NUMERACY ACROSS THE SCHOOL

How does the SP2 School implement numeracy across the school?



How does the SP2 School implement numeracy across the school?

Introduction

Psychologists have a great deal to say about cognitive development and how it may be facilitated. The present research tested one practical application of this knowledge. Techniques and principles from developmental psychology were brought to bear on a classic problem: how may we significantly improve academic achievement in an applied setting without a prohibitive investment of resources or costly training?

In this field research, cognitive development was enhanced in the classroom and the subsequent impact on academic performance was assessed. The approach to cognitive development was based on two assumptions. The first is that cognitive development can be meaningfully enhanced without unreasonable expenditure of time, funds, and effort. That may be a tall order, but it has been a perennial goal for cognitive developmental psychologists. The second assumption is that such enhanced cognitive development will subsequently lead to measurable gains in academic performance in non-laboratory situations.

This could happen if the students understood classroom instruction better after their thinking had improved — not an unreasonable supposition. However, a true test of the applicability of procedures advocated by a developmental psychologist is more demanding. The real challenge for applied developmental psychologists is to show that their procedures lead to better results than those already developed by educators. Do gains from instruction in cognition actually lead to greater academic gains than would result from an equal investment of classroom time and resources in instruction that educators have already developed? The present research was designed to test whether approaches developed earlier (Ciancio et al., 2001, Pasnak et al., 1991 and Pasnak et al., 1996) actually produced better results than state of the art instruction on academic content.

The first step was selecting a target population that was likely to be maximally responsive. The age and initial state of cognitive development of the children were key considerations. Studies of cognitive development (e.g., Capron and Duyme, 1989 and Weinberg et al., 1992) indicate that an individual's cognitive performance depends in part upon that person's genetic potential and in part upon where a person is functioning in the range defined by that potential. Children who receive much stimulus, challenge, and nurture might be functioning near the upper limit of their genetic potential; children who had not had such a propitious environment might function closer to the middle of their potential range, and those who were in a less stimulating environment might be functioning closer to the lower limit of their potential.

The second step in choosing a population maximally likely to respond to a cognitive intervention was to select children at an age when cognitive abilities were already changing. It is easier to enhance a developmental process already underway than to instigate development when a child is in a relatively stable state. Early longitudinal research by McCall, Appelbaum, and Hogarty (1973) indicated that changes in psychometric IQ are especially likely at about ages 2, 5-7, and 12-15 years. These coincide with the ages at which Piaget and Inhelder ...