. These tasks might be online or face-to-face; solo or in a group; theoretical or applied. Most of our popular learning and teaching buzzwords at the moment are active approaches: peer instruction, problem-based learning, and flipping the classroom are all focused on students spending precious class time doing, not listening.

This new study confirms a significant difference in student achievement and failure rates between lectures and active learning. A hypothetical average student would move up to the top third of the class if allowed to participate in active learning instead of lectures. The difference in failure rates was large too: students in lecture courses were 1.5 times more likely to fail than active learning students. Active learning was better than lectures for all class sizes and all of the science, engineering and mathematics fields they considered.

But active learning as defined in this study is such a broad term. If your lecturer pauses to get you to solve a problem in a group, or asks you to explain a concept to the person sitting next to you, that is active learning. Worksheets, workshops or other activities taking up at least 10% of class time was enough to get a class labelled “active”.

Rather than a call to abandon lectures, this study is important evidence that we need to improve them. We now know beyond all reasonable doubt that talking at students non-stop for an hour or two is a bad idea. But we knew that already, didn’t we?

Sadly, the study authors calculate that in their dataset of 29,300 students, there were 3,516 students who failed but would not have failed if they were in an active class. They go on to muse that if those studies were conducted by medical researchers they would have stopped the experiments for ethical reasons, as denying the students access to active classes was harmful.

So perhaps the warning label should read:

Warning: bad lectures may stunt your academic performance and increase risk of failure.

What makes a good lecture?

In What’s the Use of Lectures, Donald Bligh notes: “One of the most common mistakes by lecturers is to use the lecture method at all”.

Bligh’s review of the research found that aside from transmitting information to students, lectures were not good for much at all. Lectures should not be a default teaching approach, but should instead be used in a targeted way when they suit the specific goals of the class. For other goals, such as teaching ethics, provoking thought, or developing practical skills, more active approaches work better than lectures.

There is some debate about the ideal length of lectures, with claims that student attention diminishes after 10 or 15 minutes, however the evidence behind these claims is thin. This doesn’t, however, give us permission to waffle on: unnecessary-but-interesting details can hurt learning, and so can excessive quantitative information.

The Conversation

Phillip Dawson, Lecturer in Learning and Teaching, Monash University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share