Teachers’ gaze patterns could reveal the different priorities expert teachers and novice teachers have in their classrooms, according to a recent study published in Learning and Instruction.
Using eye-tracking glasses, Nora McIntyre and colleagues
investigated how gaze proportions might be different for teachers of different
expertise and culture, indicating differences in teachers’ priorities. Twenty
secondary school teachers from Hong Kong and twenty secondary school teachers
from the UK participated in this study. Teachers were considered as expert
teachers if they had six years’ or more experience, were selected by their
school leadership as experts in teaching, had professional membership within
the field of teaching, and scored highly in performance ratings.
Teachers’ gaze proportions were measured during questioning
(information seeking) and lecturing (information giving) in normal timetabled
lessons, for their gaze frequencies on the pupils, pupil materials, teacher
materials, and non-instructional areas (such as door, windows). The findings
were as follows:
Regardless of culture, expert teachers prioritised
their gaze to pupils during both questioning and lecturing, while beginning teachers
prioritised non-instructional classroom areas.
HK teachers prioritised their gazes to teacher
materials, while UK teachers prioritised it to non-instructional areas during
HK expert teachers also used more teacher
materials gaze than the UK expert teachers.
The authors suggest that the finding of prioritisation of
gaze to pupils by expert teachers was consistent with other research since
prioritisation of pupils deepens pupils’ understanding of the subject,
emotional security, security with peers, and their interest in subject
teacher priorities: Using real-world eye-tracking to investigate expert teacher
priorities across two cultures (April 2019), Learning and Instruction, volume 60
Jingchun Nie and colleagues conducted a randomised controlled trial to examine the effects of providing free glasses to pupils in a poor rural area of Western China.
study, screening and vision testing were provided to 1,974 grade seven and
eight (Year 8 and 9) pupils from 31 schools located in northern Shaanxi
province in China before they were divided into treatment and control groups.
Free glasses were distributed in treatment schools to pupils found to need
them, regardless of whether they had a pair of glasses already. In contrast, pupils
in the control group solely received a prescription for glasses. The glasses
usage of the treatment group increased from 31% at baseline at the start of the
school year to 72% at the end of the school year, while that of the control
group increased from 28% to 50%.
questioned pupils about their academic aspirations, administered a standardised
exam using items drawn from a bank of questions developed by the Trends in
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and measured the dropout
rate to evaluate the intervention. Findings were as follows:
the pupils without glasses at baseline, the provision of glasses increased
their maths achievement (effect size = +0.196), while there was no effect on pupils
who already had glasses at baseline.
glasses also increased pupils’ aspiration for attending academic high schools
(instead of vocational schools) by 9% on average.
glasses reduced the rate of dropout by 44% among the pupils who did not own
glasses at baseline.
Source: Seeing is believing: Experimental evidence on the impact of eyeglasses on academic performance, aspirations and dropout among junior high school students in rural China (May 2019), Economic Development and Cultural Change DOI: 101086700631
The Education Endowment Foundation has published an evaluation of Research Leads Improving Students’ Education (RISE). The programme, which was developed and delivered by Huntington School in York, aimed to improve the maths and English achievement of pupils in secondary school using a research-informed school improvement model.
Forty schools took part in the randomised controlled trial and were randomly allocated to either take part in RISE or to a control group which continued with business as usual. Schools participating in RISE appointed a senior teacher as a Research Lead who was responsible for promoting and supporting the use of research throughout the school. Support for Research Leads included an initial eight professional development sessions held over eight months, occasional follow-up meetings over two academic years, a customised email newsletter, a website with resources, a peer network, and school visits by the RISE team. The RISE team also provided a workshop for headteachers and annual workshops for English and maths subject leads.
The evaluation examined the impact on pupils in two cohorts:
in the first cohort (A) the school was only exposed to one year of RISE, while
in the second cohort (B) the school experienced two years of the intervention. For
both the one-year and two-year cohorts, children in RISE schools made a small
amount of additional progress in maths (effect size = +0.09 for cohort A and
+0.04 for cohort B) and English (effect size = +0.05 for cohort A and +0.03 for
cohort B) compared to children in the control-group
schools. However, the differences were small and not significant, so the
evaluation concludes that there is no evidence that participating in one or two
years of the RISE programme has a positive impact on pupil achievement.
In addition, the evaluation highlights the importance of
schools’ ability and motivation to make use of the Research Lead in shaping
school improvement decisions and processes. For example, it suggests that
implementation was stronger when headteachers gave clear and visible support
for the project and Research Leads had additional dedicated time to undertake
Source: The RISE
project: Evidence-informed school improvement (May 2019), Education Endowment Foundation
An intervention report from the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) presents a summary of findings from a systematic review of summer counselling.
In the US, summer counselling interventions are
designed to help ensure that pupils who have finished high school and have an
offer to go on to higher education complete the steps needed to successfully
enrol. These steps could be taking
placement tests, arranging for housing, acquiring medical insurance, obtaining
financial aid, and registering for courses. The interventions are delivered during the months between leaving
high school and enrolment into higher education, and typically involve outreach
by college counsellors or peer mentors via text messaging campaigns, e-mail,
phone, in-person meetings, instant messaging or social media. Summer counselling
is also provided to help pupils overcome unanticipated financial, informational
and socio-emotional barriers that prevent enrolment in to higher education.
The review identified five studies of summer counselling
interventions which met WWC design standards. Together these studies included
more than 13,000 pupils who had recently finished high school in 10 locations
in the US. The results of the systematic review indicated that summer counselling
had potentially positive effects on credit accumulation and persistence, and
mixed effects on access to higher education and enrolment for students who had
recently finished high school.
counseling (March 2018), What Works Clearinghouse
Intervention Report, Institute of Education Sciences
With the increasing interest in STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) curricula comes the need for evidence backing these programmes. One such science programme is The BSCS Inquiry Approach, a comprehensive secondary school science approach based on three key concepts: constructivism, coherence and cohesiveness. The materials are built around the 5E process (engage, explore, explain, elaborate and evaluate). Teaching focuses on evaluating pupils’ current understanding and using inquiry methods to move them to higher understandings. Each of the science disciplines (physical science, life science, earth science, and science and society) is composed of four chapters that repeat common themes, which advance over a three-year period. Designing and carrying out experiments in small groups is important in all topics. Teachers receive seven days of professional development each year, including a three-day summer institute and four one-day sessions, enabling sharing of experiences and introducing new content over time.
To determine the effects of The BSCS Inquiry Approach on pupil achievement, BSCS conducted a two-year cluster-randomised study of the intervention that compared pupils in grades 10–11 (Years 11–12) in nine experimental (n=1,509 pupils) and nine control secondary schools (n=1,543 pupils) in Washington State in the US. A total of 45% of pupils qualified for free or reduced-price lunches. At the end of two years, the BSCS pupils scored higher than controls (effect size=+0.09, p<.05) on the Washington State Science Assessments.
Source: An efficacy trial of research-based curriculum materials with curriculum-based professional development, Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, BSCS
A new study led by John Jerrim at UCL Institute of Education suggests that private tutoring may be one reason that children from high-income families are more likely to get into grammar schools than children from low-income families.
The research, which was funded by the Nuffield Foundation, uses data from the Millennium Cohort Study for more than 1,800 children from grammar school areas in England and Northern Ireland. It considers how factors such as family income, prior academic achievement, private tutoring and parental attitudes and aspirations are linked with children’s chances of attending a grammar school.
The study finds that children from families in the bottom quarter of household incomes in England have less than a 10% chance of attending a grammar school. This compares to around a 40% chance for children in the top quarter of household incomes. Results also show that children who receive tutoring to prepare for grammar school entrance exams are more likely to get in. Overall, around 70% of those who receive tutoring get into a grammar school, compared to just 14% of those who do not. However, less than 10% of children from families with below average income receive tutoring for the grammar school entrance test, compared with around 30% of children from households in the top quarter of family incomes.
Source: Why do so few low and middle-income children attend a grammar school? New evidence from the Millennium Cohort Study (March 2018), UCL Institute of Education