Download
1 / 13
130 likes | 262 Vues
This research project examines the differences in API scores among schools with similar student demographics. The focus is on the use of visible versus invisible pedagogies and the effects of labeling practices on student achievement. By observing classroom environments at George Mayne, Lowell, and Horace Mann, we seek to understand how teaching methods and teacher expectations influence educational quality. Our findings suggest the importance of implementing effective pedagogical practices that cater to all students, particularly those from low-income backgrounds, to promote fairness and high achievement rates.
E N D
Group Research ProjectGrades 1-3 Elise Baker Ellen Nguyet Nguyen Richard Falsetti
Theoretical Framework • Basil Bernstein * invisible and visible pedagogies * quality of education is class based • Ray Rist * labeling - “deviant” - self fulfilling prophecy - teacher expectation
Research Question • Why is there such a vast difference in API scores when the student population demographics are so similar?
Goal • - figure out which schools used visible vs. invisible pedagogy and if labeling practices have an effect on students’ test scores • - Our question is relevant because if we can figure out what the best practices classroom practices are, then it will give us a better idea of how to structure our own future classrooms in order to ensure quality pedagogic practices, fairness, and high student achievement rates.
Demographics • George Mayne 60% Hispanic 81% eligible for free/reduced lunch 48% considered ELL’s • Lowell 85% Hispanic 84% eligible for free/reduced lunch 68% considered ELL’s • Horace Mann 74% Hispanic 73% eligible for free/reduced lunch 54% considered ELL’s
George Mayne816 • Lowell798 • Horace Mann727
Methodology • Direct observation within classroom - non participant - involved observer
Classroom Overview • Examples of pedagogic practices & labeling - George Mayne - Lowell - Horace Mann
Emergent Findings • In viewing the anecdotal findings from each school, we speculated how the amount of invisible and visible pedagogies and the amount and kind of labeling correlated with each of our school’s API’s scores.
George Mayne(816)- mostly invisible pedagogic techniques & only positive labeling • Lowell(798)– about 50/50 visible and invisible pedagogic practices & positive and negative labeling • Horace Mann(727)– mostly visible pedagogic practices & negative labeling
Implications • Invisible pedagogic practices that involve open ended projects, freedom of choice within the classroom, smaller student to teacher ratios, and less specific criteria for student groups should not be class based but should be provided for all students, regardless of family income or past test performance. • Children need to be taught by quality teachers who value each child rather than seeing them as a test score. • Invisible pedagogic techniques need to be employed in all schools, especially in schools where many children come from low income families, rather than the already privileged students of privileged families.
