ResearchEd review of presentations

Praxis – a new platform to promote professional development through research inquiry.
Chris Brown A teacher of Science as well as an academic research at Cambridge University
 
Speaker discusses a possible mechanism for enhancing teacher led researcher into the classroom. The website Praxis has been developed to act as a forum for teacher research to be shared across a wider field as well as facilitating access and engagement in the praxis reflective cycle.
 
My Thoughts – What is being suggested is anecdotal and highly subjective due to large discrepancy on how individual research is conduct and reviewed. Therefore, work is valueless as no institutions will accredit or validate findings. Teachers do not feel valued when completing this kind of research. We need close, working, academic relationships with educational researchers. 
 
Chain effects? Impacts of academy chains on performance of disadvantaged students. 
Becky Francis, educational and statistical researcher at kings college.
 
A systematic review of academy chains from 2012 to 2015, measuring impact on disadvantaged pupils relative to peers in  mainstream schools. Conclusion, in general more academy chains are having a negative effect on the progress of their students in comparison to mainstream (LEA led schools). How did this situation arise? Many academy chains were allowed to expand far too quickly on unjustified evidence. Why was this permitted? London chains, improved returns for pupils, therefore policy makers assumed that this would also be reflect for the rest of the UK. What happened? Policy makers did not anticipate the huge variation of context across the country.
 
My Thoughts – Concerning trend of acting too early due to the short time frames between the electoral period. The damage of these reforms is likely to exacerbate the educational inequality within communities as resources and students can no longer be evenly distributed. We need a context driven approach where teachers and schools let other know what they need.
 
Flip the system 
Rene Kneyber, teacher, policy consultant, academic researcher and author (He says, all teachers should have these options)
 
A theoretical and philosophical discussion about how our educational system should be structure. Speaker opens by showing a the EduPolitical system where all information, how to teach, learn and manage schools is all disseminated from the top. This results in the de-professionalisation of the teachers as they have no freedom or mobility to explore their role. Therefore, in general returns for students are poor. Rene suggests that ,like Holland, the UK needs an educational system that is informed by those people stood at the chalk board who understand the context. When they ask or identify weakness, leaders then respond and government does what it can to support them. Subsequently, bring professionalism back to profession and empowering all teachers to take ownership of their own profession because what they do has real value.
 
My Thoughts – An inspiring speaker who made the point very clear. If education is so subjective and context specific, what we need is information directly from the chalk board. So, why are there no teachers currently in the whitehall to inform policy? I feel a bit tired of listening to the continual changes to the educational system which come from political ideologies as opposed to what is need in the class.
 
Using behavioural insights to improve education 
Raj Chande, researcher at PhD students for the behaviour team.
 
Research identifies how small changes in the patterns of behaviour can result in huge returns. The behaviour teacher have recently focused on sending a text home to parents when there child has an assessment coming up a week later. They found that simply sending a text home to parents saw performance increase by 10-20%. So, simply texting parents to let them know there son or daughter has an assessment costing £2 saw progress accelerate by 2 months, with greater returns for low ability students. 
 
My Thoughts – Very inspirational speaker who showed the power of changing the small things. The investment required per pupil to receive the level of gains that were being made was very impressive. I am dubious as to who is going to take the administrative role of the whole process. 
 
The five big policy changes for the new government 
Sam Freedman, Senior advisor to Michael Gove and Executive director at Teach First.
 
  • Resources: £3 Billion cuts to schools funding over 5 years. LEAs will disappear, early years and 16-19 interventions squeezed the hardest and will most likely disappear.
  • Infrastructure: More regional school commissioners – targets more academies and chains, lift coasting schools, not sure on other roles yet. Results so far suggest that they have had a poor impact.
  • Teacher supply: Teacher shortage, falling grad numbers, weak wages in education push potential teachers elsewhere. Crude incentives system which does’t support recruitment or retention. Student loans for PGCE is wasted money, all training should be free.
  • Leadership: 50% of heads will retire in the next 10 years. No good training provided to train people to become outstanding heads.
  • Expertise: Lack of quality professional development, teaching has suffered massive de-professionalisation. Lack of management training means people squeeze rather than effective manage makes working conditions worse. 
My Thoughts – High expectations, no resources; a dwindling recruitment field which lacks the ability to produce future leaders. Not great, expect to be squeezed as 25% of the education budget is being wiped away! Every school will feel this. 
Advertisements

Cultural Capital in Education

Schools should be seen as centres for improving the academic and cultural capital of it students. To my knowledge there is no policy that currently exists to develop or support the cultural richness of our students. For example, a student who attends private school has a variety of cultural and academic experiences to engage in. Parents hold the school accountable because they want their child to have these experiences. My school is sponsored by a top University, this establishment also holds the school accountable because they too want students who have had a variety of experiences. Why are state schools not held accountable for cultural capital? It’s clear that top institutions want well rounded culturally rich students. But, those from low socio-economic backgrounds struggle to gain similar experiences due to financial or guidance limitations. What is the Government going to do to address this?

The definition of cultural capital is, “Cultural capital is the ideas and knowledge that people draw upon as they participate in social life. Everything from rules of etiquette to being able to speak and write effectively can be considered cultural capital.” (Crossman, 2010). This phrase considers the development of social and practical skills that allow a person to take part and function in society. In modern democracy an individual would need strong social capabilities to be successful. This means that part of one’s success in society is dependent on their social/cultural capital.

Cultural Capital categories:

  • Embodied – concious or passive inheritance of certain behaviours or skills. Skills influenced by the environment and life that an individual leads. For example, colloquial dialect. A modern society also expects basic life skills to be develop in these avenues as well, focusing for example.
  • Objectified – physical objects of science or art owned or appreciated by an individual. Only by those who have developed strong embodied understanding of history and art.
  • Institutionalised – recognition of culture. For example, institutions provide qualifications for individuals.

Societies responsibility for develop cultural capital in all individuals is important. Embodied education is the responsibility of parents and carers. Objectified and institutionalised education is the responsibility governments and community leaders. In middle class households parents and carers continually support the embodied development of their offspring. Parents from low socio-economic community struggle to find the time to support their child in a similar way. What is been done to support the development of embodied education in these individuals? What is being done to support the embodied development of parents who were also deprived?

Society has a responsibility to support all individuals enhance their cultural captial. Government policy linked to cultural capital in education is difficult to find. I found myself constantly being referred to cultural education (DfE, 2013). The report identified that cultural education was important. To support cultural education more funding to objectified, arts based charities has been increased. The kind of students who will take advantage of these opportunities are the mobilsed middle class. There is little evidence of supporting increased mobiltiy in all individuals. For example, how a pupil thinks, talks, problem solves, socialises, concentrates, believes, aspires, plans, prepares, organises, repairs a bike, plays chests or develops other non-profitable skills that, as we all know, are important but not supported.

For those indivdiuals from low-socio economic backgrounds more must be done to support their embodied cultural development. Liberate their ability to fairly operate in a social society. What are we doing to support these individual’s? To my knowledge, nothing! That is an injustice.

Crossman, 2010. http://sociology.about.com/od/C_Index/g/Cultural-Capital.htm

DfE, 2013. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/226569/Cultural-Education.pdf