So you’ve started a teaching degree? What to read.

This is a guest blog – lifted from email advice our school SCT (specialist classroom teacher) sent to a student just starting their teaching degree here in NZ. I agree with his choices, although if you were training to be a primary teacher I would also recommend a good text on the science of reading (eg. ‘The Art and Science of Teaching Primary Reading by Christopher Such) – something University teaching courses infrequently cover. Enjoy……….


  1. Seven Myths About Education By Daisy Christodoulou Education at University will give you lots of waffle and anecdotal gibberish about what education should be. Don’t fall for it, there’s is lots of great science around teaching and learning that you can use. All people learn the same way and 99% within the same social construct. So the first reading is to get you thinking about education and start deciding what is is and isn’t relevant, it is designed to get you to start to question and reflect
  2. Why Don’t Students Like School?: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom by Daniel T. Willingham. Having deconstructed and started to question somewhat, this is a really good book on how we learn, this is the building block of being a teacher. we are there to impart knowledge and how to we do that? e.g. we can’t be generically motivated outside of success, success breeds motivation…
  1. Rosenshine’s Principles in Action by Tom Sherrington. Now you have read those ideas you are now thinking this is getting complicated so here’s a really simple book that spells out the action, really simple and used as a bible to effective teaching in many schools, this is gold (but don’t skip to it till you’ve done the reading first….trust me…)
  2. Running the Room: The Teacher’s Guide to Behaviour by Tom Bennett Now you have the theory. University will not equip you for the most import part of your job. They won’t. They will avoid classroom management because its hard. This is very sad because this is actually what you want to know! They will waffle on about ‘getting to know your students, ‘developing learning relationships,’ ‘involving students in developing classrooms’this is all fluff and waffle and great after the little blighters know you are in charge. I have written advice on behaviour management for my staff. Let me know if you would like to read it. Golden rule; the smallest intervention, at the earliest time with the least consequence. Always and consistently. This book is great, just remember most of these books are written for whole school approaches, just ignore those bits and stick with the classroom parts, managers deal with the serious and repeated stuff, that’s their job. Bill Rodgers is also good, lots of podcasts and writings, good simple advice.
  3. What Every Teacher Needs to Know About Psychologyby David Didau , Nick Rose Now that’s plenty. If you are really still excited and love all this stuff like I do. This is a cool extra reading that you might like. Teachers ask psychologist the hard questions. Good luck, let me know if you want any behaviour advice, that’s my jam

Restoring confidence in mathematics education in New Zealand

Timely comment on the Maths debate in NZ from Dr Audrey Tam

Mathmo Consulting

In my previous post, I provided an overview of the past 20 years of mathematics education and declining student achievement in mathematics. With the announcement of a refresh of the New Zealand Curriculum (NZC), this seems like a good time to discuss the first steps towards restoring confidence in mathematics education in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Explicitly value the culture of mathematics and mathematicians

Earlier this year, I attended a Ministry of Education (MoE)-facilitated hui for Mathematics and Statistics. It was explained that the Ministry desires a bicultural curriculum that explicitly values all cultures, and that we need to shift to a decolonised, anti-racist curriculum.

Immediately, we are faced with a paradox. The word bicultural suggests that we should explicitly value only two cultures, or at least value two cultures more highly than other cultures. Does that not sound a little bit racist?

I do not wish to discuss…

View original post 1,021 more words

Running through the Minefield

From Zoe Enser, thoughts on research and evidence in teaching.

Teaching it Real

One of the phrases I’ve seen used over the past few years has been ‘the evidence says’. Well, to be more precise, ‘the research says’. It is a phrase which can either provoke people into action, grabbing onto the newest book or document that comes out ready to change the world with it, or send them into spasms of eyerolling, dismissing it with a well-placed ‘research can prove anything’ or ‘it could never happen here.’ These reactions are understandable from both positions. On the one hand teachers and leaders would love there to be a silver bullet which will ‘fix’ all of the issues we face day to day. On the other there has been a lot of guff which floated around either under the label of research or having mutated into something which bears no relation to what was originally said. With all that in mind then, is there…

View original post 1,920 more words

Fueling teacher practice: Av-gas or Liquid Hydrogen?

selective focus photography of gasoline nozzle
Photo by on

Aviation gas has an energy density of 33.5 MJ/L whereas liquid hydrogen only has an energy density of 9.3 MJ/L. If ideas are the fuel that drives teachers then too many are running on liquid hydrogen.  Teacher practice is based around a number of key ideas and too many smart, dedicated, caring teachers are being given the wrong ones.

A popular one is ‘it’s all about relationships.’ The implications are students will learn best when the teacher knows their background allowing a positive relationship to be formed and thus the teacher will be able to optimise their teaching and behaviour management of said student. Trouble arises because, although there is a kernel of truth in this, it is flawed as a starting point.

To begin, most teachers have between 20-30 students in their class that can only be successfully managed as a group, not as individuals. If the teacher is in a high school, that number increases to between 100-120 students, often seen all in one day. In these circumstances, the best chance of a positive relationship between a teacher and their students depends on the teacher establishing firm control of student behaviour dynamics so that effective teaching and learning can take place. The best teachers are assertively in charge, approachable yes, but able to command student attention and co-operation to foster learning. They are not setting out to befriend students as a strategy.

Knowing more about the background of students – and yes, some have very difficult backgrounds – can cause a teacher to lower expectations. This might involve going easier on them over behaviour issues or work completion, both of which are unhelpful for the student concerned. For example, a student who is weak at maths, needs more practice at maths, not less. A maths teacher knowing a student is weak at maths but doesn’t do homework because his parents fight every night is not helping them by letting them off work.

The principal of the high school I attended as a student insisted that his teachers be firm, fair and friendly – in that order. Being firm, fair and friendly is not the same as being friendly, fair and firm, which is can be the case with more student-centered approaches. The later approach can place the teacher in the position of soliciting the friendship and good-will of students.



Starting points: teaching other people’s kids

close up of text
Photo by Public Domain Pictures on

In my last year of high school my favourite subject was physics. I enjoyed mechanics the most, calculating velocity, acceleration, angular momentum etc., and the steps in logic in working them out. I remember one key strategy for solving exam style problems imparted to us, which was to always start with what you know. This meant something very specific, which was writing down in a list all the parameters for which values were given in the question and then reading carefully to figure out what parameter you were being asked to calculate.

Today starting with ‘what you know’ seems to me to be the most logical way to address the enterprise of teaching other people’s kids. Except instead of a few values given in an exam question, ‘what you know’ becomes the ‘what we know’ in a broader scientific sense. It means considering what can be reasonably concluded from empirical investigations in relevant fields – which conclusions are supported by evidence and better still supported by a plausible theory?

I should explain I use the term ‘teaching other people’s kids’ because I think if you were, for example, teaching your own kids, you’d be entitled to teach them any which way you choose, whereas when you are employed to teach other people’s kids, you and the school should be using proven methods, as befitting any professional providing a service to the public. This is where starting from ‘what we know’ in a scientific sense comes in.

In my experience most parents and many teachers are not aware that much educational practice, both historically and currently is not developed with reference to empirical evidence, but is based instead on beliefs about how students learn. For example – students learn best when they work independently, when they choose their own topics, when they learn in an authentic context or when the teacher’s lesson delivery matches their preferred learning style. Teachers and principals, must ask ‘what is the evidence for this?’

It is astounding for me to reflect, 16 years into my career, that my teacher training did not take account of nor reference knowledge from the scientific fields relevant to learning. Even by the start of this century the fields of cognitive science and educational psychology had established reliable insights to guide teachers in their practice. There were also considerable bodies of research directly speaking to what works and what doesn’t in schools and in the classroom.

Why should we be privileging science over belief as the basis for teaching? This is because, although far from perfect, it is the best hope we have of figuring out what works and why and distinguishing that from our own folk theories, anecdotes and biases. And our children deserve this. It doesn’t mean that there is a piece of research to back every decision a teacher or school makes, but that their decision making should be informed where possible by research.





A Smoking Gun? Student Attendance and the Achievement Gap in NZ.

Image result for school student black and white on way to school clipart

In a previous post I discussed the New Zealand Ministry of Education’s premise that unconscious racist bias was the cause of the persistent under achievement gap for Māori versus Pakeha (NZ European) students. I argued that it was an unfalsifiable hypothesis since it cannot be measured and the possibility of modifying it unlikely. Here I present an alternative causal agent, one that can be measured and directly acted upon by schools.

Student attendance in NZ is collected by the Ministry of Education and the most up to date set of data and an accompanying report was released this year (here) . This data reveals that for the years 2011 to 2017, Pakeha were 15% more likely to attend school regularly than Māori (attending regularly is defined by the MOE as 90% or more). The Ministry’s own report provides graphs showing the strong positive correlation between student achievement and performance in Level One of NCEA, the country’s national qualification.

It seems very plausible that at least some of the underachievement gap for Māori students versus Pakeha is due to poor attendance. This is particularly significant given the percentage of internal course work in many NCEA courses – is often as high as 80 to 100%. In fact, by the Ministry’s own data, a drop in attendance from 80 to 70% corresponds to a 10% drop in the probability that they will achieve NCEA Level 1.

Clearly improving attendance is no simple challenge for schools, involving changing the attitudes and patterns of behaviour of both students and caregivers. But it is a measurable outcome that could have significant impact in reducing the underachievement gap for Māori students, perhaps more effectively than hunting down the ghosts of unconscious racial bias.




White privilege, White thinking, White spaces: A brief comment



Students of politics and the social sciences will no doubt be familiar with these concepts but, they may be unfamiliar to many (as a science graduate they were unknown to me until very recently). They have been used in articles about the NZ education system and the achievement gap for maori linklink . The purpose of this blog is to very briefly outline a little of the background to these terms.

The concept of ‘white privilege’ is associated with identity studies, collectively – critical race theory, intersectionality, postcolonial studies, and queer theory which developed out of post-modernism (which was heavily influenced by Marxism.) Key features are the identification of oppressed and oppressor groups and discrimination as the sole cause of inequality in measured outcomes. Oppressed/oppressor pairs include white/black, male/female, straight/gay, feminist/transgender, and even attractive/unattractive. In keeping with its postmodern origins, scientific evidence is often disregarded, dismissed disparagingly as the product of a white male patriarchy.

While most of us are sympathetic to social justice causes, the discourse emanating from identity studies is extreme. Some examples – gender is totally socially constructed, only white people can be racist, or closer to home, the claim by the NZ Ministry of Education that the achievement gap for maori students is due to unconscious racial bias of teachers (read about this here). Never mind the dozen or so other causal factors that might be in play.

It is not that discrimination does not exist and has not existed in the past for the aforementioned oppressed groups, but personal or systemic discrimination has become the blanket explanation and moral trigger point for explaining every disparate statistic between unequal groups in society. Stereotyping white people as privileged is unhelpful and simplistic and begs the question where do individuals of mixed heritage fit into the scheme of things?

Hunting for the ghost in the machine: NZ Ministry of Ed claims teachers racist (unconsciously)


Didn’t know you had been labelled thus by your employer, the NZ Ministry of Education? In fact you have been, but only indirectly eg. link. The thought leaders at the MOE consider that the underachievement of mori students is due to your unconscious racist bias. So you haven’t actually been called racist, perhaps that would be too strong, just told you are racially biased and you don’t know it.

In my talk at researchEd Auckland in June link I discussed the premise that we need to privilege scientific evidence if we are to improve educational outcomes for NZ children. So what is the scientific evidence that NZ teachers have unconscious racist bias? Unsurprisingly, there is none.

The story of unconscious or implicit bias began, or at least began to take off as a favoured explanation for the statistical lags of different groups in society, with the work of American social psychologists, Greenwald and Banaji in 1998 link. They released the Implicit Association Test or IAT, which purported to measure the unconscious bias of a person. There are different versions of the test and the race-based one rapidly became very popular with social justice advocates, and indeed helped the cement the idea of unconscious bias as the go to explanation for racial inequality in society and that it is scientifically based.

The problems with the IAT are two-fold. Diagnostic tests in psychology need to be both reliable and valid. The IAT fails reliability tests, which means it can give different scores each time the same individual takes the test. It is also not valid in that it fails to predict behaviour link . If it were valid, a high IAT score for racism should predict discriminatory behaviour.

Arguments made in support of the unconscious or systemic bias as a cause of educational inequalities sometimes draw on the fact that when poverty or socio-economic data are taken into account, it still doesn’t explain the achievement gap for minority students.  It is concluded that the extra factor must be racism. This an argument from ignorance (a logical fallacy link ) in that it fails to account for other factors that could be causing it. Even if we don’t know what those factors are, is illogical to assume it is racism.

Since it is difficult to measure unconscious bias in a valid way and there is no evidence yet that it can be modified successfully, our Ministry of Education is presenting an unfalsifiable hypothesis as the cause of educational underachievement and inequality.  So whether it exists or not, it remains an unhelpful construct in designing strategies to improve educational outcomes.

Given the poor state of NZ’s educational system as demonstrated by international data link it would pay our Ministry of Education to start privileging scientific evidence –  the science behind reading could be a good starting point – instead of undermining teachers with unproven psychological constructs.

*Please note that I am not claiming that maori students in NZ never experience overt racism personally or systemically, nor I am claiming that people do not have unconscious biases.




Guest Blog: Teaching Core Knowledge in Graphics

This is the talk my colleague, Keith Cave, gave as part of our joint presentation at ResearchEd Auckland.


I am a Design and Visual communication teacher at Tauraroa Area school in Northland. A rural school of 550 from years 1-13.

I teach DVC at all levels from 9 to 13 and deliver level 1,2 and 3 NCEA using all achievement standards, I am the only teacher of this subject so it gives be a lot of control and responsibility when it comes to curriculum content and knowledge selection. Students do not come with and testable specific prior knowledge of DVC but obviously an diverse range of skills and practices.

I have been a successful teacher, NCEA statistics show results consistently over national means and with a particular strength is Maori achievement, statistically much stronger then national means.

I am also a specialist classroom teacher; this is a role all schools with secondary schools have. This role gives me time to support teaching and learning in the classroom. It is a varied role outside management where I work alongside teachers. This can vary from observation and feedback to researching special learning needs and leading and supporting actions such as researched based classroom practice.

I also have a role of as a waka teacher, this role would be more familiar under the name form teacher.

What did I do?

A group of us wanted to improve outcomes for our students. Particularly at years 9 and 10 we were not really sure what they knew and much more importantly why they knew stuff, How could we get a more learning focused classroom?

So I Teach DVC to year 9 in 3 rotation splits over the year. I teach year 10 in 2 different ways. All students go through a 16-hour rotation then students can opt for an extra ‘options’ course for an extra 50-hour course

The rotation course is delivered in a standard project based method, students work in different contexts and are encouraged to explore design and present outcomes. Thus they experience and apply principles of design. Things like colour, line, texture, balance. This had obviously worked well before.

Here are examples of the work;

Year 9 Furniture design reflecting a house design

KC pic 1

Year 10 student presenting their spatial design

KC 2

After considerable reading research and discussion, I changed 2 key things for the option class. First was the behaviour management and expectations of my students, inspired by Michaela I changed to a very learning focused, very quiet classroom from a relationships focused classroom. And I was explicit about how and why with the students. The second change was to do the same with knowledge, I developed and made a knowledge organiser. This was making the teaching of design principles explicit and, more importantly, teaching for long term memory retention of those principles, not just in the context of the unit.

KC 3.png

This is the knowledge that I wanted to option class to learn and this is what students got.

On the back of the sheet I put these strategies to remind us (teacher and student) of how we can commit these to long term memory. They are gleaned straight from the Michaela book! As I read more I used a few new ones that Daniel Willingham talks about such as, storytelling and sharing as social/cultural knowledge.

Teaching and learning strategies

Individual recap

Short questions designed to go over knowledge and test recall

Written response to question

Whole class reading

Whole class following material and answer quick comprehension questions. teacher sharing examples to cover material

Individual Drill

Short drill questions to recap knowledge

Whole class drill

Look over examples/share answer with partner/explain to partner/ share examples with partners

Whole class recap

Whole class responding to questions together

So what happened?

So you don’t have 2 classes split neatly, they were taught in different ways for different lengths of time, but I believe there are some important differences in outcomes that relate directly to what I did. It’s really important to understand that I was not trying to be a researcher and prove the science, I was trying to see if I can use proven science to improve my teaching.

So come the next year and 21 students from all the school have opted into level one DVC, 8 of these students did not do the knowledge focused options course the year before, I was keen to see how much knowledge these students have and have retained, and what impact the different courses had.

First day of the level one course I tested the students long term memories by asking them to recall what design principles they recalled and what they meant. These students had not had DVC instruction since the end of November some for longer if they were in earlier rotations. Only 1 of the 8 students that did not take the options class could recall any design principles while the rest of the students had an average recall of 75%

KC 4

The first NCEA assessment is based on the designed principles, students need to describe them and apply them to their own designs. Given the testing results I assumed no prior knowledge and taught the first unit as I always have. Lots of handouts, examples, PowerPoints to get students up to speed. I felt strongly good teaching at this stage would overcome any lack of prior knowledge.

To see if there was a difference to NCEA outcomes I ranked my whole class and had the ranking checked (research shows teachers are very good at ranking but poor at levels) and then highlighted the 8 students

KC 5

Students in red are the 8 taught who did not do options class, top 18 were excellences. All students passed.

So 2018 95% merit/excellence pass rate.

(Past results 2015 60%, 2016 60%, 2017 72% so something different is happening here!)

So my conclusion is

It’s easy to see patterns and explain what we want to see. This is not a piece of research. These students were not taught the same things over the same time period. One group had much more time with me and much more time focussed on key knowledge so of course they score differently.

It’s important to note I am not trying to prove the science, that has already been done, I am trying to use the research effectively to teach my students, to find if my practice is effective.

What this chart does show to me is; when I thought I could catch that key knowledge up at NCEA, obviously whatever I did to do that was not effective

It strongly shows me the power of knowledge and embedding that knowledge in long term memory. Students that did that had a huge advantage and moved the cohort marks significantly.