For those of you interested in what edu-geeks of times past argued about, here's a selection of journal articles* from the 70s:
1/10
2/10
3/10
4/10
5/10
6/10
7/10
8/10
9/10
10/10
It's both unnerving and comforting that we are still unpacking these things in the 2020s. Some problems will likely never be resolved to our satisfaction.
*All from 'Educational Leadership', clearly a kick-ass journal. Go check it out: ascd.org/publications/e… (🔓)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2/ Pre-print comparing ability grouping vs mixed-ability from @JohnPeterJerrim
→ finds no clear differences in student outcomes (but primary teachers feel slightly more able to help struggling and high-achieving students with ability grouping)
Norms are more powerful than rules. How to leverage this idea in school:
↓
Norms are the unwritten rules that govern the behaviour and attitudes of a group (such as a society or school).
They are so powerful that they tend to override more formal rules or policies. Which is why, in schools, we ignore them at our peril.
The power of norms arises from two main mechanisms:
1/ Life is complex and uncertain.
Adopting the behaviours and attitudes of others is a quick and safe bet. This is why authors (like me) strive to get quotes on the front of our books and 5-star reviews on Amazon.
A mega-geeky thread I've been sitting on for 5 years:
↓
Imagine we wanted to create a system for evaluating doctors' effectiveness.
Suppose we designed a rubric outlining all the actions effective doctors typically perform:
→ Prescribe painkillers
→ Refer to specialists
→ Order blood tests
→ Conduct physical exams
→ etc.
Now imagine this system judged doctors solely on how well they fulfilled this rubric, regardless of whether these actions actually improved patient health.