Nine Characteristics of a Great Teacher

1. A great teacher respects students. In a great teacher’s classroom, each person’s ideas and opinions are valued. Students feel safe to express their feelings and learn to respect and listen to others. This teacher creates a welcoming learning environment for all students.

2. A great teacher creates a sense of community and belonging in the classroom. The mutual respect in this teacher’s classroom provides a supportive, collaborative environment. In this small community, there are rules to follow and jobs to be done and each student is aware that he or she is an important, integral part of the group. A great teacher lets students know that they can depend not only on her, but also on the entire class.

3. A great teacher is warm, accessible, enthusiastic and caring. This person is approachable, not only to students, but to everyone on campus. This is the teacher to whom students know they can go with any problems or concerns or even to share a funny story. Great teachers possess good listening skills and take time out of their way-too-busy schedules for anyone who needs them. If this teacher is having a bad day, no one ever knows—the teacher leaves personal baggage outside the school doors.

4. A great teacher sets high expectations for all students. This teacher realizes that the expectations she has for her students greatly affect their achievement; she knows that students generally give to teachers as much or as little as is expected of them.

5. A great teacher has his own love of learning and inspires students with his passion for education and for the course material. He constantly renews himself as a professional on his quest to provide students with the highest quality of education possible. This teacher has no fear of learning new teaching strategies or incorporating new technologies into lessons, and always seems to be the one who is willing to share what he’s learned with colleagues.

6. A great teacher is a skilled leader. Different from administrative leaders, effective teachers focus on shared decision-making and teamwork, as well as on community building. This great teacher conveys this sense of leadership to students by providing opportunities for each of them to assume leadership roles.

7. A great teacher can “shift-gears” and is flexible when a lesson isn’t working. This teacher assesses his teaching throughout the lessons and finds new ways to present material to make sure that every student understands the key concepts.

8. A great teacher collaborates with colleagues on an ongoing basis. Rather than thinking of herself as weak because she asks for suggestions or help, this teacher views collaboration as a way to learn from a fellow professional. A great teacher uses constructive criticism and advice as an opportunity to grow as an educator.

9. A great teacher maintains professionalism in all areas—from personal appearance to organizational skills and preparedness for each day. Her communication skills are exemplary, whether she is speaking with an administrator, one of her students or a colleague. The respect that the great teacher receives because of her professional manner is obvious to those around her.

Musical Training Boosts Verbal Memory

Before cutting any more of the arts curriculum from schools, take a look at the results of a study that came out this month in Frontiers in Neuroscience. Kids who took music lessons developed better memories for words than kids who took an extra science class or had no extra lessons.This study followed 73 seven-year olds in Germany for a year and a half, starting at the beginning of second grade. 25 were placed in a weekly 45-minute class that taught the kids how to play an instrument, another 25 spent the same amount of time in a science class and the rest received no additional instruction.
All students’ memories were tested three times, first at the beginning of second grade, before training began, and then again at the beginning and end of third grade. For visual memory, the students saw a sequence of dots on a grid and tried to remember the order they saw the dots, similar to Simon. For verbal memory, students heard a list of 15 words and tried to recall as many as they could.
The groups differed on key variables that might affect memory. The group receiving music lessons started with IQ scores about 13 points higher than the science group and 7 points higher than the control group. They were also slightly younger, just a few months past their seventh birthday, whereas the science group was almost 7 and a half. Despite the age and IQ differences, the groups were equal on verbal and visual memory tests when second grade began.
A year later, at the beginning of third grade, the groups were still equivalent in visual memory. However, the group receiving music lessons had improved their verbal memory more than the other groups. By the last test at the end of third grade, they had extended their advantage in verbal memory and now scored significantly better than the other groups. Music training seemed to cause an improvement in verbal memory that could not be explained by spending more time learning, because the music group scored higher than the science group. The improvement was specific to music lessons.

Music training has been linked to greater volume in the planum temporale, a part of the auditory cortex. Prior to this study, It was unclear if that enhanced volume was the result of music training or if people with more developed planum temporales were more likely to pick up an instrument. Although this study didn’t assess brain size, it assessed a trait—verbal memory—linked to volume of the planum temporale. The time spent focusing on melodies may lead to auditory cortex growth. These added brain cells might benefit recollection of all auditory information, like the name of someone you’ve just met at a party.This study provides good evidence that if you want your second grader to beef up her verbal memory, you should enroll her in a violin class.
This may also explain why guys on dating sites pictured holding a guitar are three times more likely to receive flirtatious responses after messaging single ladies. If girls want a guy who can listen, who better than a musician to pay attention to her words and win her heart?
Image credit: Sarah Bjork
Study:
Roden I, Kreutz G and Bongard S (2012) Effects of a school-based instrumental music program on verbal and visual memory in primary school children: a longitudinal study. Frontiers in Auditory Cognitive Science.

Why A Sense Of Belonging Is Essential To Learning

Learning is inherently social. The level of comfort we feel in another person’s presence can powerfully influence how intelligent we feel, and in some sense, how intelligent we actually are, at least in that moment. Now multiply that one-on-one interaction by tens or hundreds, and you start to get a sense of how important a sense of belonging to a learning community can be.
Early on in school, some children get the sense that, academically speaking, they don’t belong—that they’re not one of the ‘smart kids.’ The same thing can happen when young people start middle school, or high school, or college: they take a look around and think, ‘I don’t belong here.’ In our work lives, too, we may form an assumption that we’re not quick or sharp enough, not sufficiently creative or innovative, to belong at the top of our fields.
Social psychologists have documented how corrosive this self-doubt can be: sapping our motivation, lowering our expectations, even using up mental resources that we could otherwise apply to absorbing knowledge or solving problems. The feeling of not belonging becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. By contrast, a solid sense that we’re among our peers, that we’re where we ought to be, can elevate our aspirations and buoy us in the face of setbacks.

Kids need non-cognitive skill development as well to succeed

 

Thanks to the success of Paul Tough’s book How Children Succeed, the conversation in education circles has turned to so-called “non-cognitive” skills, such as perseverance, self-monitoring, and flexibility. As much as or more than the cognitive, the argument goes, these are the qualities that account for success in school and life, and we need to promote them through some form of “character education.”

Mike Rose, a professor of education at UCLA, takes issue with the way we’re framing the issue in this commentary in Education Week:

“The importance of traits like perseverance and flexibility is indisputable, but what concerns me is that the advocates for character education seem to accept without question [a limited view of what "cognition" is]. If cognition is represented by scores on ability or achievement tests, then anything not captured in those scores (like the desired qualities of character) is, de facto, noncognitive. We’re now left with a pinched notion of cognition and a reductive dichotomy to boot.

This downplaying of the cognitive and the simplistic construction of the cognitive vs. noncognitive could have some troubling implications for education, especially the education of the children of the poor.

To begin with, the labeling of character qualities as ‘noncognitive’ misrepresents them, particularly if you use a truer, richer notion of cognition. Self-monitoring, for example, has to involve a consideration and analysis of one’s performance and mental state, which is a demanding cognitive activity. Flexibility requires a weighing of options and decisionmaking. The issue of labels is not just a problem of terminology, for if we don’t have an accurate description of something, how can we help people develop it, especially if we want to scale up our efforts?

Furthermore, these desired qualities are developed over time in settings and through relationships that are meaningful to students, which most likely means that the settings and relationships involve significant cognitive tasks. Two classic preschool programs—the Perry Preschool and Abecedarian projects—have provided a research basis for the character advocates. Serving children from disadvantaged backgrounds, these programs were cognitively rich in imaginative play, language use, and activities that required thought and cooperation.

A very different example comes from a study I just completed observing community college occupational programs as varied as fashion and diesel technology. As students developed competence, they also became more committed to doing a job well, were better able to monitor and correct their performance, and improved their ability to communicate what they were doing, and help others. You could be, by inclination, the most dogged or communicative person in the world, but if you don’t know what you’re doing with a garment or an engine, your tendencies won’t be realized in a meaningful way in the classroom or the workshop.” (Read more here.)

Really important stuff here—I especially appreciate Rose’s final point, that “character” strengths often grow in tandem with knowledge and skill.

Highlighting Is a Waste of Time: The Best and Worst Learning Techniques

In a world as fast-changing and full of information as our own, every one of us — from schoolchildren to college students to working adults — needs to know how to learn well. Yet evidence suggests that most of us don’t use the learning techniques that science has proved most effective. Worse, research finds that learning strategies we do commonly employ, like rereading and highlighting, are among the least effective.

The scientific literature evaluating these techniques stretches back decades and across thousands of articles. It’s far too extensive and complex for the average parent, teacher or employer to sift through. Fortunately, a team of five leading psychologists have now done the job for us. In a comprehensive report released on Jan. 9 by the Association for Psychological Science, the authors, led by Kent State University professor John Dunlosky, closely examine 10 learning tactics and rate each from high to low utility on the basis of the evidence they’ve amassed. Here is a quick guide to the report’s conclusions:
The Worst
Highlighting and underlining led the authors’ list of ineffective learning strategies. Although they are common practices, studies show they offer no benefit beyond simply reading the text. Some research even indicates that highlighting can get in the way of learning; because it draws attention to individual facts, it may hamper the process of making connections and drawing inferences. Nearly as bad is the practice of rereading, a common exercise that is much less effective than some of the better techniques you can use. Lastly, summarizing, or writing down the main points contained in a text, can be helpful for those who are skilled at it, but again, there are far better ways to spend your study time. Highlighting, underlining, rereading and summarizing were all rated by the authors as being of “low utility.”
The Best
In contrast to familiar practices like highlighting and rereading, the learning strategies with the most evidence to support them aren’t well known outside the psych lab. Take distributed practice, for example. This tactic involves spreading out your study sessions, rather than engaging in one marathon. Cramming information at the last minute may allow you to get through that test or meeting, but the material will quickly disappear from memory. It’s much more effective to dip into the material at intervals over time. And the longer you want to remember the information, whether it’s two weeks or two years, the longer the intervals should be.
(MORE: ‘Implicit Learning’: How to Remember More Without Trying)
The second learning strategy that is highly recommended by the report’s authors is practice testing. Yes, more tests — but these are not for a grade. Research shows that the mere act of calling information to mind strengthens that knowledge and aids in future retrieval. While practice testing is not a common strategy — despite the robust evidence supporting it — there is one familiar approach that captures its benefits: using flash cards. And now flash cards can be presented in digital form, via apps like Quizlet, StudyBlue and FlashCardMachine. Both spaced-out learning, or distributed practice, and practice tests were rated as having “high utility” by the authors.
The Rest
The remainder of the techniques evaluated by Dunlosky and his colleagues fell into the middle ground — not useless, but not especially effective either. These include mental imagery, or coming up with pictures that help you remember text (which is time-consuming and only works with text that lends itself to images); elaborative interrogation, or asking yourself “why” as you read (which is kind of annoying, like having a 4-year-old tugging at your sleeve); self-explanation, or forcing yourself to explain the text in detail instead of passively reading it over (its effectiveness depends on how complete and accurate your explanations are); interleaved practice, or mixing up different types of problems (there is not much evidence to show that this is helpful, outside of learning motor tasks); and lastly the keyword mnemonic, or associating new vocabulary words, usually in a foreign language, with an English word that sounds similar — so, for example, learning the French word for key, la clef, by imagining a key on top of a cliff (which is a lot of work to remember a single word).
All these techniques were rated of “moderate” to “low” utility by Dunlosky et al because either there isn’t enough evidence yet to be able to recommend them or they’re just not a very good use of your time. Much better, say the authors, to spread out your learning, ditch your highlighter and get busy with your flash cards.

 

Why It's Harder To Learn As You Get Older

It may be the ability to filter and eliminate old information — rather than take in the new stuff — that makes it harder to learn as we age, scientists report:
“‘When you are young, your brain is able to strengthen certain connections and weaken certain connections to make new memories,” said Joe Z. Tsien, a neuroscientist at the Medical College of Georgia. It’s that critical weakening that appears hampered in the older brain, according to a study in the journal Scientific Reports

Neurons in young people’s brains are able to “talk” to one another a fraction of a second longer and make stronger bonds with each other, optimizing learning and memory.
When Tsien and his colleagues examined young mice genetically modified to have brains that mimic adults’, they were surprised at what they found. The rodents were still good at making strong connections and short-term memories, but had an impaired ability to weaken existing connections, and were less able to make new long-term memories as a result. This process is called information sculpting, and adult brains don’t appear to be very good at it.
‘If you only make synapses stronger and never get rid of the noise or less useful information, then it’s a problem,” said Tsien. The relentless onslaught of information and experiences our brains experience necessitates some selective whittling. Insufficient sculpting, at least in Tsien’s mice, meant a reduced ability to remember things short-term and long-term.” (Read more here.)
I’m no neuroscientist, but I find myself wondering whether reducing that “onslaught of information and experiences” as we get older might compensate for the aging brain’s declining ability to filter out stimuli on a neural level.
How about you—do you find that you seek out less external stimulation now than when you were younger?

 

Improving Students’ Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology

 

By John Dunlosky, Katherine A. Rawson, Elizabeth J. Marsh, Mitchell J. Nathan, and Daniel T. Willingham

Read the Full Text (PDF, HTML)
Some students seem to breeze through their school years, whereas others struggle, putting them at risk for getting lost in our educational system and not reaching their full potential. Parents and teachers want to help students succeed, but there is little guidance on which learning techniques are the most effective for improving educational outcomes. This leads students to implement studying strategies that are often ineffective, resulting in minimal gains in performance. What then are the best strategies to help struggling students learn?
Fortunately for students, parents, and teachers, psychological scientists have developed and evaluated the effectiveness of a wide range of learning techniques meant to enhance academic performance. In this report, Dunlosky (Kent State University), Rawson (Kent State University), Marsh (Duke University), Nathan (University of Wisconsin–Madison), and Willingham (University of Virginia) review the effectiveness of 10 commonly used learning techniques.
The authors describe each learning technique in detail and discuss the conditions under which each technique is most successful. They also describe the students (age, ability level, etc.) for whom each technique is most useful, the materials needed to utilize each technique, and the specific skills each technique promotes. To allow readers to easily identify which methods are the most effective, the authors rate the techniques as having high, medium, or low utility for improving student learning.
Which learning techniques made the grade? According to the authors, some commonly used techniques, such as underlining, rereading material, and using mnemonic devices, were found to be of surprisingly low utility. These techniques were difficult to implement properly and often resulted in inconsistent gains in student performance. Other learning techniques such as taking practice tests and spreading study sessions out over time — known as distributed practice — were found to be of high utility because they benefited students of many different ages and ability levels and enhanced performance in many different areas.
The real-world guidance provided by this report is based on psychological science, making it an especially valuable tool for students, parents, and teachers who wish to promote effective learning. Although there are many reasons why students struggle in school, these learning techniques, when used properly, should help provide meaningful gains in classroom performance, achievement test scores, and many other tasks students will encounter across their lifespan.

Business schools face a challenging future with MOOC

 

The delivery of online content for free is disrupting the traditional lecture-based model of education

Tuition-based universities are doing something counterintuitive: competing with each other to deliver their content online and for free. Last year Stanford University offered free courses on machine learning, database systems and artificial intelligence to more than 100,000 students. Many other professors are also making their material available online.

Indeed, some universities offer courses where the class preparation requires watching the lecture online and the synchronous part of the class – whether face-to-face or online – is devoted to problem-solving and discussion. Technology is disrupting the traditional lecture-based model and many believe this new paradigm of instruction is superior in important ways. Consumers can view the online lecture multiple times at their own pace until the concepts are clear and the instructor’s time can be used more creatively than in the traditional lecture format. And of course, the real kicker for the consumer is that it is all virtually free.

We know that brand-name universities have a good product, refined over decades of research and innovation in teaching. They are moving quickly to establish a first-mover advantage. It is logical to expect that once they do so, they could start charging for the product in the expectation that people will pay for their brand. However, the internet is lowering barriers to entry, making it easy for newer, lesser-known players to establish a large user base quickly and at low cost if they make a desirable platform available for free. As a result scores of providers in other countries, including India, China and Russia, are scrambling to mimic the content of brand-name schools.Why are brand-name universities giving away intellectual property online for free? These institutions are in the early stages of executing a global strategy to capture new markets, and plan in the future to apply the “freemium” model to make money from their IP. In a freemium model – which companies commonly use after creating a sizeable user base on the internet by offering a free product – the free part ultimately becomes bare-bones relative to the premium parts, for which people are eventually required to pay. However, this new “knowledge market” model is not without risk.

Technology is creating a new market and, with it, new competition. Top-branded universities may soon find themselves competing on price with lower-tier brands and potentially losing the battle. Brand-name universities have reason to worry over the long run. Their edge has been solid reputations and knowledge, honed over decades, which have not “travelled” freely until now. IT has changed that forever, making the previously scarce human resource available as a high-quality digital commodity in plentiful supply. Information is fluid and malleable. Once it is separated from its source, it is easily copied, modified and even improved.

IT will continue to improve the ability for universities to certify their degree programmes. Highly motivated imitators will mimic the brand-name schools extremely well and will slowly but surely build reputation. These imitators may not be as good as top-ranked schools but they will be good enough and at much lower cost. Once these newer actors are established as brands, they will find it easier to move up the value chain, as has played out in other industries.

While top-branded universities will face tough competition, they will still offer a competitive advantage because their brand carries weight among consumers. If they can expand the online market and combine it with a high-touch offering through their bricks and mortar, they can create solid niches for themselves. For example, they may adopt a hybrid model by selecting their online programme participants and still provide some of the networking benefits and physical contact with professors associated with traditional education.

Some believe there is no substitute for the classroom experience, that people will still want discussion and hand-holding. This could be wishful thinking and ignores the fact that, until now, people have not had access to high-quality content created by the very best people or have not had such high-quality interaction with instructors and cohort networks. Why would someone select a university in the hinterland with an unknown brand when they have access to the best brand-name schools virtually free? The odds seem to be stacked in favour of universities located in dynamic urban centres whose strategy could be to capture global market share rapidly and enable their students to experience at least some of the high touch and networking associated with traditional education. The future for non-brand name institutions seems bleak unless they can craft an appealing niche strategy or establish partnerships with the brand-name universities.

People forget that many of the innovators of new technologies have disappeared into the dust. Will motivated private actors and educational institutions in lower-cost regions of the world similarly disrupt the current brand-name heavyweights over the next few decades? Or will the existing brands set out to capture the global knowledge marketplace before that happens? If history is any guide, the future will be a challenging one for universities.

Vasant Dhar is a professor at NYU Stern School of Business and is co-director of the Center For Business Analytics.