Studentbidraget

Ved å analysere data fra den store PISA-undersøkelsen har noen forskere trukket fram to viktige dimensjoner

  • Ikke hvordan du har det, men hvordan du tar det
  • Ledet læringsløp er viktig, men bør suppleres med mer åpne og studentdrevne former for problembasert læring.

Dette er konklusjonen i en sammenfatende artikkel How to improve student educational outcomes: New insights from data analytics i en McKinsey Report fra September 2017 av Mona Mourshed, Marc Krawitz og Emma Dorn. Data ble hentet fra Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) som dekker et administrert av OECD og dekker  500.000 elever i 72 countries i 2015. Undersøkelsen ser på trstresultater, men har også intervjudata med elever og lærere, ledere og foreldre.

Finding 1: Having the right mindsets matters much more than socioeconomic background.

It is hardly news that students’ attitudes and beliefs—what we term their “mindsets”—influence their academic performance. But how much? To answer that question, we identified the 100 most predictive variables from the PISA survey (out of more than 1,000). We then sorted these into the following categories: home environment, school resources and leadership, teachers and teaching, and student mindsets and behaviors.

Our conclusion: after controlling for all other factors, student mindsets are twice as predictive of students’ PISA scores than even their home environment and demographics (Exhibit 1). This finding, and its magnitude, is consistent across all five regions, which amplifies its importance.

Several mindsets emerged as highly predictive of performance. Top of the list was the ability to identify what motivation looks like in day-to-day life, what we call “motivation calibration.” Students who can recognize that motivated students prepare for class, do more than expected, and work to perfection outperform those who do not by between 12 and 15 percent depending on their region. Similarly, students with a “growth mindset”—those who believe they can succeed if they work hard—performed 9 to 17 percent better than those with a “fixed mindset”—those who believe their capabilities are static.

It was particularly striking that several of these mindsets made the most difference for students either in low performing schools or in lower socioeconomic quartiles. In fact, for students in schools with low outcomes, having a well-calibrated motivation mindset is equivalent to vaulting into a higher socioeconomic class. This result was consistent across all regions. (Exhibit 2 – North American example).

Finding 2: Students who receive a blend of teacher-directed and inquiry-based instruction have the best outcomes.

There are two dominant types of teaching practices. The first is “teacher-directed instruction,” in which the teacher explains and demonstrates ideas, considers questions, and leads classroom discussions. The second is “inquiry-based teaching,” in which students are given a more prominent role in their own learning—for example, by developing their own hypotheses and experiments.

We analyzed the PISA results to understand the relative impact of each of these practices. In all five regions, when teachers took the lead, scores were generally higher, and the more inquiry-based learning, the lower the scores. That sounds damning for inquiry-based learning at first glance, but by digging deeper into the data, a more interesting story is revealed: what works best is when the two styles work together—specifically, with teacher-directed instruction in most or almost all classes, and inquiry-based learning in some. This “sweet spot” is the same in all five regions, suggesting there is something akin to a universal learning style (Exhibit 3 – European Union example).

 

 

Legg igjen en kommentar