Why students need more break time not more subject time. (EIP)

Evidence Informed Practice/Leadership (Maybe)

Transcript - Senior Team: Curriculum Model Discussion

Headteacher: “Thoughts?”

Mr Grape: “If we get rid of Learning to Learn we will have an extra period for Maths.”

Miss Plum: “Keep it as it is but make sure English exam classes are timetabled in the morning.”

Mr Apple: “Extend the school day.”

Mr Orange: “ZzzzZzzzz”

Mrs Pineapple: “Create a carousel to include Technology, Drama and Music.”

Mr Mark: “How about we design our curriculum model that works on the premise that students should have a break every hour for approximately 20 minutes.”

Headteacher: “Seriously Mark - this is no time for joking. Does anyone have anything else to add that is based on rational thinking?”

What if Mr Mark’s comments are not a joke? What if, as school leaders, we continue to create curriculum models that focus on the wrong MORE.  Rather than MORE maths, English, science, norsk, Ebacc (UK) allocated time, perhaps we should focus on adding MORE break-times (recess) in an attempt to improve student performance. What a ludicrous idea, right? Wrong!  According to a study conducted in Denmark, cognitive fatigue in students has an impact on tests scores, with student performance deteriorating every hour of a school day. Unfortunately, such deterioration is inevitable based on the design of a school timetable rather than as a result of some biological design flaw.  If students receive a 20-30 minute break after every two hours of study, then cognitive decline is inevitable.  However, if students receive a 20 - 30 minute break after every hour of study, then not only is the deterioration halted, but test performance actually improves over the school day.  

Based on the above study which model should schools look to emulate?

A truthiness model showing student performance over a school day:

A reality model (based on many schools curriculum model/school day) showing student performance over a school day:

A possible model (based on a school day with a break for 20 min after every hour of study) showing student performance over a school day:

I'll let you decide...

Two Face: A baddie or an educational guru? (EIP)

Evidence Informed Practice

Recently I became the incarnation of Harvey Dent, determining the rewards for students by the simple toss of a coin. Despite Two Face’s actions (in response to gambling people's lives or situations on the toss of a coin) often leading to disaster and destruction. I, on the other hand, enjoyed the opposite impact; students became more eager than ever to answer questions or offer their opinion in class. All it took was a slight tweak in how I applied the school reward system: if I thought a student warranted a house point he/she was offered the house point but with the opportunity to gamble. This strategy had three areas of unpredictability:

• How the House Points were awarded - I awarded a point based on student performance against the IB learner profile traits when I deemed fit
• The opportunity to gamble - toss of a coin
• The gamble randomly alternated between double or nothing, triple or nothing, and quadruple or nothing

I employed this strategy in the penultimate and final weeks (weeks 6 and 7) before the winter break. Whilst I would usually expect a slight decrease in student motivation during these weeks, the opposite became apparent. Student motivation appeared to increase. When I asked the class questions, I was often faced with over eagerness shouts of “me, me me Mr Mark me!”. And when offering one student the opportunity to gamble, she responded with: “This is why I love English”. Furthermore, a small group of boys who have only been learning English for 18 months threw off the shackles of worrying about making mistakes and became proactive in discussions, group work, and question and answer sessions because they hoped they would have the opportunity to gamble a house point should they be awarded one.

I think it is worth pointing out that our reward system is based on a collective approach. There is no individual gain from being awarded a house point. All students are assigned to one of four houses. And, in an effort to reinforce our host culture – our house system is named after four of the Norse Gods: Tyr, Heimdall, Buri & Skadi. House points are distributed each week by teachers if they perceive students to be demonstrating any of the IB learner Profile traits: risk-taker; caring; communicator; knowledgeable; principled; balanced; inquirer; open-minded; reflective; thinker. These points are collated each week and posted on the house competition noticeboard. As there is no personal gain from gambling a house point, it would appear that student motivation increased due to the hope of having an opportunity to gamble.

I also think it is worth pointing out that this approach is an attempt at evidence-informed practice, based on neuroscientific research conducted by Dr Paul Howard Jones. His research looks at the amount of dopamine generated in a part of the brain called the nucleus accumbens. His research suggests that the dopamine response in this part of the brain orientates our attention, and creates synaptic plasticity which is an indicator that learning has occurred. The more the nucleus accumbens (in response to dopamine) is activated, the more you are likely to remember. The nucleus accumbens is activated when the possibility of a reward is uncertain, rather than when there is consistency and predictability in the reward process. Therefore, rewards do not predict learning, whereas the brain's response to rewards does. And the brain responds to those rewards that are unpredictable; when there is a chance of no reward.

The Final Word: Two sides of the same coin

Whilst it helps that being a 'risk- taker' is one of the ten IB learner profile traits when implementing this strategy, I am conscious that during the two week implementation process not one student commented on the need to be 'principled', another of the IB learner profile traits. The idea of using the concept of gambling as a way to stimulate learning sits a little uneasy with this teacher. You see, just like Two Face or a coin, this strategy has two sides.

The Students’ Final Word:

When I offered a student the chance to gamble by the toss of a coin I stated the following:

“You have a 50/50 chance of winning!”

In response to this comment a host of hands shot up. One student then advised me that I had made an incorrect statement - That it is in fact 51/49 in favour of the side facing up when the coin is tossed:

“...even the 50/50 coin toss really isn’t 50/50 — it’s closer to 51/49, biased toward whatever side was up when the coin was thrown into the air.”

For further information:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04g8qfg

https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/funding/closed-rounds/education-and-neuroscience/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKFjoF-YO20

IB: The Benefit of Serving Two Masters

"Not everything that counts can be counted and not everything that can be counted counts." William Bruce Cameron

The Benefit of Serving Two Masters

Within many nations, there appears to be growing uncertainty about what education should mean, each one looking over their shoulder at other neighbours, wondering how they can improve their system and gain better and better results.  A country’s place in the Pisa standings appears to be quickly becoming the holy grail for politicians looking to further their own, and their parties cause. Is Norway any different?

In 2013, in response to the release of the Pisa results, Norwegian education minister Torbjørn Røe Isaksen said: "The new PISA survey shows that we have a science problem in Norway. It worries me greatly. The results are simply not good enough."  The article published in the online newspaper The Local also stated: "‘It surprises me that the results are so bad,’ said Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg, before heaping the blame on the previous Labour-led government.” 1

Alongside the Pisa tests, Norwegian children must also contend with National Tests.  The tests, which in their current form were introduced in 2007, are to be used to inform education policy and allocate resources. However,  it is widely accepted that the greater the value placed on these tests by politicians, the media, and parents, the greater likelihood there will be of a narrowing of the curriculum.  

“Curriculum narrowing, however, reduces many students’ chances of being thought talented in school and results in a restriction in the creative and enjoyable activities engaged in by teachers and students. The tests commonly used with narrower curricula also appear to restrict thinking skills. In addition, responses to high stakes environments can easily retard the development of achievement in later grades as a function of the restrictions on learning in earlier grades.” 2

The narrowing of the curriculum is not just about prioritising those subjects that are tested over those that are not, it also often entails ignoring  the holistic development of children.  Of course, most education systems worldwide advocate a holistic approach to education.  However,  if discrete disciplines such as English, Maths, Science or Norwegian are placed at the centre of an educational framework then this sends a clear message to schools about what is important, especially when such high priority is placed on tests by the media and politicians.  Unfortunately, I have witnessed first-hand how such a system of education leads to many teachers to de-prioritise, or even ignore many other essential purposes of education.  With such testing taking centre stage, it is important to have a model of education that at its core advocates achieving academic excellence by educating our children.  This is much more than just teaching subject knowledge, or worse still, teaching to the test.

In contrast, the International Baccalaureate framework places (at all levels: PYP, MYP & DP) the child at the centre of its educational philosophy in the form of The 10 Learner Profile attributes: Balanced, Caring, Communicator, Knowledgeable, Inquirer, Open-minded, Principled, Reflective, Risk-taker, Thinker.

The learner profile (and its positioning at the centre of the IB framework),  means that this approach to education is a must as opposed to a should or a could.  Its position keeps our focus on attempting to develop children into successful human beings, rather than children who are successful at tests, or knowledgeable in subject content.  Consider the following extract:

Dear Teacher, I am a survivor of a concentration camp. My eyes saw what no person should witness: Gas chambers built by learned engineers. Children poisoned by educated Physicians. Infants killed by trained nurses. Women and babies shot by high school and college graduates, so I am suspicious of education. My request is: Help your children to become human.  Your efforts must never produce learned monsters, skilled psychopaths, educated Eichmanns. Reading, writing and arithmetic are only important if only they serve to make our children more humane. (Ginot 1973, p24) 3

As such, the learner profile assembly (every Friday) is fast becoming my favourite school time of the week. It is a lovely reminder about the purpose of education.

1. http://www.thelocal.no/20131203/norway-falls-further-behind-in-maths-and-science

2. Cambridge Journal of Education, Volume 41, issue 3, 2011

3. Ginott, H. G. (1972). Teacher and Child. New York: Macmillan