This is post number five in a ten part blog series (you may click here to start from the beginning).

This blog series serves to highlight the most significant findings from John Hattie’s 2012 work, Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning and their applications to our classrooms.  His work has given educators quantifiable insights that have no parallel in the field of education.

Need an introduction or a crash course on the effect sizes referenced below?  An effect size of 0.40 is what Hattie refers to as a hinge-point regarding what is significantly effective or at “a level where the effects of innovation enhance achievement in such a way that we can notice real-world differences” (Hattie, 2009).  Anything between a 0.00 and 0.39 is growth, but is not considered significant growth.  Anything below a 0.00 is considered detrimental to student growth.

Hattie_barometer_2_hinge

Number 6 – Microteaching (effect size = 0.88)

This concept primarily applies to teacher preparation programs.  Hattie says microteaching “typically involves student-teachers conducting (mini-) lessons to a small group of students (often in a laboratory setting) and then engaging in post-discussions about the lessons.  They are usually videotaped for this later analysis, and allow an often intense under-the-microscope view of their teaching” (2009, p. 112).  

hattie microteaching2

Application to the Classroom

The microteaching concept may not have a direct application to many of you as currently practicing K-12 educators, but perhaps this experience may be transferable through teachers practicing specific instructional methods and using microteaching strategies to get peer feedback.  This is a practice more commonly observed in the National Board Certification process for practicing educators.

In our building this year we have loosely applied this microteaching strategy through a process of “teachers observing teachers.”  Each semester teachers are encouraged to observe another teacher and then follow-up with a reflective conversation.  The focus of the observation is at the discretion of the teachers and the goals include the opportunity to learn from one another and receive feedback on effective instructional strategies in addition to connecting, collaborating, building community, building culture, nurturing relationships, and growing professionally.

The expectations are designed to maximize impact while minimizing the time needed to complete the task.

  • Pick a theme (some suggestions are offered based upon current initiatives)
  • Set-up an observation of the partner teacher
  • Observe the partner (the recommendation is to stay from 20 minutes up to the entire period)
  • Have an informal follow-up conversation with your partner teacher
  • Share out your learnings with your team at a team meeting (focus on the positives!)
  • Switch roles with your partner and repeat

A Random Mention

Number 25 out of 150 – Not Labeling Students (effect size 0.61)

Hattie concludes his research on this topic by stating that “Very often the labels help ‘classify’ these students and can lead to extra funding, but rarely does it make a difference to what works best – regardless of the labels” (2009, p.125).  Hattie explored this topic by referencing a controversy in distinguishing between mentally disabled and non-disabled children through developmental versus cognitive processing claims.  The developmental claim held by Piaget and others believe that disabled children pass through cognitive developmental stages in the same manner, but with different rates and a different upper limit of development.  

A Peek at the Bottom 10

Number 146 out of 150 – Summer Vacation (effect size -0.02)

Not much surprise here as the absence of learning is inviting retention to take effect.  These data do provide reason to pause and consider why we still apply this agrarian practice when we know it negatively impacts students.  Hattie shared that today about three percent of U.S. citizen’s careers are linked to agricultural cycles.  Hattie shares Cooper’s 1996 comments that supporters of change “consider a three-month break too long as children learn best when learning is continuous, and the break means significant time needs to be spent reviewing previous material in order for learning to commence again” (2009, p.81).

For more from this blog series view the following posts:

#10 – Feedback

#9 – Teacher Clarity

#8 – Comprehensive Interventions for Learning Disabled Students

#7 – Classroom Discussion

 

Hattie, J., Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement (2009)

Hattie, J. Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning (2012)

Effect size image retrieved from: http://www.learningandteaching.info/teaching/what_works.htm

Microteaching image retrieved from: http://niu.edu/spectrum/archives/microteaching.shtml