Ensuring Equity in Learning

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Students often feel left out and sad about not being involved in class discussions, Q & A sessions, etc. Usually, a few students dominate interactive sessions such as these; a few others attempt to get involved, while the rest remain quiet throughout. At Wells International School, teachers and students work together to deliberately and systematically provide equal opportunity to all. Teachers accomplish this through a variety of creative techniques. The following is one such example:

Step 1: Have every student’s name represented in a set – be creative!

Every student's name pasted on ice-cream sticks

Step 2: Put them all together in a cup – to allow easy access

Put them all in a cup

Step 3: Pose question(s) or present task(s) – e.g. “State a question by looking at this picture using any one of the following words.”

"State a question by looking at this picture..."

equity in learning

Step 4: Pick up a name, randomly

IMG_0420

Step 5: Call out student name and give him/her time to answer the question or perform the task

equity in learning

Step 6: Put the name out of the set/pile and use the rest of the names until everyone have had a chance to participate – for another round, put all the names back in the cup and start all over

Advantages:

  1. no one can say “no” or “I don’t know”
  2. everyone is happy- everyone gets equal opportunity
  3. no ill-feelings – teacher is fair to all students
  4. those who dominate learn to give others a chance
  5. those who shy away are gently “forced” to participate – no excuses
  6. great way to teach respect for each others’ answers and perspectives
  7. creation of positive learning environment that helps in overall learning

Acknowledgment:

Thanks to Mr. Neal Hawthorne (Homeroom Teacher), Ms. Kate (Teaching Assistant) and students of Grade 2 of Wells International School (Thong Lor Campus).[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Tapping into your child’s potential

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]In our society, parents desire to give the best to their children. Enrollment in expensive, well-reputed school, purchase of the best educational resources available in the market and opportunity to participate in a variety of fun and enriching experiences are some ways parents cater to the needs of a growing child.

Parents living in this century feel the pressure to focus on providing the best education to their offspring (more than any other time in the history of our civilization) for a wide range of reasons. Many of them feel that their own educational experiences were mostly defective. Others believe that a good education has the potential to make people successful, responsible, and caring. And there are others who recognize the importance of a good education in preparing their children for the complex, uncertain, highly challenging future.

However, the future is unknown. While parents assume that a particular kind of education would prepare children for the future (work and life itself), they cannot guarantee it. Hence everyone approaches the whole issue by relying on subjective experience and judgment about what constitutes the best education. In reality, no one can actually say what their children really need, and how they should be assisted in acquiring them.

With this background information, let us explore ways to increase children’s potential to deal with an exciting and unpredictable future.

1. Children’s quality of life is proportionally affected by the quality of relationship they enjoy with parents, siblings, and other significant individuals in society. Ask any adult what he or she remembers from his or her classes or school/college/university and the answers would invariably point toward experiences that are based in relationships (e.g. “I had a great Chemistry teacher who encouraged and supported us,” “I remember this one time when we sang Happy Birthday to our teacher in the middle of a test,” and “Our principal was a strict man and never smiled.”). It is uncommon to hear answers such as, “I remember how plants make food and the formula for photosynthesis,” or “I remember all the events that led to the Second World War in sequence,” etc. In other words, people recall relationships more readily than what they learned at school. This is not wrong. This is simply how humans are. Hence, there is value in focusing on providing children with healthy, positive social-emotional experiences both at home and school. When children feel happy, they are ready and want to learn. Children who experience fear, insecurity, distrust, doubt, threat, and rejection are highly stressed, frustrated, and do not want to learn. Parents and teachers who genuinely love and care for their children provide them with opportunities to grow as functional individuals who are happy with themselves and others around them. This is a very important characteristic for survival and success in the future. Children who have a good quality of life grow up to become successful individuals. Good quality of life does not come from giving children all that they want (monetary sense), but from giving them sufficient exposure to positive human relationships.

2. Believe in your child – by nature, humans like to compare themselves with others. However, our tendency is to compare ourselves with those who are better off. When we do this, we feel small and disadvantaged, leading to negative feelings toward our own capacity to grow and achieve in life. Children learn to engage in social comparison early in life from parents and teachers. Because of this, many individuals develop negative attitudes toward themselves – they doubt their own potential, and before long, they believe that they are good for nothing. DO NOT compare your child with another child. There is no value in doing so. In fact, when we compare one child to another, it destroys the self-image, motivation, and confidence of both. Several research by Dr. Carol Dweck from Stanford University indicate that adults send a negative message to children when they use labels such as smart, average, or dull. In reality, these do not exist (ranking only exist for the purpose of employment, university admission, etc). They do not represent the true ability or potential of a child. Hence, parents and teachers must be careful not to compare children with others, including themselves. Every child is special. Every child has his or her own strengths. Children who succeed (regardless of school achievement records) are those whose strengths are tapped into and nurtured. A child’s strength could be in an academic subject. It could also be in non-academic areas. As parents, we should be open to accepting children’s strength without judging the field/area in which the strength is manifested. For example, in the past, when children did well in dance class or athletics, parents shunned the idea by telling them that these are not going earn them a living. Today, these pre-conceptions are proven wrong. In fact, when one area of strength is celebrated and nurtured, other areas of life undergo significant improvement as well. Believe in your child, sincerely. Believe that he or she has a special place and role in the world. Be supportive in bringing the best of your child. When parents and teachers believe in their children, the latter develop positive attitude toward themselves and become internally motivated to climb up the ladder of success.

3. Empower rather than spoon feed – We can take a horse to the river, but definitely cannot force it to drink from the water. At the end of the day, every child makes his or her own decisions about a variety of things. Parents and teachers who think that they have complete control over children’s lives are making a big mistake. While children may listen and obey, they are forming their own personal mental framework as to what they want and do not want. Psychologically speaking, children who are allowed freedom to engage in collective decision making are well-adjusted and responsible compared to those for whom all decisions are made by parents and/or teachers. This should begin early – earlier than most adults think is possible. For example, when a mother bakes cookies, she could ask her two or three year old to join in – the child could be involved in deciding about the type of cookies to be baked, the shapes, the flavor, etc. By involving children in this manner, they get to engage in higher order thinking, form preferences, and defend their choices. Creativity can be introduced and sharpened through a variety of simple, day-to-day activities at home and school, if parents and teachers spend a little bit more time thinking about designing learning experiences suitable for children.

Adults have spent a lot of time teaching children. It is time to stop teachingand start inspiring! Children who are inspired do more than what is expected of them. They push their own limits to continue treading new and challenging territories. Success for such children is inevitable and real. These are the kinds of people who will face the challenges of the 21stcentury, wisely.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Changing schools, outside-in

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Students spend about six to eight hours a day, five days a week (sometimes more) at school. These long hours are supposed to equip students with enough knowledge and skills to prepare them for future work. After school, students continue learning in tuition centers or other self-development institutes to compensate for knowledge or skills that schools do not teach.

At home, students continue learning through homework. In other words, an average student (regardless of performance level) spends about twelve to fourteen hours per day learning. High school students preparing for standardized exams may spend more than fourteen hours per day.

Society’s obsession

While learning itself is not harmful for students, the assumption behind how students learn needs to be re-visited. Long hours are required for learning because society wrongly believes that people who know more are more successful than those who know less. Secondly, society fails to acknowledge that students are humans whose capacity for learning is proportional to their qualitative experience in life. Thus, unlike a robot or machine, students’ ability to learn effectively is not only dependent on repetition of facts and/or cognitive skills, but more importantly, on meaningful repetition (which only comes as a result of connecting learning with personal experiences and reality).

The amount of knowledge acquired and the number of skills mastered have become an obsession in our society. Students are expected to learn at school and then at home. Instead of asking children, “How are you and how did school go?” parents ask, “How did you do in Math? Did you get a good grade? Are you going to work on your homework?” Students are pressured to learn at all times.

Competing outcome

Surprisingly, if adults are asked what they remember from school, the most common answers pertain to friends, fun experiences, good teachers, and other things related to human interaction. It is rare for people to talk about what they learned at school, leave alone applying their knowledge in real life. If this is the case, it is logical to think that we require students to spend countless hours in learning to pass tests for no apparent long-term gains. However, the trend continues without much hope for a significant change in the overall system.

Where does the problem lie? How do we change this scenario to reflect a genuine sensitivity toward the learning process that allows us to provide students with only relevant learning experiences?

Change agent

Society, past and present, continues to expect schools to manufacture individuals who are heavily equipped with subject knowledge but devoid of everything else important to humans (e.g. social-emotional intelligence, physical development, global citizenship, etc.). Despite numerous attempts to change how education is practiced, schools find it difficult to change because the people who make up the pillars of the system refuse to value new approaches and ideas.

Since 1960’s, literally hundreds of educational and psychological research have indicated that children learn only 10% of what is taught and that they learn through different modalities. In other words, not all children learn at the same rate and with same style. However, schools remain unchanged because parents (society) refuse to give their children an education that is different from their own. Parents figure that if the education they received made them “successful” it should work well for their children as well.

What they don’t realize is that different times require different learning. If society does not raise its expectation of student learning, schools will continue providing what they are asked to deliver. Hence the inability of schools to provide a more progressive education to students is directly linked to the unwillingness of parents (society) to relinquish their wrong ideology about the sacredness of traditional education or way of teaching/learning.

Society’s role

Schools do not and will not rise above parents’ expectations. A holistic change in education system worldwide will only be possible when parents raise their expectations of what schools should and can do as a center for learning.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Revisiting “at-risk”

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]For a novice or a teacher without teaching credential, the work of dealing with idiosyncrasies in children’s learning behavior is the duty of either school administration or counselor. Every little difference in social-emotional experiences and/or behavior of students (compared to the norm) could be seen as a possible warning sign. Hence, these teachers are quick to refer students, after having them labeled as extremely withdrawn, hyperactive, slow, deviant, etc.

However, when schools resort to such a referral system and permit the mindset that go with it, they are actually condoning a wrong-doing in how students are educated, especially the so-called “at-risk” learners. This approach places the blame for academic failure solely on students. But countless research findings indicate that academic success is determined by both student and teacher characteristics. What teachers do and/or do not do is equally responsible for under-achievement as what students do and/or do not do – a truth conveniently overlooked in the past.

For many decades, it was believed that students are fully responsible for their own failures. While this may be partly true, it is a narrow way of looking at the issue. There has been no breakthrough in dealing with students with specific learning difficulties because educators have been looking for the answer in the wrong place.

Definition

The term “at-risk” is used to refer to students who are not experiencing success in school and are potential academic failure. When a child is suspected to be at-risk of failing, teachers, administrators and counselors examine the child’s family background, home environment, past achievement records, etc. All attention turns to the child. School personnel consult with internal as well as external departments or agencies to come up with scientifically sound educational intervention to help the child. At least this is what happened in the old system.

New paradigm

Experienced and/or teachers with teaching credential usually understand the term “at-risk” differently. For these individuals, the condition is preventable. They correctly know that many at-risk students ended up being such because of what teachers do or do not do.

Examples

When a teacher is boring and monotonous, he could expect young learners to lose focus and engage in behaviors similar to hyperactive-attention-deficit conditions. Because of ignorance and oversight, the teacher then refers children who display such behaviors as ADHD cases and label them as at-risk of failing in test/exam.

Teachers who speak too softly place children at-risk of hearing impairment, and potential academic failure. Ineffective use of whiteboard (e.g. very small or illegible handwriting, disorganized presentation of points, etc.) increases potential difficulties in reading, following instructions and completing homework assignments.

Teachers with unpleasant personality and negative attitude discourage students from seeking help, hence increasing possibilities of under-performance. In this example, it is students’ refusal to seek guidance, rather than their actual intellectual prowess that places them in the at-risk category. This could be easily averted if a teacher is approachable and friendly.

Way ahead

Since most at-risk students are the direct outcome of teacher characteristics, teachers must start looking at themselves as active agents of students’ academic successes and failures in a more responsible manner. Teachers must become more perceptive of each student’s strengths and weaknesses and provide differentiated, individualized attention to each child to maximize his/her potential. They should reflect on their profession, understand its seriousness and accept to do all that it takes to help every child to succeed.

Change of expectation and attitude, engaging students in active, meaningful learning, getting students interested in lessons without judging/labeling them, believing that every child can and does learn, and utilizing multiple approaches to reaching out to students are some effective ways to prevent academic failure, successfully![/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Questioning: an instructional strategy

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]If one had to ask teachers whether or not they use questioning as an instructional strategy, the answer is invariably a confident yes. Teachers, regardless of their level of effectiveness feel that questioning is the easiest way to engage students in interactive lessons. This tends to be the case until one provides teachers with a different description of how questioning should be done to elicit maximum intelligent responses that indicate actual learning from students.

Most teachers believe that effective questioning is the ability to sprinkle randomly generated and/or intuitively expressed questions throughout lessons. They think that more questions mean better engagement in learning. Another misconception is that only open-ended questions involve higher order thinking. These may be true. However, one has to look at questioning as a far more comprehensive and technically demanding instructional strategy to attain its inherent benefits.

The ineffectiveness of current use of the questioning strategy is evident in the inability of students to understand test questions. If teachers use and overuse questioning, how come students still don’t know how to go about decoding the same when required?

To engage students in effective questioning, a teacher needs to follow certain tenets. These tenets constitute the underpinning rationale for the effective use of questioning in a classroom setting. The most important of these is, “every student, regardless of his/her past or present academic achievement level, is questioned.”

First tenet

Being humans, teachers tend to question only bright students. They do this for many reasons, none of which are educationally valid. Struggling students are deliberately skipped because teachers don’t like to wait for answers. Some teachers believe that these students cannot answer questions intelligently. Good questioning involves giving every student equal opportunity to take part in the process of learning. Even when a student answers “I don’t know,” a teacher should not give up. Asking a follow-up question or paraphrasing the question allows the student to have another chance.

Simply put, teachers should be sincere in providing everyone a chance to engage in learning through questioning. This includes students who try to avoid eye-contact with teacher by looking away and those who don’t put up their hand.

Second tenet

Another effective questioning tenet worth following is, “require students to justify all responses.” This tenet guarantees the involvement of complex thinking along with lower level mental processes. For example, it’s easy to answer the question, “How are you today?” However, when teachers go further and ask students, “Why do you say so?” a different reaction is seen. Students start thinking hard about reasons for answering the question the way they did. They pull ideas together and creatively express them using effective communication. This can be done by following the Q-R-Q pattern, where teachers ask a question, elicit a response, and ask a follow-up question that requires justification for the answer(s) provided.

Third tenet

“Questioning should not encourage random guess-making.” I have heard teachers saying things like, “Can anyone make a guess?” or “Any wild guesses?” etc. If students are to make wild guesses, then why do we teach them that a hypothesis is an intelligent guess? There is a huge difference between an intelligent and wild guess. While the former is based on prior research and reflection, the latter is based on gut feeling. Going by gut feeling in the process of learning jeopardizes the credibility of knowledge. Hence, effective questioning requires teachers to ask questions that encourage students to reason and respond thoughtfully.

Outcome

Teachers who use effective questioning strategy break the culture of disengagement in the classroom. Passive students become active. Those who heavily rely on teachers for answers become thinkers for themselves.

For more information about Highly Effective Questioning, visit http://www.workshopsinquestioning.com/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Different points of view

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Having been in the school system, dealing with parent complaints is a commonplace. At first glance, the complaints may seem to be purely related to operational issues. However, a close examination of different types of complaints reveals that they usually stem from deeper, often hidden, factors.

Philosophy of education

Everyone who has been through schooling holds his/her own opinion about education and how it should be imparted. Likewise, parents and school administrators hold their own unique philosophy of education. Schools are governed by a set of beliefs that dictate and guide their educational decisions and practices. As such, most complaints and/or clashes between parents and school administrators arise from significant differences in the philosophy of education of these two parties.

Philosophy of education drives the vision, mission, and expected school-wide learning goals of a school. Additionally, every school has its own unique philosophy that may differ from other schools. In this context, parent complaints can be traced back to two things; parents’ discomfort with difference(s) between their own and the school’s philosophy of education, and also parent’s tendency to compare one school’s philosophy of education with another.

Example

Administrators in School A decided to increase the number of Language Arts periods and reduce Math and Science periods by one per week. Hence students meet seven times a week to learn the English language and only four periods to learn Math and Science respectively. According to the principal of School A, the school strongly believes in the philosophy of relying on concrete data to make educational decisions.

The principal added that student performance on a standardized test the previous year indicated significant weakness in the area of English language. School administrators also found out that there is a significant correlation between performance in the English language and other subjects like Math and Science.

Hence, School A’s move to increase Language Arts periods and reduce Math and Science periods was based on a philosophical understanding that assessment data directs planning of teaching/learning experiences.

However, parents of School A hold a different philosophy. According to their philosophy, Math and Science are the most important subjects. This belief seems to match their own experiences when they were at school. Furthermore, they realize that other schools do not do what School A does. Hence they conclude that something is really wrong with the school and lodge a complaint.

Implications

Addressing parent complaints is necessary. On the other hand, if School A tries to address the complaint without going into the root of the problem, the administrators will fail to convince parents about the truth of the matter. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that school administrators address the root of the problem rather than pacifying parents by covering up complaints.

Schools and parents should work together to communicate each others’ philosophy of education. Fixing complaints is a temporary solution. Understanding and working from the framework of each others’ educational philosophy is a long-term solution to dealing effectively with parent complaints.

Parents rarely complain about a school whose philosophy of education they understand, fully accept and advocate for. Schools that succeed in this process would receive fewer complaints in the long run. Sessions that encourage parents to think about and own school’s philosophy of education work well to this end. Such sessions (or parent workshops) should actively involve parents to talk about, question, and assimilate school’s philosophy as their own.

At the end of the process, an increased sense ownership is developed, fostering a feeling of belongingness toward school. This sense of belongingness discourages complaints and encourages the celebration of successes instead.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Active learning

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The word education originates from the Latin word, educere which means to bring out. For centuries, educators have noted the importance of tapping into existing knowledge and wisdom of a learner and work on deepening them. The question that teachers often ask is, “are there concrete ways to make this possible?”

About five years ago, I watched a DVD that completely changed my attitude toward teaching. It is an award-winning video, A Private Universe, Minds of Our Own produced by Harvard-Smithsonian, Center for Astrophysics. The documentary emphasizes the importance of starting from what students already know before teaching them what they need to know. According to several case studies presented in the documentary, students who do not connect past and present knowledge tend to under-perform. Teaching a concept over and over again is not necessary if existing knowledge is put in the context of new knowledge.

KWL

The KWL teaching strategy (K represents “What students already know?” W represents “What students want to know?” and L represents “What students have learned?”)  effectively addresses the need to bridge the gaps between what students already know, what they want to know, and what they have to learn. This method was popularized by Donna M. Ogle in 1980’s as a strategy to encourage active reading of expository text. The strategy has increased in value and diversified in application over time. Today, the strategy is used by teachers to encourage active learning and extension of new concepts.

The application of KWL strategy allows students to personalize knowledge and become accountable for their own learning. The teacher becomes a facilitator who designs a learning environment where feedback, in the form of factual statements and questions is generated and channeled in the direction of building meaningful new knowledge. It encourages both teachers and students to become critical about existing and new information. More importantly, it provides a sense of purpose to the whole process of teaching and learning.

Example

Let’s take for example a lesson on The Eiffel Tower. The teacher starts off by announcing that students are going to learn a new topic and they are responsible for the same. She indicates that she is going to help guide them through the process. She then divides the whiteboard into three columns. On top of the first column, she writes, K (What you already know?), second column, W (What you want to know?), and third column, L (What did you learn?). Prior to this, the teacher has either prepared a handout containing sufficient information about the topic, or decided on the page in the textbook where information about the topic is found.

The class continues with the teacher asking students what they already know about The Eiffel Tower. She list down each statement shared by students on the whiteboard. At this time, the teacher must emphasize that accuracy of information is not a priority. Misconceptions could be detected and corrected later. After generating sufficient statements from students and filling up the first column, the teacher can then ask students to share questions that they may have to further their knowledge and understanding of the topic. Emphasis must be placed on encouraging students to ask good questions. These questions will be written on the second column. Every student should be involved in the process.

Once the two columns are filled up, students are asked to read the handout. This purposeful reading will allow students to verify information in the first column, answer questions in the second column, and gather additional information about the topic. Motivation for reading is high as it is highly directed and focused. At the end, the teacher and students work on filling up the third column and gauge the overall learning experience.

To view an example of actual lesson using KWL, click KWL lesson[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Talking about teaching

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The greatest challenge of being a teacher is managing students’ interpersonal relationships. Likewise, the most difficult task of a school leader is managing teachers’ interpersonal interactions. While it is okay for children to squabble, misunderstand, and fight, it is worrying when teachers engage in these immature responses toward each other. Additionally, it is easier to educate students to develop healthier relationships compared to teachers. Adults seem to be more set in their ways. This is particularly observed in their emotional responses to other adults.

Teacher relationship

At school, as long as each teacher is required to work on his/her own individual tasks (e.g. lesson planning, managing his/her own classes, assessing student learning, etc.), relational frictions are almost non-existence. Problems occur when teachers are required to work interdependently with others. Because teachers are used to working within a well-defined boundary, stretching and/or exposing personal space to others can be frightening.

New requirements

Twenty-first century schools require teachers who are comfortable working closely with others. Due to the ever-changing nature of education and students’ needs, teachers need to readily disclose information about what they teach, how they teach, what resources are used, and how learning will be assessed. Without dialoguing about these, teachers cannot empirically ensure logical flow and meaningful connections across grade levels and subjects taught.

Types of relationships

Teachers relate to their peers in a myriad of ways. This corresponds to the number of people involved in a relationship. Idiosyncrasies are the only constant in relationships at school. They are difficult to predict and thus, prepare for.

According to Roland Barth, the Founding Director of the Principals’ Center at Harvard University, teachers generally relate to one another in one of the following ways; parallel play where they work in close proximity but do not desire to work together; adversarial where they deliberately withhold information from one another, despite knowing that the same could improve student learning; congenial where they appear friendly on the surface but do not like to talk about deep-seated hopes, passion, dissatisfactions and problems; collegial where they work interdependently for collective success.

Preferred type

Obviously, collegial relationship is what leaders want to encourage in teachers. Other types of relationships imply that teachers avoid talking about teaching. When teachers don’t talk about teaching, their instructional practices fail to directly address learning needs of students. Consequently, students under-perform without much hope for improvement because there is no way for individuals in the school to engage in intelligent decision-making.

Boosting collegiality

Judith Warren Little, a professor at the Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley states that a school leader plays a significant role in reinforcing collegial relationships among teachers. To create and sustain a culture of collegiality, leaders should model collegial attitude and behaviors. Rewarding and protecting teachers who already demonstrate collegiality reinforce the same in others. More importantly, a leader who desires collegiality among his/her teachers should clearly communicate it to them. While talking about this may seem unconventional, teachers appreciate truthfulness from their leaders and would willingly oblige. They will take the leader’s words seriously and follow suit.

The extent to which a school progresses (academically) depends on the relational dynamics of teachers. Genuine discussions and vital dialogues about teaching/learning only take place when teachers are comfortable talking to each other. A positive organizational climate provides them with this opportunity. If there is any lesson that I learned as a teacher and school leader, it is that one cannot single-handedly affect constructive changes in a school, not matter how accomplished he/she is. School improvement must be anchored in steady, maturing relationships among individuals who think, feel, and do education![/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Superordinate goals: Conflict resolution technique

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]There are literally tens of conflict resolution techniques. Teachers are taught and encouraged to use them to maintain harmony among students. Examples of these are negotiation, compromise, problem solving, changing the formal structure of a group, expansion of resources, etc. Sometimes, when these don’t work, teachers use authoritative commands to fix relationships.

The effectiveness of these techniques is contingent upon the reason(s) for the conflict, the relation between the conflicting students, and the relation between the teacher and the conflicting students. If examined carefully, most of the aforementioned conflict resolution techniques are formulated around identifying or clarifying issues, searching for shared values, exploring possible solutions, and selecting the solution that satisfies students who have the conflict.

Problems with conventional techniques

While relatively easy to learn and remember, this methodical approach to conflict resolution has its own flaws. Because the presence of a mediator/referee is crucial, it becomes difficult to control conflicting situations outside the classroom or school. Conflicting parties find it difficult to find a middle ground, considering that people have their own unique needs to be fulfilled.

Characteristics of an effective technique

A truly helpful conflict resolution technique should bring reconciliation from within the individuals involved in the situation. In other words, it does not necessarily involve a third person, and at the same time, its effect endures time, space and circumstances.

Robbers Cave Experiment

In 1954, Muzafer Sherif, one of the founders of social psychology, and his colleagues conducted an experiment famously known as the Robbers Cave experiment. The study took place in a 200 acre Boy Scouts Camp, surrounded by Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma. In this experiment, two groups of twenty-four homogeneous twelve-year old boys were randomly selected. The boys, twelve members in each side, were unaware of the existence of the other group of boys as they were transported to the camp area separately.

On arrival at the camp site, individuals within a group started bonding with each other. Positive group processing enabled each group to get organized in a functional manner. This occurred naturally, without any instruction from camp staff. The groups worked exceptionally well together that each came up with a name for itself, “The Eagles” and “The Rattlers.” Feeling of Groupness was at its peak.

Later in the experiment, boys from each group were deliberately exposed to the fact that they were not alone in the camp site. Series of unpleasant events took place thereafter. Both groups became protective of camp facilities that belonged to them. Each insisted camp staff to arrange for competitive events to prove the superiority of one over the other. Name calling, passing nasty comments, raiding cabins, burning the other’s flag, and unwillingness to eat in the same cafeteria were frequently observed.

In the next phase, experimenters tried to reduce tension between the two groups through reconciliatory activities involving all the boys (e.g., get-to-know-you). Surprisingly, these activities only made the situation worse. Boys continued to defend their group and disrespect the other.

The experimenters then subjected the boys to a series of difficult situations. These situations required the two groups to work together to overcome specific problems. One such situation was the “drinking water supply failure.” Vandals had supposedly blocked the faucet from the main water tank with a sack. When the boys arrived at the scene, they gathered around the faucet trying to clear it out. They discussed effective ways to solve the problem. After 45 minutes of collaborative work, water finally came through. There was a common rejoicing. The Rattlers did not object the Eagles to get the first drink.

Implication for teaching

The experiment proved that Superordinate goals (goals that get people from opposing sides to come together and work toward a common end result) are indeed effective in resolving conflicts. Teachers could use Superordinate goals to reduce or eliminate conflicts among students. Inspiring students with the “bigger picture” helps them to focus on what is really important, and work together with others to become successful learners.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Making memory work

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]It is almost eight years since the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, in the financial hub of one of the most advanced countries in the world. Surprisingly, all of us can still recall (with great precision) the events of that fateful day. How is it possible for us to recall details of an event that took place years ago, but not so for something that happened last week, or even yesterday? Psychologists call this phenomenon “flashbulb” memory.

To test this theory, ask a friend where and what he/she was doing on 9/11 when the planes crashed into the twin towers. You will invariably get detailed, specific response from your friend. Then, ask the same person where and what he/she had for lunch last Sunday. Chances are that your friend will find it difficult remembering what he/she had. Try this with as many people as you can, and you will be surprised to notice a pattern in their responses.

Flashbulb memory explained

An event or experience registers as flashbulb memory when it is emotionally-packed, unusual, shocking, and given personal meaning. This type of memory tends to form instantaneously, but remains relatively long in one’s mental schema. Some psychologists theorize that flashbulb memory exists because of adrenalin rush and its consequent effect on both episodic (memory of events, in which one has emotional connections with) and declarative memories (memory of factual information surrounding an emotion-filled event).

This could possibly explain why the most negative and positive experiences are easily recalled. A combination of novelty, sudden change in emotional state, and strong cognitive involvement in a particular event or experience makes it harder to forget.

Application for teaching

A lot of school work requires students to commit facts into their memories. However, there are many who struggle to utilize the full capacity of their memory powers. While it is the responsibility of students to work on this, teachers could help a great deal.

Students usually memorize what was taught after school hours. The time gap between lessons at school and study time at home means that a lot of information is lost. That is why it makes more sense for teachers to teach so that students understand and memorize lessons at the same time. Applying the principle of flashbulb memory to teaching makes both possible. In the context of classroom learning, flashbulb memory should only be created using positive experiences (only positive experiences lead to effective memorization)!

Strategies

Starting a lesson with a surprise element (e.g. coming in dressed up as a Roman Emperor when introducing a lesson on Roman Empire or bringing different sized magnets when teaching earth’s magnetic poles, etc.) increases students ability to remember the lesson by mentally associating the surprise element(s) with facts learned. This association is done visually and at the time of recall, students visualize the surprise element(s) and consequently activate their declarative memory where facts are recorded.

If a teacher is a persuasive speaker or a good story-teller, he/she could use this knack to help students memorize facts better. A teacher could narrate a story (personal or otherwise) that relates to a lesson being taught. When a story is shared from the heart (implying that it touches the hearts and minds of students), and later connected to a learning experience, students tend to remember it better.

Students memorize and recall better when they have the opportunity to learn by doing. However, this is a conventional idea. The trick is to allow student to engage in learning by doing something novel, exciting, and personally meaningful. For example, when teaching about the Olympics, students could be asked to make their own medals (gold, silver and bronze), Olympics torch, etc.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]