Læst 27 gange
eric.ed.gov har udgivet:
Case study research suggests that NLP [neuro-linguistic programming] influencing strategies benefit teacher effectiveness. Maths pedagogy involving higher-order questioning, challenge, problem solving and collaborative working may be a way of improving attainment in adult numeracy learning, however, such strategies may be less effective if the relationship between teacher and learner does not reflect sensitivity to attitudes, beliefs and emotions (areas in which advocates of NLP claim effectiveness). The present study investigated these claims and the combined effect of such approaches using a pre- and post-treatment test design with 173 adult numeracy learners. Teachers were randomly allocated to three conditions, these were: (1) teachers given no training (control condition); (2) teachers trained in innovative maths pedagogy (including more frequent higher-order questioning, challenge, problem solving and collaborative learning); and (3) teachers trained in both NLP and the innovative maths pedagogy. NLP training included suggestion using language patterns modelled from hypnosis, body language modelled from family therapy and spatial anchoring for emotional state management. A significant within-subject mean difference in maths test scores for the innovative maths pedagogy group (MD = 10.97, t(66) = 7.292, less than 0.0005, eta[superscript 2] = 0.446) was nearly twice that of the control (MD = 5.67, t(42) = 3.099, p = 0.003, eta[superscript 2] = 0.186). Although an attainment gap between pre- and post- treatment scores for the innovative treatment group alone (without NLP) appeared to close over time post hoc between-group contrasts indicated differences between pre- and post-treatment means were not statistically significant (p = 0.404 and p = 0.689, respectively). However, with the addition of NLP training, post hoc contrasts showed mean maths attainment had significantly improved compared to the control (p = 0.040) with mean difference, pre- and post-treatment attainment, increased to over three times that of the control (MD = 18.35, t(62) = 9.552, less than 0.0005, eta[superscript 2] = 0.595). CfBT Education Trust carried out this research with funding from the Learning and Skills Improvement Service. (Contains 2 endnotes, 3 tables, and 2 figures.) [Funding for this research was provided by the Learning and Skills Improvement Service.]