No abstract

No abstract

London, Routledge £30 hb, £12.99 pb, 208 pp. ISBN 0-415-10144-1 (hb), 0-415-101145-X (pb) What a happy circumstance it would be if an educational innovation, which had professional credibility, led to higher pupil scores in national examinations not only in a specific subject but in a range of subjects. In this book Philip Adey & Michael Shayer provide a well-written account of how they believe they have achieved just such a goal.At the heart of their account is a description of the Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE) project in which materials were developed to support intervention in the cognitive development of pupils, with a view to raising levels of thinking capability. The materials were used, over a 2 year programme, with pupils of starting age 11+ or 12 + in 10 schools. Each school provided experimental and control classes and agreed to dedicate about 25% of science curriculum time to the intervention activities. The effects of the intervention were monitored through tests of cognitive development and science achievement, immediately after the programme and then one year later. In addition, the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) performances of the pupils were monitored after a further 2 or 3 years.Immediately after the intervention very limited differences between experimental and control groups were found in relation both to science achievement and cognitive development. One year after the intervention, it was found that any differences which had arisen in cognitive development were maintained and science achievement scores indicated significant positive effects for 12 + boys and 11 + girls. Perhaps, the most striking findings emerge from the GCSE results which were analysed for science, mathematics and English. In science strong positive effects were found with the 12 + boys and 11 + girls and similar patterns emerged in mathematics and English. In English there was an additional positive effect with the 12 + girls.Adey & Shayer argue that these results provide evidence of both long-term and far-transfer effects, supporting the notion of a general cognitive processor which can be positively influenced by appropriate intervention strategies. No small claim, so what of the interventions?The CASE materials were designed to address each of the Piagetian schemata of formal operations (such as proportionality, classification, probability) and also to incorporate the 'principles' of concrete preparation, cognitive conflict, construction zone activity, metacognition and bridging. It is interesting that Vygotskian notions should be drawn upon in assembling these principles of working, and a 'marriage of convenience' between personal and social perspectives presented. On a practical level this makes sense. The interventions are carried out in social groupings and the teacher has a clear role to play in mediating activities and supporting development of thinking. Indeed the principles listed offer a check-list for 'good teaching' irrespective of the theoretical preferences of th...

Three years after the end of a two-year intervention program intended to promote formal operational thinking, the achievement of students initially 11 years of age was tested by their results in British National examinations, taken at age 16. Although the intervention was set within the context of science learning, the effects were found in science, mathematics, and English. In contrast to results reported earlier for the older cohort aged 12 years initially, where the boys showed greater achievement than girls in science and mathematics, here the effect was limited to girls. In comparison with control classes the effect sizes were science, 0 . 6 7~; mathematics, 0.72u, and English, 0 . 6 9~. Although half of the students showed increased achievement in science, which was consistent with the Piagetian model used in the intervention, the achievement of some in science, mathematics, and English was not associated with gains on Piagetian tests above those of control students. These results were attributed to aspects of the intervention methodology intended to enhance metacognition. The distinction between intervention and instruction was discussed in relation to normative data on Piagetian development in adolescents.