SOME CHARTER SCHOOLS SPEND MORE PER PUPIL THAN SIMILAR DISTRICT SCHOOLS

 

Mixed results but KIPP schools spend substantially more per pupil than district schools in the same city and serving similar populations

Comment

Policymakers have long pursued more cost effective, scalable alternatives for delivering elementary and secondary education. The elusive goal is identifying how to reform educational systems so that children will consistently achieve more academically—at a lesser cost. According to a new report  ‘ A frequently heard reform claim of this sort is that charter schools deliver higher performance at a lower cost. While the test score side of this question has been addressed by a great number of studies (with generally mixed findings), the cost side of the question has received far less attention.’

The description of the Research by Bruce D. Baker, Ken Libby,  and Kathryn Wiley is as follows:

‘This study evaluates the cost claim by comparing the per-pupil spending of charter schools operated by major charter management organizations (CMOs) in New York City, Texas and Ohio with district schools. In each context, we assemble three-year panel data sets including information on school level spending per pupil, school size, grade ranges and student populations served for both charter schools and district schools. For charter schools we use both government (and authorizer) reports of spending, and spending as reported on IRS non-profit financial filings (IRS 990).  We compare the spending of charters to that of district schools of similar size, serving the same grade levels and similar student populations. Overall, charter spending variation is large as is the spending of traditional public schools. Comparative spending between the two sectors is mixed, with many high profile charter network schools outspending similar district schools in New York City and Texas, but other charter network schools spending less than similar district schools, particularly in Ohio.  We find that in New York City, KIPP, Achievement First and Uncommon Schools charter schools spend substantially more ($2,000 to $4,300 per pupil) than similar district schools. Given that the average spending per pupil was around $12,000 to $14,000 citywide, a nearly $4,000 difference in spending amounts to an increase of some 30%. In Ohio, charters across the board spend less than district schools in the same city. And in Texas, some charter chains such as KIPP spend substantially more per pupil than district schools in the same city and serving similar populations, around 30 to 50% more in some cities (and at the middle school level) based on state reported current expenditures, and 50 to 100% more based on IRS filings. Even in New York where we have the highest degree of confidence in the match between our IRS data and Annual Financial Report Data, we remain unconvinced that we are accounting fully for all charter school expenditures.’

Spending by the major Charter Organisations- Comparing Charter School and Local Public District Financial Resources  New York, Ohio and Texas-   Bruce D. Baker, Rutgers University Ken Libby and Kathryn Wiley University of Colorado; May 2012; National Education Policy Center

http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/rb-charterspending_0.pdf

TEACHERS AND PERFORMANCE PAY- BIG PRACTICAL OBSTACLES TO OVERCOME

SELECT COMMITTEE FAVOUR PERFORMANCE RELATED PAY

But brush off real practical difficulties

Lessons from the States?

Comment

This week’s Education  Select Committee report  ‘Great teachers: attracting, training and retaining the best’   strongly recommends ‘ that the Department for Education seek to quantify, in a UK context, what scale of variation in teacher value-added equates to in terms of children’s later prospects. We further recommend that the Department develop proposals (based on consultation and a close study of systems abroad) for a pay system which rewards those teachers who add the greatest value to pupil performance. We acknowledge the potential political and practical difficulties in introducing such a system, but the comparative impact of an outstanding teacher is so great that we believe such difficulties must be overcome. (Paragraph 121)

Rewarding outstanding teachers sounds good and fair  on the face of it .Teachers who perform well and improve pupils outcomes should be rewarded and incentivised, surely. The Committee though was  not wrong when  it  referred to ‘ practical difficulties’.

If it was accepted that  there was  one model of measuring  the value teachers add,  and  that this model   did so with a considerable degree of accuracy, over time and was absolutely fair and not subject to random results, then  there wouldn’t really be  big   ‘practical difficulties’. But that is not how things stand .Fairly measuring an individual teachers performance is a  huge challenge and, yes, there are a number  practical problems .

To really understand the issues surrounding performance related pay you have to take a close look at what is happening in the United States. In the US  performance related pay is central to education reforms, there is no real agreement among academics on the best and fairest way to measure  Value Added . Value-added measures measure  the average gains of pupils taught by a given teacher, instructional team, or school. They are often the most important outcomes for performance measurement systems that aim to offer rewards and sanctions  focused on  teachers performance.

It is worth repeating what the NFER in the UK said  in a paper in 1999 when debate on  value added was really beginning here  in earnest ‘What value added data cannot do is prove anything. Value added evidence is only part of the story of school effectiveness. The notion of a value added measure which tells you – and everyone else – how well your school or department or class is doing, and is also simple to calculate, understand and use, is a non-starter’.

A report for the US Department of Education ‘ Error Rates in Measuring  Teacher and School Performance  Based on Student Test Score  Gains’ (July 2011) found  that  there is  ‘evidence that value-added estimates for teacher-level analyses are subject to a considerable degree of random error when based on the amount  of data that are typically used in practice for estimation.’   It  added  that evidence suggests  ‘that more than 90 percent  of the variation in student gain scores is due to the variation in student-level factors that are not under control of the teacher’ There can be random differences across classrooms in unmeasured factors related to test scores, such as pupils  abilities, background factors, and other pupil -level influences and, secondly, what has been described as ‘ idiosyncratic’  unmeasured factors that affect all students in specific classrooms, such as for example  a barking dog on the test day,  or  a particularly disruptive student in the class on the day. Existing research has consistently found that teacher- and school-level averages of student test score gains  can be pretty  unstable over time. Studies in the States  have found only moderate year-to-year correlations—ranging from 0.2  to 0.6—in the value-added estimates of individual teachers (McCaffrey et al. 2009; Goldhaber and  Hansen 2008) or small to medium-sized school grade-level teams (Kane and Staiger 2002b). As a result, there are significant annual changes in teacher rankings based on value-added estimates.

Our government has actually stopped collecting what we call ‘contextual value-added‘ data – where the students’ circumstances, social background etc are supposed to be  taken into account. So if we don’t know about  these background variables, how can we account for them, when measuring performance ,one wonders?

Secondly, it is something of a challenge to disaggregate  an individual teachers effect on a pupils performance, from other teachers influence. For example  if a pupil has a bad maths teacher, it doesn’t matter how good the physics teacher is-the chances are the pupil  will not do so well in physics, and it wont be the physics  teachers fault.

Another problem is that in order to measure a pupils progress you have to test pupils  regularly. Many believe that either our pupils are over-tested or that teachers are teaching to the test(which is bad) or both. Any performance system will hardly settle these on-going concerns.  And, of course, some subjects are not tested, though they  are part of  a child’s education and are valued. What do you do about the teachers who teach these subjects? Should the tests used to measure teacher performance be based only on external exams?  Rather than , say, self-assessment. If self- assessment is being encouraged, which it is in some quarters, wont that put pressure on teachers ,who know that their pay and career depend on positive pupil  results, be tempted to cheat or exaggerate?

Unions here and in the US are resistant to performance related pay. Apart from the challenge in   designing  a system that is both  transparent and fair   they say  that teaching is a collective responsibility. To set teacher against teacher in striving to win extra pay would be destructive of the notion of teamwork so vital to the working of an effective school.

There is also the thorny issue of how you categorise teachers, once you have measured their performance. Do you place them into outcome categories and if so how many?  For example, should they be rated highly effective, effective, developing, ineffective, etc. In the United States, many states have already designated four or five categories. Those pushing for a minimum number of outcome categories believe that teacher performance must be adequately differentiated, a goal on which prior systems, most of which relied on dichotomous satisfactory/unsatisfactory schemes, fell short. In other words, the categories in new evaluation systems must reflect the variation in teacher performance, and that cannot be accomplished when there are only a couple of categories. The number of categories a teacher evaluation system employs has to depend  on how well it can differentiate teachers performance  with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

It may be possible under existing models for measurement to differentiate the performance at the top and bottom of the distribution but is it precise or accurate enough to differentiate clearly   between the bulk of teachers in the middle of the distribution? There must be some doubt about this even if you factor in ‘observation’ of teachers work. On this latter point its worth noting that most performance systems rely not just on tests but teacher observation, which advocates of performance related pay claim can offset any in built problems with added value measurements.

It is worth recalling  at this juncture  what  the methodologist Donald T. Campbell said thirty years  when he framed  what he called a ‘law’ of performance measurement: “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”

The report from the Select Committee doesn’t begin to explore the real practical issues  and difficulties raised by the issue of  performance related pay . It  simply suggests with considerable insouciance  that they should be overcome. Talk about passing the buck!

TEACHERS SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL COMPETENCE-LEADS TO BETTER CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

The Pro-Social Classroom

Researchers look at model that highlights teachers  social and emotional  competence

Comment

Patricia Jennings and Mark Greenberg propose a model, in a just published research paper, of a pro-social classroom that highlights the importance of teachers’ social and emotional competence (SEC) and well-being in the development and maintenance of supportive teacher–student relationships, effective classroom management, and successful social and emotional learning program implementation. This model proposes that these factors contribute to creating a classroom climate that is more conducive to learning and that promotes positive developmental outcomes among students.

Furthermore, they review current research suggesting that there is a relationship between SEC and ‘teacher burnout’. They also review intervention efforts to support teachers’ SEC through stress reduction and ‘mindfulness programs’.  (Mindfulness  is getting more attention among educators than ever before and involves, interalia, encouraging students/teachers to reflect and meditate to relieve stress and to think positively. There is an overlap here with positive psychology and  resilience thinking. Although its sounds  a trifle wacky and a bit 1960s sub-culture, increasing numbers of schools take it seriously ). Finally, they propose a research agenda to address the potential efficacy of intervention strategies designed to promote teacher SEC and improved learning outcomes for students. This model informs their on-going research. They are leading an intervention development project, a collaborative effort between Penn State University’s Prevention Research Center and the Garrison Institute, to complete the development and preliminary testing of the Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in EducationTM (CARE) professional development program for teachers. They recently received notice of an award from the US Department of Education Institute for Educational Sciences (IES) that will support this  project.  “The Pro-social Classroom: Teacher Social and Emotional Competence in Relation to Student  and Classroom Outcomes” by Patricia Jennings and Mark Greenberg is now published &  available online at http://rer.sagepub.com under the link “Online First.”

The Pro-social Classroom: Teacher Social and Emotional Competence in Relation to Student and Classroom Outcomes Patricia A. Jennings The Garrison Institute and Pennsylvania State University Mark T. Greenberg Pennsylvania State University

TALENT IS OVERRATED- ISN’T IT ?

 

Great performance is not reserved for a pre-ordained few

Deliberate Practice the Key

Comment

Geoff Colvin, Senior Editor at Large for Fortune Magazine, painstakingly dissected in his book Talent is Overrated enormous amounts of scientific research in the field of performance improvement and utilizes case studies of famous athletes, musicians, entrepreneurs, Nobel Prize winners, scientists and prodigies to lay the foundation for his main thesis:  “the evidence shows also that by understanding how a few,  become great, anyone can become better.  Above all, what the evidence shouts most loudly is striking, liberating news: that great performance is not reserved for a preordained few.  It is available to you and everyone”. So, what really separates world-class performers from everybody else?  Researchers identify the secret as ‘deliberate’ practice. This is  something that is not performed in our workplaces by most people, nor by the neurosurgeon at our local hospital nor by the scratch golfer at our country clubs.  Certainly, there are many of these stars who are clearly very good at what they do but they never manage to achieve greatness, as true masters in their field.  In case after case, Colvin recounts the studies of our greatest performers and how they reached the pinnacle of success through this ‘deliberate’ practice.   So practice makes perfect? No, or rather this is not the  complete message that Colvin wants to communicate. In explaining what deliberate practice is he is careful to explain what it is not.   Practice alone, does not make perfect. Simply repeating actions in an unstructured way ie Repetition, repetition and more repetition is not the answer. Instead, it consists of five basis elements:

• It’s specifically designed to improve performance.

• It must be repeated a lot where both the amount of repetition and the type of activity are carefully calculated.

• It requires continuous feedback by a teacher, coach or mentor.

• It must be highly demanding mentally.

• It isn’t (much) fun.

The best people in any field are those who devote the most hours to this deliberate practice. So, it encompasses activity that’s explicitly intended to improve performance, that reaches for objectives just beyond one’s level of competence, provides feedback on results and involves high levels of repetition.

Colvin conjures up a golfing  image to describe what he means “Hitting an eight-iron 300 times with a goal of leaving the ball within 20 feet of the pin 80 percent of the time, continually observing results and making appropriate adjustments, and doing that for hours every day – that’s deliberate practice.” Colvin writes ‘Scientific experts are producing remarkably consistent findings across a wide array of fields. Understand that talent doesn’t mean intelligence, motivation or personality traits. It’s an innate ability to do some specific activity especially well.

British-based researchers Michael J. Howe, Jane W. Davidson and John A. Sluboda conclude in an extensive study, “The evidence we have surveyed … does not support the [notion that] excelling is a consequence of possessing innate gifts.” In short ‘There’s no evidence of high-level performance without experience or practice’. Vladimir Horowitz supposedly said, “If I don’t practice for a day, I know it. If I don’t practice for two days, my wife knows it. If I don’t practice for three days, the world knows it.”

Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else-Geoff Colvin (ISBN 9781591842248),

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/10/30/8391794/index.htm

 

LOSING OUT IN THE ARTS-US STUDY-ENGAGEMENT WITH THE ARTS HELPS ATTAINMENT OF DISADVANTAGED PUPILS

LOSING OUT IN THE ARTS-US STUDY

Engagement with the Arts helps  the attainment and civic engagement  of  the most disadvantaged pupils

Are the Arts being crowded out?

Comment

Rocco Landesman, the Chairman National Endowment for the Arts (US), says that over the past four decades, budget pressures and  an increasing focus on just reading and maths have  crowded the arts out of too many school days. What’s  lost?  Landesman claims -The chance for a child to express himself. The chance for the idiosyncratic child who has not yet  succeeded elsewhere to shine. A sense of play, of fun,of discovery.  But, adds Landesman , James Catterall and the  fellow authors of a new report on Arts and Achievement,  have shown  that something else is lost, too- potential.

Students who have arts-rich experiences in school  in fact  do better  across-the-board academically, and they also  become more active and engaged citizens, voting,  volunteering, and generally participating at higher  rates than their peers.

The reports key finding is that ‘Socially and economically disadvantaged  children and teenagers who have high levels of  arts engagement or arts learning show more  positive outcomes in a variety of areas than their  low-arts-engaged peers.’ They earn better grades and demonstrate higher rates of college enrolment and attainment.

At-risk teenagers or young adults with a history of intensive arts experiences show achievement  levels closer to, and in some cases exceeding, the  levels shown by the general population studied

Young adults who had intensive arts experiences in high school are also  more likely to show civic-minded behaviour than young adults who did not. They take an interest in current affairs, as evidenced by comparatively high levels of volunteering, voting, and engagement with local or school politics.  In many cases, this difference appears in both low-  and high-SES groups

Most of the positive relationships between arts involvement and academic outcomes apply only to at-risk populations (low-SES). But positive relationships between arts and civic engagement   are noted in high-SES groups as well.

The Arts and Achievement in At-Risk Youth: Findings from  Four Longitudinal Studies; James S. Catterall,   University of California Los Angeles   with   Susan A. Dumais,   Louisiana State University   and   Gillian Hampden-Thompson,   University of York, U.K.

April 2012

http://www.nea.gov/research/Arts-At-Risk-Youth.pdf

YOU ARE NOT PREDESTINED TO FAIL AT SCHOOL DUE TO YOUR GENES (OR BACKGROUND)

DAVID SHENK AND GENIUS

Practise makes Perfect

Comment

David Shenk in his book “The Genius in All of Us,” referenced in Michael Goves most recent speech, argues that we have before us not a “talent scarcity” but a “latent talent abundance.” Our problem “isn’t our inadequate genetic assets,” but “our inability, so far, to tap into what we already have.” Talent is not a thing,” says David Shenk, “it’s a PROCESS.” This is actually quite an arresting thought. Talent doesn’t just come from genes, says Shenk. It comes from the way your genes interact with the environment. This means that, with enough effort, some people can learn how to be excellent at things. The truth is he says “that few of us know our true limits, that the vast majority of us have not even come close to tapping what scientists call our ‘un­actualized potential’.” Shenk writes. “Genes are constantly activated and deactivated by environmental stimuli, nutrition, hormones, nerve impulses and other genes.” That means there can be no guaranteed genetic windfalls, or fixed genetic limits, bestowed at the moment of conception. Instead there is a continually unfolding interaction between our heredity and our world, a process that may be in some measure under our control. . Forget about genes as unchanging “blueprints” and talent as a “gift,” all tied up in a bow. “We cannot allow ourselves to think that way anymore,” Whatever you wish to do well, Shenk writes, you must do over and over again, even if it results frequent failures. This is known as “deliberate practice,” and over time it can actually produce changes in the brain, making new heights of achievement possible But he is careful to say that we are not born without limits — it’s just that none of us can know what those limits are “before we’ve applied enormous re­sources and invested vast amounts of time.”  He relates his own struggle to achieve. “My attitude toward my own writing is simple: I assume that everything I write is rubbish until I have demonstrated otherwise. I will routinely write and rewrite a sentence, paragraph and/or chapter 20, 30, 40 times — as many times as it takes to feel satisfied.”

Gove used Shenks book to argue that there is plenty of evidence that our children are not,  due to their genes or due to their environment (poor background broken home etc), pre-destined to fail at school .   Our children can succeed if  given the right support and encouraged to stretch themselves. Outstanding state schools can and do demonstrate this, by showing no significant achievement gaps based on their pupils background.  Maybe  we make too many assumptions about a childs potential or ‘intelligence’  based on too little information.

LEARNING FROM CHARTER MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONS (US)

LEARNING FROM CHARTER MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONS (US)

High Expectations for student behaviour and Intensive teacher coaching and monitoring

Comment 

The National Study of CMO Effectiveness is a four-year study designed to assess the impact of CMOs on student achievement and to identify CMO structures and practices that are most effective in raising achievement. Earlier reports from the study documented substantial variation in CMOs’ student achievement impacts and in CMOs’ use of particular educational strategies and practices.  The last report from the study found that the most effective CMOs tend to emphasize two practices in particular: high expectations for student behaviour and intensive teacher coaching and monitoring. This report provides a more in-depth description of these two promising CMO practices, drawing on surveys and interviews with staff in high-performing CMOs that emphasize one or both practices.  However, CMO leaders say that high expectations for student behaviour and intensive teacher coaching should not be considered “silver bullets.” These leaders suggest that these practices are more effective when coordinated or implemented in conjunction with other strategies, such as:

 Recruitment and training of strong school leaders who can monitor and improve instruction, hold teachers accountable, and set the tone for student behaviour and school culture

Commitment to college-going expectations and academic supports for all students, regardless of background

Development of strong data systems, time set aside for teachers to analyse and discuss data, and an expectation that teachers will regularly adjust instruction based on evidence

Formulation of school- or system-wide instructional goals and frameworks to guide teacher, coach, and principal action

Development of strong, trusting relationships between school staff and students

Provision of resources (such as handbooks and online lesson plans) from the central office to inform teacher practice

Cultivation of commitments from parents to reinforce school actions

Learning from Charter School Management Organizations:   Strategies for Student Behaviour and Teacher Coaching Robin Lake, Melissa Bowen, Allison Demeritt  Center on Reinventing Public Education  Moira McCullough, Joshua Haimson,  Brian Gill  Mathematica Policy Research  March 2012

http://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_CMO_Strategies_Mar12.pdf

NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN THE CLASSROOM

NEW  TECHNOLOGIES IN  THE CLASSROOM

Do they   work?  Or is empirical evidence in short supply?

Comment

It is often assumed that new technologies will massively improve what happens in the classroom, and  the learning environment and experience of pupils . Give pupils a lap top or ipad and their learning experience will be much better for it. But what exactly ,asks Larry Cuban of Stanford University,  is the pressing or important problem to which an iPad is the solution? Asking that  pretty basic question first uncovers, he says, the confused set of purposes that surround buying and using high-tech devices in classrooms. Here are some reasons given by educators  to Cuban about how technology improves learning   :

*These devices will motivate students to work harder, gain more knowledge and skills, and be engaged in schooling. Engaged students will achieve higher grades. When the  Auburn (ME)  school board authorized the purchase of  iPads for kindergartners, their leaders assured them that reading scores would rise.

*Students will be prepared for an information-driven labour market. Or as one superintendent put it: “Students have to have digital competence, and to be competent, you have to have access. Using current-day technology should be a normal part of what we do. We need to close the gap between schools, education and the real world.”

*High-tech devices will erase the gap in access to knowledge that exists between poor and wealthy. The superintendent who bought 6,000 iPads said:  “It’s an equalizer. There’s no difference in learning advantage from the poorest to the most affluent.”

*Using laptops and tablets will transform traditional teaching. Etc..

The use of technology, apparently, is the answer then to all sorts of education challenges. Or is it? Where exactly is the evidence in support of this proposition and the various associated claims? Cuban reminds us, for example, that research clearly shows that certain practices do, indeed, “work.” Take pre-school education. Study after study done on three and four year-olds who were in preschool programmes and their progress through schools and into adulthood show short- and long-term gains in academic achievement, earnings, and other behaviours . But ,when  it comes to research supporting major purchases of laptops, tablets, and similar devices, such a cumulative body of evidence is ‘missing-in-action’, claims  Cuban.

Occasional studies that do show promising results for new technologies are, according to Cuban, dragged in to cover the near nakedness of research, much like a fig leaf, to justify the high costs of these new devices in the face of little evidence. The fact remains that no one knows for sure whether the new hardware and software appearing in schools works.

So, if this is the case-why such an investment in new technology? Cubans explanation is   to do  pretty much with politics.  He says ‘school boards and superintendents also buy high-tech devices because they want to be seen as technologically innovative and ahead of other districts. In this culture, the value of technology is equal to social and economic progress. Because school boards are completely dependent upon the political support of their parents, taxpayers, and voters to fund annual budgets, being seen as ahead of the game in technology garners public support. Not to adopt new technologies, even when funds are short, means that district leaders are failing their students and against progress.’

I must admit to being baffled about the ipad fad-given that it is difficult to work on and far inferior in performance to mini-laptops if you want internet access and speed. A triumph of design and marketing  over substance.

It does seem that Cuban makes a compelling case-policy and practice should be informed by robust up to date evidence.  But it is also true that our youth are highly proficient in the use of new technologies, and, crucially, enjoy working with them and they allow  for , self-evidently, greater  personalisation of learning and for learners to take more ownership of their learning and to work with greater independence but also to work within networked teams with a global outlook,  all of which must be positive. So why is evidence in support of such  new technologies in the classroom  so  very hard to come by?

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, FINDING FLOW AND ITS RELEVANCE TO EDUCATION

FINDING  FLOW

Another dimension of positive psychology and its relevance to education

Comment

Positive psychology is making inroads into current educational thinking. Here is one aspect- Reaching a state of Flow-bear with me!

Flow in psychology’ is the mental state of operation in which a person in an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity.

Part psychological study, part self-help book, Finding Flow is a prescriptive guide that ‘helps us reclaim ownership of our lives’.  The author Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi has devoted his professional life to the study of happiness and how we can attain it.

Based on a far-reaching study of thousands of individuals, Finding Flow contends that we often walk through our days unaware and out of touch with our emotional lives. He describes the mental state of flow as “being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz. Your whole being is involved, and you’re using your skills to the utmost.” Our inattention makes us constantly bounce between two extremes: during much of the day we live filled with the anxiety and pressures of our work and obligations, while during our leisure moments, we tend to live in passive boredom. So, the  key, according to Csikszentmihalyi, is to challenge ourselves with tasks requiring a high degree of skill and commitment. So at its most simple level-instead of watching television, for example  play the piano. Transform a routine task by taking a different approach. In short, learn the joy of complete engagement. Though they appear simple, the lessons in Finding Flow are life-altering.

Flow first came to Csikszentmihalyi’s attention while he was studying artists for his postgraduate thesis. As they worked the artists seemed to go into a trance-like state. To his surprise he found that the finished product was less important to them than the process of doing the work itself. External rewards were less important than intrinsic pleasure, an observation that went against the grain of psychological thinking at the time.

 

According to Csíkszentmihályi, there are ten factors that accompany the experience of flow. While many of these components may be present, it is not necessary to experience all of them for flow to occur:

 

Clear goals that, while challenging, are still attainable.

 

Strong concentration and focused attention.

 

The activity is intrinsically rewarding.

 

Feelings of serenity; a loss of feelings of self-consciousness.

 

Timelessness; a distorted sense of time; feeling so focused on the present that you lose track of time passing.

 

Immediate feedback.

 

Knowing that the task is doable; a balance between skill level and the challenge presented.

 

Feelings of personal control over the situation and the outcome.

 

Lack of awareness of physical needs.

 

Complete focus on the activity itself.

 

So what relevance does this have for education? Csíkszentmihályi has suggested that overlearning a skill or concept can help people experience flow. Another critical concept in his theory is the idea of slightly extending oneself beyond one’s current ability level. This slight stretching of one’s current skills can help the individual experience flow. Flow can lead to improved performance too. Researchers have found that flow can enhance performance in a wide variety of areas including teaching, learning, athletics and artistic creativity. Flow can also lead to further learning and skill development. Because the act of achieving flow indicates a strong mastery of a certain skill, the individual must continually seek new challenges and information in order to maintain this state.

 

In the late 1980s Csikszentmihalyi and several colleagues undertook a longitudinal survey of over 200 talented teenagers to discover why some are able to develop their talents while others give up. One of their principal findings, published in Talented Teens – The Roots of Success and Failure was that ‘flow was the strongest predictor of subjective engagement and how far the student progressed in the school’s curriculum in his or her talent’.

 

The authors suggest three ‘promising steps for promoting optimal experience in the classroom’:

 

1. The most influential teachers were found to be those who always continue to nurture their interest in their subjects and do not take their ability to convey that enthusiasm for granted. Learning was found to flourish where the cultivation of passionate interest was a primary educational goal.

 

2. Attention should be paid to ‘conditions that enhance the experience of maximum rewards’. Everything should be done to minimise the impact of rules, exams and procedures and to focus on the inherent satisfaction of learning. (In a more recent interview, Csikszentmihalyi has stated that although it makes some sense to work on students’ weaknesses, it makes even more sense to work on their strengths, ‘Because once someone has developed strengths, then everything else becomes easier.’)

 

3. Teachers must read the shifting needs of learners. The flow state is not a static one: once a skill has been mastered it is necessary to add more complexity if the student is not to become bored – there must always be a close fit between challenges and skills. The teacher’s sense of timing and pace, of when to intervene and when to hold back, is therefore crucial. There must be freedom wherever possible for the student to control the process, but teachers must also draw on their experience to channel students’ attention.

 

References:

 

Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Rathunde, K. (1993). The measurement of flow in everyday life: Towards a theory of emergent motivation. In Jacobs, J.E.. Developmental perspectives on motivation. Nebraska symposium on motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

 

Csíkszentmihályi, Mihály (1975), Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997) Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life. Basic Books, New York.

 

Csikszentmihalyi, M (2002), Flow: The Classic Work on How to Achieve Happiness, Rider, London

Thoughts about Education on www.newhorizons.org

 

Csikszentmihalyi, M, Rathunde, K, and Whalen, S (1997), Talented Teenagers: The Roots of Success and Failure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Scherer, M (2002), ‘Do students care about learning? A conversation with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’Educational Leadership 60 (1)

RESILIENCE AND ITS IMPORTANCE TO YOUNG PEOPLE -THE YOUNG FOUNDATION TAKES A LEAD

YOUNG FOUNDATION AND RESILIENCE

Pilot programme  trains professionals to target potential gang members

Comment

The Young Foundation was commissioned by Harrow Metropolitan Police to develop and pilot an emotional resilience programme, targeting 14 -19 year olds who are offending or at risk of offending.

New thinking, backed by research, particularly in America , points to the importance that ‘resilience’ plays in equipping disadvantaged young people to cope with and succeed at school and in later life.  While schools prioritise the acquisition and development of core academic skills this has, too often, squeezed out another set of important skills – how to think creatively, how to collaborate, how to empathise. The value of social and emotional learning and motivation, including its constituent parts, resilience and persistence or grit is beginning to be recognised. The OECD has found, for example, that disadvantaged children can  succeed at school and later on if they have developed resilience, overcoming the odds.  Positive psychology and a focus on supporting  the development  of character in schools are informing much  education thinking on both sides of the Atlantic.

The Young  Foundation has been involved in a UK Resiliency Project in 24 secondary schools across three local authorities – Manchester, Hertfordshire, South Tyneside – developing a programme specifically for working with ‘gangs’. This was delivered by a range of professionals working with young people and the Foundation has developed new materials with Dr Ilona Boniwell, one of Europe’s leading positive psychologists.

The Young Foundation team carried out a scoping exercise with a range of key agencies including local voluntary organisations, majority group and opposition councillors in Harrow, Harrow’s Young People’s services, the Anti-social Behaviour Unit, Safer Neighbourhoods Team and the Wealdstone Anti-social Behaviour Partnership.

Stakeholders were interviewed to understand the local context, past experiences of similar initiatives, perceptions of what success would look like, and risk factors associated with the project. The Foundation also explored perceptions of ‘gang culture’ in the target area, and built an understanding of the range of provision and facilities for young people in the area.

Multi-disciplinary teams of frontline professionals who are based in Harrow and who regularly come into contact with these young people have been trained to deliver the course materials.

The Foundation will be publishing an evaluation of the Harrow work soon and will seek to test this approach in other areas.

Watch the accompanying video outlining the activities the young people participated in.

http://www.youngfoundation.org/publications/talks/emotional-resilience-gangs