The East Asian Modernization Model: Whither Education? Whither Education Research?

Professor David HoganDean, Office of Education

Research National Institute of EducationSingapore

1. Metaphysical Certainties: The East Asian Modernization Model

1.1. Metaphysical Certainties: The Asian Education Modernization Model

The Singapore East Asian Education Modernization Model maps out a broad strategy of nation building based on the following sets of claims:

• Economic thesis• Meritocratic thesis• Pedagogical Thesis• Cultural thesis• Organizational thesis• Nationhood thesis

Each of these theses under pressure, and have been so for some time, producing no little anxiety and, in time, a range of remedies…

3

East Asian Modernization Model -1

1. Economic growth dependent on high levels of educational attainment

Economic growth, social mobility and political legitimacy dependent on high skills/high value / high wages economic algorithm

High skills / high value dependent on human capital formation (Becker: “the age of human capital”)

Human capital formation dependent on rapid increase in educational participation and achievement Primary education in the 1960s: labor force for initial industrialization Secondary education by mid 1980s: labor force for high value manufacturing

East Asian Modernization Model-2

2. High levels of student performance/attainment are dependent on

2.1. Reliance on traditional (and direct) instruction rather than “child centered” or “constructivist” instruction… repetition and memorization lead to understanding Well organized, teacher dominated, clear, focused lessons

2.2. A traditional [Confucian] classroom moral economy based on Hard work and effort attributions of academic success, rather than ability

attributions High levels of extrinsic motivation, engagement and student compliance Favorable “pedagogical exchange”: effort and compliance in exchange for

grades, promotion, credentials, good jobs, good income and social mobility

2. High levels of student performance/attainment are dependent on… 2.3. A differentiated system of student grouping based on academic

performance in high stakes summative assessments and streaming in primary and secondary schools

Permits differentiated instruction and maximizes pedagogical efficiency

Reduces drop out / non-participation rates. Increases institutional efficiency by reducing “wastage”

Permits selection of meritocratic elite critical to larger nation building project

East Asian Modernization Model -3

East Asian Modernization Model -4

2. Metaphysical Anxieties: The Exhaustion of the Asian Modernization

Model, 1995--

1. Changing Human Capital Requirements: KBE & the Organization of Work

Recent reports on contemporary workplaces in Knowledge Based Economies (KBEs) generally find that they are characterized by a new technical and social organization of work and by demands for new kinds of cognitive, communication and social skills

9

Technical organization of work

A new technical organization of work, characterized by… Significantly greater cognitive complexity Expanded information processing and knowledge requirements Cross-functional, transdisciplinary, interactive tasks environments and

project work High levels of tacit and uncodified knowledge

Generating a demand for new kinds of cognitive and communication skills Analytical problem solving Knowledge application Generation of new knowledge Understanding complex multi-level functional relationships and system

10

Social organization of work

A new social organization of work characterized by Greater autonomy Flatter hierarchies More team work More intensive interaction Shared decision making More risk taking More extensive oral and written communication

Generating demand for new kinds of social understanding and skills A sense of agency Interpersonal problem solving Independence Collaboration Trust Adaptability

11

While Singapore does well on TIMSS, concerns about EA PISA results

• Narrower E-W gap than TIMSS

• Western students do better on more open ended tasks

• Singapore partaking in PISA in 2009: How well will it do?

TIMSS assessments don’t measure 21st century skills or the kinds of skills and dispositions needed for successful management of work in KBE worksites

Very narrow measurement band: Almost no measurement of broader institutional and existential capacities that are important for successful management of 21st century institutional environments, eg meta-cognition, deep processing of information, multi-literacies etc

Ignores findings from “revisionist” human capital theory research, especially importance of non-cognitive skills and attributes to productivity growth and life time income streams

2. Achievement Anxieties

Anxiety that Singapore schools too focused on development of 20th C skills and knowledge rather than 21st century knowledge and skills…

Anxiety that the intellectual quality of knowledge work in Singaporean classrooms are suboptimal with respect to development of 21st century skills?

Anxiety that too much surface processing of information rather than

deep processing

Anxiety about the limited integration of technology into classroom pedagogy reflecting teacher judgments that new technologies are broadly inefficient with respect to the achievement of conventional assessment driven classroom objectives

3. Instruction & Cognition Anxieties

4. Innovation Anxieties

Anxiety that the close alignment of instructional practices with high stakes assessments has constrained the opportunity for pedagogical innovation

Anxiety that teachers lack the necessary capacities for high quality teaching

Anxiety that the dominant instructional pattern in Singapore (as elsewhere) are highly intractable and resistant to change

• Motivation Crisis

ability/deficit discourses of student achievement rather than traditional “East Asian” discourse of hard work / effort

Declining levels of student compliance and engagement

Anxiety that Singapore system encourages a heavy reliance on extrinsic motivation and instrumental outcomes and that this leaves students renders the dominant pedagogical exchange vulnerable to a decline in its exogenous terms of trade (declining rates of return to educational investments, declining social mobility rates)

5. Culture Trouble: Decline of East Asian moral economy?

Culture Trouble/Moral Panic – cont’d

Values Crisis

• Anxiety about the creeping infiltration of Western, modernist and postmodern values and identity projects into the classroom, displacing traditional Confucian/East Asian values and identity projects.

• In short, pervasive moral anxiety that modernization and globalization resulting in the “Westernization” of classroom, that Western values invading and colonizing Confucian sanctuary or “museums of virtue”. Yet Singapore strongly committed, since the early 1990s, to becoming a global city

Culture Trouble/Moral Panic – cont’d

Crisis of Meaning

• Anxiety about the limited focus on meaning-making in Singaporean classrooms in favor of content coverage and exam preparation.

• Anxiety that classrooms all too often constructed as manufactories of drill and practice and/or competitive marketplaces rather than communities of learners engaged in distributed forms of knowledge building

Values Crisis

• Anxiety about the creeping infiltration of Western, modernist and postmodern values and identity projects into the classroom, displacing traditional Confucian/East Asian values and identity projects.

• In short, pervasive moral anxiety that modernization and globalization resulting in the “Westernization” of classroom, that Western values invading and colonizing Confucian sanctuary or “museums of virtue”. Yet Singapore strongly committed, since the early 1990s, to becoming a global city

6. Organizational Anxieties

7. Nationhood: A state but not a nation?

Fundamental ontological anxiety that Singapore born a state but not a nation.

Achievement of a sense of nationhood profoundly fragile and precarious Very young society Complex multi-racial society Government support for maintaining traditional racial identities and

traditions Reliance on two discourses to create a national narrative

Singapore success story Danger

Anxiety about the tension between Singapore’s global city project and its national identity/nationhood project: How can these be reconciled?

Tension between materialism and individualism, on the one hand, and sense of national belonging and attachment, on the other.

Substantial and growing inequalities of educational achievement, in TIMSS and in national high stakes assessments, principally along social class lines, secondarily along racial lines

Critical importance of “compositional effects” at classroom and school level: what family you come from matters, but who you go to class or school with matters even more

Increasing fear of institutionalized forms of social reproduction of inequality…

education mediates social stratification

but social stratification increasingly mediates achievement?

specter of a tight coupling of race and class with strong racial component.

8. Social Inequality Anxieties

3. Metaphysical Remedies: The Remaking of the Asian Modernization

Model, 1997--

3.1. Policy Settings

3.2. Education Research

3.1. Policy Settings

• Thing Schools Learning Nation (TSLN) (1997)• Innovation & Enterprise (I&E)• ITC Master Plan (ITC-MP)• National Education (NE)• Teach Less and Learn More (TLLM) (2005)• [Leveling Up] (2007) • CRPP (2003)

23

24

Thinking Schools, Learning Nation, 1997

“We will bring about a mindset change among Singaporeans. We must get

away from the idea that it is only the people at the top who should be

thinking, and the job of everyone else is to do as told. Instead we want to

bring about a spirit of innovation, of learning by doing, of everyone each at his

own level all the time asking how he can do his job better...” (Italics added).

Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, Speech at the Opening of the 7th International

Conference on Thinking in 1997, para. 31.

Teach Less, Learn More, 2005

Instructional Practices• Focus on “quality,” not “quantity,” of instruction

• Greater focus on “quality of interaction” between teachers and students• Less “telling” and more “talking”• Less drill and practice, more inquiry based learning strategies

• More formative assessment and differentiated instruction, not one size fits all• Better integration of technology and pedagogy• Less “academic”/more practical/”hands on” curriculum for low achieving

students• Stronger curricula focus on national education and moral development: key

desired outcomes of schooling

Moral Economy/ Classroom Culture• Try to promote intrinsic interest in learning: “Passion for learning” (“Ignite”)• Recognize a multiplicity of “talents” rather than a singularity of “merit”• Weaken ability attributions at the classroom level 25

Teach Less, Learn More: Towards a New EAMM

Organizational Changes• Flexible pathways: substantial weakening of the streaming system without

formally abolishing it.

Instructional Governance and Implementation Strategy• Devolution of pedagogical authority to schools – partial decoupling of schools

and centre (but to individual teachers rather than collectively?)• “Top down support for bottom up initiatives”• School based curriculum development --“White space” (no school based

assessment … yet!)• increase innovation at the school and classroom level by supporting action

research / classroom inquiry. Research activists in every school by 2010.• Establishment of CRPP in 2003 to support evidence based policy and practice

with a grant of SGD $49m (HKD $200m)

26

3.2. Supporting Research on Classroom Pedagogy:

CRPP 2003-2008

27

28

CRPPCRPP established in 2003 with five key objectives:

1. to describe & measure patterns of classroom pedagogy in Singaporean schools

2. to measure the impact of pedagogical practices on student outcomes controlling for student characteristics

3. to design technologically enriched learning environments & support their integration into classroom pedagogy

4. to identify opportunities for the improvement of pedagogical practice through a carefully designed & evidence-based intervention strategy

5. to support evidence-based policy formulation and instructional practice to meet the challenges of 21st century institutional environments

Panels Sample Key Focus

Panel 1 Entire school population from 1993-2002+ (500,000 students pa)

Modelling impact of SES, race and MT on student achievement as measured by high stakes national assessments in Grade 4, 6, 10, 12

Panel 2 Sample (n=19,000) of all P5 and S3 students in 80 schools (40 P, 40 S)

Linked to Panels 1, 3, 4 and 5.

Sample of teachers (n=4000) in same P and S schools across all subjects.

Students: Describing patterns of pedagogical practice and modelling impact of pedagogy on student achievement (E, M)

Teachers: mapping pedagogical capacities and teaching practices. Also school climate and leadership.

Panel 3 2004: Sample of 500+ lessons in Math, English, Science, Social Studies, Chinese, Malay and Tamil in 36 schools. Sub sample Panel 2 sample.

2005: Sample of 420 lessons in 20 schools with special focus on MT, NT and Special Stream

Linked to Panels 1, 2, 4 and 5.

Pedagogical practices (level, subject, stream).

29

Core Panel Design

Panels Sample Key Focus

Panel 4 Audio-taping and video-taping of lessons drawn from cluster sample of Panel 3 sample. Transcription and electronic coding and tagging of 600+ lessons

Linked to Panels 1, 2, 3 and 5.

Classroom talk, social interaction and knowledge construction.

Panel 5 Same sample of 36+23 schools as in Panel 3.

Linked to Panels 1, 2, 3 and 4

Teacher assessment tasks and student artefacts (class-work, homework, project work).

Panel 6 Sample of students (n=28,000) in 80 schools (40 P, 40 S) in grades P4 and S1 plus 30 post secondary institutions (JCEs, Polys, ITEs) in PS1

Longitudinal measures of life (incl. schl) experiences, patterns of social participation and attainment (academic, economic, social, civic), SWB and life goals, choices and pathways

30

Organization of CRPP Research Program

31

Core Research Program(2004-07)

6 Panels

Specific Focus Projects (2004-06)

90+ Projects

EB Intervention Program(2006-08)

20 projects

CONCEPTUAL MODEL CONCEPTUAL MODEL

OF CRRP RESEARCH OF CRRP RESEARCH

PROGRAM 2003-2008PROGRAM 2003-2008

32

INSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENTENVIRONMENTINSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENTENVIRONMENT

PEDAGOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICESPRACTICES

PEDAGOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL INTERVENTIONSINTERVENTIONS

CLASSROOM CLASSROOM INTERACTIONSINTERACTIONS

MORAL ECONOMY MORAL ECONOMY OF THE CLASSROOMOF THE CLASSROOM

STUDENT STUDENT OUTCOMESOUTCOMES

LIFE GOALS, LIFE GOALS, CHOICES AND CHOICES AND

PATHWAYSPATHWAYS

ORGANIZATION OF ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOLINGSCHOOLING

ORGANIZATION OF ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOLINGSCHOOLING

So – what did we find out?

Student Achievement Levels

Is there evidence of an achievement crisis?

Do Singapore Students Outperform Western Students?

Yes: TIMSS and in Mathematics and Science.

Not participated in PISA...

The gap between Singapore and the West will likely be smaller on PISSA than it is on TIMSS, just as it is for other East Asian countries.

Singapore students will vary in how well they perform across different kinds of tasks, as East Asian and Western students have in both TIMSS and PISSA. Indeed, it’s possible that Western students will do slightly better than Singaporean students in on some kinds of creative, non-routine open-ended questions (Cai 1997, 1998, 2000; Leung, 2006, pp. 21-50; Wu, 2006, 2008; Wang and Lin 2005; Tatusoko 2005).

TIMSS Results 2003, Mathematics, Grade 4 and 8

Grade 4 Average Score Grade 8 Average Score

Country Rank TIMSS2003

Country Rank TIMSS2003

Singapore 1 594 Singapore 1 605

Hong Kong SAR

2 575 Korea 2 589

Japan 3 565 Hong Kong SAR

3 586

Chinese Taipei

4 564 Chinese Taipei 4 585

Belgium-Flemish

5 551 Japan 5 570

InternationalAverage

- 495 International Average

- 467

36

Source: http://timss.bc.edu/timss2003i/mathD.htmlSource: http://timss.bc.edu/timss2003i/mathD.html

Student Motivation

Is there evidence of a motivational crisis?

Culture trouble?

Legitimation Crisis?

School Level Differences in Motivation & Engagement

P5Maths(1-5)

S3 Maths(1-5)

P5English

(1-5)

S3English

(1-5)

Motivation

Efficacy 3.94 3.74 3.90 3.77

Task goal 3.96 3.55 3.89 3.55

Work avoidance goal 2.09 2.57 2.07 2.56

Interest 3.96 3.44 3.96 3.53

Classroom engagement

Individual engagement 4.23 3.81 4.17 3.85

Group engagement 3.96 3.66 3.98 3.78

Note. All variables are measured on a 1-5 Likert scale

Student Compliance by Level/Subject

39

What Makes Education Valuable? Most Important Value Primary

4%

Secondary 1%

Post Secondary

1%

Getting a high paying job 14.3% 28.8 32.6

Doing well in exams 41.1% 22.8 11.1

Contributing to your community 3.1% 3.8 3.4

Learning information about the future

3.3% 3.6 6.7

Learning new things 11.3% 13.8 18.8

Learning about yourself 1.1% 2.7 -

Understanding your life experiences

- - 20.7

Learning about nature 1.7% 1.0 0.7

Spending time with friends 3.5% 3.2 4.6

Learning to be a cultured person

.8% 2.2 -

Being a person with good character

9.2% 14.4 -

Being a good citizen 8.4% 3.3 -

Getting out of school as soon as possible

- - 1.6

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

41

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Per

cen

tag

e

p4

p5

s1

s2

Value of Education

Student Values…

43

Singapore Post Secondary Students: What Do They Value?

Life Aspirations: Post Secondary Students (n=8700) Mean(1-5)

SD

To take care of your parents 4.51 0.68

To be a good parent 4.41 0.84

To respect myself 4.41 0.74

To get a University Degree 4.33 0.77

To have a sense of meaning and purpose in life 4.32 0.77

Having work that really interests me 4.28 0.77

To have a sense of achievement 4.26 0.74

To make my own choices 4.22 0.72

To figure out who I am 4.21 0.79

Having work that suits my skills and abilities 4.06 0.83

To set my own goals 4.06 0.81

To live close to my parents 3.94 0.95

To have lots of friends 3.87 0.91

44

Mean(1-5)

SD

Having high job security 3.86 0.87

To get married 3.77 1.05

Having work that allows you to learn new skills 3.72 0.94

Having work that provides opportunities for promotion 3.71 0.90

To spend lots of time with my friends 3.66 0.89

To have children 3.65 1.09

To live in Singapore 3.60 1.05

To practice my religious faith better 3.36 1.24

To buy big ticket items (e.g., car, house) 3.31 0.99

To vote in governmental elections 3.28 1.09

Having work that really challenges you 3.28 0.91

To take part in my cultural traditions and ceremonies 3.23 1.03

To buy high-tech products (e.g., latest hand-phone, MP3 player)

3.040.95

To get a university education overseas 3.03 1.05

45

Mean(1-5)

SD

To live and work overseas 2.89 0.98

To travel to countries in Europe or America etc 2.87 1.08

To live by yourself 2.79 1.17

Having work that doesn't give you lots of responsibility 2.77 0.95

To buy branded clothes 2.57 0.96

To eat at expensive restaurants 2.30 0.93

Existential Aspirations _PS1

Factor Loading

Mean(1-5)

SD

To have a sense of meaning & purpose in life .827 4.32 .77

To have a sense of achievement .821 4.26 .74

To figure out who I am .812 4.21 .79

To make my own choices .794 4.22 .72

To respect myself .763 4.41 .74

To set my own goals .705 4.06 .83

Existential Aspirations Scale (alpha =.911) EV=5.59 4.25 .63

Average correlation.62

Human Capital Formation

1. How well prepared are young people for 21st century institutional environments?

2. Is there a human capital formation crisis?

3. How efficiently does cognitive achievement signal KBE knowledge, skills and dispositions

New Economy Competencies

48 48

Interpersonal skills

Interpersonal Problem-Solving Skills

Group Engagement (in class)

Team Work Social & Leadership Skills

Innovation Dispositions

Orientation to Risk-Taking

Adaptability

Problem Solving / Self Efficacy

Orientation to Decision Making

Work-related Skills

Orientation to Project Work

Generic Agentic Skills

Orientation to Competition Orientation to Learning

Knowledge Management

Skills

Multi-literacy Skills Interdisciplinary Work Skills Information Management Skills

Self-Regulation

Time Management Individual Engagement (in class) Effort Regulation

50

NEW ECONOMY COMPETENCIES(Secondary 2)

Cronbach’s Alpha

Means(1-6)

SD

Multi-literacy Skills Scale (4 items) 0.73 4.06 .87

Interdisciplinary Work Skills Scale (3 items) 0.84 4.17 .83

Information Management Scale (5 items) 0.85 4.51 .84

Risk Taking Scale (5 items) 0.85 4.55 .83

Adaptability Scale (6 items) 0.86 4.26 .82

Self Efficacy Beliefs (Problem-Solving) Scale (6) 0.85 4.18 .80

Engagement in Individual Work Scale (4 items) 0.90 4.29 .97

Effort Regulation Scale (reversed) (5 items) 0.88 4.22 1.10

Time Management Scale (3 items) 0.81 3.96 1.12

Coping Skills Scale (3 items) 0.77 3.39 1.21

Interpersonal  Problem-Solving Skills Scale (5) 0.82 4.18 1.00

Locus of Control (External) Scale (6) (reversed) 0.80 4.32 1.00

Confidence / Outcome Expectancies Scale (7) 0.89 4.40 .86

Agentic Self Concept Scale (5 items) 0.79 4.22 .90

Locus of Control (Internal) Scale (5 items) 0.82 5.00 .79

51

Correlation: Measures of Human Capital Formation

Agentic Dispositions

Effective Communicat’

n

Self Regulat’n

Knowledge Managem’t

UNSW Math

UNSW English

Agentic Disposit’ns .398*** .505*** .659*** .042 .093***

Effective Communic-ation

.254*** .339*** .066* .082**

Selfregulation .522*** .062* .080**

Knowledge Managment .066* .123***

52

New Economy Competencies

Correlations UNSW English UNSW Math

Work-related Skills

Orientation to Learning .16** .06

Orientation to Project Work .07 -.02

Generic agentic skills .09** .08**

Orientation to Competition .06 .04

Self Regulation

Individual Engagement .10** .11**

Persistence .16** .15**

Time Management .03 -.02

Knowledge Management Skills

Multi-literacy skills .19** .07

Interdisciplinary skills .21** .07**

Information Management .17** .06

Does this indicate a labor market “market failure”?

Productive Efficiency & Allocative Efficiency

Metacognition (Reflexivity)

How well prepared are young people for 21st century institutional environments?

Meta-cognition and Self Regulation

P5 Math

P5 English

S3 Math

S3 English

Mean(1-5)

Mean(1-5)

Mean(1-5)

Mean(1-5)

N 2182 2293 2083 1937

MSLQ 3.93 3.61 - -Rehearsal - - 3.33 3.00Elaboration - - 3.07 3.19Organization - - 3.20 2.76Critical Thinking - - 3.26 3.11Meta-cognitive self-regulation - - 3.37 3.09Time and study environment - - 3.61 3.58Effort regulation 3.95 4.04 3.30 3.44Test taking strategies 4.00 3.97 3.63 3.71Time management 3.73 3.69 3.29 3.35

Note: 1 = very little; 2 = little; 3 = moderate; 4 = large; 5 = very large

Classroom Pedagogy

1. What is the intellectual quality of classroom pedagogy in Singapore?

2. Is it appropriate for 21st institutional environments?

Three Pedagogies: Mean Scores / SD

Secondary 3 Secondary 3 MathematicsMathematics

Secondary 3 Secondary 3 EnglishEnglish

MeanMean（（ 1-51-5 ））

SDSD MeanMean（（ 1-51-5 ））

SDSD ώ2

Direct Instruction

3.79 .79 3.71 .74 -.004

Traditional teaching

3.69 .64 3.38 .67 .355

Authentic pedagogy

2.96 .78 3.16 .73 .037

Omega Sq scale (ώ2) <.01 – Insignificant ; .011 to .06 – Small to moderate; .061 to .16 – Moderate to Large

>.16 – Large; ≥.03 threshold value57

Three Pedagogies: Secondary 3 Mathematics and English(Student Survey)

S3 Math(1-5)

S3 English

(1-5)F-ratio p ώ2

N (number of students) 4,690 4,547

Direct Teaching (a=.92, .91) 3.79 3.76 .05 .82 -.004

Maximizing Learning Time 4.02 4.05 .21 .65 -.003

Review 3.74 3.54 10.99 <.01 .039

Questioning 3.44 3.49 .73 .39 -.001

Structure and Clarity 3.73 3.73 .00 .98 -.004

Feedback 3.65 3.72 1.67 .20 .003

1. Direct Teaching

Omega Sq scale (ώ2) <.01 – Insignificant ; .011 to .06 – Small to moderate; .061 to .16 – Moderate to Large

>.16 – Large; ≥.03 threshold value 58

Three Pedagogies: Secondary 3 Mathematics and English(Student Survey)

2. Traditional Teaching

S3 Math(1-5)

S3 English

(1-5)F-ratio p ώ2

Traditional Teaching (a=.76, .75) 3.69 3.38 136.55 <.01 .355

Frequency of Homework 4.33 3.76 50.03 <.01 .166

Memorization 4.03 3.21 257.79 <.01 .511

Drill and Worksheets 3.84 3.48 69.24 <.01 .217

Lecture 3.61 3.78 10.80 <.01 .038

Textbook Focus 3.61 2.91 105.82 <.01 .299

Frequency of Exams 2.40 2.14 28.29 <.01 .100Omega Sq scale (ώ2) <.01 – Insignificant

.011 to .06 – Small to moderate.061 to .16 – Moderate to Large

>.16 – Large ≥.03 threshold value 59

Three Pedagogies: Secondary 3 Mathematics and English(Student Survey)… continued

3. Authentic Pedagogy

S3 Math(1-5)

S3 English

(1-5)F-ratio p ώ2

Authentic Pedagogy (a=.89, .90) 2.96 3.16 10.39 <.01 .037

Depth of Understanding 3.38 3.32 1.70 .19 .003

Quality of Homework 3.34 3.19 10.98 <.01 .039

Classroom Discussion 3.26 3.48 14.70 <.01 .053

Meta-language 3.11 3.23 4.35 <.05 .013

Criticality and Creativity 3.11 3.20 2.87 .09 .008

Integration of Knowledge across Disciplines 2.99 3.15 10.23 <.01 .036

Connectedness to Real World 2.97 3.22 18.75 <.01 .067

Significance and Meaningfulness 2.94 3.18 17.51 <.01 .063

Frequency of Project Work 1.14 1.54 73.77 <.01 .22860

Bivariate Correlations Matrix (Student Survey)

Secondary 3 Math Secondary 3 English

Direct Teaching

TraditionalTeaching

Authentic pedagogy

Direct Teaching

TraditionalTeaching

Authentic pedagogy

Directteaching 1 .62** .65 ** 1 .58** .68**

Traditionalteaching .62** 1 .59** .58** 1 .69**

Authentic pedagogy .65** .59** 1 .68** .69** 1

61

So, what are we to make of all this?• No singular, unidimensional pedagogy…

• Rather, a hybridic, multi-dimensional pedagogy.

• No pedagogical sectarianism in Singapore thank you very much. We are irredeemably pragmatic …

• But is it a principled pragmatism? Or simply a sign of wishy-washy epistemic and pedagogical confusion? A lack of clarity about Singapore’s national identity and what it stands for? Or, perhaps, a lack of a coherent pedagogical discourse that focuses on fundamental principles rather than opportunistic fit-for-purpose interventions or adjustments? To be continued …

62

… and the enacted curriculum, particularly the intellectual quality

of classroom knowledge work?

63

Knowledge Practices in Primary 5 and Secondary 3: Mean Scores(Classroom Observation Data)

Knowledge ClassificationPrimary 5

(0-3Secondary 3

(0-3)

Depth of Knowledge

Basic/Fact/Rote 2.4 2.3

Procedural/How To 0.7 1.1

Advanced Concept 0.1 0.2

Knowledge Manipulation & Production

Reproduction 2.3 2.1

Interpretation 0.6 0.7

Application 0.4 0.5

Generation of Knowledge New to Students 0.1 0.2

Assessment of Knowledge Claims

Knowledge presented as Truth 2.6 2.5

Comparison 0.2 0.3

Critique 0.1 0.2

Number of lessons 591 578  64

Two Pedagogies: Exploratory Factor Analysis of Classroom Knowledge Practices

Factor LoadingsBasic Knowledge

TransmissionComplex Knowledge

Construction

Knowledge Presented as Truth .982  

Reproduction .945  

Single Discipline .900  

Basic/Factual/Rote .850  

Specialized Language .580  

Procedural Knowledge .425  

Critique   .817

Comparison   .750

Advanced Concept   .644

Generation of Knowledge New to Students   .620

Interpretation   .588

Application   .573

Cronbach’s Alpha .898 .742

Mean 2.0 0.4

Correlation .378**

Explained Variance 58 %65

66

Subject and level differences in enacted curriculum

F1: Basic Knowledge Transmission F2: Complex Knowledge Construction

So too assessment tasks…

67

Mean Score Differences of the Quality of Teachers’ Assessment Tasks

Criteria Grade 5n = 210

Grade 9n = 136

Mean SD Mean SD

Depth of Knowledge

Factual Knowledge 3.36 .80 3.30 .82

Procedural Knowledge 2.61 1.03 2.54 .95

Advanced Concepts 1.69 .80 1.83 .93

Knowledge Manipulation & Production

Reproduction 2.94 1.03 3.26 .92

Organization, Interpretation, or Evaluation of Information

2.27 .83 2.35 .87

Sustained Writing 2.18 1.16 2.49 1.06

Application/Problem-Solving 1.94 .90 2.04 .90

Generation/Construction of Knowledge New to Students 1.68 .91 1.50 .83

Assessment of Knowledge Claims

Presentation of Knowledge as Truth 3.10 .99 3.48 .81

Compare and Contrast Knowledge 1.73 .83 1.82 .88

Critique of Knowledge 1.54 .81 1.35 .77

Authentic Knowledge

Connections to the Real World beyond the Classroom 1.92 1.02 1.52 .8668

. Correlations Between Quality of Teachers’ Assessment Tasks and Quality of Student Work in Secondary 3 (for Core Subjects)

Task Quality Student Work Quality

Depth of Knowledge

KnowledgeCriticism

Knowledge Manipulation

SustainedWriting

Connections to the Real

World

Depth of Knowledge

.52**

Knowledge Criticism

.65**

Knowledge Manipulation

.62**

Sustained Writing .80**

Connections to the Real World

.72**

69

Correlation between the Intellectual Quality of Teachers’ Assessment Tasks and Intellectual Quality of Student Work (for the Core Subjects) 2004/05

Authentic Intellectual Quality

of Student Work

Primary 5 Secondary 3

Authentic Intellectual Quality of Teachers’ Assignments or Assessment Tasks

.72** .63**

70

**p<.01

Surface vs Deep Processing

How well prepared are young people for 21st century institutional environments?

Surface Processing & Deep Processing. S3 Students

S3 Math S3 English

M(1-5)

SD N

M(1-

5)

SD N

Surface Processing 3.91 .87 3.40 .81

Deep Processing 3.30 .83 3.29 .81

72

4. Whither Education? Research Priorities, 2008-2012

The Logic of NIE’s RD&I Program

1. MOE Policy Context

and Priorities

2. NIE ResearchFindings

4. NIE RD&I Programs

and Strands

3. NIE Research Priorities & Questions

Organizational Outcomes

Student Outcomes

RESEARCH PRIORITIES

1. Develop and expand a comprehensive baseline data base on teaching and learning in Singaporean classrooms in order to evaluate the impact of policy initiatives and to support evidence-based interventions and policy development.

2. Deepen our understanding of the logic of teaching, classroom interaction and student learning in Singaporean classrooms: What happens in classrooms? Why do teachers teach the way they do? What – and how -- do students learn?

3. Identify and map the nature of the skills, understandings, dispositions and values that young people are likely to need to effectively negotiate 21st century institutional environments and that enhance the ability of students to frame and lead lives that are meaningful to themselves and valuable to the communities they live in, and identify and develop curricula frameworks and pedagogies that are likely to cultivate them.

RESEARCH PRIORITIES

4. Strengthen the intellectual quality of knowledge work in classrooms by

an appropriate and effective balance of alternative teaching and formative assessment strategies to achieve clearly articulated and valuable learning goals linked to specific forms of knowledge and understanding,

strengthening the disciplinarity of the enacted curriculum,

organizing classrooms as epistemic communities with a clear focus on participating in high quality knowledge work and the development of appropriate skills, understandings and dispositions

designing rich, high quality multi-dimensional assessment tasks that enhance cognitive and meta-cognitive learning that serve both instructional and assessment purposes (formative and summative).

5. Identify and develop forms of professional learning that build teacher capacity necessary to improve the quality of teaching and learning in Singaporean classrooms.

Theory of Pedagogy: Knowledge, Learning, Teaching(Adapted from Galton 2007)

KNOWLEDGE

Learning as memorization of

propositional knowledge

Learning as constructing and reconstructing (unlearning)

knowledge (“constructivism”)Learning as socially situated

cognitive apprenticeship(socio-cultural learning thy)

Learning as learning how to learn and adaptive

expertise(development of

automaticity and executive control)

Procedural Knowledge & Conditional Knowledge

(knowing how and

knowing when)

Conceptual Knowledge(understanding of

domain-specific schema and schematic networks)

(knowing why..)

Meta-cognitive Knowledge and Reflexive Knowledge(strategic knowledge; self knowledge; self regulation

of cognitive processes)

(knowing me…)

LEARNING

TEACHINGTeaching as

transmission Teaching as thoughtful discourse; teaching as

participation in knowledge building communities; teaching as participation in disciplinary

practices in epistemic communities

Teaching as strategic scaffolding

(automaticity)

FactualKnowledge

(knowing what)

Learning as information

processing and application

Teaching as direct

instruction

Figure 4

RESEARCH PRIORITIES

6. Support development of schools as professional learning communities that support strong knowledge management and instructional systems.

7. Support expanding the use of formative assessment and summative school based assessment to improve the quality of teaching and learning.

8. Support development of measures of “non-academic” student learning (including dispositions and values) in order to measure more effectively and comprehensively the contribution that schools make to developing student capacities, enhance student wellbeing and promote community welfare.

9. Develop pedagogical resources, including technologically enriched learning environments, that enhance the quality of teaching, assessment and learning.

RESEARCH PRIORITIES

10. Design, implement, monitor and evaluate an innovation strategy that is scientifically warranted (evidence-based), principled, strategically focused, sustainable, scaleable, affordable, localized, recognizes the complex mediation of innovation/implementation strategies at the teacher, classroom, school and cluster level, and provides appropriate levels of resourcing, support and scaffolding (including modeling, coaching, mentoring).

11. Support development of leveling up strategies to expand learning opportunities for low achieving students.

12. Develop a statement of generative principles of pedagogical practice suitable for the Singaporean context

13. Support development of a deeper understanding of the nature, logic, production and management of pedagogical discourse

Core Research Programs

NIE Research Programs

NIE RD&I Programs by Program Leaders and Funding Category

 Research Program Program Leaders,

Strand Leaders

MOE Budget Allocation Model

Strategic RD&I

Program

Priority Innovation Program

Next Generation

1 TEACHER LEARNING PROGRAM

     

1.1. Initial Teacher Education (FP)

X

1.2 Knowledge Management: Codifying Expert Teacher Knowledge

X    

 Research Program Program Leaders,

Strand Leaders

MOE Budget Allocation Model

Strategic RD&I

Program

Priority Innovation Program

Next Generation

2 TECHNOLOGY IN FORMAL AND INFORMAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

     

2.1 New Media/New Literacies (incl. IDM)

X [X]

2.2 Knowledge Building Communities

X

2.3 Emerging Technologies (incl. IDM)

X

2.4  On-Line Communities (incl. IDM)  X   [X]

2.5.  Technology and Pedagogy   X   

NIE RD&I Programs by Program Leaders and Funding Category (continued….)

 Research Program Program Leaders,

Strand Leaders

MOE Budget Allocation Model

Strategic RD&I

Program

Priority Innovation Program

Next Generation

3 LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE

     

3.1 Leadership, Instruction and Student Outcomes

X X   

3.2 Leadership Education Program X X   

NIE RD&I Programs by Program Leaders and Funding Category (continued….)

 Research Program Program Leaders,

Strand Leaders

MOE Budget Allocation Model

Strategic RD&I

Program

Priority Innovation Program

Next Generation

4 PEDAGOGY AND CLASSROOM PRACTICE

     

 GROUP A: DOMAIN-SPECIFIC

4.1. Language, Literacies and Education (ELL, ALC)

X

4.2.  Mathematics (MME) X

4.3.  Science (NSSE) X

4.4. Social Studies and National Education Program (HSSE, CTL)

X X

4.5 Visual and Performing Arts Education (VPA)

X

4.6. Physical Education (PESS) X

4.7. ECSE Research Program X X

NIE RD&I Programs by Program Leaders and Funding Category (continued….)

 Research Program Program Leaders,

Strand Leaders

MOE Budget Allocation Model

Strategic RD&I

Program

Priority Innovation Program

Next Generation

4 PEDAGOGY AND CLASSROOM PRACTICE

     

 GROUP B: WHOLE OF CURRICULUM

4.8 Core2 Research Program X

4.9. 2020 Curriculum and Pedagogy X X

4.10 Assessment X X

4.11.

TLLM Sustainable Innovation Program*

X

NIE RD&I Programs by Program Leaders and Funding Category (continued….)

 Research Program Program Leaders,

Strand Leaders

MOE Budget Allocation Model

Strategic RD&I

Program

Priority Innovation Program

Next Generation

5 STUDENT MOTIVATION, COGNITION AND LEARNING OUTCOMES**

     

5.1 Motivation and Engaged Learning X X

5.2 Student Outcomes Program X X

5.3 Neuro-Science, Cognition and Learning

X

5.4 Meta-cognition & Self Regulation X X

5.5  Learning Theory  X    X

5.6  Counselling X

NIE RD&I Programs by Program Leaders and Funding Category (continued….)

ORGANISATIONAL AND STUDENT OUTCOMES

Rich Disciplinary &

TransdisciplinaryUnderstandings,

Skills & Dispositions

Engaged Learning

Formative Assessment and

Reflective Pedagogy

Technologically enriched learning

environments

Rich Disciplinary Pedagogies &

Organization of Classrooms as

Epistemic Communities

Social and Civic Agency

Levelling Up: Diversity and

Inclusion

Balanced Assessment

& Pedagogical Alignment

Practical Reason

& Subjective Wellbeing

Continual Authentic

Professional Learning

Organization of Schools as

Professional Learning

Communities

Sustainable Innovation

Bilingualism and Multi-literacies

3. Whither Education Research?

Key Imperatives

Develop an evidence-informed, policy-aligned moderately prescriptive strategic research framework that identifies priorities, research programs, timelines and deliverables

Shift to multidisciplinary research Focus on practical outcomes but ample scope for long term strategic

research Secure a large multi-source funding base government grant Appoint experienced academic research managers Develop strong research management systems Develop strong professional development/ capacity building system for

academic staff Cultivate a sense of irony and have a sense of humor!

Thank you and Good Luck!