Being talkative, chirpy and bubbly are some of the features associated with being a female. Nothing can beat a female tongue, her ever-lasting gossips and the constant groupings, but surprisingly the girls fall behind boys when it comes to making friends.

Girls find it more difficult than boys to adjust to new surroundings, where they are required to learn a new language, according to new Michigan State University research.

The study, conducted on three- to six-year-old kids attending an international school in Beijing, found that generally girls faced more social adjustment problems than boys. All the students, belonging to 16 nationalities, were dealing with both Chinese and English, which implied that each child was learning at least one new language.

“In early childhood, we know from previous research that girls are more verbal and more social than boys, generally speaking, but what we found in this study is that girls had a tougher time with social adjustment in the classroom,” said Anne Soderman, MSU professor emeritus of family and child ecology and lead researcher on the project.

It was found that girls who did not understand teachers or classmates at the 3e International School, tended to withdraw more than their male counterparts. The pupils at the “dual immersion” school were taught in Mandarin during the morning and English in the afternoon.

In the last school year, Soderman, a consultant at the school, examined preschoolers and kindergartners , by using more than 100 two- to three-hour observations in the classroom and teachers” perceptions of the children”s social adjustment on the Social Competence Behaviour Evaluation scale.

Soderman said that young children overall were found to have a more difficult time learning a second language than many people believe. “There”s a wide-held perception that if children are very young, learning language is extremely easy for them – that they are like sponges – and that is just not true. Their motivations for doing so are very different from those of older children or adults,” she said. The study has been published in the latest issue of European Early Childhood Education Research Journal.

Well, after all its true that boys just want to have fun and can get well with just anyone very quickly.

Source: Oneindia
http://living.oneindia.in/men/man-vs-woman/2008/girls-social-adjustment-problems-071008.html

Next time you head off to bed to get a good night’s sleep, your brain’s memory bank is likely to thank you for it.

American research presented at the Australasian Sleep Conference in Adelaide yesterday showed that far from resting while people sleep, the brain uses this time to store and remember important information and discard useless details.

Associate Professor Robert Stickgold, from Harvard Medical School, said sleep played a more important role in memory processing than previously had been thought.

Professor Stickgold’s research showed that sleep not only strengthened recently formed memories, it could also blend them into networks of older memories.

He said the brain also used sleep to sift through memories such as scenes people saw that day, to remember the important “emotional” memories and dismiss unimportant ones.

And when people were given a task to finger-tap out a difficult-to-remember code and then sent home to “sleep on it”, the next morning they were 15-20 per cent faster at performing the task and had 30-40 per cent fewer errors.

“So while you’re sleeping, your brain is actually improving on the memory that you formed while you were awake, and if people don’t get enough sleep, say more than six hours, then you won’t see that improvement,” Professor Stickgold said.

Source: The West Australian
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=2&ContentID=100927

Three-year-old Nicole Smith knows how to put numbers in order and she knows how to stack blocks from largest to smallest.

Experts say this early algebraic thinking will help students later in life … in school and at work.

Fourteen-year-old Jen agrees, “‘Cause everything that you do leads to math… and so like, I like to use math in a lot of different ways.”

Tips for Parents
Excellence in mathematics education requires high expectations and strong support for all students. Regardless of their personal characteristics, background, or physical challenges, all students must have opportunities to study - and support to learn - mathematics. This does not mean that every student should be treated the same. But all students need access to a coherent, challenging mathematics curriculum that is taught by competent and well-supported mathematics teachers.

Too many students - especially students who are poor, not native speakers of English, disabled, female, or members of minority groups - are victims of low expectations in mathematics. For example, “tacking” (grouping students by ability) has consistently consigned disadvantaged groups of students to mathematics classes that concentrate on redemption or do not offer significant mathematical substances. The Equity Principle demands that high expectations for mathematics learning be communicated in word and deeds to all students.

Children learn by exploring their world. Everyday activities are natural vehicles for developing mathematical thinking. When a parent places crackers in a toddler’s hands and says, “Here are two crackers - one, two,” or when a three-year-old chooses how she wants her sandwich cut - into pieces shaped like triangles, rectangles, or small squares - mathematical thinking is occurring. As a child arranges stuffed animals by size, an adult might ask, “Which animal is the smallest?” Through careful observation, conversations, and guidance, adults can help children make connections between the mathematics in familiar situations. Because young children develop a disposition for mathematics from their early experiences, opportunities for learning should be positive and supportive.

Source: Winknews.com, Florida
http://www.winknews.com/features/education/29946519.html

Any sprint coach will stress the importance of a good start. That’s why sprinters focus just as much on the starting blocks as the finish line – for what happens at the outset often determines the outcome.

Such is life.

This is the first lesson, quite literally, that advocates of early childhood development will teach you. The human brain is essentially front-end loaded, according to scientists. The pattern of your life is stamped to a large degree by the stimuli and experiences of early childhood which imprint themselves on the developing brain.

Other kids who come from disadvantaged backgrounds are already losing the race before they darken the doors of a school. By no means are they doomed, but they do face an uphill battle. Research shows that if kids have not caught up in literacy and language skills by Grade 3, chances are they never will. Or if they are experiencing a behavioural or learning impediment, this spells trouble down the road.

One-quarter of Canadian kids up to six years old are in that situation. That’s not just a scary statistic, but a call to action. Not only is this a tragedy for the children who never reach their potential, but also for our society. Underachievement carries a lot of baggage in terms of costly social and health problems.

But that’s not all. It’s also an important economic issue. Increasingly, our prosperity will depend on producing knowledge workers – a fact that is more readily grasped in China than here. Other countries are investing in early childhood development programs – Scandinavians lead the pack – but Canada ranks last among industrialized countries in spending in this area.

Our current crop of political leaders doesn’t get it yet. Prime Minister Stephen Harper foolishly cut the Liberals’ modest funding of such initiatives. And the provincial Tories recently canned a pre-Primary pilot program deemed too expensive to expand provincewide.

But there are signs the business community is paying attention. Last week, former banking executive Charles Coffey made a direct pitch to a primarily business audience at the Halifax Club.

“Of course your universities and colleges need more dollars,” he said. “But I’m just as convinced that at the other end of the educational spectrum, major investments in your early child development programs are sorely needed too. When corporate Canada divides its philanthropy pie for education, why can’t a larger piece be devoted to early childhood development? It’s time to invest in bridging the gap.”

At the moment, early childhood education in Canada consists of a loose patchwork of programs and assistance. Advocates would like to see billions invested in creating a nationwide network of community hubs, preferably centred around schools, that would provide support for parents, child care, social services and activities.

For those who toil in the trenches, this is an investment in human capital we can no longer afford to put off.

“I’ve spent 10 years on the South Shore of Nova Scotia as a supervisor of special education and student services,” Theresa Griffin, Maritime co-ordinator of the Council for Early Child Development, told The Chronicle Herald editorial board last week. “We could tell those kids coming into the system who were going to need support. But you know what? Those kids had to fail. They had to fail badly and repeatedly before we could put any kind of intervention in place for them. And then … the intervention was not tailored to their needs, nor intensive enough, of sufficient dosage, to make a difference.”

That’s a waste of government resources. But it’s also a waste of human resources which our society needs. Without greater emphasis on early childhood development, we might as well be entering the global race without tying our shoelaces first.

Source: TheChronicleHerald.ca
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Editorial/1081664.html

Although school has been back for less than a month, it is likely that many children are already experiencing frustration and confusion in math class. Research at The University of Western Ontario in London, Canada could change the way we view math difficulties and how we assist children who face those problems.

Daniel Ansari is an assistant professor and Canada Research Chair in Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience in the Department of Psychology at Western. He is using brain imaging to understand how children develop math skills, and what kind of brain development is associated with those skills.

Research shows that many children who experience mathematical difficulties have developmental dyscalculia – a syndrome that is similar to dyslexia, a learning disability that affects a child’s ability to read. Children with dyscalculia often have difficulty understanding numerical quantity. For example, they find it difficult to connect abstract symbols, such as a number, to the numerical magnitude it represents.

“Research shows that many children have both dyslexia and dyscalculia. We are now exploring further the question of exactly what brain differences exist between those who have just math problems and those who have both math and reading difficulties,” says Ansari.

Using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of children with math difficulties, Ansari says that it becomes clear that children with developmental dyscalculia show atypical activation patterns in a part of the brain called the parietal cortex.

This research holds tremendous promise for people who, in the past, had simply accepted that they are ‘not good at math.’ Understanding the causes and brain correlates of dyscalculia may help to design remediation tools to improve the lives of children and adults with the syndrome.

A report of this research is forthcoming in the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.

“We have some cultural biases in North America around math skills,” says Ansari. “We think that people who are good at math must be exceptionally intelligent, and even more dismaying and damaging, we have an attitude that being bad at math is socially acceptable. People who would never dream of telling others they are unable to read, will proclaim publicly they flunked math.”

Ansari says that math skills are hugely important to life success and children who suffer math difficulties may avoid careers that, with help, might be a great fit for them.

An article by Ansari entitled “The Brain Goes to School: Strengthening the Education-Neuroscience Connection,” will be published in the upcoming Education Canada, the magazine of the Canadian Education Association. In the article Ansari says technological advances such as fMRI have provided unprecedented insights into the working of the human brain.

“A teacher who understands brain structure and function will be better equipped to interpret children’s behaviours, their strengths and weaknesses, from a scientific point of view, and this will in turn influence how they teach,” says Ansari.

Source: Science Daily
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080924151007.htm

American taxpayers invest heavily in education. Last year, spending on public K–12 education totaled $553 billion, about 4 percent of gross domestic prod­uct (GDP) in 2006. For each child enrolled in a pub­lic elementary or secondary school, expenditures averaged $9,266 that year—an increase of 128 per­cent, adjusted for inflation, since 1970.

Despite this increase in public spending, student achievement and educational attainment over the last four decades has remained relatively flat. In 2007, a significant portion of students, disproportionately from disadvantaged backgrounds, scored “below basic” in reading and math on the National Assess­ment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Sadly, in many of the nation’s largest cities, fewer than half of high school students graduate.

While academic research has consistently shown that increased spending does not correlate with edu­cational gains, the research does show a strong rela­tionship between parental influences and children’s educational outcomes, from school readiness to college completion. Two compelling parental factors emerge:

2. parents’ involvement in their children’s schoolwork.

Consequently, the solution to improving educa­tional outcomes begins at home, by strengthening marriage and promoting stable family formation and parental involvement.

The Erosion of Family Stability in America

“Perhaps the most profound change in the American family over the past four decades,” writes sociologist Paul Amato, “has been the decline in the share of children growing up in households with biological parents.” In 1960, 88 percent of all children lived with two parents, compared to 68 percent in 2007. In 1960, 5 percent of all children were born to unmarried mothers. That figure rose to 38.5 per­cent in 2006. Demographers have estimated that, overall, one child in two will spend some portion of his or her childhood in a single-parent family.

Studies show that children raised in intact families, i.e., with two con­tinuously married parents, tend to fare better on a number of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral outcomes than children living in other family forms. Not surprisingly, the changes in family structure over the last 40 years have affected child and adoles­cent well-being. In 2002, nearly 7 million children between the ages of 12 and 18 repeated a grade. Based on this figure, Professor Amato estimates that if the share of two-parent fami­lies had remained unchanged be­tween 1980 and 2002, some 300,000 fewer teens would have repeated a grade. Some 750,000 fewer students in 2002 would have repeated a grade if the share of two-parent families remained at the level it was in 1960.

Social science research over the past decades suggests that family structure affects children’s school outcomes, from preschool to college. Some of the variations in school performance could be explained, in part or in whole, by the differences in family resources such as time and money, family dynamics and parental characteristics that are asso­ciated with the various family forms. These are mediating factors, or mechanisms through which family structure affects schooling outcomes. Family structure may also exert a direct influence, inde­pendent of mediating factors. Thus, depending on the outcome, family structure’s total effect may con­sist of one or more mediating influences or a com­bination of both direct and mediating influences.

Though various methodological research issues— e.g., data quality, inconsistent definitions of family structure, the selection effect (e.g., are individuals who possess better parenting qualities more likely to choose marriage and stay married, or does mar­riage per se bolster children’s well-being?)—limit the findings, the evidence, nonetheless, is strong: Fam­ily structure matters.

School Readiness. A number of early-childhood outcomes contribute to children’s eventual school readiness. The evidence suggests that potentially important early-childhood outcomes vary by family structure. One study, analyzing 1,370 mothers in the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study who were continuously married or in cohabiting rela­tionships from the child’s birth to age three, found that three-year-olds born to cohabiting mothers tended to exhibit more aggressive, withdrawn, and anxious or depressive behavior than children born to married mothers. For aggressive and with­drawn behaviors, the association was explained by income differences. For anxiety and depressive symptoms, even controlling for income, the cohab­itation effect remained.

Studies show that reading to young children aids their literacy development. Toddlers and preschool-age children in married-parent families are read to more often than peers in non-intact families. One study of 11,500 kindergartners living with two par­ents orparent figuresreported that, accounting for parental education and income, children living with married parents averaged higher reading achieve­ment test scores than peers living in cohabiting or stepparent families.

Elementary and Secondary Education. The research on family structure and elementary and secondary educational outcome is extensive. Studies have reported that:

1. First-graders whose mothers were married when they were born are less likely to engage in dis­ruptive behavior with peers and teachers than those whose mothers were single or cohabiting at the time of their birth.

2. Children aged three to 12 who live in intact fam­ilies have higher average math scores than peers whose mothers live in cohabiting relationships.

3. The association between family structure and nine-year-olds’ science and math achievement appears to be cross-national.

4. Children aged seven to 10 who live in continu­ously intact families tend to score higher on read­ing tests than peers who have lived in other family structures.

5. Children aged six to 11 who live in intact fami­lies tend to be more engaged in their schoolwork than peers in other family structures.

6. Eighth-graders in two-parent families perform, on average, better on math and science tests than peers in single-parent or stepparent families.

7. The predominant family structure of a school’s student population appears to be linked to the individual science and math scores of eighth-graders.

8. Ninth-graders whose mothers were married when they were born are more likely to complete an algebra course than are peers whose mothers were single when they were born.

9. Middle school and high school students who expe­rience a parental divorce tend to suffer declines in their grade point averages and are more likely to fail a course one year later compared to peers of married parents; the evidence suggests a causal link.

10. Among middle school and high school students, the portion of childhood spent in a single-parent family is associated with declines in GPAs over time; and living in a single-mother family with a cohabiting partner is associated with a greater likelihood of suspension or expulsion from school at a later time.

Finally, studies have also shown a robust link between family structure and high school dropout or graduation rates, and the evidence suggests that the relationship may be causal.

Higher Education and Educational Attainment. The impact of family structure on educational out­comes appears to last into young adulthood. Throughout the college entrance process, students from non-intact families tend to fall behind their peers from intact families. The gap increases when the process involves selective college admission. Overall, children from intact families complete more years of schooling and achieve higher educational attainment than do peers from other family forms.

One study, analyzing two nationally representa­tive data sources, reported that longer durations in single-parent or blended families during child­hood appear to have a negative impact on college attendance and graduation. Though family income and parental education explained the association between single-parent families and lower college attendance and graduation rates, the disparities in these outcomes between children in intact families and those in blended families persisted.

Similarly, another study showed that, accounting for family income and estimated financial aid, an average student from a non-intact family was 5 per­cent less likely to attend a four-year college and 6 percent less likely to graduate from college than an average student from an intact family.

Parental Involvement

Parental involvement emerges as another robust influence on educational outcomes. It is multi-dimensional. Examples include monitoring chil­dren’s activities outside home and school; setting rules; having conversations about and helping chil­dren with school work and school-related issues; holding high educational expectations; discussing future planning with children and helping them with important decision making; participating in school-related activities such as meeting with teach­ers and volunteering in the classroom; and reading to children or engaging in other enrichment or lei­sure activities together.

A meta-analysis of 77 studies, consisting of 300,000 elementary and secondary students, found that parental educational expectations are a particu­larly important aspect of parental involvement. Parenting style, reading to children, and, to a lesser extent, participation in school-related activities appeared to be influential as well. Furthermore, parental involvement is associated with multiple measures of student achievement, for the entire stu­dent population as well as for minority and low-income student populations. Overall, “the academic advantage for those parents who were highly involved in their education averaged about 0.5–0.6 of a standard deviation for overall educational out­comes, grades and academic achievement.”

Parental Involvement and Family Structure. The level of parental involvement varies by family structure, and the relationship between parental involvement and educational outcomes depends on the family context as well. One study, for exam­ple, found that compared to high school students from intact families, those from single- or step­parent families reported less parental involvement in their school work, supervision, and parental educational expectations, which, in turn, affected school outcomes.

Early Childhood. Studies show that a sensitive, warm, and respon­sive type of parenting and engaging in play activities with young children bolster their social and emotional development, communication skills, and ability to focus. Doing arts and crafts with children, reading to them, showing them how to write words, and using a more complicated vocab­ulary around them also aid their liter­acy and language development. One study reported a link between these types of parental engagement and a range of school readiness out­comes such as “children’s motivation to learn, attention, task persistence, and receptive vocabulary and…fewer conduct problems.”

Frequent contact between parents and their children’s preschools as well as parent participation in school-related activities, such as volunteering in the classroom or meeting with a teacher, appear to benefit children on a num­ber of dimensions, including classroom performance and social interaction with peers and adults. One study reported that children whose teachers per­ceived more parental involvement tended to exhibit fewer problems and higher language and math com­petencies compared to children whose teachers per­ceived less parental engagement. The evidence also suggests that parental school involvement’s pos­itive influences buffer against some of the negative effects of poverty.

Elementary Education. Parental involvement during elementary school affects children’s school­ing outcomes as well. The quality of the parent-child relationship is significant. Middle school stu­dents who received sensitive, supportive parenting from their mothers during kindergarten tend to per­form better in school. Children of parents who frequently praise and show affection to them are less likely to require classroom attention for behavior and socio-emotional issues.

Studies also show that parental involvement in school-related activities during elementary school is associated with long-term educational gains. One study reported that among low-income African-American families, children of highly involved par­ents during elementary school were more likely to graduate from high school. In the same study, children of parents who were involved in school-related activities for three or more years completed more years of schooling compared to peers of less involved parents. Involvement, specifically by fathers, is significant as well. Children of fathers who visit their classrooms and meet with teachers tend to fare better in school than peers whose moth­ers are the only involved parent.

Reading with children and the way in which par­ents read to their children affect children’s reading ability. The research shows a distinction between reading storybooks to children, which contributes to their literacy development, and teaching children to read and write, which aids their language devel­opment. Both types of activities affect third- and fourth-grade performance.[50] Furthermore, parents’ use of vocabulary and their attitude toward home­work appear to influence corresponding outcomes in their children. Not surprisingly, children of parents who provide appropriate help with their homework tend to fare better in school.

The home environment in which children are raised plays a role in schooling outcomes. For ex­ample, in a study of middle-class families, elemen­tary students whose parents offered them math and science learning materials showed greater incli­nation toward and interest in math and science activities. Finally, parental expectations of achieve­ment, particularly adolescents’ perceptions of such expectations, appear to strengthen their actual mo­tivation and ability in school.

Secondary Education. Parent-child relation­ship quality continues to be an effective factor in schooling outcomes throughout adolescence. For example, in one study, youths who felt bonded to their parents and enjoyed good communication with them tended to have higher grades and physical well-being. In another study, among low-income youths, those whose parents encouraged individual decision making in their children during early ado­lescence were more likely to graduate from high school and attend college. Beyond academics, teens who receive more support from their parents are more likely to participate in structured after-school activities, which, in turn, are positively corre­lated with achievement and social competence.

During adolescence, parental monitoring to the extent to which parents know their children’s activ­ities outside of home and school, plays a crucial role in adolescent outcomes, particularly when children and adolescents perceive genuine care from their parents. Parental monitoring is associated with fewer school problems, less substance use, and reduced delinquency. Moreover, parental monitor­ing is positively linked to social development, school grades, and school engagement, such as pay­ing attention in class and being motivated to do well in school. The evidence also suggests that paren­tal monitoring may have different effects on boys and girls.

Not only does parental involvement in their chil­dren’s school-related activities send a positive mes­sage to students and teachers, such involvement is also related to high school completion. The research also suggests that minority students benefit from their parents’ participation in formal leader­ship roles at the school district level. The effects of parental involvement, however, may vary by par­ents’ education. One study showed that involve­ment from more-educated parents was associated with fewer behavioral problems in students, which, in turn, affected achievement and aspirations. Among students whose parents are less educated, parental involvement was related to student aspira­tions but not achievement.

At the secondary education level, high parental expectations continue to yield significant schooling benefits. In one study of high school seniors, “parental expectations for achievement stand out as the most significant influences on [their] achieve­ment growth, high school credits completed, and enrollment in extracurricular academic high school programs.” High parental educational expecta­tions are also associated with math and reading scores, interest in school, academic self-discipline, future planning, and motivation for school work. In one study of African-American families, when parents taught that success originates from effort rather than surpassing peers, their expectations had a strong effect on eighth- and ninth-grade math grades. Overall, parental expectations appear more influential than peer effects.

Finally, discussions with parents about the future and pursuing further education support teens’ aspi­rations and college preparation. One study of high-achievement Latino college students found that their parents imparted strong encouragement and values that emphasized education as a means to escape poverty.

Policy Implications

Social science research over the last few decades indicates a strong relationship between family struc­ture, parental involvement and children’s educa­tional outcomes, with enduring influences from early childhood to young adulthood. The empirical evidence points to several policy implications:

* Family policy intersects critically with education policy. Fortifying the intact family structure may lead to improvements in individual student out­comes as well as the American education system as a whole.

* Policies that strengthen healthy marriage and stable family formation may bolster child well-being, including school outcomes, both at the individual and aggregate levels.

* Conversely, policies and laws that facilitate fur­ther family breakdown may have adverse impacts on children’s educational outcomes and provide additional stress on the education system.

* In education reform efforts, greater emphasis on parental involvement and parental choice could yield significant gains in student achievement and attainment. Importantly, the research shows consistent benefits of high parental involvement for minority and low-income students, which deserves serious consideration in light of the achievement gap.

* On the other hand, education initiatives that dis­regard the importance of families and parental involvement, instead focusing on strategies such as increased expenditures, are likely to continue to prove less effective or ineffective altogether.

Conclusion

American taxpayers invest heavily in education, with annual public education spending totaling $553 billion. The average annual expenditure per child enrolled in a public school amounts to $9,266. Though per-pupil expenditures have increased dra­matically over the past few decades, student achieve­ment has remained relatively flat. A significant portion of students attending public schools score “below basic” in reading and math on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. In some of the most disadvantaged central cities in America, fewer than half of high school students graduate.

While numerous education reforms over the last quarter century have demonstrated little impact on overall student achievement, the research clearly shows that the intact family structure and strong parental involvement are significantly correlated with educational outcomes, from school readiness to college completion. Instead of favoring proven ineffective education policies, policymakers seeking effective education reform should consider policies that strengthen family structure in America and bol­ster parental involvement and choice in education.

Christine C. Kim is Policy Analyst in the Domestic Policy Studies Department at The Heritage Foundation.

Source: Heritage.org
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/bg2185.cfm

The addition of Sonic the Hedgehog and Super Mario Brothers to the ranks of Robert Burns and Robert Louis Stevenson is helping Scottish schoolchildren become enthused about learning and reaping ground-breaking educational results, according to researchers and teachers.

Experts say in games-based learning, using technology such as the Nintendo Wii and Nintendo DS in the classroom, Scotland leads the world.

According to the Consolarium, the Scottish centre for games and learning which is funded by Learning and Teaching Scotland, the number of pilot schemes around the country has grown exponentially. Last year 10 local authorities were using games-based learning. At the start of the new school term, 27 are investigating its possibilities.

As further evidence of growth, Derek Robertson, head of the Consolarium, points to this week’s Scottish Learning Festival at the SECC in Glasgow. With titles ranging from Thinking Out of the Xbox to Scotland’s Got Game: How Scotland Has Embraced Games-Based Learning, there are 10 seminars sharing examples of how classrooms are using computer games. Last year there were only four related talks.

“I don’t think there is any other place in the world that has done what LTS did,” said Robertson. “I’m continually asked who does my job in England, and there isn’t anyone. For LTS it was a risk, a maverick idea from the left field that has moved into the mainstream. It’s even mentioned in the Curriculum for Excellence. That’s the impact we’ve had.”

The world is now looking to Scotland. Robertson has been asked to speak in Germany, Australia the US. He has already advised the Singapore government. A section of the influential Handheld Learning Conference in London will be given over to what is happening in Scotland.

“People recognise that Scotland is a place that is keen to integrate these things into the curriculum,” said Robertson.

Teachers are reporting that by using games such as Mario and Sonic at the Olympics, Guitar Hero, Wii Sports and Endless Ocean, pupils’ motivation, attendance, personal skills and academic performance have improved, particularly among young boys and hard-to-reach children.

Meldrum Primary school in Aberdeenshire employed the game Endless Ocean as a hook for cross-curricular project for its P7 class. After playing the game on the Wii, which involves controlling a diver exploring a seascape, the pupils learned about bio-diversity, wrote stories and staged a debate about developing the a section of the ocean for tourists.

“It got so heated the person acting out the part of the tourist development person was in tears,” said Kim Aplin, the deputy-head teacher. “The quality of the learning that took place was tremendous. There is no doubt at all it improved their academic ability.”

Other examples around the country include West Lothian nurseries and primary schools using dance mats as a way to develop early-years phonics and reading skills, with “huge success”, according to Laura Compton, the authority’s information and communications technology development officer.

In Elrick and Banchory primary schools in Aberdeenshire, P2 pupils learned how to be responsible for looking after a pet using the Nintendogs game on the Nintendo DS.

In Clepington Primary School in Dundee, Jo-Anne Bell used Mario and Sonic at the Olympics on the Wii as a hook to teach her P6 class about the solar system. Pupils were placed into teams named after planets, wrote stories about the creatures that would live there, and competed against each other every morning on the Wii.

After last year’s trial involving a Dundee primary school class using Dr Kawashima’s Brain Training on the Nintendo DS for 20 minutes a day, which sparked a 10% improvement in their basic arithmetic, the project was rolled out to 16 other schools. The results will be revealed on Thursday at the Scottish Learning Festival.

The head teachers’ organisation, School Leaders Scotland, said while it welcomed the rise of Nintendo and Sony consoles in the classroom, it had reservations.

“It’s a great extra resource, a great motivational tool, but it has resource implications and you have to keep it in perspective of the other things that you really need to do in terms of education,” said Ken Cunningham, the general secretary. “The projects are product-dependent and not readily available to everyone all the time. They have to balance all that with all the more traditional style of teaching, the interpersonal skills. So it’s about getting the balance right.”

Source: Sunday Herald
http://tinyurl.com/42tzq2

… despite £12bn Spent on Nursery Education

One in seven children struggles to write his or her name after a year at primary school, official figures showed yesterday.

Overall, just half of the 556,000 children at this stage were judged to have reached a ‘good level of development’.

The figures, which come from the Department for Children, Schools and Families, apply to pupils in both state and private sectors. While the five-year-olds’ progress was judged to be better than last year, it was still down on 2005 in most areas.

Officials have blamed tougher assessment arrangements for the decline in results since 2005 but the Tories have warned that performance is ’slipping back’.

Ministers have also missed a 2008 target for 53 per cent of children in state-maintained schools and nurseries to meet the expected level of development.

Boys remain behind girls in all developmental areas, especially in writing, where girls are 18 points ahead.

The results mean that a majority of pupils are beginning Year 1 this month lacking key skills.

Under the Government’s system of assessments for five-year-olds, children are judged to have reached a ‘good level’ if they can show they are attentive in class; know the importance of school rules; take turns in conversation; guess at the meaning of simple sentences; write a letter to Father Christmas; blend sounds together to say simple words; and respect others.

Teachers are meant to observe children as they work and play and then record their progress.

Yesterday’s results will intensify calls for the current developmental goals in writing to be scaled back because they are too tough for young children.

One of the goals is for five-year-olds to write simple sentences using basic punctuation.

Just a quarter of youngsters met the standard this year.

Childcare experts have warned that a new ‘nappy curriculum’ being introduced this month - a statutory learning framework for children from birth to five - will put teachers under greater pressure than ever to push youngsters towards such goals.

Children will be forced into formal lessons too soon, they say.

Ministers have asked an inquiry into the primary curriculum to consider the complaints when it reports back next year.

Yesterday’s assessments also showed a persistent gap in attainment between the richest and poorest youngsters.

Children from more affluent areas are already well ahead of pupils in the most deprived parts of the country before they even start school, and the gulf shows little sign of narrowing.

Among five-year-olds in the most deprived 30 per cent of areas in the country, only 38 per cent achieved a good level of development.

This compares with 54 per cent in all other areas - a gap of 16 points. While this is down from 17 points last year, ministers missed a target aimed at reducing the gap to 12 points.

Children’s minister Beverley Hughes said the results showed ‘continued improvements’.

‘But there is more to do to ensure that all children achieve their potential, especially the most disadvantaged.’

Why teenagers are maths dunces

Half of schools are failing to teach maths properly, an Ofsted report warns today.

The education watchdog said that this means millions of teenagers are finishing compulsory education with a poor grasp of the subject.

Teachers are increasingly drilling pupils to pass exams instead of encouraging them to understand crucial maths concepts, the report adds.

Ofsted’s damning conclusion was that rising exam results owe little or nothing to better teaching or a deeper understanding among pupils.

They have instead been inflated by ‘teaching to the test’. Inspectors-also highlighted a growing-culture of dependence on quick-fix ‘booster’ classes for pupils on the borderline between grade thresholds.

Exam bodies were also criticised for designing national exams which test maths skills in bite-size chunks.

Ofsted’s verdict is embarrassing for ministers who have attempted to make political capital out of rising results.

Schools Minister Jim Knight said: ‘There is no reason why testing should result in a narrow focus or uninspiring lessons.

This year’s new secondary curriculum will help bring mathematics to life.’

Source: This is London
http://tinyurl.com/3wafrq

While high school is important, education should begin when children are much younger than that. Because what they learn will ultimately influence the economy of the community they live in.

Bill Millett, founder of Scope View Strategic Planning, spoke at the Champions of Education breakfast Wednesday morning, saying schools and communities need to stop promoting the “warm fuzzy” image and focus more on early education.

“USA is no longer No. 1 like we were in the 1950s,” Millett said. “We are under intellectual and educational assault, and we are getting our butts kicked. Early education is imperative. It’s under-appreciated and under-funded. Today’s kids’ competition for jobs is growing up on at least five other continents.”

He said schools need to focus on not teaching students memorization, per se, but cognitive skills they can use to advance their learning. That can begin with children’s early education — before they’re in kindergarten — so later years will be successful.

“All aspects of adult human capital from work force skills begin with early education,” he said. “In the first four years of a child’s life, a child’s brain learns a lot with cognitive development. We should put more emphasis there. It’s something our competitors in other parts of the world are doing, and we should also.”

Millett said programs such as Smart Start and More At Four give children the early childhood assistance they need so they excel at school during their formative years. This will, in turn, benefit society.

“In 2006, the majority of people getting doctoral degrees in the U.S. — 60 percent — were foreign nationals. A lot of them are getting their degrees in the U.S. and are going home because the opportunities are better,” Millett said. “Americans are getting fat, lazy and complacent.”

He urged community leaders at the meeting to get involved with children’s education and encouraged them to get active in getting students excited about going to school and getting additional degrees. Millett said the U.S. can catch back up to other countries, despite having a larger pool of people to select their workers from, assuming the U.S. doesn’t get complacent with our standing in the world.

“It’s a knowledge competition,” Millett said. “China and India have more honor students than we have students.”

He encouraged the business community to invest in early education, because it’s an investment in the work force development of the future.

“Sometimes, it’s measured long after a term of office expires, but you will see the results,” Millett said.

Source: Hickory Daily Record
http://www2.hickoryrecord.com/content/2008/sep/18/expert-says-early-education-imperative/news/

Is school breaking our boys? Accumulating evidence says yes:

* Boys are kicked out of preschool at 4.5 times the rate of girls.
* Boys lag behind girls in reading and writing in elementary school, a lag that gets bigger in middle school and high school.
* Teenage boys are four times as likely to commit suicide as girls.
* Girls are doing so much better than boys at academics that by 2016 only 40 percent of college undergraduates are expected to be men.

I saw the roots of this miserable trend up close and personal last week when I visited my daughter’s elementary school lunchroom. The girls sat quietly talking and eating. The boys were jumping up, poking each other, spilling juice, running around the table, smooshing their pb&js into a ball. The lunchroom ladies’ response: Sit down and zip your lip. Yikes! These are 5-year-olds we’re talking about here, and this was their first break after a morning of literacy and math lessons. In kindergarten. Is it any wonder boys might conclude that school is not for them?

So I feel lucky to have come across The Trouble With Boys, a new book by Peg Tyre. Peg’s my kinda gal, a former investigative reporter for Newsweek who doesn’t take anyone’s word for it. She’s also the mother of two sons. When she heard that even at fancy New York private schools the struggling students were almost all male, she decided to investigate, looking for solid data as to why. What she found isn’t pretty. Among her findings:

• Teachers and principals know that boys are struggling but feel it’s politically incorrect to suggest that the curriculum needs to be changed to help boys.

• Schools have cut recess and gym and increased classroom time to boost test scores, but the lack of exercise is actually making it harder for boys (and girls) to learn.

• Most reading curricula are based on narrative fiction that turns off boys. How many boys want to read Little House on the Prairie?

There’s a lot of misinformation out there on how boys learn, Tyre found. She cites the example of Michael Gurian, who tells teachers at his popular workshops that neuroscientists have identified a “boy brain” that is less adept at staying focused than is a “girl brain.” At first, Tyre thought this made sense. But then she took the next step and asked the neuroscientists who did the research Gurian cites if this is true. They all said, no way do we know enough about the brain to say there’s a “boy brain.” “When we talk about gender, we’re talking about something that’s pretty complicated,” Tyre told me. “It’s not just nature. It’s not just nurture.” And there will be no simple solutions. But there are smart parents, smart teachers, and smart principals out there who are trying their own experiments to help boys, and getting good results. Tyre’s reporting provides solid information that parents can act on now:

• Boys do much better at reading and writing when the subject matter matches their interests. Savvy parents offer nonfiction books and stories with action and don’t cringe when their darling wants to write about Pokémon or Star Wars. Who cares if the kid’s reading Captain Underpants or The Day My Butt Went Psycho, as long as he loves to read?

• Dads can encourage their sons to read by reading to them on topics they both love. One smart school invited uniformed police officers (macho male ones) to come read to the kids each day.

• Find out how much PE and movement time your child gets, and advocate for more. Research unequivocally shows that all kids do better in school when they get plenty of time to run, jump, and play, and boys need time for tag and other rambunctious games. When you have your kids at home on the weekend, Tyre notes, you don’t keep them locked inside from 8 to 3 because you know they’ll turn into screaming meemies if you do.

All parents want their children to grow up to be happy and successful. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if reading The Gas We Pass: The Story of Farts helped boys get there?

Source: U.S. News & World Report
http://tinyurl.com/6movp5