Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
DIEBELIUS: HOW CAN I DEVELOP AN ‘EXPANDABLE INTELLIGENCE’ USING LUCAS AND CLAXTON’S ‘EXPANSIVE TALKING FRAMEWORK’ IN MATHS? Citation Diebelius, J. (2017) ‘How can I develop an ‘expandable intelligence’ using Lucas and Claxton’s
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Copyright Year | 2017 |
| Abstract | This paper is a personal reflection of a student teacher’s decisions and actions towards trying to support pupils in developing the belief that their intelligence is expandable through effort and strategy. Using action research in their last year of teacher training I researched my influence over 30, aged 7-8, pupils’ attitudes towards maths learning over 8 weeks. Using Lucas and Claxton’s (2010) Talking Toolkit framework, which claims to support the development of ‘Expandable Intelligence’, to promote a growth mindset. This was done over a period of 8 weeks. In a reflexive turn it was identified that the Talking toolkit framework tool could not be used in isolation, other strategies and approaches were adopted. This research illustrates a reflection on pupils’ responses and my analysis against four habits of mind, chosen from Claxton (2002) Building Learning Power that supports the belief that intelligence is expandable. This research provides an example of a constant reflective log of my findings. The key finding from this research was that attitudes have the potential to be developed in the short term and expandable intelligence is a state of mind that transcends experiences and cannot be seen in just mathematics. This paper concludes with implications for future practice. Introduction and Background An individual’s mind-set is their outlook on events (Dweck, 2006). The mind-set can influence what Lucas et al (2013) refers to as ‘habits of mind,’ which is your attitude towards a task. I have always been interested in different approaches children adopt with regards to their learning. Can you teach effort and can you create an environment which develops resilience? The idea for my study initially stemmed from conceptual understanding in maths, the notion of deep understanding. I then pondered if children want to learn and if I can influence this. I was pointed in the direction of Lucas and Claxton’s (2010) book: New kinds of smart. This is where I came across the view that intelligence is expandable; it can increase through effort and strategy. I decided to embed the ‘Expansive Talking framework’ (ETF) in to my teaching to create a learning environment where the dispositions to learn and ‘build learning power’ (Claxton, 2002) were tackled. This study focuses upon the impact, and to what degree, teachers have over fostering ‘expandable intelligence,’ in the classroom environment. The data collection was undertaken in a two form entry Primary school in Essex. The children were predominantly from a White British background with a below average number of children who receive free school meals (DFE, 2014). 31 7-8 year olds were included in this nine week study. Rationale for my study I strongly hold the view that every child should value their intelligence as a capacity which can increase with purposeful effort. Lucas and Claxton (2010) suggest that intelligence is not easily measureable, possibly due to the fact that every experience is situational. This is why my study is highly contextual and responsive to mine and children’s needs, as my effects needed to be measured. Significantly this motivation became stronger after reading ‘The Unseen Children Report’ DIEBELIUS: HOW CAN I DEVELOP AN ‘EXPANDABLE INTELLIGENCE’ USING LUCAS AND CLAXTON’S ‘EXPANSIVE TALKING FRAMEWORK’ IN MATHS? 106 (Ofsted, 2013). It presented the view that expectations can have more of a negative impact than material poverty. Resnick (1999) states that any maintained environment (learning or home) has the potential to affect the children’s behaviour, due to expectations. This provides a place for my research; as we infer the need to analyse our own actions to increase awareness and effects of interactions with children. If we consider Duckworth’s (2013) claim that researchers understand the internal and external nature of motivation to learn, but there is no unified approach to achieve this, then my research focus gained credibility as I aimed to assess my impact with critical engagement, in contextual situations. If we want children to value effort then they have to hold the belief that their intelligence can improve, thus presenting the idea of ‘expandable intelligence.’ Literature review Research tells us there is much debate surrounding intelligence. This literature review will explore the field of research around the notion of ‘expandable intelligence:’ the belief that, through effort and strategy, intelligence is a capacity which can increase (Lucas and Claxton, 2010). My analysis begins with the works of Lucas and Claxton and the concept that intelligence is expandable. From here I touch upon areas of psychological literature, as Lucas and Claxton’s ideals draw upon such findings. Alternatively, I explore opposing views to ‘expandable intelligence’ and finish focusing upon environmental influences; this is where I find a place for my study. Firstly, the idea that intelligence has the capacity to expand and grow through effort is a concept which Lucas and Claxton (2010) emphasise should be the attitude which drives pedagogy in education. ‘Expandable intelligence’ transcends beyond the training of skills and holds the aim of adopting what Claxton (2007) refers to as ‘cultivating dispositions.’ A skill or capacity (skills and strategies) becomes a disposition when it is independently applied. This application is what Perkins (1995) refers to as ‘sensitivity to occasion;’ and will show whether the learner understands the skills deeply enough to be able to apply them in appropriate learning situations. In turn this involves a development of attitudes or ‘habits of mind’ (Lucas et al, 2013), which support children meeting the demands of this world, which extends beyond a testing culture (Lucas, et al, 2013), as ultimately this focus on achievement can oversimplify learning (Stobart and Gipps, 1997). This implies that not only should learning involve depth but a positive attitude; (habits of mind) to support the motivation to achieve a disposition, ultimately stretching beyond superficial teaching and learning. Furthermore is it important to consider that Lucas and Claxton (2010) draw from the works of Dweck. Dweck adopts a psychological stance to education; her extensive research is based up on the beliefs people have about themselves and the impact they can have. Dweck (1999) identifies two mind sets, which ultimately change the way education is viewed. If you hold a ‘fixed mind-set’ individuals believe they have a certain amount of intelligence and therefore this will need to be proven. They have a tendency to opt for easy asks to ensure they are successful (Dweck, 2006). It should be questioned, if the aim is to learn, whether task completion is an appropriate measure of success, especially if ‘expandable intelligence’ values the learning process and exerting effort. A ‘growth mind-set’ however views intelligence as something which can increase through effort and therefore those who hold it thrive off challenges. This suggests that if it is possible to cultivate the belief that intelligence is expandable then work needs to focus upon creating an environment in which the ideals of ‘growth mind-set’ are promoted: making mistakes, effort, resilience and learning rather than end product goals (Dweck, 1999). Additionally, reasons for a focus on the learning environment can be explained through Bandura’s (1993) reference to the attribution theory which involves an individual’s self-efficacy. How the child views what has happened can affect how they view themselves within this situation. Weiner (1972) explains the attribution theory through the ‘Locus of Control.’ He states that outcomes can be attributed to internal or external characteristics retrospectively: i.e. ability, effort or task difficulty DIEBELIUS: HOW CAN I DEVELOP AN ‘EXPANDABLE INTELLIGENCE’ USING LUCAS AND CLAXTON’S ‘EXPANSIVE TALKING FRAMEWORK’ IN MATHS? 107 and luck. This attribution could be reliant on the individual’s mind-set (Dweck, 1999). We may speculate that children need to be in an environment where if they ‘fail’ their ability is not compromised, rather a lack of effort. This then places children in control or their learning (Watkins, No Date) and promotes the value of effort. The psychological literature presents how learning can be affected by an individual’s belief system. If we refer to Ofsted (2013) that the environment can have a greater impact on confidence that any material poverty, we begin to view that it is those who interact with children that can have an impinging role over the development of a mind-set. We therefore infer the significance of the learning environment. Black and Wiliam (1998) emphasise the importance of formative assessment (a process undertaken by teachers and should be responsive to the child’s learning needs). It is however only beneficial if focused on the learning process (Clarke, 2005). Lucas et al (2013) question if this assessment involved monitoring of growth in learning dispositions. If learning is viewed as an ongoing process (expandable) then grade only feedback, as a form of assessment, ultimately places emphasis on the end product (Butler et al, 2013). Claxton (2007) places emphasis on a teacher’s language and states it is not only that thoughtful interactions but instinctive responses also contribute to the classroom environment (Lucas et al, 2013). This suggests teachers reflect and evaluate their practice; especially if ‘expandable intelligence’ ventures beyond isolated strategies (discussed later). Moreover, Claxton’s, (2002) work on ‘Building Learning Power’ (BLP) links with the idea of cultivating attitudes. These attitudes arguably require an environment which supports them. He prioritises resilience, resourcefulness, reflectiveness and reciprocity (The four R’s) as optimum ‘habits of mind.’ This fostering of attitudes sends a message that everyone is capable of improvement. Piaget (1950) states: intelligence is the |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://ojs.cumbria.ac.uk/index.php/step/article/download/428/547 |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
