APPENDIX C: STRATEGIES AND INTERVENTIONS
A promising approach to the needs of low-income students can be found through “interventions in education”—brief exercises carried out in homes and in schools under the guidance of professionals and/or trained volunteers. I highlight three kinds: 1.) direct, or student-centered interventions; 2.) indirect interventions that focus on the adults in students’ lives, primarily parents, guardians and teachers; and 3.) interventions that combine direct and indirect approaches.
I. Direct Strategies: Focusing on Students
Tutoring and mentoring. The most traditional and time-tested approach involves tutoring and mentoring. Tutors focus on academic skills and mentors focus on “life skills” and role modeling. A number of nonprofit organizations such as Big Brothers, Big Sisters have been operating in this field for many years and have developed state-of-the-art programs.
Mindset interventions. More recently there are a number of new interventions that come out of the field of social psychology, especially interventions that address a student’s sense of belonging, that lead students to see intelligence as malleable rather than fixed, and interventions that help students find value and relevance in their academic work. These interventions can be characterized as “mindset” interventions, for they focus on students’ inner lives, their attitudes, their identity, their beliefs about themselves (“attributions”) and the way they construe their world.
To date, a growing number of these interventions have been carried out on a limited basis by researchers in school settings as controlled experiments. There also is growing evidence that short exercises ranging from one-time classroom activities of 20 minutes to a string of 6-8 such activities can bring about significant changes in academic behavior, both in increasing students’ GPA and in arresting an extended decline in grades.
The power in these interventions lies not only in their content (i.e., the social and emotional factors that undergird learning) but also in the sophistication of their design. The most effective interventions, for example, call upon students to think critically, to shift their perspective, to plan ahead and perhaps most importantly, to advocate to others what they have just experienced.
The most famous interventions involve “growth mindsets,” the Stanford psychologist, Carol Dweck’s life work and the notion that intelligence is not fixed at birth but rather is malleable and can be improved through effort and practice. The brain, in other words, is a muscle that can be strengthened through mental exercise. This represents a powerful shift in attitude on the part of students. Understanding “intelligence” this way also offers students an important motivational factor: a sense of hope.
n brief, these interventions are like a crash course in self-awareness and “metacognition”—especially a student’s ability to see behind a particular situation and discover more universal patterns that govern their behavior. What is particularly encouraging is that many of the interventions that have been piloted in a few locations and are now ready to be replicated on a larger scale.
II. Indirect Strategies: Focusing on adults who interact with students. There has always been the understanding among educators and researchers (and the general public) that the adults in students’ lives play a crucial role in their development. What is relatively new, however, are formal and sustained efforts to incentivize adults to change their priorities and alter their behavior. Let’s call these approaches “indirect strategies.”
Indirect strategies in the home. Here are three examples of “indirect strategies” that help parents of young children (up to age four or five) improve their skills:
These are short and simple approaches, not involving much time or resources. Yet these small “tweaks” can reap great rewards and set in motion new long-term habits.
Indirect strategies at school. Upon entering kindergarten, the number of potential childhood stressors can increase dramatically. Here are two examples of how school adults in schools can indirectly improve the lives of their students:
III. Combining direct and indirect strategies. Linking direct strategies, whether such time-tested direct approaches such as tutoring and mentoring and the newer approaches such as “mindset interventions” with indirect strategies that invest in adults’ skill sets can reap great rewards. Here are some examples:
Imagine teachers who are trained in the structure and design of mindset interventions, then conducting them in their classes or advisory sessions or homeroom periods, and then drawing upon what they’ve learned to counsel individual and small groups of students.
Imagine offering teachers a workshop on how to provide students with “wise feedback,” the art of holding students accountable to high standards while building trust and affirming them at the same time. This is called “the mentor’s dilemma.” (See Gilovich and Ross, The Wisest One in the Room, p. 237)
Imagine a school principal leading an effort to create vivid and memorable school-wide messages that convey to students and teachers alike that failure is an opportunity to develop a “growth mindset” or build one’s capacity for greater resiliency. Imagine, further, teachers aligning these school-wide messages with the self-narratives of their students. Just think how this combined effort can transform a student’s sense of confidence and can-do spirit, especially when faced with disappointment. (See Farrington et al., pp. 76-78)
Imagine, further, grafting on these interventions onto routine the cycles in a school’s schedule and yearly calendar. In so doing, these interventions are no longer one-time events, but are repeated systematically and tactically across a whole school year and throughout a student’s career kindergarten through twelfth grade. For example, such interventions could be implemented at significant transitional points as home to kindergarten, from elementary school to middle school, from middle school to high school, and from high school to college).
Thus, vicious cycles can be transformed into virtuous cycles. This is what researchers call “recursive effects.” (See Appendix D: The Power of Social Context, especially “a gift of time.”)
A word of caution. According to Susan Neuman of the University of Michigan, “interventions are only effective under certain circumstances.” They need to be targeted with precision. They need to be timed to the right moments in a child’s cognitive and affective development. They need to be delivered with the right amount of intensity and energy. And they need to fill the right gaps in a child’s academic skill set. In addition, interventions need to connect with the student’s support network and be aligned with professional staff development. Finally, interventions need to utilize the right metrics, whether to ensure accountability or to contribute to research.
If one or more of these are not accurately and skillfully applied, then the efficacy of the intervention can be dramatically reduced. So, let the educator beware: do it right or you risk both wasting time and doing damage. See Susan B. Neuman, Changing the Odds for Children at Risk: Seven Essential Principles of Educational Programs that Break the Cycle of Poverty (2008).
A promising approach to the needs of low-income students can be found through “interventions in education”—brief exercises carried out in homes and in schools under the guidance of professionals and/or trained volunteers. I highlight three kinds: 1.) direct, or student-centered interventions; 2.) indirect interventions that focus on the adults in students’ lives, primarily parents, guardians and teachers; and 3.) interventions that combine direct and indirect approaches.
I. Direct Strategies: Focusing on Students
Tutoring and mentoring. The most traditional and time-tested approach involves tutoring and mentoring. Tutors focus on academic skills and mentors focus on “life skills” and role modeling. A number of nonprofit organizations such as Big Brothers, Big Sisters have been operating in this field for many years and have developed state-of-the-art programs.
Mindset interventions. More recently there are a number of new interventions that come out of the field of social psychology, especially interventions that address a student’s sense of belonging, that lead students to see intelligence as malleable rather than fixed, and interventions that help students find value and relevance in their academic work. These interventions can be characterized as “mindset” interventions, for they focus on students’ inner lives, their attitudes, their identity, their beliefs about themselves (“attributions”) and the way they construe their world.
To date, a growing number of these interventions have been carried out on a limited basis by researchers in school settings as controlled experiments. There also is growing evidence that short exercises ranging from one-time classroom activities of 20 minutes to a string of 6-8 such activities can bring about significant changes in academic behavior, both in increasing students’ GPA and in arresting an extended decline in grades.
The power in these interventions lies not only in their content (i.e., the social and emotional factors that undergird learning) but also in the sophistication of their design. The most effective interventions, for example, call upon students to think critically, to shift their perspective, to plan ahead and perhaps most importantly, to advocate to others what they have just experienced.
The most famous interventions involve “growth mindsets,” the Stanford psychologist, Carol Dweck’s life work and the notion that intelligence is not fixed at birth but rather is malleable and can be improved through effort and practice. The brain, in other words, is a muscle that can be strengthened through mental exercise. This represents a powerful shift in attitude on the part of students. Understanding “intelligence” this way also offers students an important motivational factor: a sense of hope.
n brief, these interventions are like a crash course in self-awareness and “metacognition”—especially a student’s ability to see behind a particular situation and discover more universal patterns that govern their behavior. What is particularly encouraging is that many of the interventions that have been piloted in a few locations and are now ready to be replicated on a larger scale.
II. Indirect Strategies: Focusing on adults who interact with students. There has always been the understanding among educators and researchers (and the general public) that the adults in students’ lives play a crucial role in their development. What is relatively new, however, are formal and sustained efforts to incentivize adults to change their priorities and alter their behavior. Let’s call these approaches “indirect strategies.”
Indirect strategies in the home. Here are three examples of “indirect strategies” that help parents of young children (up to age four or five) improve their skills:
- They learn new strategies for play.
- They are coached on how modulating the tone of voice can increase their child’s sense of calm and wellbeing.
- They get to observe themselves interact with their children through videotaping.
These are short and simple approaches, not involving much time or resources. Yet these small “tweaks” can reap great rewards and set in motion new long-term habits.
Indirect strategies at school. Upon entering kindergarten, the number of potential childhood stressors can increase dramatically. Here are two examples of how school adults in schools can indirectly improve the lives of their students:
- Kirabo Jackson, an economist from Northwestern University, offers schools
- Cybele Raver of the Chicago School Readiness Project coaches teachers in the art
III. Combining direct and indirect strategies. Linking direct strategies, whether such time-tested direct approaches such as tutoring and mentoring and the newer approaches such as “mindset interventions” with indirect strategies that invest in adults’ skill sets can reap great rewards. Here are some examples:
Imagine teachers who are trained in the structure and design of mindset interventions, then conducting them in their classes or advisory sessions or homeroom periods, and then drawing upon what they’ve learned to counsel individual and small groups of students.
Imagine offering teachers a workshop on how to provide students with “wise feedback,” the art of holding students accountable to high standards while building trust and affirming them at the same time. This is called “the mentor’s dilemma.” (See Gilovich and Ross, The Wisest One in the Room, p. 237)
Imagine a school principal leading an effort to create vivid and memorable school-wide messages that convey to students and teachers alike that failure is an opportunity to develop a “growth mindset” or build one’s capacity for greater resiliency. Imagine, further, teachers aligning these school-wide messages with the self-narratives of their students. Just think how this combined effort can transform a student’s sense of confidence and can-do spirit, especially when faced with disappointment. (See Farrington et al., pp. 76-78)
Imagine, further, grafting on these interventions onto routine the cycles in a school’s schedule and yearly calendar. In so doing, these interventions are no longer one-time events, but are repeated systematically and tactically across a whole school year and throughout a student’s career kindergarten through twelfth grade. For example, such interventions could be implemented at significant transitional points as home to kindergarten, from elementary school to middle school, from middle school to high school, and from high school to college).
Thus, vicious cycles can be transformed into virtuous cycles. This is what researchers call “recursive effects.” (See Appendix D: The Power of Social Context, especially “a gift of time.”)
A word of caution. According to Susan Neuman of the University of Michigan, “interventions are only effective under certain circumstances.” They need to be targeted with precision. They need to be timed to the right moments in a child’s cognitive and affective development. They need to be delivered with the right amount of intensity and energy. And they need to fill the right gaps in a child’s academic skill set. In addition, interventions need to connect with the student’s support network and be aligned with professional staff development. Finally, interventions need to utilize the right metrics, whether to ensure accountability or to contribute to research.
If one or more of these are not accurately and skillfully applied, then the efficacy of the intervention can be dramatically reduced. So, let the educator beware: do it right or you risk both wasting time and doing damage. See Susan B. Neuman, Changing the Odds for Children at Risk: Seven Essential Principles of Educational Programs that Break the Cycle of Poverty (2008).