Debunking Education Myths: Rethinking Standardized Tests, Instructional Time, Teaching Approaches, and Teacher Effectiveness
In this article we summarise the myths of standardised tests, defined time blocks of literacy and numeracy, ‘back to basics approach’ and the ‘watered down curriculum’ view of contemporary teaching methods.
Myth: Standardised tests accurately measure a child’s intelligence or potential
Reality: Standardised tests measure a student’s ability to perform in a specific format under timed conditions, and often focus on rote memorisation rather than critical thinking. They are a snapshot, and don’t capture the entirety of a child’s intelligence, creativity or potential.
Myth: One hour of reading, writing and mathematics instruction per day is the most effective way to support children in learning literacy and numeracy.
Reality: The belief that limiting reading, writing and mathematics instruction to one hour per day is optimal for all learners oversimplifies the complex nature of learning. In reality:
1. Learning Transcends Subject Areas: Literacy and numeracy skills are not confined to their specific subjects. These essential skills can be reinforced and applied in various areas of the curriculum, enhancing their relevance and usefulness for students.
2. Understanding Requires Time: The depth and breadth of learning that children need may not fit within a rigid one-hour timeframe. More time might be necessary for an in-depth exploration and practice, especially for students who need additional support.
3. Engagement through Active Learning: Children tend to learn more effectively through active engagement. Experiential learning approaches like problem-solving, real-world applications, and collaborative projects often demand more time than traditional methods but are typically more effective in facilitating comprehension and retention.
4. The Role of Play: Play is a vital component of learning, especially for younger children. It promotes communication, problem-solving, and understanding of the world, suggesting that an instructional model which allows for more play-based learning could be beneficial.
5. Respect for Individual Learning Pace: Each child has a unique pace of learning that may not align with a strict one-hour rule. An approach that respects these individual differences can better support effective learning.
6. Holistic Learning: Learning extends beyond academics. Socio-emotional skills, creativity, and physical development are all integral parts of education that may not fit within a one-hour instructional timeframe.
Myth: The ‘back to basics’ approach, focusing on traditional skills in reading, writing, and mathematics, is the best way to educate students.
Reality: Although foundational literacy and numeracy skills are crucial, relying solely on the ‘back to basics’ approach can fall short in preparing students for the demands of the 21st century. This is because:
1. Necessity of a Broad Skill Set: Modern education needs to foster a range of skills beyond basic literacy and numeracy, including critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving. These ‘21st century skills’ are pivotal for future employment and life satisfaction (Binkley et al., 2012).
2. Engagement Matters: Traditional direct instruction might not engage students effectively, potentially reducing motivation and learning. Studies suggest that students learn more effectively with active, hands-on approaches than passive, teacher-centred ones (Galton, Hargreaves, & Pell, 2009).
3. Diversity of Learning Styles: The ‘back to basics’ approach tends to assume all students learn the same way, which isn’t the case. Students have unique learning styles and paces, and some might struggle with traditional instructional methods. For example, active learning approaches have proven more effective than traditional lecturing in STEM fields (Freeman et al., 2014).
4. Real-world Applicability: The basics approach often prioritises rote memorisation over understanding or applying knowledge. However, students need to see how their learning applies to real-world situations. Studies show that problem-based and project-based learning methods, linking classroom learning to real-life, are more effective than traditional instructional approaches (Strobel & van Barneveld, 2009).
5. Drawbacks of Standardised Testing: The ‘back to basics’ approach often coincides with a focus on standardised testing. But research suggests that an over-reliance on standardised testing can limit the curriculum’s scope and increase stress without necessarily enhancing student learning outcomes (Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2006).
Myth: Contemporary teaching methods present a ‘watered down’ curriculum that fails to adequately prepare students for the adult workforce.
Reality: Contrary to this myth, contemporary teaching methods can provide a more engaging, relevant, and comprehensive education that effectively prepares students for future career challenges. This is due to these teaching methods ensuring:
1. Depth Over Breadth: Contemporary methods often focus on teaching fewer topics in greater depth. This approach encourages a deeper understanding of key concepts and skills, rather than a superficial overview of a wide range of topics.
2. 21st Century Skills: These teaching methods often emphasise ‘21st-century skills’ such as critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity, collaboration, and digital literacy. These are skills highly sought after in today’s workforce and can be more effectively taught through active, project-based learning rather than rote memorisation.
3. Real-world Application: Contemporary teaching methods often involve real-world application of knowledge, helping students see the relevance of their learning and preparing them for the practical challenges they will face in the workforce.
4. Engagement and Motivation: Contemporary methods are typically more engaging and motivating for students. When students are interested in what they’re learning, they’re likely to be more persistent, which is a key characteristic of successful employees.
5. Lifelong Learning: These methods often aim to instil a love of learning and the ability to learn independently. These qualities are essential in a rapidly changing world, where individuals often need to update their skills or learn new ones throughout their careers.
Myth: If teachers are using contemporary methods of teaching (like play-based, project-based or problem-based learning, or flipped classrooms) instead of traditional methods, they are ineffective teachers, ‘lazy’ or ‘not doing their jobs properly’.
Reality: Far from being a sign of ineffective teaching, the use of contemporary teaching methods often indicates a teacher’s commitment to engaging students in deeper, more meaningful learning. In reality, teachers increase and engage in:
1. Planning Effort: Contemporary methods require substantial effort in planning and organisation. Teachers must design relevant and engaging projects or problems, anticipate different learning needs, and scaffold the learning process, often demanding more effort than traditional methods.
2. Active Facilitation: Teachers using contemporary methods are not merely content deliverers; they’re facilitators of learning. They guide student inquiries, provide feedback, promote critical thinking, and help students connect new learning with prior knowledge and real-world contexts. This active role can be more challenging that traditional lecturing.
3. Continuous Assessment: Contemporary teaching involves ongoing, formative assessment, requiring teachers to monitor student progress closely, provide timely feedback, and adjust their teaching strategies as needed.
4. Professional Development: Implementing contemporary teaching methods often means that teachers are actively engaged in professional learning to develop their understanding and skills. This commitment to professional growth enhances student learning.
5. Addressing Diversity: Contemporary teaching often entails differentiated instruction to cater to diverse learning needs. This approach requires a deep understanding of each student’s strengths and needs and the ability to adapt teaching strategies accordingly.
Research supports the effectiveness of these contemporary methods. Active learning methods, where students participate actively in their learning rather than passively receiving information, were more effective than traditional teaching in promoting student learning and reducing failure rates (Freeman et al., 2014).
We would love to know your thoughts below.