It includes of of my favourite research stories... [brief thread]
In 1988 Berliner asked a bunch of expert teachers to teach a short lesson to an unfamiliar group of pupils.
Despite performing well, one teacher walked out, another ended up in tears, and all were unhappy they participated!
💡Lesson:
Expert teaching entails specific knowledge about the pupils being taught: what they know, what motivates them etc.
When you remove this, you inhibit superior performance.
And piss expert teachers right off.
One of the big questions this raises is the value of 'interview lessons'.
Schools may get a better sense of a teacher potential by watching a video of them interacting with their current pupils, rather than asking them to teach a group they don't know.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
→ They enable students to spend less time thinking about the *process* of their learning and more time thinking about the *content* of their learning.
🧵...
First, let's zoom out a bit. Routines can be both behavioural and/or instructional:
• Behavioural routines (eg. classroom entry) create more time and space for learning.
• Instructional routines (eg. cold call) make learning more efficient.
Both types bring a range of benefits:
→ Reduction in behaviour management burden
→ Increased student motivation, confidence and safety
→ Freeing up of teacher mental capacity to monitor learning and be more responsive
Empirical findings around 'choice in classroom classroom' are equivocal and confusing. Katz & Assor review a range of evidence (through the lens of SDT) to identify when providing choice may be beneficial and when it may not.
Power quote:
"The present article has attempted to demonstrate that merely offering choice is not in itself motivating. In fact, in some cases it can even reduce motivation."