Research ED 2013

[Anna]

Hi all, I hope everyone is enjoying the half-term break, despite the soggy weather!

I have just booked a ticket for this conference on evidence-based education. It's on Saturday 7th September at Dulwich College in London.

The website for the event is: http://www.researched2013.co.uk
The website says that tickets are not yet available but they now are. You can book at: http://www.researched2013.eventbrite.co.uk

Tickets are very reasonably priced. Speakers already lined up include Daniel Willingham, Ben Goldacre, Daisy Christodoulou and several of my favourite education bloggers. It would be great if other RRFers come too. I also thought that it would be excellent if we could contribute a speaker on synthetic phonics, especially as I think the Speakers are currently rather biased towards Secondary education.

[geraldinecarter]

Thanks, Anna. It should be a great day. Willingham will be appearing via video link. Amanda Spielman is one of the speakers - perhaps she will include SP in her talk - but I imagine that it's such a full programme it's unlikely that there is room for any more. What incredible power Twitter has to get this organised in just a few days.

[Anna]

Hi Geraldine,
I read that they were still looking for speakers but I'm not sure how up to date that was. There is always next year.

Apparently a third of the tickets have sold already so anyone wanting one needs to book quickly. There will be online streaming as well.

[Derrie Clark]

Thanks Anna. Have booked our tickets!

[Debbie Hepplewhite]

Dr Kevan Collins, Chief Executive of the Education Endowment Foundation.

One of the speakers!

[JIM CURRAN]

“I read that they were still looking for speakers but I'm not sure how up to date that was.”

The Synthetic Phonics lobby has an abundance of gifted and passionate advocates.

[geraldinecarter]

Possibly what would make the biggest difference is for someone with Prof. Dorothy Bishop's expertise to speak on lack of evidence for dyslexia special 'treatments'. See her Deevybee post:
deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/neuroscientific-interventions-for.html …

Nearly everyone there will be from the secondary sector and those attending any specific SP talk would most likely be SP people anyway. Also, if someone with a distinguished science background could expose the dyslexia myths the press would be much more likely to take note.

There's a good pub 1/2 mile from the College - would be nice if we could all gather there (it would be nice to put a 'face' to you - Derry).

[Anna]

That's great, Derrie. I'm looking forward to meeting you.

[Derrie Clark]

Well you know Angelina Jolie .... unfortunately I look nothing like her! But am looking forward to meeting up with you both Geraldine and Anna.

[Susan Godsland]

http://debrakidd.wordpress.com/2013/09/ ... ched-2013/

Debra Kidd attended Laura McInerney's talk at the conference. She reported that:

One of the questions Laura asked was ‘what would be the most effective way to teach a dyslexic child to memorise the spellings of 1000 words?’ Immediately my mind kicked into unhelpful critical mode. ‘What if’, I thought, ‘the answer involved electric shock therapy’? ‘What if it involved removing the child for a period of ‘intervention’ away from peers or other subjects he/she loved’? ‘What if they felt forced and labelled’? ‘What if we simplified our spelling system instead’? ‘What if we just accepted that dyslexic people are dyslexic and bring other great benefits to our society in addition to their poor spelling?’. What if…

[kenm]

http://debrakidd.wordpress.com/2013/09/ ... ched-2013/

This report frustrated me. Lack of immediate recall of the meaning of her undefined abbreviations slowed me down; I found ITT and CPD in the RRF abbreviations list, but had to consult Wikipedia to choose Randomised Controlled Trials as the most plausible expansion of the 18 for RCT. I could appreciate the tones of approval and disapproval without being able to find any constructive proposals within it.

Ben Goldacre is a doctor and of course, as a doctor, he needs to know ‘what works’. As Frank Furedi said, if I am ill, I am quite keen to know that the medicine I am given will cure me. But children are not an illness.

This suggests that medical doctors treat illnesses without considering the other characteristics of the patient. This is, indeed, a criticism levelled against Western medicine, and contrasted with the Chinese approach. I can see a parallel between a person with an illness and a student with a sub-optimum technique and I see no reason why the same sorts of research methods should not be used to determine the effectiveness of possible remedies. Gaps in a student's knowledge or crucial misunderstandings are rather different.

He [Ben Goldacre] argued that education needed an ‘information architecture’ in order for researchers and educators to work more closely together and he recommended the setting up of journal clubs, as is common in the medical profession

From Wikipedia:
"Information architecture (IA) is the art and science of organizing and labeling data including: websites, intranets, online communities, software, books and other mediums of information, to develop usability and structural aesthetics. It is an emerging discipline and community of practice focused on bringing together principles of design and architecture, primarily to the digital landscape. Typically, it involves a model or concept of information which is used and applied to activities that require explicit details of complex information systems. These activities include library systems and database development."

[Susan Godsland]

Prof. of Sociology, Frank Furedi, brought up the subject of phonics in his talk, which had the title, ''Why evidence-based teaching methods are a bad idea''

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/ar ... i2-Hn-5rpV

As many educators understand, what works for some teachers may not work for others. For example, some research has conclusively demonstrated that teaching reading through phonemic awareness is the most effective form of instruction; other researchers insist that actually phonics is the best way of teaching. The reality is that teaching reading through phonemic awareness works for some, while phonics works for others. This seems to be a secret to the Department of Education, which is splashing out money on research into the work of effective teachers, in the hope that RCTs might help to reproduce these teachers’ effectiveness in other classrooms.

Hmmm...
Back in 2005, Frank had an article in the Telegraph which outlined his views on teaching reading and synthetic phonics -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/33 ... ature.html
Note the 1st paragraph:

This year the Commons education committee noted that one in six 11-year-olds fail to reach the expected levels in reading and concluded that this is "unacceptably high".

and his conclusion in the last paragraph:

She rightly believes that we need less emphasis on developing reading skills and more on appreciating literature. Cultivating an appreciation for literature will inevitably improve reading skills..

[Derrie Clark]

The reality is that teaching reading through phonemic awareness works for some, while phonics works for others.

What?? Oh dear ... and oh dear.

[maizie]

I am curious to know why a professor of Sociology should be thought to have any expertise in the teaching of reading? His comments sound like a variation on the usual 'children learn in different ways' mantra. Usually chanted by a 'layperson' or an anti-phon.

[Derrie Clark]

His comments sound like a variation on the usual 'children learn in different ways' mantra.

Usually of the osmosis kind.