Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Evidence based teaching and learning Martin Valcke

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Evidence based teaching and learning Martin Valcke"— Presentation transcript:

1 Evidence based teaching and learning Martin Valcke

2 Structure Starter Effective instructional strategies: Activity 1 Overview of some evidence based strategies Pairwise discussion: activity 2 Making it more complex Applying frame of reference: activity 3

3 Before we start: testing x

4 As a starter Do you consider to be educational research being of relevant for teaching practice? Choose a number from 0 (not at all) to 9 (extremely relevant) 0__1__2__3__4__5__6__7__8__9

5 Activity 1 Individually: Map a list of 5 key didactical strategies that you consider or experienced to be effective. Develop list on flip-over.

6 What “works” in education? What has an impact on learning performance? –Direct impact –Indirect impact (motivation, attitude, self- efficacy, …).

7 Certain intervention, process, variables, … Attitude Self-efficacy Motivation Beliefs …. Better performance

8 Examples 1.HomeworkHomework 2.Mind mapsMind maps 3.Giving feedbackGiving feedback 4.Web based learningWeb based 5.Collaborative versus individual learningCollaborative versus individual learning Certain intervention, process, variables, …

9

10 Mindmap

11 11

12

13

14 Examples: Strongest impact? 1.HomeworkHomework 2.Mind mapsMind maps 3.Giving feedbackGiving feedback 4.Web based learningWeb based 5.Collaborative versus individual learningCollaborative versus individual learning Certain intervention, process, variables, …

15 Effect size Significant impact of process, variable, …. Integration research: meta-analysis Summary measure: effect size (d). Rule of thumb: d = >.40 is relevant impact. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta- Analysis relating to Achievement. Milton Park, Oxon: Routledge.

16 Examples: Strongest impact? 1.HomeworkHomework 2.Mind mapsMind maps 3.Giving feedbackGiving feedback 4.Web based learningWeb based 5.Collaborative versus individual learningCollaborative versus individual learning Certain intervention, process, variables, … d=.29 d=.57 d=.73 d=.37 d=.59

17

18

19 Activity 2 Make a “thinking pair” Check your own “top 5” with the two tables (see print out Tables Hattie) Discuss congruency and incongruency with colleague. What might explains (in)congruencies?

20 Maar … even complexer maken Akkoord met onderzoeken? Bijv. Huiswerk

21

22

23 Certain intervention, process, variables, … Attitude Self-efficacy Motivation Beliefs …. Better performance Characteristics teaching staff Characteristics learner Making it more complex

24 Complexer: frame of reference

25

26 Making it more complex Activity 3: exemplify the frame of reference –Actors Learner + characteristics Teaching staff + characteristics –Didactical activity (objectives, content, media, didactical strategy, evaluation) –Context

27 Look at the impact.. Evidence about: –Student characteristics –Teaching staff characteristics –Teaching strategies –Curricula –Education institution characteristics –Context

28 Learner characteristics

29 1.Reducing anxiety 2.Diet 3.Gender 4.Personality 5.Self-concept

30 Learner characteristics 1.Reducing anxiety (d=.40) 2.Diet (d=.12) 3.Gender (d=.12) 4.Personality (d=.19) 5.Self-concept (d=.43)

31 Teaching staff characteristics (gebaseerd op Hattie, 2009, p. 109)

32 Teaching staff characteristics 1.Expectations staff 2.Relationship staff member–student 3.Teacher subject matter knowledge 4.Not labelling students 5.Professional development staff (gebaseerd op Hattie, 2009, p. 109)

33 Discuss with partner and select again 1.Expectations staff 2.Relationship staff member–student 3.Teacher subject matter knowledge 4.Not labelling students 5.Professional development staff (gebaseerd op Hattie, 2009, p. 109)

34 Teaching staff characteristics 1.Expectations staff (d=.43) 2.Relationship staff member–student (d=.72) 3.Teacher subject matter knowledge (d=.09) 4.Not labelling students (d=.61) 5.Professional development staff (d=.62) (gebaseerd op Hattie, 2009, p. 109)

35 Conclusions

36 1.Look for the evidence 2.Approach the “complex” teaching and learning setting 3.Consider interaction of processes/variables in different actors in the educational setting

37 Evidence based teaching and learning Martin Valcke


Download ppt "Evidence based teaching and learning Martin Valcke"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google