BS: Slippery Scholars

Subject: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 08:53 AM

I heard a news report a few days ago which really made me think - but I won't reveal what it made me think for a while. I'd rather see other people's responses first.

The article concerned a school that has decided children can wear slippers all day, rather than shoes. They are doing so because of a study looking at schools all over the world and schools where students do not wear shoes score significantly higher in standardised tests.   The head teacher explained that this allowed them to teach a wide variety of subjects they might not otherwise address and when questioned, offered Time Management as an example.
Ok, 'catters, comments, questions, thoughts?

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 09:41 AM

Micro cephalic administrators are in need of a statistic course and logic classes.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 10:13 AM

Subjective view from me: it's a great idea. I have worn shoes and socks just once in the last twelve months, I wear sandals (never flip-flops) without socks all year round and I go barefoot indoors (and outdoors whenever practical). It's wonderfully comfortable and you get cold feet far less often than you'd think. If you're a bit knackered and have been on your feet a lot, walk barefoot in wet grass for two minutes. It makes you feel great again. Children who are not forced to wear constricting footwear will grow up to to have beautiful, trouble-free feet. Told you it would be subjective!

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Mr Red
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 11:24 AM

Kids learn when they are engaged.

How you engage them is the question. And a big slice of that comes from the teachers. Like parents! And how old are these kids? Primary.

I see people (mostly mothers) get on the bus with kids in push chairs and some face the kid and engage. Some point them the other way (wrong for safety too) and proceed to happytap on the phones.
I don't see the results - or do I? I often hear kids' shouts getting louder! Guess which.
It ain't rocket science. Kids learn faster if you engage in their interests.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:07 PM

As a lifelong primary teacher I feel that footwear is a very strange factor to consider when assessing the success or otherwise of an education system. Culture must come into it, and teaching methods, class sizes, equipment and resources, discipline standards, hours of education per day, testing procedures, expectations and so on and on...

When I was teaching, the pupils wore quite an odd assortment of footwear, particularly in the very deprived Glasgow school where the children were ill-fed and ill-clothed, and suffered from scabies, rickets, malnutrition, impetigo and headlice. I doubt whether their progress or lack of it was due to the fact their shoes were in a lamentable condition, or on their feet at all.

If anyone were to ask me why some countries have a higher success rate among their pupils I might offer the following:-

1) Who says that one system is better than another? Maybe another country is strait-jacketing their students and the price for academic success is an extremely stultifying school experience.

2) Discipline may be much tighter in other cultures. My husband's country has the 'teachers' walloping the unfortunate pupils with huge sticks.

3) Many countries implement the repetition method, making the children say over and over again the facts they need to learn. This isn't learning in my opinion, (except maybe learning how to mimic a parrot)

4) Some places (Japan for example) drive their students so hard with hours of homework and immense pressure to succeed that quite a number are driven to suicide or mental health problems. Not recommended.

5) Parental support for the school and for education may be greater in some cultures/societies than others. In some countries, it's revered and enormously valued, in others not so much.

6) Academic success is mostly down to good teaching. It's irrelevant what anyone wears (pupils or teachers) but it's essential that the teacher has a vocation for the job, an instinctive knowledge of what will work for each individual child and the ability to interest and stimulate the class. Plus (it has to be said) a good grasp of discipline and benevolent control. (No lesson on this Earth is going to be effective if no-one is paying attention.)

I don't think slippers are going to make an iota of difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 01:07 PM

It's not irrelevant if the alternative footwear is more comfortable. I get all the rest of wassup-with-schools stuff, but I'm sticking to the footwear point!

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 01:20 PM

True Steve, comfort is important. But when you're scratching flea-bites and picking at your impetigo, feeling very hungry and reflecting on your drunken father's attack on your mum last night, you aren't too concerned about your feet.
Actually, the poorer children in my class wore gym shoes with the toes cut out (probably inherited from another member of the family) which probably weren't too bad comfort-wise, although rather smelly it has to be said.

I'm like you though. I've just come back from a visit to Norwich and wore my faithful open sandals over bare feet. I hate blooming shoes, and have only one pair which are for snowy conditions. I suppose I look a bit eccentric but I don't care a pin.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 01:37 PM

Ok, I didn't intend to get back to the thread yet, but there have been a few interesting points. I have no problem with steve's argument, and the one about getting healthier feet overall was not one that occurred to me. I suspect given things like the social pressures for trainers, and football boots and the rest would stop it making much difference, but it is still a good point.

But Steve's arguments were not the one's the head teacher used, so i am closer to Donuel's position. The whole thing seems an excellent exemplar in faulty logic, misunderstanding, and self induced errors. I would have said self delusion but while accurate that is far too strong for what I mean. Primarily a confusion between correlation and causation, but that's really just the start of it.

I am also in agreement with Mr Red and Senoufou about the importance of dealing with the child as a person and that schemes like this are unlikely to much good, but it was the lack of intellectual coherence in the news report that drew my attention.

On the dealing with individuals: i remember reading of a study by IBM in the sixties, I think. In those days most computer ran from.punched cards made from coding sheets and computer listings were on paper that was 14 inches by 11 (closed) or 14 by 22 with an open fanfold. So IBM was interested in how large the deak needed to be. So they gave people larger desks and productivity went up. Then they made the desks larger again and productivity went up again. And the same thing happened again when even larger desks were introduced. This was beginning to get odd, so they revertes to the original size - and productivity went up again. Eventually they realised that whatevwr the effect of the desk size it was swamped by the idea they were being monitored/valued (take negative or positive view as you wish).


So I would not be at all surprised to learn this school did get better results after allowing slippers. But whether footwear has anything to do with it is another matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: JHW
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 01:54 PM

We couldn't afford Startrites so we had to wear Startrongs

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 01:56 PM

Reminds me of the joke (maybe based on a true story) where the bigger kids were having fun with Johnny by offering him a choice between a nickel and a dime. Johnny made them laugh when he took the nickel. One of the playground monitors took pity on him, took him aside, and told him that the dime was worth twice what the nickel was.

"I know THAT", said Johnny, "but if I take the dime they'll stop giving me MONEY."

Considering how much we don't know and are still learning about how the brain is wired, I appreciate the frankness of the folks who say "This apparently works, and we really don't know why."

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 02:05 PM

DMcG, I agree that almost any form of monitoring will produce an improvement, as it's giving some form of attention to the people under study, and it encourages them.
The Glasgow school where I was employed for five years was actually the subject of a national social study. The pupils (aged 6yrs) were weighed and measured, their diets investigated and their home conditions looked at. The results were absolutely pitiful. In comparison with various national 'norms' the children were way behind in everything (hardly surprising) I noticed that during the two weeks of the study, the poor little souls were coming to school in slightly cleaner clothes and having had a quick wash of faces and hands. Many had 'nit treatment' plastered on their hair. The parents obviously felt a bit under pressure to make improvements. But it didn't last of course.
However, it did result in a residential place (in Mugdock, in the countryside) for 6 weeks for the weaker ones, offering nourishing food and plenty of fresh air. And a 'spray bath' was installed at the school for each child to be washed by a lady once a week. I'm proud to say I managed to raise their reading ages by one and in some cases two years by the end of their year with me. But none of that was to do with shoes!
I loved every one of those bairns.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Mrrzy
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 03:16 PM

The preschool I've taught in had indoor and outdoor shoes, and the indoor ones were usually slippers. You switched shoes before leaving and after entering the classroom area, and nobody stepped on anybody in hard shoes, and nobody tracked mud everywhere. So for grownups, why not.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 04:25 PM

One of our granddaughters really does not like wearing shoes, or rather socks. She does not like her feet being constrained at all. Now she has started school she is putting up with it. She is very athletic and gymnastic and is happy to throw herself around all over the place barefooted!

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 07:52 PM

interesting article DMcG, & replies.

My first thought when reading 'schools where students do not wear shoes score significantly higher in standardised tests' -

how can letting "rich" westerners wear their slippers (ie. another pair of footwear) at school compare with poor cultures where kids don't even have any footwear?

As many have said it's a rather strange comparison.

Unshod kids do well, therefore let shod kids wear fluffy slippers, I suppose insurance or some other first world important fact/idea does not allow these kids to be barefooted.

sandra

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 03:31 AM

I think that report was probably scientifically accurate but perhaps confusing in its own right. Of critical importance is that it was world wide. For most of these standardised tests such as PISA, Asian countries score well. For cultural reasons, children in Asian countries remove their shoes when they enter their school. I checked with my daughter last night and her Thai pupils never wore shoes. So statistically not wearing shoes correlates with a high PISA score because it correlates with being Asian, which in its turn correlates with a higher score. Now I would hope whoever undertook the report did not make such a basic error but it seems likely the head teacher did.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 03:46 AM

No one has remarked on the non sequitur about teaching time management. The head teacher seemed to think that because they taught shoeless and also taught time manaagement it was the lack of shoes that enabled them to teach time management. How wearing shoes would make it harder.to teach escapes me.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 04:22 AM

Oh, and of course because going barefoot is the culture requirement in these Asian schools (and I should have made clear I am referring to "many" nor "all"), wearing slippers instead would be equally unacceptable.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 04:35 AM

No-one in my husband's school wore shoes, but the standard of education was woeful.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 04:47 AM

I can easily belive that, Senoufou. My knowledge of African culture is almost non existant, but my guess would be that shoe wearing in schools indicates wealth or lack of it. The same would apply in Europe not that long ago - my wife's mother remembers as a child being astonished that some children in her class couldnt afford shoes. And where you have extensive poverty the teachers are usually not well paid either so they seek jobs in private schools and the better teachers often end up there because of financial pressures - though I have known some startingly poor teachers in private schools.

In much of Asia, though, the dynamics are different. Because it it culturally 'The Done Thing' even the fee paying schools expect the children to go barefoot so it is no longer a marker of wealth, but something more like politeness.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Thompson
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 04:49 AM

I wear slippers indoors. I don't want to track outdoor filth around; it also means my shoes last years longer. Floors would too, but for the big-dog-claws factor!

The main things I'd say would bring school results up would be a nutritious and delicious
school meal for all, as in France, and free books and schooling.

Lots of Irish kids go to school without a decent breakfast - they might have a piece of toast and black coffee, for instance - and are falling asleep by lunch time. Then their packed lunch will consist of perhaps a sandwich, a bar of chocolate, a packet of crisps and a can of fizzy sweet drink. They'll eat dinner at home; for many nowadays this doesn't mean "cooking from scratch" (normal cooking where you chop the carrots, etc), but a package of fat and salt cooked in the microwave. Parents have to pay "voluntary" fees and other costs for all kinds of things, and all children now wear hugely expensive uniforms.

All this seems normal because it's usual. It's not helping education.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Mr Red
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 05:59 AM

As a (UK Political) aside,
Harold Wilson claimed he had to go to school without boots.
To which Harold McMillan opined "that was because he was too big for them"

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 06:22 AM

"No-one in my husband's school wore shoes, but the standard of education was woeful."

Well no-one is suggesting that ditching shoes is a universal panacea. There are many factors affecting the quality of education and it can be pretty difficult both to tease out individual factors for study and to quantify in any meaningful way the effect of that factor on standards. The best thing to do is to scrutinise the researchers' methods, particularly with regard to sample size and sample selection, and take it from there. Might go for a stroll in my Teva Toachi sandals (my favourites, tough as anything, superb grip and foot support, been up volcanoes in 'em), otherwise I'm barefoot today from sparrow's fart to sack time.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 06:29 AM

Other brands are available. I also love my Merrell Kahuna III sandals. Fantastic over any terrain. I'm putting my socks on eBay.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 06:33 AM

Mine are Hotters Steve. Winter and summer. Toes always free. No corns, bunions or callouses. Perfect feet. The rest of me is rubbish though! :)

Thompson, my mother used to tell us about her early days in Ireland (near Cork) She was one of eight children, drunken father and none of the children had boots. (early 20th Century) The parish priest arrived one day with a secondhand pair of boots for my mother, but they were too small and very tight. Her mother told her to wee in them to stretch the leather! She did, but it didn't help much.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 09:29 AM

There are many musicians who play barefoot. I don't personally feel more in contact with my music if my feet are unencumbered, but some folks seem to feel that way, and that's fine.

Personally, I think of shoes as condoms for the feet. There are lots of nasty things in the world just waiting to send me to the emergency room. If they're going to get to me through the soles of my feet. they're going to have to go through the soles of a pair of work boots first.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 09:34 AM

Blimey, a bloke going round wearing used condoms! Yeuch!

Sandie Shaw used to sing barefoot. No relation.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: robomatic
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 11:47 AM

In the American South in the early part of last century, a significant portion of the population suffered from hookworm. This was related to shoelessness and resulted in significant lack of health and energy, mental and otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 12:46 PM

I'd never go barefoot in W Africa. You can get jiggers and filaria, and any tiny wound to the skin from a sharp stone gets infected in a very short time. On the beach in Accra (Ghana) and Senegal too there were spiny sea urchins washed up, waiting to pierce the feet (agony for the unaware). I always wear my trusty sandals there.

My husband just told me there were about eighty pupils in his 'class' and the teacher often forced a miscreant to kneel down and cross his arms while he larrupped his back with a huge stick (not a cane, a thick stick) The parents would be informed and the father would do exactly the same on the lad's return home. Sometimes the teacher got four stronger, bigger boys from the senior class to hold the lad down for this 'punishment'. This all seems to me to be outright sadistic abuse and completely appalling. (Sorry about digressing, but I was reading this thread out to my husband and this is what he told me. He says no-one dared misbehave very often, but no-one learned very much either!)

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 01:10 PM

In America a big stick was allowed to be used to beat your wife and children as long as it wasn't larger than their thumb.
It was called "rule of thumb"

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Thompson
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 02:38 PM

Yes, Senoufou, that kind of poverty in Ireland under the British Empire was one of the main reason for the War of Independence. Took a while to bring up the standard of living after independence too, though one of the first things was a huge housing project to replace the hideous tenements in the city and even huger redistribution of land in rural areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 02:55 PM

My husband's feet when he first arrived in UK (many, many years ago now) had thick soles like hard leather. He could walk on sharp gravel and feel nothing.

I think Donuel that some Muslims nowadays advocate bashing one's wife with a thick stick, but she must be fully clothed, which is nice of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Mo the caller
Date: 05 Feb 17 - 04:50 PM

I think the school in the report I read had changed more than just footwear. It suggested that children read more - because some children prefer to lie on the floor to read.

So the slippers are just part of a look at the classroom from the child's viewpoint. Can't see anything wrong with that. Respect the children if you want them to respect you.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Thompson
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 06:03 AM

Many's the Christian man who happy bashes his wife and children and relations with big sticks!

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: leeneia
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 09:58 AM

I have serious doubts about the validity of such a study.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 11:52 AM

Well it's a valid study if it was carried out according to scientific process. Samples of schools both with and without the slippers policy would have had to be selected with an eye to minimising other variables that might have clouded the conclusions, and samples would have had to be quite large and the study would have taken a considerable time. Whether it was a study worth doing is a moot point and a separate issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 01:11 PM

"Rule of Thumb" from Donuel's "Rule of Old Wife's Tale".
Every time I read one of D's posts I find I know less than before.

"Whether it was clever is a moot point and a separate issue."

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Airymouse
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 02:42 PM

About rule of thumb, which seems bit off topic. We Americans think it was an English rule that you could beat your wife with a stick no thicker than your thumb. Some supporting evidence is that we measure with a ruler, whereas the English use a rule. Of course the truth is that there never was such a rule, either in England or the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 04:22 PM

In Americana it is the wisdom of southern old wives. Robo is correct there is no statutory law allowing beatings and is only mentioned in statutory law metaphorically.

Spousal abuse has advanced in modern times. The abuse or killing is measured in the caliber of bullets used and not the measurement of thumbs.

Robomatic, Let's avoid the subject of pitchforks and torches.

As for shoes in school it is a croc of crocs. But many good points were made.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Fossil
Date: 06 Feb 17 - 09:51 PM

Back to the thread, maybe? If you seriously wanted to know whether the quality, presence or absence of children's footwear had an impact on their educational achievement, you'd have to set up a properly controlled trial.

Let's say it is shoes vs slippers. Divide your cohort of children randomly into two groups, one wears shoes, the other slippers. When seated for lessons, their feet should be hidden from view (inside a pillowcase), so that no bias - conscious or unconscious - could come from the teacher. Their academic work is marked independently by someone who never sees the children - shod or otherwise - and the results collated. The code is then broken by a researcher who also never sees the children and the mean performance of each group is worked out. This gives you a first analysis.

Then you apply tests of statistical significance to the results to ensure that the result could not have arisen by chance. Then - and only then - could you say that slippers were better than shoes (or vice versa) with any confidence. Was all this done by the academics at the heart of this discussion? I don't know, but I suspect not.

In short, it is the classic "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy. Since one thing follows another, it is assumed the first thing CAUSED the second thing. Not always the case, it seems.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Feb 17 - 02:48 AM

I agree, Fossil. And, as Steve's post also implies, you have to have begun suspecting the footwear made a difference, so you build your samples and controls around that. But it is such a strange thing to hypothesise about that is seems probable that a different approach was taken. A difference in outcomes between two or more groups was observed. Lets measure every difference in inputs we can find, and then look at what correlates with what. That is not an absurd thibg to do, but it is not a proper experiment in itself. Rather, it is a precursor to an experiment. It might reveal footwear correlates with results. Good - now do the sort of experiment described ny fossil to find out is the is a genuine factor.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 17 - 04:45 AM

Good stuff, but not sure about those pillowcases though. You're introducing an external factor that could itself affect the results.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 07 Feb 17 - 07:37 AM

Ah, but the Shariah Crew of Muslims advocate it. (However, "Use quite a short stick and do not leave any mark, and don't hit her face leaving a bruise, as others will see." So the abuse is hidden. Ghastly!)
There's never any mention of Muslim women whacking their husbands. I've told mine I could use a frying pan or a rolling pin, so at least he'd have a choice.

How do these pupils in the tests get to their desks with their feet encased in pillowslips? It would look like the Sack Race on Sports Day.
And what if a pupil had rather tight-fitting slippers? He/she'd be better off with bare feet, but a bit chilly if the classroom is draughty.
And would the two teachers facing the shod and unshod students be exactly identical in their discipline, methods, delivery and so on?

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Mrrzy
Date: 07 Feb 17 - 07:49 PM

Also, kids learn whether or not they are engaged-their brains are just stuck in the On position.

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Fossil
Date: 08 Feb 17 - 12:21 AM

The point being (about the pillowcases), that no-one in direct contact with the children should know what footwear they have on, as this could, consciously or unconsciously affect the teaching and influence the result. If 'catters can come up with any better suggestions, go to it! Another way would be to have the teacher teach remotely with screens showing only head and shoulder views of the children.

Ridiculous and impractical, sure, but in a clinical trial every effort has to be made to eliminate anything which could possibly affect the outcome, other than the thing for which you are testing. If you want a statistically valid result, that is. However I suspect academic scholastic research is somewhat less rigorous!

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Thompson
Date: 08 Feb 17 - 05:24 AM

Perhaps the children having warm, comfortable feet helps them to concentrate?

Subject: RE: BS: Slippery Scholars
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 17 - 06:09 AM

I'm sure being comfortable is very important for the pupils. If they're hungry, tired through lack of sufficient sleep, cold (I've sat through several power cuts with no heating in the school and the children in their coats. They'd have closed the school nowadays, of course) or even unhappy due to bad conditions/abuse at home, then no-one can expect them to do their best and achieve all of which they're capable.
My husband sat in class for hours with hunger gnawing his insides as he often ate only every couple of days.

There can't be many students today in the West who have these problems. However, modern times bring their own difficulties. I imagine many teenagers have angst due to nasty texts, social media bullying and remarks about their appearance etc. It would need to be a very wise and stable society that produced excellent educational results in the young.

I'm going to sound like a real old gal now, but honestly, just after the War, where I lived we had most things necessary for a very good education. Discipline, simple but nourishing food, stable home life, lots of fresh air and exercise, no internet or TV, dedicated teachers, parental support of the school and high expectations of our capabilities. Most of my schoolmates did very well under these conditions. Slippers didn't enter the equation!