Prof Steve Dinham

Research Director
Teaching, Learning and Leadership
“The chains of habit are too weak to be felt until they
are too strong to be broken.”
 Dr Samuel Johnson

 Much of what we do in education is the result of

taken-for-granted routines, habits, mind-sets,
ideologies, superstitions and untested assumptions
and beliefs.
 However, we are now in the age of evidence and we
need to ask some hard questions (what?, why?,
how?, effects?).
 Is your school in a groove or a rut?

2
“ …the focus of every school, every educational
system and every education department or
faculty of education – [should be] student
learning and achievement.” Dinham, 2008: 1).

3
 The Declaration articulates two important
goals for education in Australia:
◦ Goal 1: Australian schooling promotes equity and
excellence
◦ Goal 2: All young Australians become:
■ successful learners
■ confident and creative individuals
■ active and informed citizens.

4
 Until the mid-1960s the view was that
schools make almost no difference to
student achievement, which was largely
pre-determined by socio-economic status,
family circumstances and innate ability
(Coleman Report, 1966).
 However, research has powerfully refuted
that view.
 We now know that teachers, teaching and
schools make a significant difference to
student success.

5
 As a result, there has been a major
international emphasis on improving the
quality of teachers and teaching since the
1980s.
 We now know how teacher expertise
develops and we know what good teaching
looks like. However we also know that
teacher quality varies within schools and
across the nation.
 A quality teacher in every classroom is the
ultimate aim, but how to achieve this is the
big question and challenge.

6
‘... the most important factor affecting student
learning is the teacher. ... The immediate and
clear implication of this finding is that
seemingly more can be done to improve
education by improving the effectiveness of
teachers than by any other single factor’.
Wright, S.; Horn, S. & Sanders, W. (1997).
'Teacher and Classroom Context Effects on
Student Achievement: Implications for Teacher
Evaluation', Journal of Personnel Evaluation in
Education, 11, pp. 57-67.

7
8
 QUALITY
TEACHING

FOCUS ON THE
STUDENT
(Learner, Person)

LEADERSHIP PROFESSIONAL
LEARNING

9
 Student Learning and
Achievement
 Quality Teaching in Action
 Professional Learning
 Leadership for Quality

Teaching and Learning

10
What Does Current Research Tell Us?
Prof John Hattie (Uni Auckland): Meta-analysis of
over 50,000 studies
Major sources of variance in student achievement:
 Student: accounts for 50% of variance in student achievement
 Home: 5-10%
 School: 5-10% (principals, other leaders an influence)
 Peer Effects: 5-10%
 Teachers: 30%
 “It is what teachers know, do, and care about which is very
powerful in this learning equation”.
 Reference: Hattie, J. (2003). ‘Teachers Make a Difference:
What is the Research Evidence?’,
http://www.leadspace.govt.nz/leadership/articles/teachers-
make-a-difference.php

12
 Effect size (ES) is a name given to a family of
indices that measure the magnitude of a treatment
effect. Unlike significance tests, these indices are
independent of sample size.
 ES measures are the common currency of meta-
analysis studies that summarize the findings from
a specific area of research.
 The larger the ES, the greater the influence of the
treatment effect.
◦ Note: As a guide, ES < 0.0 negative impact; 0.0 > 0.2
no/weak impact; 0.2 – 0.4 small, possibly significant
impact; 0.4 – 0.6 moderately significant impact; > 0.6
large, significant impact.

13
 An ES of 1.0 indicates an increase of one standard
deviation on the outcome, typically advancing
achievement by 2-3 years or about 50% (see Hattie,
2009: chapter 2)
 Almost everything works
 We need to set the bar at about 0.4 at which point
we start to see real difference
 However we also need to consider variance – it
won’t be 0.4 for every student
 We also need to think about how various
interventions work together, or not.

14
 Over 750 Meta-analyses of over 50,000
international studies
 See Hattie, J. (2007). ‘Developing Potentials

for Learning: Evidence, assessment, and

progress’, EARLI Biennial Conference,
Budapest, Hungary.
http://www.education.auckland.ac.nz/uoa/
hattie-conference

15
Influence Effect Size
Mobility (shifting schools) -.34
Retention -.16
Television -.14
Summer vacation -.09

16
Influence Effect Size
Open v Traditional .01
Multi-grade/age classes .04
Inductive teaching .06
Reading: whole language .06
Perceptual-motor programs .08
Out of school experiences .09
Distance education .09
Web based learning .09

17
Influence Effect Size
Ability grouping .11
Teacher training .11
Diet on achievement .12
Teacher subject matter knowledge .12
Gender (boys-girls) .12
Multi-media methods .15
Problem based learning .15
Home school programs .16

18
Influence Effect Size
Extra-curricular programs .17
Family structure .18
Co-/team teaching .19
Learning hierarchies .19
Aptitude/treatment interventions .19
Individualised instruction .20
Charter schools .20
Religious schools .20

19
Influence Effect Size
Class size .21
Teaching test taking .22
Finances .23
Summer school .23
Competitive learning .24
Programmed instruction .24
Within class grouping .25
Mainstreaming .28

20
Influence Effect Size
Desegregation .28
Exercise/relaxation .28
Audio-based teaching .28
Home visiting by teachers .29
Reducing anxiety .30
Principals/school leaders .30
Ability grouping for gifted students .30
Homework .31

21
Influence Effect Size
Inquiry based teaching .31
Simulations and gaming .32
Reading: exposure to reading .36
Bilingual programs .37
Teacher positive expectations .37
Computer assisted instruction .37
Enrichment on gifted .39
Integrated curriculum programs .39

22
Influence Effect Size
Adjunct aids .41
Hypermedia instruction .41
Behavioural objectives/adv organ .41
Self-concept on achievement .43
Frequent/effects of testing .46
Early intervention .47
Motivation on learning .48
Small group learning .49

23
Influence Effect Size
Questioning .49
Cooperative learning .49
Reading: 2nd/3rd chance programs .50
Play programs .50
Visual based/audio-visual teaching .51
Outdoor programs .52
Concept mapping .52
Peer influences .53

24
Influence Effect Size
Keller's mastery learning prog .53
Reading: Phonics instruction .53
Reading: Visual-perception prog .55
Parental Involvement .55
Peer tutoring .55
Goals – challenging .56
Mastery learning .57
Social skills programs .57

25
Influence Effect Size
Socio-economic status .57
Home environment .57
Providing worked examples .57
Reading: Comprehension programs .58
Direct instruction .59
Time on task .59
Study skills .59

26
Influence Effect Size
Acceleration of gifted .60
Problem solving teaching .61
Teacher professional development .64
Reading: Repeated reading prog .67
Reading: Vocabulary programs .67
Meta-cognition strategies .67
Teaching students self-verbalisation.67
Creativity programs .70
Prov. Formative eval to teachers .70

27
Influence Effect Size
Feedback .72
Teacher-student relationships .72
Prior achievement .73
Reciprocal teaching .74
Quality of teaching .77
Classroom behavioural .80
Absence of disruptive students .86
Self-report grades 1.44

28
 The teacher and the quality of his or her teaching
are major influences on student achievement, along
with the individual student and his or her prior
achievement (all have large effect sizes).
 School-based influences (beyond the classroom)
have weaker effects on student achievement.
 Structural and organisational arrangements (open
vs traditional classrooms; multi-age vs age graded
classes; ability grouping; gender; class size;
mainstreaming) have negligible or small effects on
student learning. It is the quality of teaching that
occurs within these structural arrangements which
is important.

29
 Examples of ‘active teaching’ (reciprocal teaching;
feedback; teaching self-verbalisation; meta-
cognition strategies; direct instruction; mastery
learning; testing) have large to moderate effects on
student achievement.
 Effect sizes are negligible or small for ‘facilitory
teaching’ (simulations and games; inquiry-based
teaching; individualised instruction; problem-based
learning; differentiated teaching for boys and girls;
web-based learning; whole language reading;
inductive teaching).
 Strategies to promote and remediate literacy figure
prominently in Hattie’s full list. Literacy is the
foundation of student achievement.

30
 SES and family background do have moderate/large
effect sizes
 SES is about:
◦ Foundations/advantage
◦ Opportunity
◦ Support
◦ Role models and encouragement
 SES is not about:
◦ Innate ability
◦ Social-biological determinism
◦ Potential

31
 Reading PISA 2000
PISA
Score 800

700

600

500

400

300

200
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
SES

32
 Reading PISA 2000
PISA
Score 800

700

600

500

400

300

200
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
SES

33
 Poor student performance is spread across
the SES spectrum
 Schooling represents an obstacle course.

Some students have certain advantages and

others have obstacles.
 Life is not fair, but good teaching and good

schools can help overcome SES disadvantage

34
“ … school improvement by itself has potential to
make an enormous difference in the lives of
children even if broader social change is slow in
coming. The children who depend most on good
schooling for academic growth are the least likely
to receive it. If school improvement begins early in
life and if sustained, the most disadvantaged
children stand to benefit most. This reasoning
suggests that increasing the amount and the
quality of schooling to which these children have
access would reduce inequality in academic
achievement.”

35
 Since the 1970s
 More than 70 models
 Psychologists and neuroscientists believe there is
little efficacy for these models which rest on
dubious grounds
 Confusion with teaching strategies (as with
‘constructivism’ – see over)
 “It is hard not to sceptical about these learning
preference claims” (Hattie, 2009: 197).
 Problems caused by categorisation, labelling,
limiting learning experiences; potential harm

36
“… one of the most damaging things we can do
to people is to put them into categories and
treat them accordingly.” (Dinham, 2008: 2)

37
 ‘As constructivism has become the dominant view of how
students learn, it may seem obvious to equate active learning
with active methods of instruction. Thus, educators who wish
to use constructivist methods of instruction are often
encouraged to focus on discovery learning – in which students
are free to work in a learning environment with little or no
guidance. Under the banner of social constructivism, the call
for discovery learning remains, but with a modest shift in form
– students are expected to work in groups in a learning
environment with little or no guidance. … The research in this
brief review shows that the formula constructivism = hands-
on activity is a formula for educational disaster’.
◦ Mayer, R. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure
Discovery Learning?, American Psychologist, 59(1) ,14-19.

38
1. Carefully explain to students an
assignment or learning activity, including
key terms and directions.
2. Provide students with the assessment
rubric, including criteria and the
marking/assessment scale/method for
each item/criterion.
 Optional: Jointly discuss and determine criteria
to be used.
3. Students complete the activity (individually
or in groups), using rubric as a guide.

39
4. Students assess their work using the
rubric.
 Optional: Students assess another student’s
work, discuss with student concerned.
5. Teacher assesses each student’s work,
providing feedback using rubric.
6. Student and teacher discuss/compare their
assessments.
 One-to-one conferences are powerful

40
 ‘In a nutshell: The teacher decides the
learning intentions and success criteria,
makes them transparent to the students,
demonstrates by modelling, evaluates if they
understand what they had been told by
checking for understanding, and re-telling
them what they had been told by tying it all
together with closure.’ (Hattie, 2009: 205-
206).
◦ It is a major mistake to confuse direct
instruction/explicit teaching with didactic teaching.

41
 “Look at learning or mastery in fields as diverse as
sports, the arts, languages, the sciences or recreational
activities and it’s easy to see how important feedback is
to learning and accomplishment. An expert teacher,
mentor or coach can readily explain, demonstrate and
detect flaws in performance. He or she can also identify
talent and potential, and build on these.
 In contrast, trial and error learning or poor teaching are
less effective and take longer. If performance flaws are
not detected and corrected, these can become ingrained
and will be much harder to eradicate later. Learners who
don’t receive instruction, encouragement and correction
can become disillusioned and quit due to lack of
progress.”
(Dinham, Feedback on Feedback, 2008)

42
The four questions of Students:
1. What can I do?
2. What can’t I do?
3. How does my work compare with that of
others?
4. How can I do better?

43
“When asked to provide evidence and guidance on
enhancing the quality of teaching and student
performance, I’m usually equivocal about
advocating quick fixes … In the case of feedback,
however, I’m prepared to state categorically that if
you focus on providing students with improved,
quality feedback in individual classrooms,
departments and schools you’ll have an almost
immediate positive effect.
The research evidence is clear: great teachers give
great feedback, and every teacher is capable of
giving more effective feedback.” (Dinham, Feedback
on Feedback, 2008).

44
G. Nuthall (2007). The Hidden Lives of
Learners. Wellington: NZCER.
 80% of feedback students receive about their

work in primary school comes from other

students
 80% of this student-student feedback is

incorrect.

45
I suggest that you begin a professional conversation
about feedback by asking eight questions:
1. What are our present approaches – formal and
informal – to student feedback? Conduct an audit.
2. Are our assessment methods and criteria clear,
valid and reliable? Identify the links between
assessment and feedback.
3. Do our students understand what is meant by
feedback?
4. Is the feedback our students receive infrequent,
unfocused, unhelpful, inconsistent or negative?
OR

46
5. Is the feedback we provide focused, comprehensive,
consistent and improvement oriented, addressing the
four key questions raised above? (especially How can I
do better?)
6. How does the feedback our students receive relate to
parental feedback through reports, interviews and
parent nights? Is feedback to students and parents
consistent?
7. How can we provide our students with improved
feedback?
8. How will we know if it works? What evidence will we
need?
 The answers to these questions will provide an
important foundation for improving the quality of
teaching and student achievement in our schools.
 However, feedback is only one part of the equation. It is
not a substitute or remedy for poor teaching.

47
Case Study: Successful Senior Secondary
Teaching
 Experts notice features and meaningful
patterns of information that are not noticed
by novices.
 Experts have acquired a great deal of
content knowledge that is organised in ways
that reflect a deep understanding of their
subject matter.
 Experts’ knowledge cannot be reduced to
sets of isolated facts or propositions but,
instead, reflects contexts of applicability.
 Experts are able to flexibly retrieve
important aspects of their knowledge with
little attentional effort.

49
 May appear ‘arational’, intuitive, non-
analytic
 Understand and solve problems at a deeper
level
 ‘Know’ their students; students ‘know’ them
 Though experts know their disciplines
thoroughly, this does not guarantee that
they are able to teach others.
 Both teacher and students have high
expectations
 Experience gained over time important
 Expert teachers can’t (easily) articulate their
practice

50
51
 identify the relationship between teaching
methods and HSC outcomes for students
 identify the characteristics of successful

HSC teaching methodology

 consider the implications of the study

findings for improving teacher efficiency

52
1. School Background
2. Subject Faculty
3. Personal Qualities
4. Relationships With Students
5. Professional Development
6. Resources and Planning
7. Teaching Strategies

53
 Teachers genuinely expert in their
subject area(s), and enjoyed teaching
 Three sorts of knowledge essential:

◦ Subject content knowledge (what subject

content to teach)
◦ Subject pedagogic knowledge (how to teach
particular subject content)
◦ Subject course knowledge (subject
curriculum, assessment, exam knowledge)

54
 Lessons were student centred and teacher
directed.
 Teachers were highly responsive to students

and highly demanding, i.e. authoritative,

rather than uninvolved, permissive or
authoritarian.
 Mutual respect, confidence and high

expectations.

55
 Although wide range of strategies used, key
common factor was emphasis on having
students think, solve problems and apply
knowledge.
 Understanding built in layers, connections.
 Frequent assessment and feedback.
 Teachers saw their role as challenging

students beyond demands of the HSC.

56
 Assisted note building, ownership of note-
making
 Group work, community learning more

common than might be expected

 Good relationships and positive classroom

climate essential
 Overall, no instant recipe for teaching

success, yet much can be learned from

successful teachers and faculties – a
framework for reflection and action

57
 Overall, the quality of the teacher and the
quality of teaching (large effect sizes) are
much more important than structural or
working conditions (negligible or small
effect sizes), demonstrating the futility and
waste of ‘fiddling around the edges’ of
schooling without sufficiently addressing
the quality of teachers and the quality of
teaching within schools and classrooms.

58
 Quality teaching matters and it’s time we
started acting like it.
 A quality teacher in every classroom is the

biggest equity issue in Australian Education

today.
 “It’s no use saying ‘we are doing our best’.

You have got to succeed in doing what is

necessary”. (Sir Winston Churchill)

59
60
 Teaching, like life generally, is heavily
dependent on relationships.

62
 Work of Diana Baumrind on parenting styles
 Two dimensions underlie parenting style:

Responsiveness - ‘the extent to which parents

intentionally foster individuality, self-regulation
and assertion by being attuned, supportive, and
acquiescent to children’s special needs and
demands’.
Demandingness - ‘the claims parents make on
children to become integrated into the family
whole, by their maturity demands, supervision,
disciplinary efforts and willingness to confront the
child who disobeys’. (Baumrind, 1991: 62)

63
 Uninvolved – low responsiveness, low
demandingness;
 Authoritarian - low responsiveness, high
demandingness;
 Permissive – high responsiveness, low
demandingness, and
 Authoritative – high responsiveness, high
demandingness.

64
“… authoritative parents are high on both
responsiveness and demandingness. They
are warm and supportive of their children,
aware of their current developmental levels
and sensitive to their needs. They also,
however, have high expectations, and set
appropriate limits while providing structure
and consistent rules, the reasons for which
they explain to their children, rather than
simply expecting unthinking obedience.

65
While they maintain adult authority they are
also willing to listen to their child and to
negotiate about rules and situations. This
combination of sensitivity, caring, high
expectations and structure has been shown
to have the best consequences for children,
who commonly display academic
achievement, good social skills, moral
maturity, autonomy and high self esteem.”
(Scott & Dinham, 2005)

66
 Can the four types of parenting identified by
Baumrind be productively applied to
teaching?

67
 Study of Successful NSW HSC Teaching
(Ayres, Dinham & Sawyer)
 Study of faculties and teams achieving
exceptional educational outcomes Years 7-
10 (AESOP project)
 Study of a primary school where boys
outperform girls (Dinham, Buckland,
Callingham, Mays)
 Evaluation of AGQTP Action Learning for
NSW DET (Aubusson, Brady & Dinham)

68
 Uninvolved Teaching
 Authoritarian Teaching
 Permissive Teaching
 Authoritative Teaching

69
 RESPONSIVENESS
Low High
High
DEMANDINGNESS

Authoritarian Authoritative
Teaching Teaching

Uninvolved Permissive
Teaching Teaching

Low

70
What might each type of Teaching look like?
 Uninvolved Teaching
 Authoritarian Teaching
 Permissive Teaching
 Authoritative Teaching

71
 “We argued that an authoritative teaching
style where high responsiveness is
accompanied with high demandingness
provides the best model for enhancing both
student achievement and self esteem, and
that a pre-occupation with building student
self esteem through a permissive approach
in the hope that this will translate into
student achievement and development is
counter productive.

72
We noted recent research where schools that
were successful in facilitating students’
academic, personal and social development
achieved this through an effective balance of
focus on student achievement and student
welfare, regardless of whether the school
might be perceived by others as being either
a ‘welfare’ or ‘academic’ school, an unhelpful
and damaging false dichotomy” (Scott &
Dinham, 2005; Dinham, 2005).

73
 Overall focus on students as learners and
people
 Expect a lot, give a lot
 Clear, agreed high standards
 Everybody knows where he or she stands
 Flexibility and compassion when needed
 Recognition: find ways for all students to be
successful

74
 Create a culture of doing one’s best
 Centrality of student welfare
 Focus on “getting students into learning”, not

“warm fuzzies”, self-esteem, self concept

 Students see student welfare has something

done for them, not to them

 Early, appropriate intervention

75
 In the early 1960s education generally was
characterised by high demandingness and
low responsiveness, i.e., the relationship
between schools and students was
authoritarian.
 A wave of social change saw pressure to
make schools more responsive to students
and their needs.

76
 However, demandingness and responsiveness
were falsely dichotomised
 Greater responsiveness was thought to
require less demandingness, and thus the
relationship between schools and students
became more permissive as demandingness
decreased and responsiveness increased .

77
 This false dichotomy and others
(knowledge/skills; subject content/process;
academic/welfare; competition/
collaboration; student centred/teacher
centred; ‘sage’/ ‘guide’) has resulted in many
of the problems we see in schools today, e.g.,
◦ Disengagement, low expectations, behaviourial
problems, role conflict and ambiguity, social
determinism/stigmatisation, under-achievement,
abrogation of teacher responsibility, fear of
‘competition’, learning must be ‘fun’, grade
inflation

78
 When such problems occur, there is a
tendency to conclude that responsiveness has
not gone far enough and is still being
hindered by too high demandingness.
 Thus, problems are further exacerbated

79
 Some who speak out about this situation are
seen as traditionalists or part of a ‘back to
basics’ movement, i.e., seeking more
authoritarianism.
 However, the best teachers/leaders and
schools today exhibit both high
demandingness and high responsiveness, i.e.,
the relationship between schools, teachers,
leaders and students is authoritative.

80
 Quality teaching matters
 Leadership is the big enabler
 Professional Learning is essential
 The best classrooms, departments, schools, and
even systems have a central focus on students as
learners and people
 Educational systems, leaders and teachers need to
plan, proceed, assess, evaluate and modify as
necessary ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE.
 Data is not just about compliance – it is about
improvement
 Vision is important but it must rest on evidence.

81
82
Ayres, P.; Dinham, S. & Sawyer, W. (1999). Successful Teaching in the NSW Higher School Certificate .
Sydney: NSW Department of Education and Training.
Ayres, P.; Dinham, S. & Sawyer, W. (2000). ‘Successful Senior Secondary Teaching’, Quality Teaching
Series, No 1, Australian College of Education, September, pp. 1-20.
Ayres, P.; Dinham, S. & Sawyer, W. (2004). ‘Effective Teaching in the Context of a Grade 12 High Stakes
External Examination in New South Wales, Australia’, British Educational Research Journal, 30 (1), pp.
141-165.
Dinham, S. (2009). ‘Teacher Effects – What makes a difference to student achievement?’, The Spray, 3,
NSWIT (in press).
Dinham, S. (2008). ‘Feedback on Feedback’, Teacher, May, pp. 20-23.
Dinham, S. (2008). How to get your School Moving and Improving: An evidence-based approach .
Melbourne: ACER Press.
Dinham, S. (2008). ‘Powerful Teacher Feedback’, Synergy, 6(2), pp. 35-38. Available at:
http://www.slav.schools.net.au/synergy/vol6num2/dinham.pdf
Dinham, S. (2007). Leadership for Exceptional Educational Outcomes . Teneriffe, Qld.: Post Pressed.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning. London: Routledge.
Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). ‘The Power of Feedback’, Review of Educational Research , 77(1), pp.
81-112.
Marzano, R.; Pickering, D. & Pollock, J. (2005). Classroom Instruction that Works – Research-based
strategies for increasing student achievement . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
National Research Council. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School . Washington,
DC: National Research Council.

83
Professor Stephen Dinham
Research Director – Teaching, Learning and
Leadership
ACER
Private Bag 55
Camberwell Vic 3124
Email: dinham@acer.edu.au
Phone: 03 9277 5463
Website:
www.acer.edu.au/staffbio/dinham_stephen.html
Publications:
http://works.bepress.com/stephen_dinham/

84