More of This and Less of That: How behavioral science shows a path forward education programming

• In Event: To Nudge or Not to Nudge? Improving classroom instruction to achieve learning for all

Proposal

How do we expect teachers to respond to educational changes in LMICs? How does a teacher respond when they go through “another” round of training provided by a Donor or NGO that presents a different classroom instructional approach than the teacher’s default instructional practice?
The short answer is teachers’ response to educational change varies. Behavioral economics suggests that the environment and personality characteristics influence individual decision-making in response to change. However, when we review educational research regarding how teachers respond to change, we are often presented with a single model of how teachers change (Guskey, 1986). It is often the case that education programming is based on research that provides a single model or average response. Consequently, educational programming is only implemented effectively by teachers whose response to change aligns with that expected model of change.
Economics has similar issues with its average model of human behavior based on rationality and self-interest. However, behavioral science has its challenges. The outcomes of nudge theory experiments have also been quite underwhelming (The Economist, 2022). A single intervention “nudge” to prompt good decision-making relies on individuals all having the same expected responses.
This paper compares traditional education research to behavioral science research applied to educational change. Using metadata and doctoral thesis research, where do these two research frameworks agree on teacher response to change, and where do they contradict each other? Given this comparison, we will provide two types of recommendations for education programming – what we need to do more of and what we need to do less of.

Author

• Simon King, Creative Associates International