A World Leading Educational System – Singapore

The educational system in Singapore has often been described as world leading, being commended on by many specialists in the field, including Michael Gove, the British education minister. The national education budget for last year was S$ 11.6 billion, showing that the country has a vested interest in providing a high level of education at all levels, which is also showed by the literacy percentages, Singapore having a total of 96.1% of literate population, 66.6% having a secondary diploma and 47% having a post-secondary diploma. The administration and development of state school are controlled by the Ministry of Education, which also exerts a supervisory role on private schools. Whether private or public, schools benefit from flexibility when it comes to curriculum autonomy, scope of government funding or admission policy. Singaporean citizens enjoy subsidized education and the costs are much higher for non-citizens. The high level of literacy and education in Singapore may also be attributed to the Compulsory Education Act from 2000, which made it a criminal offence for parents not to enroll children in school and also provided that they ensure regular attendance. The systems is also highly aided by the large number of education resources, the country having an extensive platform of bookstores and academic resources, Singapore books even being found online.

An online bookstore in Singapore is not a rare thing and many parents make use of this great tool to buy practice books and other learning resources more quickly and easily. The school year in Singapore in divided into two semesters, from January to May and from July to November. Many parents not only sign up their children for primary school, but also enroll their kids in kindergarten and even preschool playgroups, at the age of 4-6 years and respectively 3-4 years, so many kids learn to read and write at a very young age. There are learning materials available even for such young ages and one can easily find, as mentioned above, Singapore books for practice or learning for kids who are at the age of 4 or 5. The kindergartens are usually run by the private sector, but kids here learn written and oral language, numbers and two languages: English, which is the official language in Singapore, and their native language, which can be Chinese, Malay or Tamil.

All things considered, the Singapore educational system definitely sets an example to many other countries, even European countries, showing that making school attendance mandatory and offering the right educational forums for kids at young ages can significantly influence the level of education within a country. The wide range of academic resources and educational aids also has a beneficial impact on the system, especially since the arrival and development of online bookstore platforms, which significantly aided parents and teachers in finding the right resources for the children. The country also has a GEP, which stands for Gifted Education Programme, which was set up in 1984 and helps the intellectually gifted children receive proper guidance and education.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

The Education System Of New Zealand – A Holistic View

New Zealand (or Aotearoa, the Maori name for New Zealand) situated south-east of Australia in the South Pacific Ocean, is famous mainly for two reasons – amazing scenery and quality education. It is a wonderful place for tourism, and also a superb destination for study. This feature is corroborated by thousands of international students from various countries like South East Asia, the UK, North Asia, Japan, South America, India and Australia, and many others.

Travel to New Zealand is easy, with many cities offering direct flights. The two main international airports are in Auckland and Christchurch. Wellington, New Zealand’s capital city is also connected to Australia.

New Zealand has an excellent reputation as a place where education is synonymous with quality, offering a safe learning environment and excellent study opportunities. Various types of courses are available for academic, professional and vocational studies at universities, polytechnics, colleges of education, secondary schools and private training establishments. The education system of New Zealand provides a progressive education to students, thus helping them in achieving a leading position in the global scenario. Many New Zealanders are working internationally and are involved in collaborative research with prestigious universities world wide. Students can enroll on short-term course such as English language programs, secondary schools for ultimately enrolment into tertiary institutions. They can also enroll in vocational courses and degree programs.

There are many reasons for choosing New Zealand over others. High standards of education, internationally recognized qualifications, excellent facilities and study support for international students are to name a few. Students have access to more advanced technology than they could wish for. New Zealand produces top graduates who can take their place with confidence in the international arena. Also, English being the everyday language of New Zealanders (English and Maori are the two official languages), it proves to be a big help to international students, specially for those who don’t have English as a native language in their home country. Since the education programs and degrees are based on the British education system and are well recognized internationally, it is possible to do an undergraduate degree in New Zealand and a post-graduate degree in another English-speaking country. Foreign students are accepted at all levels of learning and there is a wide variety of subjects to choose from.

The cities are quiet, clean and beautiful and are ideal for studying in. The cost of living and education is not high when you compare it to other places with the same standard of education. It is not difficult to obtain a visa and the country is stable and safe. The climate is relatively mild, wet winters and warm, dry summers. The weather can also change dramatically and very quickly, so that people joke about experiencing “four seasons in one day”. The weather varies a lot between different geographical regions. Since New Zealanders are well-traveled and have a great interest in people from other cultures, international students can acclimatize much sooner than they would in other countries. Students from all corners of the globe studying and socializing together also help them in feeling at ease.

A Code Of Practice, operated by the Ministry of Education, provides a framework for looking after international students. It covers pastoral care, accommodation and provision of information. All members of Education Tauranga are signatories to this code. Schooling is compulsory in New Zealand for all children from their sixth until sixteenth birthday. Schooling is free at state (government funded) schools until the age of 19. There are 10 levels of study in New Zealand schools and universities. The lowest level is a Certificate and the highest is a Doctoral degree. Each level is more complex than the one below it. These are the names of qualifications and their levels: . Levels 1 to 4 – Certificates . Levels 5 and 6 – Diplomas . Level 7 – Bachelors degrees and Graduate Diplomas . Level 8 – Postgraduate Certificates and Diplomas, and Bachelors degrees with Honors . Level 9 – Masters degrees, and . Level 10 – Doctoral degrees. There are eight national universities offering degree programs at undergraduate and postgraduate levels in academic and professional studies.

All universities offer a broad spectrum of subjects for degrees in commerce, science and the arts. Each university has also developed its own specialist subjects, such as technology, engineering, computer studies, medicine, agriculture and environmental studies. There are 20 Polytechnics and Institutes of Technology. These provide education and training at tertiary levels ranging from introductory studies through to full degree programs. Specialized training for teachers is available at Colleges of Education. Additional university studies may be undertaken as part of the courses. All colleges offer advanced courses for trained teachers. There is a comprehensive system of distance education, providing courses similar to those in conventional New Zealand educational institutions. There are also private (i.e. not state-funded) tertiary institutes and training providers, including over 100 English language schools.

English language is one thing about which international students have to take special care. It is especially applicable for those who are not well-versed in English. The English language requirements for international students are strict in most tertiary institutions. IELTS (International English Language Testing System), is used at most tertiary institutions in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada and increasingly used in the United States too. It assesses the ability to read, write, speak and listen in English. Care should be taken to find out what standard of English is exactly needed for the course chosen for study. But it’s also true that most of the universities offer English language tuition for students who are already enrolled and also to those who want to study there.

Even though ample choices are available in respect to institutes and courses, it is important to choose an institution according to the field of specialization and the institution’s reputation in that field.

One point worth mentioning is the Quarantine regulations. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry enforces very strict quarantine requirements in order to protect New Zealand’s agricultural, horticultural and forestry industries. Live animals or plants, or animal or plant products, including seeds, or perishable food, are not allowed into the country. It’s a good idea to follow these regulations to avoid unpleasant situations.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Alberta’s Education system

In Canada, each Province and Territory has jurisdiction over its own education system. Public education is free to all Canadian citizens and permanent residents aged less than 20 years.
Parents are responsible for providing school supplies, school uniforms are not worn but Band and Sports uniforms are also the parent’s responsibility. In Alberta, students are legally required to attend school between the ages of 6 and 16 years.It is extremely important that you find out when the registration period is to ensure that your kids get the places at the schools you want. The registration normally takes place several months before the year starts (I.E. register in Feb. for September). Contact the particular school to find out the precise details. There may well be an administration fee charged to register your child!
There are a number of different types of schooling options available for your child’s education in Alberta. The choices are: Public, French immersion, Catholic, Francophone, Charter and Private Schools. Parents also have the option of home schooling their children.Each school has its own attendance area; school boards are required to provide transportation for students that live more than 2.4 kilometers away. There may be a charge for this which you can expect to have to pay before the start of each school year. Your child does not have to enroll in the school in your attendance area as you may choose to enroll them elsewhere. However, the parents would then be responsible for transportation to and from school. Also, a percentage of the local taxes that every resident has to pay are paid to the school system of your choice (catholic, public etc.) in your catchment area.The school year usually runs from the beginning of September through to June 30th. However, there may be variations to this from system to system. Most schools close down for the months of July and August as well as breaks at Christmas and Easter.Preschool and KindergartenSchooling can start as early as 3 years old, at preschool. These tend to be privately run; therefore, you have to pay for them. Most children will attend pre-school until they are five years old.Children’s Services set standards for day care, nursery schools, drop in centers and family day homes. This ensures the health and safety and well-being of the children that attend these facilities.Kindergarten generally starts at the age of 5 years, although some school boards have different age cut off dates. The student will attend 5 days of either morning or afternoon classes. Kindergarten has 400 instructional hours per year. It is normally part of the school that your child will attend in Grade 1 and is good preparation for full time school.If your kid(s) are around this age be sure to find out about vaccinations. There will be standard Vaccinations offered that schools MAY insist on being up to date before they start school. Check with your chosen school for more details.This age or younger is a very good time to think about saving for your child’s post secondary education. Fees for post secondary education in Alberta are very expensive. There is a savings plan available in which the Federal Government will input a percentage of your contributions. These are called Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP).Elementary and High SchoolChildren start Elementary school at the age of 6 years (Grade 1) and stay there until they are 12 years old(Grade 6). There are certain subjects that are required in these grades; these include Language Arts, Math, Science, Social Studies, Art and Music, Health and Physical Education. There are also optional courses available; these vary from school to school.Some school boards have a middle school for grades 5 to 8. If there is no middle school structure the children move on to junior high for Grades 7 to 9. (12 to 15 years)Finally, there is Senior high school; this is for grades 10 – 12(15 – 18 years old). To graduate from high school, students need to achieve 100 credits. Credits are given for different subjects and courses that the student can take.
High schools also offer many different choices for students to help them to prepare for further education in Alberta.Schools do not have to teach a second language, however many schools offer various language courses. Students are encouraged to learn French, Canada’s other official language. Depending on the school there are many other second language courses available.There are three types of language courses offered:Immersion – this is where French is mainly used during the school day to teach the pupils. At elementary level it is used for 50 – 100 % of the day and 40 – 80% at the secondary level. You do not have to have French speaking parents to enroll in French immersion.Bi-lingual – in which the language is used 25-50% of the time.Second language programs – in which a particular language is taught as a course.Transfer from abroadStudents who are new to education in Alberta and are from a foreign (non Canadian curriculum) school system should submit an official statement of previous standing, such as a report card to the school they want to enroll in. You should also have the previous school records and transcripts, copies of course outlines and content.After considering a number of factors including the students age, records and test results they will be placed in the appropriate grade.Post Secondary EducationPost Secondary education in Alberta has a wide variety of institutes to choose from:There are publicly funded colleges which are located at many different places. The courses that these colleges offer include academic upgrading, job readiness, apprenticeship certificate and diplomas.The two main technical institutions of Alberta are North Alberta Institute of Technology (NAIT) which is located in Edmonton and South Alberta Institute of Alberta (SAIT) located in Calgary offer certificate, diploma’s, apprenticeship and continuing education in Alberta that are tailored to workplace requirements.Three campus based universities, University of Alberta (Edmonton), University of Calgary and the University of Lethbridge and one distance learning university, the University of Athabasca. There are also seven private colleges that are accredited to grant degrees at University level.
Another type of course available is the Alberta Apprenticeship and Industry Training System which is an industry and government partnership that ensures a highly skilled workforce in 54 designated trades. There are also scholarships available in this system.Student loans, numbers and permitsAs with all of Canada, the Post Secondary education in Alberta is NOT free. Several years ago, the Canadian Government launched Registered Education Savings Plans (RESP’s) to help parents save for their children’s future education in Alberta. These are great if you start them early, but if your kids are about to start when you land it is too late.In that case, there are interest free student loans available if you attend a designated post secondary institute full time. These are only available to Canadian citizens or permanent residents. There are two sources of student loans for education in Alberta – the Government of Canada and the Government of Alberta.To be able to enroll in any school or post secondary institute in Alberta or to apply for a student loan you must firstly apply for an Alberta Student Number.

Posted in education system | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Increasing Student Success Through Instruction in Self-Determination

An enormous amount of research shows the importance of self-determination (i.e., autonomy) for students in elementary school through college for enhancing learning and improving important post-school outcomes.
Findings

Research by psychologists Richard Ryan, PhD, and Edward Deci, PhD, on Self-Determination Theory indicates that intrinsic motivation (doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable), and thus higher quality learning, flourishes in contexts that satisfy human needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Students experience competence when challenged and given prompt feedback. Students experience autonomy when they feel supported to explore, take initiative and develop and implement solutions for their problems. Students experience relatedness when they perceive others listening and responding to them. When these three needs are met, students are more intrinsically motivated and actively engaged in their learning.

Numerous studies have found that students who are more involved in setting educational goals are more likely to reach their goals. When students perceive that the primary focus of learning is to obtain external rewards, such as a grade on an exam, they often perform more poorly, think of themselves as less competent, and report greater anxiety than when they believe that exams are simply a way for them to monitor their own learning. Some studies have found that the use of external rewards actually decreased motivation for a task for which the student initially was motivated. In a 1999 examination of 128 studies that investigated the effects of external rewards on intrinsic motivations, Drs. Deci and Ryan, along with psychologist Richard Koestner, PhD, concluded that such rewards tend to have a substantially negative effect on intrinsic motivation by undermining people’s taking responsibility for motivating or regulating themselves.

Self-determination research has also identified flaws in high stakes, test focused school reforms, which despite good intentions, has led teachers and administrators to engage in precisely the types of interventions that result in poor quality learning. Dr. Ryan and colleagues found that high stakes tests tend to constrain teachers’ choices about curriculum coverage and curtail teachers’ ability to respond to students’ interests (Ryan & La Guardia, 1999). Also, psychologists Tim Urdan, PhD, and Scott Paris, PhD, found that such tests can decrease teacher enthusiasm for teaching, which has an adverse effect on students’ motivation (Urdan & Paris, 1994).

The processes described in self-determination theory may be particularly important for children with special educational needs. Researcher Michael Wehmeyer found that students with disabilities who are more self-determined are more likely to be employed and living independently in the community after completing high school than students who are less self-determined.

Research also shows that the educational benefits of self-determination principles don’t stop with high school graduation. Studies show how the orientation taken by college and medical school instructors (whether it is toward controlling students’ behavior or supporting the students’ autonomy) affects the students’ motivation and learning.
Significance

Self-determination theory has identified ways to better motivate students to learn at all educational levels, including those with disabilities.
Practical Application

Schools throughout the country are using self-determination instruction as a way to better motivate students and meet the growing need to teach children and youth ways to more fully accept responsibility for their lives by helping them to identify their needs and develop strategies to meet those needs.

Researchers have developed and evaluated instructional interventions and supports to encourage self-determination for all students, with many of these programs designed for use by students with disabilities. Many parents, researchers and policy makers have voiced concern about high rates of unemployment, under-employment and poverty experienced by students with disabilities after they complete their educational programs. Providing support for student self-determination in school settings is one way to enhance student learning and improve important post-school outcomes for students with disabilities. Schools have particularly emphasized the use of self-determination curricula with students with disabilities to meet federal mandates to actively involve students with disabilities in the Individualized Education Planning process.

Programs to promote self-determination help students acquire knowledge, skills and beliefs that meet their needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness (for example, see Steps to Self-determination by educational researchers Sharon Field and Alan Hoffman). Such programs also provide instruction aimed specifically at helping students play a more active role in educational planning (for example, see The Self-directed Individualized Education Plan by Jim Martin, Laura Huber Marshall, Laurie Maxson, & Patty Jerman).

Drs. Field and Hoffman developed a model designed to guide the development of self-determination instructional interventions. According to the model, instructional activities in areas such as increasing self-awareness; improving decision-making, goal-setting and goal-attainment skills; enhancing communication and relationship skills; and developing the ability to celebrate success and learn from reflecting on experiences lead to increased student self-determination. Self-determination instructional programs help students learn how to participate more actively in educational decision-making by helping them become familiar with the educational planning process, assisting them to identify information they would like to share at educational planning meetings, and supporting students to develop skills to effectively communicate their needs and wants. Examples of activities used in self-determination instructional programs include reflecting on daydreams to help students decide what is important to them; teaching students how to set goals that are important to them and then, with the support of peers, family members and teachers, taking steps to achieve those goals. Providing contextual supports and opportunities for students, such as coaching for problem-solving and offering opportunities for choice, are also critical elements that lead to meeting needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness and thus, increasing student self-determination.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off

How to Build a Better Educational System: Jigsaw Classrooms

The jigsaw classroom technique can transform competitive classrooms in which many students are struggling into cooperative classrooms in which once-struggling students show dramatic academic and social improvements.
Findings

In the early 1970s, in the wake of the civil rights movement, educators were faced with a social dilemma that had no obvious solution. All over the country, well-intentioned efforts to desegregate America’s public schools were leading to serious problems. Ethnic minority children, most of whom had previously attended severely under-funded schools, found themselves in classrooms composed predominantly of more privileged White children. This created a situation in which students from affluent backgrounds often shone brilliantly while students from impoverished backgrounds often struggled. Of course, this difficult situation seemed to confirm age-old stereotypes: that Blacks and Latinos are stupid or lazy and that Whites are pushy and overly competitive. The end result was strained relations between children from different ethnic groups and widening gaps in the academic achievement of Whites and minorities.

Drawing on classic psychological research on how to reduce tensions between competing groups (e.g., see Allport, 1954; Sherif, 1958; see also Pettigrew, 1998), Elliot Aronson and colleagues realized that one of the major reasons for this problem was the competitive nature of the typical classroom. In a typical classroom, students work on assignments individually, and teachers often call on students to see who can publicly demonstrate his or her knowledge. Anyone who has ever been called to the board to solve a long division problem – only to get confused about dividends and divisors – knows that public failure can be devastating. The snide remarks that children often make when their peers fail do little to remedy this situation. But what if students could be taught to work together in the classroom – as cooperating members of a cohesive team? Could a cooperative learning environment turn things around for struggling students? When this is done properly, the answer appears to be a resounding yes.

In response to real educational dilemmas, Aronson and colleagues developed and implemented the jigsaw classroom technique in Austin, Texas, in 1971. The jigsaw technique is so named because each child in a jigsaw classroom has to become an expert on a single topic that is a crucial part of a larger academic puzzle. For example, if the children in a jigsaw classroom were working on a project about World War II, a classroom of 30 children might be broken down into five diverse groups of six children each. Within each group, a different child would be given the responsibility of researching and learning about a different specific topic: Khanh might learn about Hitler’s rise to power, Tracy might learn about the U.S. entry into the war, Mauricio might learn about the development of the atomic bomb, etc. To be sure that each group member learned his or her material well, the students from different groups who had the same assignment would be instructed to compare notes and share information. Then students would be brought together in their primary groups, and each student would present his or her “piece of the puzzle” to the other group members. Of course, teachers play the important role of keeping the students involved and derailing any tensions that may emerge. For example, suppose Mauricio struggled as he tried to present his information about the atomic bomb. If Tracy were to make fun of him, the teacher would quickly remind Tracy that while it may make her feel good to make fun of her teammate, she is hurting herself and her group – because everyone will be expected to know all about the atomic bomb on the upcoming quiz.
Significance
When properly carried out, the jigsaw classroom technique can transform competitive classrooms in which many students are struggling into cooperative classrooms in which once-struggling students show dramatic academic and social improvements (and in which students who were already doing well continue to shine). Students in jigsaw classrooms also come to like each other more, as students begin to form cross-ethnic friendships and discard ethnic and cultural stereotypes. Finally, jigsaw classrooms decrease absenteeism, and they even seem to increase children’s level of empathy (i.e., children’s ability to put themselves in other people’s shoes). The jigsaw technique thus has the potential to improve education dramatically in a multi-cultural world by revolutionizing the way children learn.
Practical Application

Since its demonstration in the 1970s, the jigsaw classroom has been used in hundreds of classrooms settings across the nation, ranging from the elementary schools where it was first developed to high school and college classrooms (e.g., see Aronson, Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, & Sikes, 1977; Perkins & Saris, 2001; Slavin, 1980). Researchers know that the technique is effective, incidentally, because it has been carefully studied using solid research techniques. For example, in many cases, students in different classrooms who are covering the same material are randomly assigned to receive either traditional instruction (no intervention) or instruction by means of the jigsaw technique. Studies in real classrooms have consistently revealed enhanced academic performance, reductions in stereotypes and prejudice, and improved social relations.

Aronson is not the only researcher to explore the merits of cooperative learning techniques. Shortly after Aronson and colleagues began to document the power of the jigsaw classroom, Robert Slavin, Elizabeth Cohen and others began to document the power of other kinds of cooperative learning programs (see Cohen & Lotan, 1995; Slavin, 1980; Slavin, Hurley, & Chamberlain, 2003). As of this writing, some kind of systematic cooperative learning technique had been applied in about 1500 schools across the country, and the technique appears to be picking up steam. Perhaps the only big question that remains about cooperative learning techniques such as the jigsaw classroom is why these techniques have not been implemented even more broadly than they already have.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off

Have Your Children Had Their Anti-Smoking Shots?

Findings

In the early 1960s, social psychologist William McGuire published some classic papers showing that it is surprisingly easy to change people’s attitudes about things that we all wholeheartedly accept as true. For example, for speakers armed with a little knowledge of persuasion, it is remarkably easy to convince almost anyone that brushing one’s teeth is not such a great idea. McGuire’s insight into this curious phenomenon was that it is easy to change people’s minds about things that they have always taken for granted precisely because most people have little if any practice resisting attacks on attitudes that no one ever questions.

Taking this logic a little further, McGuire asked if it might be possible to train people to resist attacks on their beliefs by giving them practice at resisting arguments that they could easily refute. Specifically, McGuire drew an analogy between biological resistance to disease and psychological resistance to persuasion. Biological inoculation works by exposing people to a weakened version of an attacking agent such as a virus. People’s bodies produce antibodies that make them immune to the attacking agent, and when a full-blown version of the agent hits later in life, people win the biological battle against the full-blown disease. Would giving people a little practice fending off a weak attack on their attitudes make it easier for people to resist stronger attacks on their attitudes that come along later? The answer turns out to be yes. McGuire coined the phrase attitude inoculation to refer to the process of resisting strong persuasive arguments by getting practice fighting off weaker versions of the same arguments.
Significance

Once attitude inoculation had been demonstrated consistently in the laboratory, researchers decided to see if attitude inoculation could be used to help parents, teachers, and social service agents deal with a pressing social problem that kills about 440,000 people in the U.S. every year: cigarette smoking. Smoking seemed like an ideal problem to study because children below the age of 10 or 12 almost always report negative attitudes about smoking. However, in the face of peer pressure to be cool, many of these same children become smokers during middle to late adolescence.
Practical Application

Adolescents change their attitudes about smoking (and become smokers) because of the power of peer pressure. Researchers quickly realized that if they could inoculate children against pro-smoking arguments (by teaching them to resist pressure from their peers who believed that smoking is “cool”), they might be able to reduce the chances that children would become smokers. A series of field studies of attitude inoculation, conducted in junior high schools and high schools throughout the country, demonstrated that brief interventions using attitude inoculation dramatically reduced rates of teenage smoking. For instance, in an early study by Cheryl Perry and colleagues (1980), high school students inoculated junior high schools students against smoking by having the younger kids role-play the kind of situations they might actually face with a peer who pressured them to try a cigarette. For example, when a role-playing peer called a student “chicken” for not being willing to try an imaginary cigarette, the student practiced answers such as “I’d be a real chicken if I smoked just to impress you.” The kids who were inoculated in this way were about half as likely to become smokers as were kids in a very similar school who did not receive this special intervention.

Public service advertising campaigns have also made use of attitude inoculation theory by encouraging parents to help their children devise strategies for saying no when peers encourage them to smoke. Programs that have made whole or partial use of attitude inoculation programs have repeatedly documented the effectiveness of attitude inoculation to prevent teenage smoking, to curb illicit drug use, and to reduce teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. In comparison with old-fashioned interventions such as simple education about the risks of smoking or teenage pregnancy, attitude inoculation frequently reduces risky behaviors by 30-70% (see Botvin et al., 1995; Ellickson & Bell, 1990; Perry et al., 1980). As psychologist David Myers put it in his popular social psychology textbook, “Today any school district or teacher wishing to use the social psychological approach to smoking prevention can do so easily, inexpensively, and with the hope of significant reductions in future smoking rates and health costs.” So the next time you think about inoculating kids to keep them healthy, make sure you remember that one of the most important kinds of inoculation any kid can get is a psychological inoculation against tobacco.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off

Early Intervention Can Improve Low-Income Children’s Cognitive Skills and Academic Achievement

National Head Start program conceptualized while psychologists were beginning to study preventive intervention for young children living in poverty.
Findings
As a group, children who live in poverty tend to perform worse in school than do children from more privileged backgrounds. For the first half of the 20th century, researchers attributed this difference to inherent cognitive deficits. At the time, the prevailing belief was that the course of child development was dictated by biology and maturation. By the early 1960s, this position gave way to the notion popularized by psychologists such as J. McVicker Hunt and Benjamin Bloom that intelligence could rather easily be shaped by the environment. There was very little research at the time to support these speculations but a few psychologists had begun to study whether environmental manipulation could prevent poor cognitive outcomes. Results of studies by psychologists Susan Gray and Rupert Klaus (1965), Martin Deutsch (1965) and Bettye Caldwell and former U.S. Surgeon General Julius Richmond (1968) supported the notion that early attention to physical and psychological development could improve cognitive ability.
Significance

These preliminary results caught the attention of Sargent Shriver, President Lyndon Johnson’s chief strategist in implementing an arsenal of antipoverty programs as part of the War on Poverty. His idea for a school readiness program for children of the poor focused on breaking the cycle of poverty. Shriver reasoned that if poor children could begin school on an equal footing with wealthier classmates, they would have a better of chance of succeeding in school and avoiding poverty in adulthood. He appointed a planning committee of 13 professionals in physical and mental health, early education, social work, and developmental psychology. Their work helped shape what is now known as the federal Head Start program.

The three developmental psychologists in the group were Urie Bronfenbrenner, Mamie Clark, and Edward Zigler. Bronfenbrenner convinced the other members that intervention would be most effective if it involved not just the child but the family and community that comprise the child-rearing environment. Parent involvement in school operations and administration were unheard of at the time, but it became a cornerstone of Head Start and proved to be a major contributor to its success. Zigler had been trained as a scientist and was distressed that the new program was not going to be field-tested before its nationwide launch. Arguing that it was not wise to base such a massive, innovative program on good ideas and concepts but little empirical evidence, he insisted that research and evaluation be part of Head Start. When he later became the federal official responsible for administering the program, Zigler (often referred to as the “father of Head Start”) worked to cast Head Start as a national laboratory for the design of effective early childhood services.

Although it is difficult to summarize the hundreds of empirical studies of Head Start outcomes, Head Start does seem to produce a variety of benefits for most children who participate. Although some studies have suggested that the intellectual advantages gained from participation in Head Start gradually disappear as children progress through elementary school, some of these same studies have shown more lasting benefits in the areas of school achievement and adjustment.
Practical Application

Head Start began as a great experiment that over the years has yielded prolific results. Some 20 million children and families have participated in Head Start since the summer of 1965; current enrollment approaches one million annually, including those in the new Early Head Start that serves families with children from birth to age 3. Psychological research on early intervention has proliferated, creating an expansive literature and sound knowledge base. Many research ideas designed and tested in the Head Start laboratory have been adapted in a variety of service delivery programs. These include family support services, home visiting, a credentialing process for early childhood workers, and education for parenthood. Head Start’s efforts in preschool education spotlighted the value of school readiness and helped spur today’s movement toward universal preschool.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off

Family-Like Environment Better for Troubled Children and Teens

The Teaching-Family Model changes bad behavior through straight talk and loving relationships.
Findings

In the late 1960′s, psychologists Elaine Phillips, Elery Phillips, Dean Fixsen, and Montrose Wolf developed an empirically tested treatment program to help troubled children and juvenile offenders who had been assigned to residential group homes. These researchers combined the successful components of their studies into the Teaching-Family Model, which offers a structured treatment regimen in a family-like environment. The model is built around a married couple (teaching-parents) that lives with children in a group home and teaches them essential interpersonal and living skills. Not only have teaching parents’ behaviors and techniques been assessed for their effectiveness, but they have also been empirically tested for whether children like them. Teaching-parents also work with the children’s parents, teachers, employers, and peers to ensure support for the children’s positive changes. Although more research is needed, preliminary results suggest that, compared to children in other residential treatment programs, children in Teaching-Family Model centers have fewer contacts with police and courts, lower dropout rates, and improved school grades and attendance.

Couples are selected to be teaching-parents based on their ability to provide individualized and affirming care. Teaching-parents then undergo an intensive year-long training process. In order to maintain their certification, teaching-parents and Teaching-Family Model organizations are evaluated every year, and must meet the rigorous standards set by the Teaching-Family Association.
Significance
The Teaching-Family Model is one of the few evidence-based residential treatment programs for troubled children. In the past, many treatment programs viewed delinquency as an illness, and therefore placed children in institutions for medical treatment. The Teaching-Family Model, in contrast, views children’s behavior problems as stemming from their lack of essential interpersonal relationships and skills. Accordingly, the Teaching-Family Model provides children with these relationships and teaches them these skills, using empirically validated methods. With its novel view of problem behavior and its carefully tested and disseminated treatment program, the Teaching-Family Model has helped to transform the treatment of behavioral problems from impersonal interventions at large institutions to caring relationships in home and community settings. The Teaching-Family Model has also demonstrated how well-researched treatment programs can be implemented on a large scale. Most importantly, the Teaching-Family Model has given hope that young people with even the most difficult problems or behaviors can improve the quality of their lives and make contributions to society.
Practical Application
In recent years, the Teaching-Family Model has been expanded to include foster care facilities, home treatment settings, and even schools. The Teaching-Family Model has also been adapted to accommodate the needs of physically, emotionally, and sexually abused children; emotionally disturbed and autistic children and adults; medically fragile children; and adults with disabilities. Successful centers that have been active for over 30 years include the Bringing it All Back Home Study Center in North Carolina, the Houston Achievement Place in Texas, and the Girls and Boys Town in Nebraska. Other Teaching-Family Model organizations are in Alberta (Canada), Arkansas, Hawaii, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off

Believing You Can Get Smarter Makes You Smarter

Thinking about intelligence as changeable and malleable, rather than stable and fixed, results in greater academic achievement, especially for people whose groups bear the burden of negative stereotypes about their intelligence.
Findings

Can people get smarter? Are some racial or social groups smarter than others? Despite a lot of evidence to the contrary, many people believe that intelligence is fixed, and, moreover, that some racial and social groups are inherently smarter than others. Merely evoking these stereotypes about the intellectual inferiority of these groups (such as women and Blacks) is enough to harm the academic perfomance of members of these groups. Social psychologist Claude Steele and his collaborators (2002) have called this phenomenon “stereotype threat.”

Yet social psychologists Aronson, Fried, and Good (2001) have developed a possible antidote to stereotype threat. They taught African American and European American college students to think of intelligence as changeable, rather than fixed – a lesson that many psychological studies suggests is true. Students in a control group did not receive this message. Those students who learned about IQ’s malleability improved their grades more than did students who did not receive this message, and also saw academics as more important than did students in the control group. Even more exciting was the finding that Black students benefited more from learning about the malleable nature of intelligence than did White students, showing that this intervention may successfully counteract stereotype threat.
Significance

This research showed a relatively easy way to narrow the Black-White academic achievement gap. Realizing that one’s intelligence may be improved may actually improve one’s intelligence, especially for those whose groups are targets of stereotypes alleging limited intelligence (e.g., Blacks, Latinos, and women in math domains.)
Practical Application

Blackwell, Dweck, and Trzesniewski (2002) recently replicated and applied this research with seventh-grade students in New York City. During the first eight weeks of the spring term, these students learned about the malleability of intelligence by reading and discussing a science-based article that described how intelligence develops. A control group of seventh-grade students did not learn about intelligence’s changeability, and instead learned about memory and mnemonic strategies. As compared to the control group, students who learned about intelligence’s malleability had higher academic motivation, better academic behavior, and better grades in mathematics. Indeed, students who were members of vulnerable groups (e.g., those who previously thought that intelligence cannot change, those who had low prior mathematics achievement, and female students) had higher mathematics grades following the intelligence-is-malleable intervention, while the grades of similar students in the control group declined. In fact, girls who received the intervention matched and even slightly exceeded the boys in math grades, whereas girls in the control group performed well below the boys.

These findings are especially important because the actual instruction time for the intervention totaled just three hours. Therefore, this is a very cost-effective method for improving students’ academic motivation and achievement.
Cited Research

Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2001). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1-13.

Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002), Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In Mark P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 379-440. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.
Additional Sources

Blackwell, L., Dweck, C., & Trzesniewski, K. (2002). Achievement across the adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Manuscript in preparation.

Dweck, C., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off