Cliquez sur l'image pour commander l'ouvrage

lundi 30 mai 2011

L'effet enseignant : plusieurs recherches présentées par Kerry Hempenstall

“Clearly, there is a tremendous interaction effect between longitudinal exposure to ineffective teachers and effective teachers when crossed with prior student achievement level. A sequence of ineffective teachers with a student already low achieving is educationally deadly.” 
Babu, S., & Mendro, R. (2004). Teacher Accountability: HLM-based teacher effectiveness indices in the investigation of teacher effects on student achievement in a state assessment program, Dallas TX public schools, AERA.
http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/research/articles/Babu-Teacher-Accountability-HLM-Based-Teacher-Effectiveness-Indices-2003.pdf
________________________________________

“Student choice does not equate to gains in achievement. … Research finds that students do less well academically when they are given freedom to choose, select, and pace their own learning. … When children fail to learn in a student-centered school environment, the explanation usually is that they lack maturity or readiness.  And yet their lack is often just the failure to receive the necessary instruction.” (p.117).
Chall, J. (2002). The Academic Achievement Challenge: What Really Works in the Classroom? New York: Guilford.
________________________________________

Classroom researcher, Dr. Robert Mendro, assistant superintendent for research and evaluation at Dallas public schools, has developed "Classroom Effectiveness Indices" on 6,000 Dallas Independent School District teachers. His research, which is based on their pupils'
standardized test results, indicates that 30 percent to 40 percent of those teachers could be labeled as "ineffective." disorganized, mean to children, unwilling to team up with colleagues, a shrinking violet incapable of maintaining classroom order. Some are just burned out.
Declines in achievement can last up to three years after a student leaves a bad teacher's classroom, he said. "It is a myth that if a kid has an ineffective teacher, you can make up the difference the next year," Dr. Mendro said. 
Jordan, H., Mendro, R., & Weerasinghe, D. (1997). The effects of teachers on longitudinal student achievement. Dallas, TX: Dallas Independent School District.
http://www.endteacherabuse.info/pushout.html
________________________________________

A study conducted in 1998 by the Education Trust found: 
“Students who have several effective teachers in a row make dramatic gains in achievement, while those who have even two ineffective teachers in a row lose significant ground, which they may never recover. Indeed, students who achieve at similar levels in the third grade may be separated by as many as 50 percentile points three years later, depending on the quality of the teachers to whom they were assigned!”
Haycock, K. (1998, Summer). Good teaching matters. Thinking K-16. The Education Trust, Washington DC.

________________________________________

“In a poll by the Consortium on Chicago School Research, more than two-thirds of principals in Chicago said they would dismiss 20% of their staff if they could avoid the hearings” 
Weele, M. V. (1994, November). Why it's too hard to fire bad teachers.
Washington Monthly, 26(11), 12

________________________________________
Professor John Hattie from the University of Auckland (New Zealand) has provided compelling evidence for the importance of quality teaching via a meta-analytic synthesis of the relevant evidence-based research, drawn from an extensive review of literature and a synthesis of over half a million studies (Hattie, Clinton, Thompson & Schmidt-Davies, 1995). 

In drawing from this research, Hattie (2003, pp. 2-3) asserts: “When I review the initiatives of the previous Ministries of Education up to a couple of years ago, and when I review the policies in so many New Zealand schools, I note that the focus of discussions are more about the influences of the home, and the structures of schools. We have poured more money into school buildings, school structures, we hear so much about reduced class sizparents to help manage schools and thus ignore their major responsibility to help co-educate, and we highlight student problems as if students are the problem whereas it is the role of schools to reduce these problems. Interventions at the structural, home, policy, or school level is like searching for your wallet which you lost in the bushes, under the lamppost because that is where there is light. The answer lies elsewhere – it lies in the person who gently closes the classroom door and performs the teaching act – the person who puts into place the end effects of so many policies, who interprets these policies, and who is alone with students during their 15,000 hours of schooling. 

I therefore suggest that we should focus on the greatest source of variance that can make the difference – the teacher. We need to ensure that this greatest influence is optimised to have powerful and sensationally positive effects on the learner. Teachers can and usually do have positive effects, but they must have exceptional effects. We need to direct attention at higher quality teaching, and higher expectations that students can meet appropriate challenges – and these occur once the classroom door is closed and not by reorganising which or how many students are behind those doors, by promoting different topics for these teachers to teach, or by bringing in more sticks to ensure they are following policy”.
Hattie, J.A. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Background paper to invited address presented at the 2003 ACER Research Conference, Carlton Crest Hotel, Melbourne, Australia, October 19-21, 2003. 
Hattie, J.A., Clinton, J., Thompson, M., & Schmidt-Davies, H. (1995).
Identifying highly accomplished teachers: A validation study.
Greensboro, NC: Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, University of North Carolina. 

________________________________________

Cuttance (1998, pp. 1158-1159) concluded: Recent research on the impact of schools on student learning leads to the conclusion that 8-15% of the variation in student learning outcomes lies between schools with a further amount of up to 55% of the variation in individual learning outcomes between classrooms within schools. In total, approximately 60% of the variation in the performance of students lies either between schools or between classrooms, with the remaining 40% being due to either variation associated with students themselves or to random influences. 
Cuttance, P. (1998). Quality assurance reviews as a catalyst for school improvement in Australia. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan., & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change, Part II (pp. 1135-1162). Dordrecht: Kluwer Publishers.
________________________________________

Likewise, from the related British research, Muijs and Reynolds (2001, p. vii) report: “All the evidence that has been generated in the school effectiveness research community shows that classrooms are far more important than schools in determining how children perform at school”.
Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
________________________________________

“Education productivity studies typically measure the size of the relationship between various quantifiable education factors and student achievement. Goldhaber, Brewer, and Anderson (1999), for example, investigate the contributions of school, teacher, and class characteristics on student achievement. They find only about 3 percent of the contribution teachers make toward explaining student achievement is associated with teacher experience, degree level, and other readily observable characteristics. The remaining 97 percent is made up of teacher qualities or behaviors that could not be separately isolated and identified”.
Goldhaber, D., Brewer, D.J., & Anderson, D. (1999). A three-way error components analysis of educational productivity. Education Economics 7(3), 199–208.

“A growing body of research shows that the quality of the teacher in the classroom is the most important schooling factor predicting student outcomes (see, for instance, Ferguson 1998; Goldhaber 2002; Goldhaber et al. 1999; Hanushek et al. 1999; Wright et al. 1997). The impact of having a high-quality teacher can be profound. Hanushek (1992), for instance, finds that, all else equal, a student with a very high quality teacher will achieve a learning gain of 1.5 grade level equivalents, while a student with a low-quality teacher achieves a gain of only 0.5 grade level equivalents. Thus, the quality of a teacher can make the difference of a full year’s learning growth”.

Ferguson, R. (1998). Teachers’ perceptions and expectations and the Black-White test Score gap. In C. Jencks and M. Phillips (Eds.). The Black-White Test Score Gap, pp.273–317. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching: Surveying the evidence on student achievement and teachers’ characteristics.”
Education Next, 2(1), 50–55.
Goldhaber, D., Brewer, D.J., & Anderson, D. (1999). A three-way error components analysis of educational productivity. Education Economics 7(3), 199–208.
Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy 100(1), 84–117.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (1999). Do higher salaries buy better teachers? Working Paper No. 7082. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Wright, P., Horn, S., & Sanders, W. (1997). Teachers and classroom
heterogeneity: Their effects on educational outcomes. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11(1), 57–67.
________________________________________

"Our findings for various student subgroups are consistent with previous findings that teacher quality has a larger impact on poor students than on higher income students (Coleman, 1990)". 
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Equality and achievement in education. Boulder,
Co: Westview Press.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Anthony, E. (2004). Can teacher quality be effectively assessed? Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press. Retrieved
21/3/2004 from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/410958_NBPTSOutcomes.pdf

________________________________________ 

The evidence that teaching itself can become the most important factor bearing on achievement is not new and continues to mount. In 1987, Mortimore and Sammons conducted a study of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds in England, finding that in the areas of reading and math, the school and its teachers had between six and ten times as much influence on learning as did all socioeconomic factors combined. A 1997 U.S Department of Education Study found that effective teaching accounted for as much as a 16-point difference in reading and math scores (Jordan, Mendroe, and Weerasinghe 1997). The groundbreaking value-added studies of William Sanders found that certain teachers achieve far better results than their same-school counterparts, which belies the notion that socioeconomic factors reign supreme (Archer 1999). And now we have the most recent Education Trust study (Mathews
2001) which found not hundreds, but thousands of schools that prove good teaching can in fact overcome demographic factors. Teaching matters — mightily.
Schmoker, M. (2002). The real causes of higher achievement. SEDL Letter 14(2). Within Our Reach: Higher Student Achievement.
http://www.sedl.org/pubs/sedletter/v14n02/

________________________________________

William L. Sanders, director of the Value-Added Research and Assessment Center at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, corroborates Shearon's observations. According to Sanders's analysis, "On average, the least effective teachers produce gains of about 14 percentile points among low-achieving students; the most effective teachers posted gains that averaged 53 percentile points. High-achieving students gain an average of only 2 points when taught by the least effective teachersan average of 25 points when taught by the most effective teachers.
Middle achievers gain a mere 10 points with the least effective [teachers] and in the mid-30s with the most effective."
At-risk students in classes with effective teachers for 3 years in a row achieved 50% more learning than those in classes with poor teachers (not just in reading)”

Teacher effectiveness is “the single biggest factor influencing gains in achievement,” an influence bigger than race, poverty, parent’s education, or any of the other factors that are often thought to doom children to failure”.
Sanders, W. & Rivers, J. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville, TN:
University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
________________________________________

Researchers for the Dallas Independent School District  studied the correlation between teacher effectiveness and student performance on formal assessments. They found that 
the average reading scores of students assigned to three highly
effective teachers in a row rose from the 59th percentile in fourth grade to the 76th percentile by the end of sixth grade, and students of similar ability assigned to ineffective teachers for three consecutive years fell from the 60th percentile in fourth grade to the 42nd percentile by the end of sixth grade. 
the average math scores of students assigned to three highly
effective teachers in a row rose from the 55th percentile in third grade to the 76th percentile by the end of fifth grade. The scores of students of similar ability assigned to ineffective teachers fell from the 57th percentile in third grade to the 27th percentile in fifth grade.
Students of similar ability and performance in third grade, therefore, were separated by nearly 50 percentile points just three years later. 
Starr, L. (No date). Measuring the effects of effective teaching.
Education World. http://www.education-world.com/a_issues/issues297.shtml
________________________________________

Hattie’s meta-analytic synthesis of the relevant evidence-based research drew from an extensive review of literature and a synthesis of over half a million studies. The answer lies in the person who gently closes the classroom door and performs the teaching act.
Hattie, J.A., Clinton, J., Thompson, M., & Schmidt-Davies, H. (1995).
Identifying highly accomplished teachers: A validation study.
Greensboro, NC: Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, University of North Carolina.
________________________________________

The proportions of IQ variance attributable to genes and environment vary nonlinearly with SES.
Heritability of IQ at the low end of the wealth spectrum is very low (0.10). it is quite high for families of high socioeconomic status (0.72). Genes can influence the effects of life experiences, and those life experiences can influence the manner in which those genes are expressed. In disadvantaged families, 60% of the variance in IQ is accounted for by the environment. This makes high quality teaching a much more important requirement for such students. 

Opposite scenario is more likely to be found. 
• advantaged students receive higher quality teaching than disadvantaged. 
• advantaged students among studious peers in orderly classes & learn more • teachers produce their best because not distracted and exhausted by discipline Turkheimer, E., Haley, A. Waldron, M., D'Onofrio, B., Gottesman, I.I.
(2003). Socioeconomic status modifies heritability of IQ in young children. Psychological Science, 14, 623-628.
________________________________________

See more in: Hempenstall, K. (2004). The importance of effective instruction. In N.E. Marchand-Martella, T.A. Slocum, and R.C. Martella (Eds.), Introduction to Direct Instruction (pp.1-27). Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.
________________________________________

“The results show large differences among teachers in their impacts on achievement. Our estimates, which are based on just the within school variations in teacher quality, reveal the effects of teacher quality to be substantial even ignoring any variations across schools. They indicate that having a high quality teacher throughout elementary school can substantially offset or even eliminate the disadvantage of low socio-economic background.” (p.3).
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2002). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Dallas, TX: University of Texas-Dallas Texas Schools Project.
________________________________________

“An important conclusion arises from this study: a reduction in the teacher/pupil ratio is only effective if teachers apply structured teaching practices, drawing on an explicit teaching approach. In other words, reducing the number of pupils per class without previously addressing the teaching methods implemented by teachers is not the right approach. An ineffective teacher with thirty pupils will be just as ineffective, if not more, with fifteen pupils”.
Crahay, M. (2000). L’école peut-elle être juste et efficace ? De l’égalité des chances à l’égalité des acquis. Belgique, De Boeck Université.
________________________________________

“Most successful innovations in classroom practices or school organization have positive effects on low as weIl as average and high-achieving students. A major goal of education is to bring all students to an acceptable level of achievement… Research generally finds that teacher behaviors that are successful with low achievers tend to be very similar to those successful with all students. Thus it is likely that if programs focusing on improving teachers’ general instructional skills are successful with low achievers, they will also be effective with other students” (p.16).
Slavin, R., Karweit, N., & Madden, N. (1989). Effective programs for students at risk. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
________________________________________
Some References
Ballou, Dale. 2003. “Certifying Accomplished Teachers: A Critical Look at the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.” Peabody Journal of Education 78(4): 201–19.
Ballou, D., and Podgursky, M. 1998. “The case against teacher certification.” The Public Interest no. 132, 17–29.
Bond, L., Smith, T., Baker, W., and Hattie, J. 2000. The Certification System of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards: A Construct and Consequential Validity Study. University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Center for Educational Research and Evaluation.
Card, D., and Krueger, A. B. 1996. “Labor Market Effects of School
Quality: Theory and Evidence.” Papers 357, Princeton, Department of Economics Industrial Relations Sections.
Clotfelter C. T., Ladd, H. F., and Vigdor, J. L. 2003. “Teacher sorting, teacher shopping, and the assessment of teacher effectiveness.” Paper presented at the American Association of Public Policy and Management, November 2003.
Coleman, J., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, F., and York, R. 1966. Equality of educational opportunity.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Ferguson, R. (1998). Teachers’ perceptions and expectations and the Black-White test Score gap. In C. Jencks and M. Phillips (Eds.). The Black-White Test Score Gap, pp.273–317. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Ferguson, R., and Ladd, H. 1996. “How and why money matters: An analysis of Alabama schools.” In Holding Schools Accountable, edited by Helen Ladd. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.
Finn, C. E. Jr. 2003. “High Hurdles.” Education Next 3(2): 62–67.
Finn, J., and Achilles, C. 1999. “Tennessee’s Class Size Study:
Findings, implications, misconceptions.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 21(2): 97–110.
Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching: Surveying the evidence on student achievement and teachers’ characteristics.”
Education Next, 2(1), 50–55.
Goldhaber, D. D., and Brewer, D. J. 1997. “Evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on educational performance.” In Developments in School Finance 1996, edited by J. William Fowler (197–210). Washington,
DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Goldhaber, D., Brewer, D.J., & Anderson, D. (1999). A three-way error components analysis of educational productivity. Education Economics 7(3), 199–208.
Goldhaber, D. D., and Brewer, D. J. 2000. “Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 22: 129–45.
Goldhaber, D. D., and Anthony, E. (2003). Teacher Quality and Student Achievement. New York: Teachers College, Institute for Urban and Minority Education, ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.
Goldhaber, D. D., and Cramer, L. 2003. “A descriptive analysis of the distribution of NBPTS certified teachers in North Carolina.” Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Conference on Public Policy and Analysis.
Goldhaber, D., Perry, D., and Anthony, E. 2004. National board
certification: Who applies and what factors are associated with success?
The Urban Institute, Education Policy Center, Working Paper.
Greenwald, R., Hedges, L., and Laine, R. 1996. “The effect of school resources on student achievement.” Review of Education Research 66(3):
361–96.
Hanushek, E. A. 1986. “The economics of schooling: Production and efficiency in public schools.” Journal of Economic Literature 24(3):
1141–78.
Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy 100(1), 84–117.
Hanushek, E. A. 1997. “Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19(2): 141–64. (EJ 550 073) Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (1999). Do higher salaries buy better teachers? Working Paper No. 7082. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., and Rivkin, S. G. Forthcoming. “Why public schools lose teachers.” Journal of Human Resources.
Hedges, L. V., Laine, R., and Greenwald, R. 1994. “A meta-analysis of studies of the effects of differential school inputs on student outcomes.” Educational Researcher 23(3): 5–14.
Krueger, Alan B., and Whitmore, Diane M. 2001. “The Effect of Attending a Small Class in the Early Grades on College-Test Taking and Middle School Test Results: Evidence from Project STAR.” Economic Journal 111(468): 1–28.
Latham, A. S., Gitomer, D., and Ziomek, R. 1999. “What the tests tell us about new teachers.” Educational Leadership 56(8): 23–26.
Levin, H. M, and McEwan, P. J. 2000. Cost-Effectiveness Data, 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Levinson, A. 1988. “Reexamining teacher preferences and compensating wages.” Economics of Education Review 7(3): 357–64.
Podgursky, M. 2001. “Defrocking the National Board: will the Imprimatur of ‘Board Certification’ Professionalize Teaching?” Education Matters
1(2): 79–82.
Stone, J. E. 2002. The value-added achievement gains of NBPTS-certified teachers in Tennessee: A brief report. College of Education, East Tennessee State University, 2(5).
Wilcox, D. D. 1999. “The National Board of Professional Teacher
Standards: Can it live up to its promise?” In Better Teachers, Better Schools, edited by Marci Kanstoroom and Chester E. Finn, Jr. Washington,
DC: The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Wright, P., Horn, S., & Sanders, W. (1997). Teachers and classroom
heterogeneity: Their effects on educational outcomes. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11(1), 57–67.
Schmoker, M (2002). The real causes of higher achievement. SEDLETTER, 14(2). http://www.sedl.org/pubs/sedletter/v14n02/welcome.html

dimanche 29 mai 2011

La technologie détourne les enfants de la lecture | Pascale Breton










La Presse
Les technologies modifient le comportement des jeunes vis à-vis de la lecture. C'est à 6 ou 7 ans qu'un enfant lit le plus, un intérêt qui décroît jusqu'à l'adolescence au profit des ordinateurs, des cellulaires et des consoles de jeu.
Cette situation inquiète les parents, révèle le rapport 2010 Kids&Family Reading Report, publié tous les deux ans par les Éditions Scholastic, qui se spécialisent dans les livres jeunesse. Le rapport se fonde sur un sondage mené en 2010 aux États-Unis auprès de 1045 écoliers âgés de 6 à 17 ans ainsi que leurs parents, soit 2095 répondants au total.
Plus de la moitié (56%) des parents sondés considèrent que la multiplication des appareils électroniques nuit à l'intérêt de leurs enfants pour la lecture.
Plus l'enfant est jeune, plus il a tendance à lire pour le plaisir. Les intérêts changent ensuite. Vers 12 ou 14 ans, les écoliers préfèrent nettement les jeux vidéo et les jeux d'ordinateur. À l'âge de 15 à 17 ans, ils passent beaucoup de temps à parler au cellulaire ou à envoyer des messages texte. C'est aussi à ce moment que leur intérêt pour la lecture est au plus bas. Selon le rapport, 56% des enfants de 6 à 8 ans lisent fréquemment, comparativement à seulement 24% des adolescents de 15 à 17 ans.
L'omniprésence des appareils électroniques n'a toutefois pas que des effets négatifs: le quart des élèves interrogés ont déjà lu un livre sur un support électronique, tel un ordinateur. La majorité des jeunes de 9 à 17 ans démontrent également beaucoup d'intérêt pour ce genre de lecture, principalement sur les tablettes numériques. Une minorité d'entre eux y ont toutefois accès.
«L'intérêt pour la lecture pourrait croître de façon importante avec la technologie, sauf qu'on est encore loin d'un monde où la lecture va passer par la technologie. L'école, en ce sens, a un décalage énorme par rapport au reste de la société», note Thierry Karsenti, professeur à la faculté des sciences de l'éducation de l'Université de Montréal et titulaire de la chaire de recherche du Canada sur les TIC et l'éducation. Auteur de plusieurs recherches sur la question, M. Karsenti souligne que, avec l'ordinateur, notamment avec Facebook, les jeunes lisent et écrivent, mais différemment.
Clé de la réussite
La lecture est un élément crucial lorsqu'il est question de réussite, rappelle pour sa part Nathalie Lavoie, professeure en éducation à l'Université du Québec à Rimouski, où une chaire de recherche sur la persévérance scolaire et la littératie a vu le jour cette année.
«Les recherches mettent en évidence que l'apprentissage de la lecture et de l'écriture est déterminant dans le cheminement scolaire de l'élève. Un enfant qui, à la fin de la première année du primaire, commence déjà à manifester des difficultés de lecture, généralement, verra ses difficultés perdurer durant tout son parcours scolaire. Ses difficultés vont s'aggraver et parfois entraîner des problèmes dans d'autres domaines d'apprentissage», explique Mme Lavoie.
Pour inciter les jeunes à lire, il faut miser sur le plaisir en lui offrant des modèles et un environnement propice à la lecture. «La recherche du plaisir va continuer par la suite», souligne Mme Lavoie.

jeudi 26 mai 2011

La gestion des activités éducatives des directions d'école au Québec

Impact sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire

En vue d'assurer la réussite des élèves, plusieurs acteurs dans le domaine de l'éducation insistent sur l'importance que les directions d'établissement doivent accorder à la gestion des activités éducatives. Au regard de cette insistance, le texte veut répondre à un double objectif : évaluer dans quelle mesure les directions d’écoles primaires du Québec interviennent dans la gestion des activités éducatives et voir quel en est l’impact sur des aspects du fonctionnement de l'école. Les données proviennent d’un sondage par questionnaire auquel ont répondu 138 directions et 421 enseignantes et enseignants.


Le succès de la réforme ontarienne


A video series profiling policies and practices of education systems that demonstrate high or improving performance in the PISA tests


Making sure students from all backgrounds and origins can fulfill their potential

Most Canadian high school students do well in education, independently of their socio-economic status, their first language or whether they were born in Canada or elsewhere. Provincial governments are in charge of education policy, and the province of Ontario provides a good illustration of the factors behind the educational success of the nation as a whole.

Handling the education challenges facing immigrant children is one of Canada’s social and political priorities. Its large land area, low-density population and low birth rates make immigration an important and needed economic resource. Since 2003, Ontario has deliberately targeted the development of immigrant children as part of an overall drive to raise educational standards and boost its economy.

The general social environment in Canada is favorable for educational success. Parents are supportive of their children’s schooling, and society is viewed as having collective responsibility for children’s educational welfare. PISA data on leisure reading habits suggest that Canadian school students are more likely than other children in the world to read daily for pleasure.

Canadian multiculturalism seeks to respect the importance of native cultures while incorporating immigrants into a distinctively Canadian identity, and schools see it as their duty to incorporate immigrants into the mainstream culture as rapidly as possible. The value placed on high educational achievement for immigrant children has positive spill-over effects throughout the school system.

As part of its reforms, Ontario launched a Literacy and Numeracy project to raise reading and mathematics results in elementary schools. It also launched a Student Success project to increase high school graduation rates, including a new program for high school students who were not interested in traditional academic subjects: the High Skills Major teaching practical skills that can lead to employment opportunities.

One of the biggest challenges facing Ontario in its reform strategy was to win the support of teachers. This was achieved in negotiations with teacher unions through a combination of measures such as reduced class sizes, more time made available for class preparation and the creation of a “student success” position in each school, with a drive to strengthen teachers’ professional capabilities.

lire le rapport


voir un vidéo

Enfants désobéissants: la faute à la génétique et à l'environnement












La désobéissance aux règles et les comportements d'opposition sont fréquents chez les jeunes enfants et peuvent survenir dès la première année de la vie. Chez certains enfants, cette tendance persistera et deviendra un trait de personnalité malgré les efforts déployés par leurs parents pour leur inculquer l'obéissance et le respect des règles. Pour une part d'entre eux, il s'agira d'une manifestation annonciatrice de comportements plus violents et même antisociaux.
Tout semble donc montrer qu'il y a là une combinaison de facteurs génétiques et éducatifs. C'est ce que vient de confirmer une étude longitudinale auprès de 597 paires de jumeaux qui ont été suivis de l'âge de 20 mois jusqu'à l'âge de 5 ans.
«C'est la première fois qu'une étude sur ce sujet est faite avec des jumeaux qui ont été suivis année après année», affirme Richard E. Tremblay, professeur au Département de psychologie de l'Université de Montréal. Il est codirecteur, avec Michel Boivin de l'Université Laval, de cette recherche doctorale réalisée par Amélie Petitclerc à l'Université Laval.
Les données proviennent de l'Étude longitudinale du développement des enfants du Québec et de l'Étude des jumeaux nouveau-nés du Québec. La cohorte retenue pour la recherche comportait 238 paires de jumeaux identiques (monozygotes) et 359 non identiques (dizygotes).
«En comparant les données d'observation des monozygotes avec celles des dizygotes, nous pouvons mieux estimer la contribution de la génétique et celle de l'environnement dans les comportements qu'en nous limitant à l'étude d'un seul enfant par famille», mentionne Richard E. Tremblay.
Dans ce genre de travaux, le terme «environnement» désigne l'environnement à la fois physique, culturel et biologique. La notion regroupe donc des facteurs tels les interventions parentales et autres faits vécus par l'enfant, les lieux où celui-ci est élevé, les ressources à sa disposition ainsi que sa propre biologie autre que sa génétique.


Variabilité et stabilité
Les résultats de l'étude, publiés dans le numéro de mars 2011 de Behavior Genetics, montrent que ce sont les facteurs environnementaux qui sont les principales causes des comportements de refus ou d'acceptation des règles à un âge donné, alors que la génétique explique la stabilité de ce type de comportements pendant toute la durée du développement de l'enfant.
Les chercheurs ont même réussi à chiffrer ces résultats: la génétique ne compte que pour environ 35 % dans la désobéissance observée à chacune des étapes du développement mais pour plus de 90 % dans la persistance de l'attitude au fil des années.
«Les attitudes de respect ou de mépris des règles apparaissent relativement stables sur un continuum de cinq ans et cette stabilité est due à un effet génétique fort qui fait que certains enfants sont plus obéissants et d'autres plus désobéissants. Mais la variation dans la désobéissance chez chaque enfant est pour sa part liée aux facteurs environnementaux», précise le professeur Tremblay.
Il reconnait par ailleurs que la comparaison entre jumeaux monozygotes et dizygotes ne permet de dégager que de grandes tendances des effets partagés entre la génétique et l'environnement. «Il est impossible de chiffrer de façon exacte la part de l'une et de l'autre et les résultats doivent être considérés comme des approximations, souligne-t-il. Par contre, les études portant exclusivement sur les jumeaux monozygotes sont de plus en plus utilisées; l'effet génétique étant essentiellement le même, nous pouvons dans de tels cas mieux désigner les effets environnementaux qui eux, contrairement aux gènes, sont souvent modifiables.»
La recherche d'Amélie Petitclerc ayant montré que les comportements problématiques de mépris des règles reposent sur des facteurs génétiques pouvant être transmis de génération en génération, l'équipe de chercheurs conclut par la nécessité d'intervenir de façon préventive dès la grossesse afin d'améliorer les compétences parentales et d'éviter la reproduction à la chaine de comportements perturbateurs.
Daniel Baril

lundi 23 mai 2011

Atelier JAM-1 au Colloque 2011 de l’Ordre des psychoéducateurs et psychoéducatrices du Québec Orford, les 26 et 27 mai 2011

Le soutien au comportement positif (SCP)

Steve Bissonnette, Ph.D., ps.éd., Carl Bouchard, Ph.D., professeurs, UQO et Normand St-Georges,
coordonnateur du programme SCP, Bureau des services à la jeunesse

Le SCP représente, en contexte éducatif francophone, une application du programme Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), actuellement utilisé dans plus de 13 000 écoles un peu partout aux États-Unis (Bradley,Doolittle, Lopez, Smith et Sugai, 2007). Les effets positifs  du programme PBIS, tant sur le plan comportemental qu’académique, ont été largement démontrés. Après avoir participé à l’implantation de ce programme dans les écoles franco-ontariennes de la région d’Ottawa, l’équipe de recherche a décidé d’en faire l’expérimentation dans les écoles de la CS de la Rivière-Du-Nord. Lors de cet atelier, les grandes lignes du programme PBIS/SCP seront présentées ainsi que quelques résultats de recherches obtenus dans les écoles américaines et franco-ontariennes.


Télécharger la présentation ici

vendredi 20 mai 2011

Literacy quotes - older struggling readers de Kerry Hempenstall

“For older students with LD who continue to struggle in reading, the
challenge is providing instruction that is powerful enough to narrow or
close the gap with grade-level standards in reading. This means that
students who previously have struggled to even keep pace with
expectations for average yearly growth in reading must now make
considerably more than expected yearly growth each year if they are to
catch up. While adolescence is not too late to intervene, intervention
must be commensurate with the amount and breadth of improvement students
must make to eventually participate in grade-level reading tasks.
Because most intervention studies provide only a limited amount of
instruction over a relatively short period of time, we do not yet have a
clear understanding of all the conditions that must be in place to close
the gap for older students with serious reading disabilities. However,
it does seem likely that the intensity and amounts of instruction
necessary to close the gap for many older students with LD will be
considerably beyond what is currently being provided in most middle and
high schools”.
Roberts, G., Torgesen, J.K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008)
Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with
learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 23(2),
63–69.
________________________________________
“Many older struggling readers are victims of poor early reading
instruction. They were not taught or were insufficiently taught the
basic skills necessary for fluent reading and deep processing of text.
Some of these students are able to catch up in critical reading skills
if provided with additional, sustained instruction in small, focused
instructional groups (Torgesen, 2005). Of course, the older and further
behind the student, the more ground he or she will have to cover,
impacting the intensity and duration of necessary intervention. However,
for many students in this situation, reading at grade level with good
comprehension is a reasonable goal”.
Roberts, G., Torgesen, J.K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008).
Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with
learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23,
63.
________________________________________
“Older students with reading difficulties benefit from interventions
focused both at the word level and at the text level. Identifying need
and intervening accordingly in the appropriate areas (e.g., vocabulary,
word reading, comprehension strategies, and so on) is associated with
improved outcomes for older students with reading difficulties”.
Scammacca, N., Roberts, G., Vaughn. S., Edmonds, M., Wexler, J.,
Reutebuch, C. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (2007).  Interventions for
adolescent struggling readers: A meta-analysis with implications for
practice. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on
Instruction.
http://flare.ucf.edu/Research/Interventions%20for%20Struggling%20Readers.pdf
________________________________________
“Phonological decoding made a significant unique contribution to reading
comprehension for the eighth/ninth-grade group, to spelling for the
fourth/fifth- and eighth/ninth-grade groups, and to the decoding rate
and accuracy measures for all three groups, with only three exceptions”.
Nagy, W., Berninger, V.W., & Abbott, R.D. (2006). Contributions of
morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and
middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1),
134-147.
________________________________________
“Even among experienced readers individual differences in comprehension
of text reflect efficiency of phonological processing at the word
level”.
Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L. G., & Dickinson, C. C.
(1996). Reading and spelling difficulties in high school students:
Causes and consequences. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary
Journal, 8, 267-294.
________________________________________
“In this group of higprospectively monitored since kindergarten, our findings indicate that
difficulty with phonologic awareness represents the most robust
characteristic of reading disability”.
Shaywitz, S. E., Fletcher, J. M., Holahan, J. M., Shneider, A.E.,
Marchione, K., Stuebing, K. K., Francis, D. J., Pugh K.R., Shaywitz, B.
(1999). Persistence of dyslexia: The Connecticut longitudinal study at
adolescence. Pediatrics, 104, 1351-1359.
________________________________________
“Together, these findings provide evidence that dyslexic adults are not,
as may have been assumed, unable to profit from remedial practice,"
wrote the researchers. "In fact, the same strategies that are effective
in teaching children phonological awareness skills are helpful in
adults. Further, they are accompanied by neural changes known to
underlie reading remediation of developmental dyslexia in childhood
combined with those previously observed during the rehabilitation of
adults with acquired dyslexia [due to brain damage].”
Eden, G. F., Jones, K.M., Cappell, K., Gareau, L., Wood, F.B., Zeffiro,
T.A., Dietz, N.A.E., Agnew, J.A. and Flowers, D.L. (2004).
Neurophysiological recovery and compensation after remediation in adult
developmental dyslexia, Neuron, 44, 411–422.
________________________________________
“Many (but not all) older children with severe reading disabilities
(grades 3 through 5) can significantly improve their reading skills with
intensive intervention approaches that emphasise direct remediation of
phonological processing and the systematic integration of these
phonological skills into phonics instruction, textual reading, and
reading comprehension strategies” p. 579.
Lyon, G. R., & Moats, L.C. (1997). Critical conceptual and
methodological considerations in reading intervention research. Journal
of Learning Disabilities, 30, 578-588.
________________________________________
From Kerry
 There is little doubt that the failure to establish reading skills
early leads to a cascading skill deficit that pervades all curriculum
areas eventually. Additionally, the deleterious effects on motivation
can so severe for some students as to be largely intractable. Further,
the years of employing inadequate reading strategies can produce a
strong resistance to the modifications of style necessary for progress.
The modifications themselves tend to slow the reading rate initially,
and also require markedly increased attention to graphemic detail - both
of these changes can irritate students sufficiently to preclude their
serious cooperation. A group of poor readers will almost inevitably
contain a higher than average proportion of students with "interesting"
behaviours - making teaching just that little bit more challenging. The
years of little exposure to print compared with their reading-facile
peers can leave these students with a vocabulary insufficient to cope
with the complexity of language in secondary school texts.

It is the understanding of the alphabetic principle that allows students
to decipher novel words. Using the alphabetic principle as a cipher
represents what Perfetti (1991) calls a productive process in contrast
to the very limited process of memorising words. Share (1995) sees this
phonological recoding process as critical to the development of skilled
reading, and describes it as being "... a self-teaching mechanism,
enabling the learner to acquire the detailed orthographic
representations necessary for rapid, autonomous, visual word
recognition" (p. 152). This point is also critically important in
designing effective programs for older students. Tempting as it may be
to teach whole word recognition to older struggling readers because the
phonic strategies seem so ‘babyish’, one cannot bypass the ‘sounding-out’
stage. It is a necessary step on the path to automatic whole word
recognition. It is only by practising these steps that ‘word pictures’
arise. An interesting study by Shankweiler, Lundquist, Dreyer, and
Dickinson (1996) provides evidence forproblem areas and provides an intervention focus.

"Basic skills in reading and spelling and supporting metalinguistic
abilities were assessed in ninth and tenth grade students in two school
settings. Students attending a private high school for the learning
disabled comprised one group and the other comprised low to middle range
students from a public high school. Both the LD students and the regular
high school students displayed deficiencies in spelling and in decoding,
a factor in reading difficulty that is commonly supposed to dwindle in
importance after the elementary school years. Treating the overlapping
groups as a single sample, multiple regression analysis was used to
investigate the contribution of non-word decoding skill and phonological
and morphological awareness to spelling ability. The analysis revealed
that decoding was the major component, predicting about half of the
variance in spelling. The effect of phonological awareness was largely
hidden by its high correlation with decoding, but was a significant
predictor of spelling in its own right. Morphological awareness
predicted spelling skill when the words to be spelled were
morphologically complex. An additional study showed that differences in
decoding and spelling ability were associated with differences in
comprehension after controlling for reading experience and vocabulary.
Even among experienced readers individual differences in comprehension
of text reflect efficiency of phonological processing at the word
level." (Shankweiler, Lundquist, Dreyer, & Dickinson, 1996. p.267)
Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L. G., & Dickinson, C. C.
(1996). Reading and spelling difficulties in high school students:
Causes and consequences. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary
Journal, 8, 267-294.
Perfetti, C. A. (1991). Representations and awareness in the acquisition
of reading competence. In L. Rieben, & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning
to read: Basic research and its implications, pp. 33-44. NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua
non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151-218.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences
of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading
Research Quarterly, 21, 360-406.

________________________________________
“Both Year 9 and 10 LD students and regular high school students
displayed deficiencies in spelling and in decoding, a factor in reading
difficulty that is commonly supposed to dwindle in importance after the
elementary school years. Data analysis revealed that decoding was the
major component. Differences in decoding and spelling ability were
associated with differences in comprehension after controlling for
reading experience and vocabulary. Even among experienced readers
individual differences in comprehension of text reflect efficiency of
phonological processing at the word level”.
Shankweiler, D., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L. G., & Dickinson, C. C.
(1996). Reading and spelling difficulties in high school students:
Causes and consequences. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary
Journal, 8, 267-294.
________________________________________
“Of students identified as reading disabled in Year 3, 75% will remain
so at Year 9”.
Francis, D.J., Shaywitz, S.E., Stuebing, K.K., Shaywitz, B.A., &
Fletcher, J.M. (1996). Developmental lag versus deficit models of
reading disability: A longitudinal, individual growth curves analysis.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 3-17.
Shaywitz, S. E., Escobar, M. D., Shaywitz, B. A., Fletcher, J.M., &
Makuch, R. (1992). Distribution and temporal stability of dyslexia in an
epidemiological sample of 414 children followed longitudinally. New
England Journal of Medicine, 326, 145-150.

________________________________________
Some similar findings:
“In a study of 3000 Australian students, 30% of 9 year olds still hadn’t
mastered letter sounds, arguably the most basic phonic skill. A similar
proportion of children entering high school continue to display
confusion between names and sounds. Over 72% of children entering high
school were unable to read phonetically regular 3 and 4 syllabic words.
Contrast with official figures: In 2001 the Australian public was
assured that ‘only’ about 19% of grade 3 (age 9) children failed to meet
the national standards”.
Harrison, B. (2002, April). Do we have a literacy crisis? Reading Reform
Foundation Newsletter, 48. [On-Line]. Available:
http://www.rrf.org.uk/do%20we%20have%20a%20literacy%20crisis.htm
________________________________________
“Juel (1988) found that the probability of a poor reader in first grade
remaining a poor reader at the end of fourth grade was .88. Satz,
Fletcher, Clark, and Morris (1981) found that 93.9% of severely poor
readers in second grade continued to be poor readers in fifth grade.
Scarborough (1998b) found similar results for students from second grade
to eighth grade”.
Juel, C. (1988). Learning to read & write: A longitudinal study of 54
children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 80, 437-447.
Satz, P., Fletcher, J. M., Clark, W., & Morris, R. (1981). Lag, deficit,
rate and delay constructs in specific learning disabilities: A
re-examination. In A. Ansara, N. Geschwind, A. Galaburda, M. Albert, &
N. Gartrell (Eds.), Sex differences in dyslexia (pp. 129-150). Towson,
MD: The Orton Dyslexia Society.
Scarborough, H. S. (1998b). Predicting the future achievement of second
graders with reading disabilities: Contributions of phonemic awareness,
verbal memory, rapid naming, and IQ. Annals of Dyslexia, 48, 114-136.

________________________________________
"...a longitudinal study of students with poor word identification
skills in the third grade (Felton & Wood, 1992) indicated that most of
these students failed to significantly improve their skills by the end
of eighth grade."
Felton, R. H., & Pepper, P. P. (1995). Early identification and
intervention of phonological deficit in kindergarten and early
elementary children at risk for reading disability. School Psychology
Review, 24, 405-414.

________________________________________
“If reading assistance fails to exert a significant impact on the
reading performance of low-achieving older readers one reason is that
the instruction provided is not sufficiently intense.”
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000).
National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. [On-Line]. Available:
http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org.
________________________________________
“We found that extended practice was particularly important toward
increasing the magnitude of treatment outcomes”.
Swanson, H.L. (2001). Research on interventions for adolescents with
learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of outcomes related to
higher-order processing. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 331-348.
________________________________________
“This much is certain: for students identified as having LD, wide
reading or repeated reading by itself should never substitute for
systematic, explicit instruction in word study and comprehension
strategy use. Indeed, fluency instruction and practice may be most
effective when combined with instruction on word-level reading skills
and comprehension (Edmonds et al., in press). The idea is that improved
fluency unleashes cognitive resources while comprehension strategy
instruction provides the older readers with guidance on the use of these
newly available resources (Willingham, 2006)”.
Roberts, G., Torgesen, J.K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008)
Evidence-based strategies for reading instruction of older students with
learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 23(2),
63–69.
________________________________________
From Kerry Hempenstall:
Can intervention be successful, given the circumstances militating
against effectiveness when reading issues are addresses at a late stage?
There is not a great deal of published empirical evidence at this level.
In the RMIT Psychology CliniCorrective Reading very successfully. It is one of the 3 approaches
(Direct Instruction) supported in "An Educators' Guide to School-wide
Reform". The 141-page report from American Institutes for Research,
found that only the programs Direct Instruction, High Schools That Work,
and Success for All had adequate evidence for effectiveness in reading
instruction. Commissioned by five education groups-including the
National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers.
See the report at www.aasa.org/Reform/index.htm

In the Clinic, we have trained teachers, aides and parents to implement
the programs, which have the advantage of being self-contained - thus
there is no requirement that the person presenting the program be a
reading teacher. Program fidelity is very important - in the Clinic we
provide some initial training, monitor the presenters during the
program, and ensure all mastery tests are completed. Given these
caveats, the Corrective Reading program is measurably and noticeably
effective in most circumstances, whether presented by teachers in groups
(up to 15) or by parents or aides individually. There is no quick fix
however - gains, in my experience are of the order of 18 months in the 3
months or so it optimally takes to complete 65 lessons. An 18 month gain
in a Year 7 student formerly reading at Grade 3 is impressive, but
insufficient to presume the student can subsequently progress unaided.
The programs are sequential, so given the commitment, continues progress
will occur as more advanced levels are introduced. The effects do not
appear to be transient nor related to novelty.

In the numerous evaluations I have completed over many years, I have
noted that gains are generally maintained and progress continues while
programs are in operation. In my doctoral thesis which involved
providing one level of the CRP to 134 mid to upper primary school
students, and comparing the outcome with 72 waitlist students, a very
large effect size of 1.34 on Word Attack (Woodcock) was noted for the
experimental group and an effect size of only 0.15 for the
non-intervention group. A few students who continued with a subsequent
level of the program achieved a similarly large effect size of 1.63 from
the end of the first to the conclusion of the second level.

Hempenstall, K. (1997). The effects on the phonological processing
skills of disabled readers of participating in Direct Instruction
reading programs. Australian Digital Theses Program, RMIT University
Library. Retrieved September 5, 2005, from
http://adt.lib.rmit.edu.au/adt/uploads/approved/adt-VIT20050628.114735/public/02whole.pdf
________________________________________

jeudi 19 mai 2011

Direct Instruction: The Launch For Efficient Learning in a Differentiated, Multi-Dimensional Context Nancy Maynes Nipissing University, Schulich School of Education

Enseignement explicite de l'écriture au primaire

Modeling in the Classroom: What Approaches are Effective to Improve Students' Writing?

Abstract 
Effective writing is a learned skill, required to advance many forms of learning both in classroom contexts, and in job and career contexts.  Previous research (Graham & Perin, 2007) has identified many strategies that promote improvements in students’ writing through a meta-analysis of research studies and previous meta-analyses.  Other authors and researchers identify approaches to effective teaching (DeRiddler, 2002; Englemann, Becker, Carmine & Gersten, 1988; McLaughlin, Gregory, Weber, & Stookey, 2005; Rosenshine, 1997; Stahl & Nagy, 2006; Waldrep, 2005).  This study uses 10 of the 11 high impact writing strategies identified by previous writing research, as well as more general approaches to effective instruction, to examine the gain scores in three forms of writing by 81 students in Grades 3 to 6 classes to determine the combined effects of high impact approaches to writing on students’ ability to write definitions (concept clarification), compare, and write in argumentative formats