“When is good behaviour no longer good enough?”

An Action Research post by Aleisha Woodley (Pupil Welfare)

Our Ofsted report in 2014 stated: “The behaviour of students is good in lessons and around the school.  Relationships are respectful and productive and learning is greatly valued.” Whilst I don’t always look to Ofsted reports for up to date reflections of school life in this case it gives a picture of the context of behaviour in our school. The Headteacher, SLT, and all staff model in their interactions that positive relationships are at the heart of all that we do. Not that we can say it is perfect but it runs through the heart of this Catholic school. Oftsed went on to say, “The school closely checks on students’ behaviour, including those in alternative provision, and sets high standards of behaviour.  Staff are effective in dealing with any issues that arise.  Rewards and sanctions are clear and well understood by students.”

As the behaviour lead in SLT for the past 8 years I was proud of the progress that had been made.  It saluted the hard work of all staff.  We had made many changes over that time including centralising some of our detentions, reorganising and changing our pastoral structure to include non-teaching staff.

As in any school behaviour of students and any disruptions to learning are an emotive subject for staff, students and parents alike.  Our students come from varied backgrounds and represent over 30 primary schools from the south and east of the city of Bristol.

Our school self-evaluation is robust and searching, it includes self-review with other members of SLT, Headteacher reviews as well as external reviews.  Each of these reviews produces searching and detailed recommendations. It is unfailingly honest.   It was through this process as well as informal visits to classes and data monitoring on a weekly and termly basis, that showed up some anomalies in behaviour data between different faculties and the same groups in different classrooms.  It made me reflect on a blog I had shared with new staff, NQTs and PGCE students from Tom Bennett 04/01/2017 @tombennett71.  He called his blogpost Leadership: Reboot your school’s behaviour 2017. In it he reflected on students’ behaviour that varies, he said. “Ever seen how a student will behave for one teacher but not another, as if they were two different people? They pick up cues wherever they go; they act one way in the playground and another at Grandma’s.” Our evidence showed that supply staff; staff new to the school and new teachers were struggling with some aspects of the behaviour system, it was not working for them all of the time in preventing low level interruptions to learning which is the most significant as far as our analysis was concerned.

I attended a training day by @pivotalpaul, it was an exceptional day calling upon his experiences in mainstream and PRU education.  Some of the key messages that led to further reflection and developments were as follows (please forgive any misinterpretation but this is what I took away):

  • If you want students to follow your rules make them simple and understandable – follow the rule of 3.
  • Ensure every adult is using and displaying the behaviour you want from them. If this is being on the corridor at lesson change-over or greeting pupils at the door. One of our SLT phrased it as, ‘every adult, every time.’ (which has become a key phrase and action for us all).
  • Check consistency amongst the adults; if it’s important insist on it.

At the same time I researched a successful behaviour system implemented by several schools in the Bristol, South Gloucestershire and the Somerset areas. This system was called Ready to Learn.  I am eternally grateful to Clare Braford, Headteacher and Nicole Cerullo, Deputy Headteacher from Henbury School; Dan Goater, Assistant Headteacher from Bedminster Down School and Tony Searle, Principal at Hans Price Academy. They gave their time and expertise generously.  Each school had implemented their own version of Ready to Learn but the core principle remains the same.  Ready to Learn is a binary system that is simple and clear for students and staff, that gives students a chance to be ‘ready to learn’.  On the second occasion they are not ‘ready to learn’ in a lesson they are sent to isolation to work independently of their class. The onus is back on the students to be responsible, follow the rules and be prepared for their learning with the right equipment, on time and with a work-focused attitude.  The expectations for our students are to:

  • Be prepared
  • Be polite
  • Work hard

They succinctly summarise the rules that previously expanded upon these expectations.  Students are able to articulate them and are clearer about what they mean.  After visiting the three schools referred to above, I reflected with the Headteacher and SLT about how this could work in our school context. I was reminded of the quote from Dylan William and his blog post @dylanwilliam on why teaching will never be a research-based profession and why that’s a good thing. He asserts that, “everything works somewhere, nothing works everywhere.”  The schools we had visited had certainly adapted Ready to Learn to their school and context.  The way it was constructed had not diminished its core or effectiveness but did reflect the needs of each school and its context.  One school with  a high percentage of pupil premium students had invested heavily in support and intervention for pupils who were not getting it right in the early days of its implementation. Another had spent a lot of time working with staff prior to implementation so they could be familiar with every aspect of the programme and ensure its implementation was seamless.  A third school had worked extensively to ensure it permeated every aspect of school life and this was evident from the exercise books, to expectations of teachers in ‘Ready to Teach’ and leaders in ‘Ready to Lead.’ The extent to which the Principal had established the language, principles and culture within the school in a relatively short space of time enabled all staff new to the school to have the same impact with the students and therefore disruptions to learning were rare.

I took all the information from the visits and the advice received and put together the strengths and lessons learned.  Bill Rogers work, which I came across through Tom Sherrington some years ago at @teacherhead, also influenced my thinking and planning for our own introduction of Ready to Learn:

  • Positive correction- a non-confrontational approach to discipline based on positive teacher-student relationships. The Ready to Learn (RTL) system is clear about the warnings given and the expectations on pupils at all times.
  • Prevention – planning for good behaviour; teaching the routines and the rules. The level of detail in the introduction to staff, students, parents and Governors led by the Headteacher meant there could be no misunderstandings.  All non-teaching staff were also inducted in their part of this, empowering them in a way that we had not previously implemented universally.  Lab technicians giving ‘red card’ detentions for ignoring rules in the super lab for example.   This fed the ‘every adult, every time’ philosophy that underpins our version of RTL.
  • Consequences – have a clear structure that students understand and use to inform the choices they make. In our previous behaviour system pupils knew well that they could get warnings before a consequence kicked in, which were not universally applied with the same rigour in every classroom. With RTL warnings clearly displayed and a universal language, it is clear for all with a much swifter impact of  consequences.
  • Repair and rebuild – the imperative to work hard to build and repair the damage that is done when things don’t work out. Restorative conversations have become the absolute must for repairing that all important relationship with the student.  Staff have the restorative conversation the same day if possible.  Students then believe they can get it right.

Tom’s own reflections included the suggestion that teachers need to exercise assertive authority: a teacher should expect compliance but refuse to rely on power or the status of their role to gain respect. This last concept is one that we have worked on with staff over a number of years.   The assertions from Bill Rogers were exactly what we wanted to implement after considering what our data was telling us, coupled with classroom visits, as well as staff and pupil feedback.  The RTL video from our website ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhbVesuIcFE&feature=youtu.be) summarises the tenets of the approach with reflections from some our students as to why they wanted it.

I don’t have the room here to explain in detail exactly how we went about devising our version of Ready to Learn, the stages we went through with Governors, SLT, staff, parents and students to introduce, familiarise, embed and launch it with them all.  We had a three week trial in July that went really well.  It has now been in place since September and indications are very positive.  We are learning as we go but we are not changing or compromising on the fundamental principles which were introduced by our Headteacher to all staff back in March. The hard work and the level of planning that has gone on behind the scenes have been monumental.  The proof is in the classroom, as it should be.  Ask teachers at our school and they are planning more work per lesson due to the increased focus and attention of pupils. They are not running detentions except academic catch up ones for missed homework.  This has been a time-saver especially when previously they had to pass on for follow up a detention if the student did not attend.  RTL and Red Card detentions for poor behaviour are centralised (@tombennett71 blogged about the benefits for teaching staff of centralised detentions 20/01/2017 in “Sharing is caring: Why centralised detentions might save your sanity.”).  Staff so far are very positive about the benefits of not having to add detentions to their workload.

If behaviour was rated as good before we are thrilled and excited that this could improve the learning focus and time available for learning to meet the curriculum demands that we all face. But that’s another blog for another time…

References

Tom Bennett: ‘Teachers: reboot your classroom behaviour 2017’ –  http://behaviourguru.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/teachers-reboot-your-classroom.html

Dylan Williams: Why teaching isn’t—and probably never will be—a research-based profession – https://researched.org.uk/sessions/dylan-wiliam/#toggle-id-1

Featured image: ‘successful’ by 3dman_eu on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

Advertisements

Diary of a Lazy NQT Music Teacher

An Action Research Post by Catherine Mainwaring (Music)

Reading time: 4 minutes

Focus

Using the ‘Lazy Teacher’s Handbook’ to develop strategies to ease teacher workload.

Objective

To develop a range of practical strategies to lighten the workload of a single-teacher department so that curriculum planning and teaching is more efficient.

Background and Context

When deciding upon my research project for my NQT year I was drawn towards a book that I was first introduced to during my Initial Teacher Training Year. The supposedly lazy strategies to ease the life of teachers intrigued my curiosity about the possibility of doing less but achieving more when delivering a full teaching timetable – something that as a graduate teacher, was extremely daunting! What I soon discovered with the Lazy Teacher’s Handbook was that though some ideas could be adapted for everyday classrooms, with advances in technology a number felt out-of-date or misleadingly hard work. That being said there were some strategies that I was able to integrate within my teaching practice such as

  • Lazy lessons with the TA
  • Toolkit – giving pupils the tools to succeed and stepping back
  • No Photocopying

Let’s get lazy!

Actions and Impact

Lazy lessons with the TA

Having the addition of another adult in your classroom is simultaneously exceedingly helpful and terrifying! Especially in the initial stages of term 1 having a teaching assistant in the room was perhaps more of a comfort or safety blanket for myself rather than an additional support mechanism for certain pupils. The handbook identified a few ideas for using the TA ‘lazily’,  though when reflected upon, it became clear that in order to reach a ‘happy-medium’ of being a lazy teacher, some preparation and planning was needed which then had to be embedded. The handbook identified the following strategies:

  • Talk to your TA – introduce yourselves.
  • Give them a copy of the schemes of work
  • Get to know the TA – hobbies, interests, name
  • Engage the TA in the curriculum planning process

While some of these suggestions may seem quite obvious, it was still reassuring to have some guidance. Using the above strategies I found that my lessons with those classes who had the Teaching Assistant slowly started to become more manageable especially when faced with difficult behaviour in lessons or lessons where due to the practical nature of the class where pupils were in different rooms, having an extra pair of eyes proved very useful. Whilst giving them a copy of the scheme of work would be useful it contradicted another lazy activity of no photocopy (more of that later!). Among the trepidations I had about this particular avenue was that there was no guarantee that the TA would be available for every Music lesson or whether it would not be less strenuous to have a short conversation about the individual lesson they were in. One of the more useful suggestions was to engage the musical interests of the TA into my lessons. Being able to provide a united front and use example analogies to the pupils that the TA could also reiterate in the lesson proved useful whenever further clarification was needed.

Toolkit – giving pupils the tools to succeed and stepping back

I quite liked the idea for a toolkit especially when teaching the new GCSE course which now consists of a higher level of analytical detail than previously. Though having a toolkit for pupils to access in lessons seemed like a good idea at the time, it proved quite costly when resources needed to either be replaced, because students lost them or took them for their files or as more set works were discussed, more revision resources were produced. Towards the end of the academic year, I started to think of alternative ways of presenting a toolkit to my pupils, not only in Key Stage 4 but to Key Stage 3 as well, especially with regard to assessment and verbal feedback. As it stands, more time and planning is needed to fully explore the possibilities of a student toolkit.

No Photocopying

This particular strategy is one that I wasn’t sure I could fully commit to. While I loath printing out reams of scores and starter activities, such as tarsias/ rhythm bingo and exit passes, they have proved the activities that students both enjoyed the most and the ones which were able to be used multiple times during a lesson.  Motivating students by highlighting the amount of progress made within one lesson is crucial, especially for GCSE students as they approach the examination. Although I wanted to reduce the amount of printing, there are some things which need photocopying such as musical scores, especially for those pupils who do not have access to IT and online facilities at home.

Conclusions

To conclude, the Lazy Teacher’s Handbook is indeed a good foundation stone for a teacher in the initial stages of their career and as a starter for any teacher wanting to do less to allow their students to do more. One of the strengths in the literature is the ability to adapt each strategy to different teaching environments. One of the disadvantages however, is that some of the the strtaegies seem to be starting to become outdated given the vast range of developments that have been made with ICT in Education over the last few years (though I believe a new updated edition of the book has been published since my copy was printed).

Next Steps

I have found a variety of strategies in the text that I have used in different contexts within my teaching and have found with each one, a happy medium to build upon as I venture further into the teaching profession.  I have started researching the development of an online student toolkit which will be accessible to all pupils for feedback and revision. I have also built up professional relationships with Teaching Assistants and the extended Learning Hub (our pupil support team) to further develop my teaching style, to accommodate the specific learning needs of my Key Stage 4 pupils.

References

The Lazy Teacher’s Handbook – How your students learn more when you teach less  (The Independent Thinking Series – Crown House Publishing Ltd.)  Jim Smith – Author, Ian Gilbert – Editor

Featured image: ‘Teacher’ by dutchpirates on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

Making revision more effective

A sharing best practice post by Jodie Johnson (Mathematics)

Reading time: 2 minutes

Among the many challenges inherent in the new GCSE courses is the greater volume of knowledge and understanding that pupils are required to learn, recall and master in the exam hall.  This puts even greater importance on them undertaking effective revision.

In recent years staff have worked hard to develop a broad range of revision resources, whether they be revision booklets, guides, summary sheets, past paper booklets, revision tests and so on.  On top of the that, with the potential for using computer and online resources, teachers have collated or produced youtube films, channels, links and guides, not to mention making paper based resources accessible via VLEs, Google Drive and the School website.

However, despite this plethora of resources offering pupils a multitude of ways in which to revise, there are those  who still fail to make effective use of them.  In some cases these are pupils who have collected or accessed resources, have told the teacher, ‘Yes, I have my revision resources’ and ‘Yes, I know what I need to revise’, but still fail to revise effectively.

For some the problem lies not in knowing how to revise, because teachers have modelled and rehearsed that.  Nor in knowing what to revise, because teachers have provided them with revision lists and planning tools.  The problem for some seems to lie in marrying the two together.

For some pupils, breaking revision down and being specific in telling them which activities to undertake with which resources is far more likely to be productive, even for those who think they know what they are doing.

Being prescriptive in the way pupils are expected to revise can take the mystery, or in some cases the awe that some seem to feel, out of starting and completing an effective revision session.

As a tutor of a Year 11  group I have discussed with my pupils what help they want from teachers.  The answer that came back loud and clear was, “We need their help to tell us exactly how to revise individual topics.”

When I thought about this I came to the following conclusions:

  • The more structured the revision task the better, especially for the less able and many of the boys (as well as those students who are inclined to panic) so that they know exactly how and where to start revising
  • Frequent consolidation, not just of the learning but of the ‘how to’ strategies for revision, is needed to keep pupils focused

So, as a Maths teacher with a Year 11 class this is approach I am incorporating into my revision this year by using the following process:

  • Complete one mock paper per fortnight in class

Then, in the following fortnight pupils complete two homeworks:

  • Week 1 – a written homework that can be self-assessed in class
  • Week 2 – a clearly defined revision task based on the outcome of the mock, which I talk through with the class before they complete it

JJ - HW task

Figure 1  An example of a revision homework

Put simply my advice is:

  • Show the pupils how to revise by modelling the strategies
  • Set revision tasks on a regular basis, guiding the pupils specifically as to what they need to revise and how they are to do it.

Featured image: ‘Brain’ by ElisaRiva on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

Investigating the impact of Kagan Cooperative Learning strategies on pupils’ learning

An Action Research Project by Daniel James (Business Studies)

Reading time: 9 minutes

This is an investigation into the practical implications of using Kagan Cooperative Learning and its impact on pupils’ learning.

1.1 Introduction:

In the traditional taught classroom the teacher may provide some instructions or a knowledge based element followed by some activity and a question and response section to track progress. The teacher may also ask questions and expect responses from students; this is sometimes delivered in a differentiated manner where the questions are posed at differing levels depending on their ability level.

As outlined by Kagan (2009)[1] “Traditional learning is either whole-class, with the teacher leading the class, or independent practice work”, as such this can lead to an environment that is not as conducive to learning as we might think.  The traditional classroom creates a more intimidating learning environment where students are picked for their answers, where the teacher is in charge of learning and as such often lacks engagement.

Kagan offers a different approach to this where interaction is an expected part of the learning environment. This need not be at odds with the traditional classroom, as outlined Kagan (2009)[2] “Cooperative learning compliments rather than replaces direct instruction; it is used to cement learning that occurs via direct instruction”.

“[T]eachers believe Kagan Structures are instructional strategies designed to promote cooperation and communication in the classroom, boost students’ confidence and retain their interest in classroom interaction.”[3]

The whole idea behind Cooperative Learning is the act of allowing students to directly interact with their own learning. In this action research project I will explore some of the learning structures outlined by Kagan and report on their impact on attainment, knowledge development, enjoyment and confidence in the classroom.

1.2 The Structures

In Kagan (2009) they introduce the idea of the replacement cycle which suggests that with each academic cycle there is a new teaching and learning approach that replaces its predecessor.  The phrase “It is all cyclical” rings true here.  Kagan (2009)[4] says that because of this replacement cycle, experienced teachers get jaded and “give little or no effort… It is tragic for teachers who get turned off to the whole process of educational innovation”.

The ‘Cooperative Learning Structures’ approach has been designed to break this replacement cycle, getting rid of the need to plan one off cooperative learning lessons and instead implement structures that can be used as part of any lesson. “Don’t do cooperative learning lessons; make cooperative learning part of every lesson”. (Kagan 2009)[5]

2.1 My Approach

Throughout the last academic year I have used my year 9 Business classes as a focus for developing and researching the use and impact of Kagan Cooperative Learning strategies on the progress and engagement of students. The two classes have 31 students each, are roughly 50:50 in gender split and have a range of behavioral and learning needs, they are broadly mixed ability.

Throughout the year I have used a range of Kagan structures as outlined in the book “Cooperative Learning”. These structures were used multiple times across both classes, at points they were adapted to fit the subject specific content, and were evaluated as to their effectiveness.

2.1.1 How the structures were evaluated

The structures were evaluated on a three point scale these were:

  1. How time effective the structure was (Time needed to setup Vs. overall impact)
  2. Impact on student subject understanding
  3. Impact on student engagement

When evaluating against these three areas I used a 5 point scale with 1 being not effective, 5 being extremely effective. The judgements were based on students’ responses to in-class questioning, assessment of tests and exercise books and through observation.

Example judgement:

Fig 1

3.1 Findings

3.1.1 Fan-N-Pick

Each team of four has a set of question cards.  Pupil #1 holds a set of cards with questions on them, pupil #2 selects a question to ask, player #3 answers the question, player #4 checks whether the answer is right or wrong and praises or tutors, or in the case of opinion based questions,  paraphrases the thinking that went into the answer.  Roles rotate on each round.

Fan-N-Pick was used when teaching the topic of business structures. This was used as there were complex areas of ownership and control that the students need to grasp. The setup of this task was time intensive but once set up did highlight student understanding and areas where further consolidation was needed. This structure also enabled all students to take an active role in the peer assessment and challenge of one another and so improved engagement in the lesson. Overall, this structure was effective and once set up should provide a range of assessment opportunities for the teacher.

Fig 2

3.1.2 Find Someone Who

In this activity the teacher prepares a sheet/list of questions.  Pupils circulate around the class forming different pairs on each round.  Each person in the pair then take it in turns to ask and then answer a question for the other person.  Pupils record the answer on their sheet and their partner initials the answer they have given.  The activity continues with pupils moving to form a pairing with a new person.

This structure was used in a recap lesson on stakeholders, their objectives and the impact they can have on business. The idea behind this activity is that each student is given a sheet with a series of questions relating to the topic and they move around the room trying to find people who had the answer (hence ‘find someone who’). I liked the principle idea behind this and  it encouraged the students to move around the room, however with a class of 31 this proved to be a challenge with students shouting to find the answer and all too often the more able students were swamped with questions. The other issue with this is that although answers were recorded and they were correct, this did not lead to increased understanding because the responses were taken at face value and not examined in greater detail.

I further used this strategy following a series of lessons covering e-commerce. This time students were only allowed to ask a partner student one question and as such had to be strategic with which questions they asked which students. The other adaption was that the students had to stick to their side of the room and thus limiting access to only 14/15 other students. Overall, this structure needs time to embedded and strict expectations need to be applied so that no student gets a “freeride”.

Fig 3

3.2.3 Round Table

In Round Table pupils in a group take it in turns to add an answer, idea or contribution to a project the whole group is working on.  The use of a single task sheet/pen or pencil emphasizes the cooperative nature of the task.

This strategy was very effective when used to examine extended questions relating to how a business could improve its cash flow. This activity was simple to set up and the students were provided with an exam based questions where there were multiple answers, each of which were valid. The students took it in turns to add to the previous answer put down by their table and by the end of the time each row (table) had an answer that was backed up and justified. Most of the rows found this engaging and understanding of the topic was shown to have greatly increased among these students, however where rows did not engage this was due to no student in that row wanting to “take a chance” and put an answer forward. When I went to these rows and questioned their understanding they all had appropriate ideas but were initially unwilling to share with their table.

Overall an effective strategy, that if used regularly with student’s who have built up their resilience, will impact positively on engagement and understanding.

Fig 4

3.2.4 Timed Pair Share

In Timed Pair Share pupil A talks to pupil B on a topic given by the teacher for a set period of time.  Pupil B responds with a positive comment – these might be set up in the form of sentence starters, “One thing I have learned from listening to you is…’, ‘Your most interesting idea was…’, and so on.  Roles are then reversed and a new topic given by the teacher.

This structure like the previous one was very time efficient to set up and I found made for effective teacher assessment as part of a mini or full plenary activity. I was able to move around the room as students explained all they knew about the topic to their partner. Students were encouraged not to repeat what their partner had said but they could develop it if they felt some detail was lacking. Overall, this was effective and the only issue was when students did not correct their partners’ mistakes for fear of upsetting them. This is an area that could be worked on by teaching students how to give and receive constructive criticism.

Fig 5

Notes:

[1] Kagan, S. Kagan Structures: A Miracle of Active Engagement. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing. Kagan Online Magazine, Fall/Winter 2009. www.KaganOnline.com

[2] Kagan, S. Kagan, K Kagan Cooperative Learning Pages 1.4. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing. 2009.

[3] Kagan, S. Kagan Structures: A Miracle of Active Engagement. San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing. Kagan Online Magazine, Fall/Winter 2009. www.KaganOnline.com

[4] Kagan, S. Kagan, K Kagan Cooperative Learning. Page 6.5 . San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing. 2009

[5] Kagan, S. Kagan, K Kagan Cooperative Learning. Page 6.6 . San Clemente, CA: Kagan Publishing. 2009

Featured image: ‘Classroom’ by OpenClipart-Vectors on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

Kagan Cooperative Learning: Finding its place in a knowledge based curriculum

An Action Research Project by Kate Gilbert (Geography)

Reading time: 8 minutes

Background

I have been teaching for 6 years now and throughout all stages of my career so far, Kagan strategies are often shared as good practice, or referenced on Twitter or highlighted as strengths during lesson observations. As such, I have used Kagan strategies tokenistically in my lessons throughout my career but have never looked into whether the idea of cooperative learning could be fully embedded across Schemes of Work and adopted as an entire educational philosophy.  As such, I have used Professional Development time this year to investigate the full breadth of cooperative learning as opposed to stand alone strategies to see how easily it can be used within a classroom where pedagogical approaches seem to be moving away from the notion of cooperative learning to an increase in the focus on the acquisition of knowledge.

Kagan Cooperative Learning

In order for cooperative learning to be embedded, Kagan identifies seven keys: Structures, Teams, Management, Classbuilding, Teambuilding, Social Skills and Key Principles. Each will briefly be outlined below with a summary of how effective each element was when implemented within my classroom.

Key 1: Structures

In short, structures are the relationship between the teacher, the students and the content of a lesson and how these are delivered, received and processed. The structures used are content free and so can be applied to a wide range of topics and embedded over time. On reading Kagan Cooperative Learning (by Dr S Kagan and M Kagan, published by Kagan Publishing)  I realised that this is where many of the key strategies I already utilised in my lessons could be found. This I assume is because the rationales behind them make good sense in terms of general classroom practice (Carousel feedback, Find the Fiction, Think Pair Share). However, using the book to understand their place in the overall context of cooperative learning has been a beneficial one, especially in relation to the links between the other 6 keys identified by Kagan. Therefore, a starting point for this project was to identify the structures that I already use and aim to adopt more into my lesson planning. Although this was a good place to start, my previous experiences of Kagan (staff briefings, twitter etc.) had given me the misconception that the structures utilised in lessons were the main feature of cooperative learning when in fact in order to fully establish the principles, all seven keys need to be used together. As such, the project I intended to undertake – a review of the utility of different Kagan structures – became much broader by attempting to incorporate more of the keys, rather than just structures into my lessons.

Key 2: Teams

The key idea Kagan is developing here is that rather than pupils working in groups, they work in teams. The key difference here being that teams have a strong identity, ideally consist of 4 members and endure over time, with a recommendation of teams working together for 6 weeks. The idea of cooperative learning is one that I wholeheartedly support. In my first year of teaching, I changed the layout of my classroom each term ranging from rows, pairs and tables of various sizes. Whilst I also found that tables of 4 worked the best, logistically my classroom isn’t big enough to accommodate this. As such, I have four tables of 6 and two of 4 which are heterogeneous as recommended by Kagan. However, along with logistical challenges, building teams can also be difficult with constant changes to seating plans (i.e. when new information is received about a pupil, or friendship issues that arise at various points during the year) and the time needed to dedicate to building said teams. In an educational environment where the acquisition of knowledge is now more important than ever, time taken away from this to build a team identity can seem to be a waste when teams may constantly change and I only see pupils for a maximum of 5 hours a fortnight. As such, the key idea has been taken forward, but the activities that come along with this have not as discussed in relation to Key 5 below.

Key 3: Management

This aspect is the general management of the class and classroom to promote cooperative learning, for example managing noise levels and setting up the classroom in groups. Due to the layout of my classroom and the pedagogical choices I make in relation to group work tasks, this is an aspect I have already had to consider for my classroom such as giving clear time warnings and using hand claps instead of my voice to gain attention during group tasks. As such, this element of embedding cooperative learning did not require any changes to my normal classroom routine.

Key 4: Classbuilding

Classbuilding is about building a culture in the classroom with a sense of safety and belonging. There are many structures suggested for building this and the book makes a strong argument as to why developing this is important. However, I cannot help but feel that many of the structures suggested would be most suited to a primary school setting or developed and fostered within tutor time as opposed to lesson time due to their lack of application to content. The notion of pupils feeling safe enough within the classroom to take risks and feeling like they belong is not limited to Kagan but is a wider requirement for effective teaching. At secondary school level, this is largely developed through building relationships with pupils, asking about interests and having the time to praise them when they get it right. As such, I feel that any time spent using the Kagan strategies for class building during subject lessons could be better utilised with the strategies above.

Key 5: Teambuilding

Teambuilding is similar to classbuilding but on a smaller scale within teams. Despite being sceptical to begin with I found that short activities such as devising team names, identifying favourite hobbies etc. acted as ice breakers for unfamiliar groups and in some cases identified common factors that brought groups together. As such I have learnt that building pupil-pupil relationships within the classroom is just as important as building pupil-teacher relationships, especially in a cooperative classroom where the focus is moving away from teacher-pupil dialogue. This is something I will consider moving forward. However, some suggestions such as a birthday calendar were deemed to be more suited to primary school age children and so strategies need to be selected on appropriateness.

Key 6: Social Skills

Social skills encompass all aspects of interactions within our classrooms and are vital life skills that pupils need to develop. Kagan strategies aim to develop these skills by talking answers through, allocating team roles, providing structures for conversations and feedback and modelling good examples of social skills. Pages 11.6-11.7 highlight various social skills and match them to the structures discussed previously. Kagan also identifies a dozen learning roles for pupils to assume during group work. Whilst these were trialled with younger years, it was deemed that the name and nature of the roles are more suited in a primary school setting. “Quiet Captain” and “Materials Monitor” in a secondary school classroom were deemed as patronising to the pupils and some roles were seen as being higher status than others. Instead, a social skills checklist was utilised. Expectations were given of each team and every member of the team was expected to ensure that the expectations were followed. For example, the “Praiser” role was instead listed within the checklist as “show appreciation for teammates ideas and contributions”. As the teacher, I would then circulate and listen out for examples of this being demonstrated to fill in the social skills observation sheet. This resulted in a similar outcome to that envisaged by Kagan but was more adapted to the pupils I teach.

The chapter also identifies various characters who can appear during group work and the ways to overcome their dominance/shyness etc. Whilst the strategies were helpful and gave me some ideas as to how to manage different scenarios, a difficulty arises here where all pupils in the class can fit into one category or another. As such, a variety of skills are covered in different topics to ensure that all aspects are addressed.

Key 7: Basic Principles (PIES)

The acronym PIES stands for Positive interdependence, Individual accountability, Equal participation and Simultaneous interaction, where if all are in place, then pupils will be actively engaged in the learning process and as such increase their rate of academic achievement.

Positive interdependence – pupils need to work together in order to achieve. They are dependent on one another.

Individual accountability – each pupil is accountable and must bring something to the table or is randomly selected to share/give idea so no free riders

Equal participation – everyone is expected to have a voice. A partner share with your B partner sharing as much as partner A

Simultaneous Interaction – Pupils are talking at the same time so more time is dedicated to active participation

As such, tasks need to be set in order to take account of this. This lead to a re-think as to how I structure group work tasks in the future so that all pupils have ownership over a particular area. In addition, cooperative learning moves away from the emphasis on teacher-pupil dialogue. As such, pupils themselves become more active in their learning and allows more time to be dedicated to this. This aspect of Kagan has lead to a restructuring of group work where pupils take more responsibility and I act as an observer to their learning process and give feedback based on this rather than content.

Conclusion

Overall, taking more time to explore Kagan strategies has been a beneficial one. Initially I thought that I could dip in and out of particular sections of the book as I held the misconception that Kagan was largely about the structures used in lessons. Although this was a misconception, arguably I feel that it is the structures themselves that are perhaps most useful in a secondary setting and the main ideas that I will be developing further. I think that whilst it is unfortunate that our education system now seems to favour content heavy courses with the key way to test pupils being how much they can remember, I think we as teachers need to remember that the rationale behind Kagan and cooperative learning is a strong one and has a plethora of research to support its impact on raising achievement. As such, whilst I may not be fully embedding all of the 7 keys discussed above, cooperative learning can most definitely complement direct instruction from the teacher by giving pupils the chance to practice skills.

Ultimately, we as teachers could cover the curriculum through didactic teaching but it removes the element of consolidation and enjoyment that pupils need to experience. As such, I have found that Kagan Cooperative Learning strategies most definitely still have a place in a knowledge based curriculum but may not be deployed in the immersive way that the author may have intended.

Featured image: ‘Silhouettes’ by geralt on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

The same homework for 3 years – how and why

missdcoxblog

We have a 3 year key stage 4. Students that opt for GCSE Religious Studies have 3 different homeworks that carry through every year. I have blogged previously about some of these (see links in headers) but not as our key stage 4 homework programme as a whole.

  1. Learning keywords

Students are given mini booklets of keywords that they need to know to understand the key beliefs and teachings of the religions studied. They are given these before they have studied their context. The idea is that they learn these ‘off by heart’ and then when we cover them in lesson their meaning and application to the religion becomes clear.

All keyword sheets are available in our classrooms and are always attached on ShowMyHomework when set.

We also have made Quizlet quizzes on all the words here. We also give students index cards to create their own testing set.

img_2812

The…

View original post 774 more words

Using Social Media to Help Pupils’ Prepare for an Exam

An Action Research project by Nicola Osman (English)

Reading time: 8 minutes

Choosing a focus

Teenagers spend an awful lot of time on social media and we wanted to see if we could harness some of this time and energy into encouraging them to revise. It seemed important to me to ensure that I used the sorts of social media that my students were using on a day-to-day basis and tried to respond to their ideas about what would work.

To begin with, I spoke to students in my class about the sort of thing they thought would help them. They gave me a number of ideas. They were keen to have a group on Facebook as they said it would be easier to ‘find’ the stuff, rather than having to scroll through all their feeds. A number of them felt that the Faculty youtube (StBernsEnglish) channel would be a great resource as they could follow links from there to any available information.

Initial actions

With the consent of my Head of Learning/Line Manager I set up a school-based Facebook page with my surname as a first name and my subject as the surname (No other personal information was shared or accessible to pupils).

The first thing that I wanted to help my students to do was to revise Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. I was also rereading the book and revising myself. Every evening, I would read a chapter of the book. Then I would put a post on facebook, reminding them of the content of the chapter and making a link to the ebook version of the chapter, a youtube video of someone reading the chapter and a youtube video of someone’s analysis of the chapter. As time went on, I began to make the summary of the chapter that I posted more detailed as I realised that pupils were more likely to read what I had written than to follow the links. Pupils told me that they did not find this particularly helpful – I think there was too much for one evening’s revision for one subject.

Having tried these initial revision strategies, I felt that I had a sense of what the pupils would find useful: they wanted bullet pointed information and not too much to read. Pupils in our school were given a revision schedule for their English Literature exam. There was a key question each week from one of the key texts that they needed to revise as well as one or two poems. Using this schedule, I set out a plan for the posts over the final weeks of revision. Each week, I tried to post ideas that would help the pupils to answer the question posed for their revision or, if they were revising a poem, some of the key revision points from the poem.

The first post of the week was always a reminder of what exactly they were supposed to be revising.

Fig 1

Figure 1: Weekly reminder

I would then try to bullet point a plan for the question in a second post.

Fig 2

Figure 2: Weekly bullet points

In subsequent posts, I would go into more detail about each bullet point, explaining the relevance and including supporting quotations.

Fig 3

Figure 3: Individual bullet points

Fig 4

Figure 4: Quotations example

I tried very hard to bullet point the information and keep posts as succinct as possible, although this was challenging given the scope of the exam questions students can expect.

Fig 5

Figure 5: Theme with bullet points

Other Strategies

In reviewing the facebook page, I found evidence of other strategies I’d tried. Megan Poore in her book ‘Social Media in the Classroom’ said, ‘The trick is to design teaching and learning tasks that demand deep, considered engagement with a topic, as opposed to surface occupation with a technology or tool.’ In order to ensure that pupils were engaged with the posts, I created a closed group intended to provide a safe space for students to comment and engage in the learning.  Access to this was limited to members of my class who had to request membership of the group to join, so that I could ensure that no other person had access to any of the group’s messages or details.   In doing this, I ensured that the e-safety lead in my school had access to this group as well so that, whilst it was a closed group, I was making the conversations available to another member of staff so that there were no ‘private’ conversations between my students and me. Then I posed questions or asked for supporting quotations. The idea being, that pupils would respond and actively contribute to the learning online.

Fig 6

Figure 6: Examples of questions posed for pupils

The difficulty was that students were not prepared to comment, even in a closed group. In the example above, four or five students had read the post (admittedly not many) but none of them replied. My speculation was that they did not want anyone else to see them being the ‘keener’ who replied to the teacher’s post. Another explanation would be that they wanted to be passive users of facebook, to have a look at what I had to say but not wanting to be actively engaged themselves. Retrospectively, I would like to have included some feedback on this particular issue in the closing survey. This dramatically altered the way in which I used the facebook page, however, as there were no opportunities to assess, respond to ideas, share different perspectives or give other constructive feedback – or other good things that happen in a classroom. The model, therefore, became very information or lecture-based.

Analysis of feedback data

In total, I wrote over 200 posts, which amounted to a significant amount of time and effort. My concern was that the amount of time I was spending would not match the impact on pupils.

I surveyed the pupils in an anonymous questionnaire in which I asked them to be honest in their responses.

Year 11 were asked how often they used the page. The majority said they had used it sometimes. Of those who had never accessed the information, one did not have facebook and the other said that they did not know what to search for.

Fig 7

Figure 7: Year 11 Social Media Use

Year 10 were asked how often they used the page. There were a greater number who had only used it once or twice. However, the year 10 group was set up later than the Year 11 group so that might account for this response as pupils were asked to consider their usage across the year. More pupils in this group had never accessed the content – responses showed that they did not use or have access to facebook.

Fig 8

Figure 8: Year 10 Social Media Use

Those Year 11 who had used the page responded strongly to the idea that it helped them to remember details. There were six negative responses – half of these said that it didn’t help them with what to write in the exam.

Fig 9

Figure 9: Year 11 views on the content of the posts

Those Year 10 who had used the page responded strongly to the idea that it helped them with their weekly revision. They also responded strongly to the idea that they got something out of reading the posts. There were no negative responses from this group.

Fig 10

Figure 10: Year 10 views on the content of the posts

Pupils in Year 10 and Year 11 responded strongly to the statements that suggested they had accessed the post – in some way – but had mostly used other resources.

Fig 11

Figure 11: Year 11 Social Media Use of Revision Resources

Other findings

  • Around half of the pupils said that they had followed links shared
  • Around half answered ‘maybe’ to accessing the posts in another format, such as a blog

Further Actions

My second initiative was to summarise the content of the Year 10 lessons as I taught them to help Year 11 revise. Feedback from students was that this was better but when the mock exams came along, this was shelved as students requested more input on An Inspector Calls.

 

Again, I took up the challenge – trying to help them revise an entire text in a fortnight. I divided the text into sections and, using the revision book, began analysing the text. This meant writing four or five posts sometimes as I desperately tried to ‘reteach’ them the entire text. The result was that, whilst I had revised the text very well, the students said that there was too much information for facebook. I had also included links to youtube videos that would help them to revise the poems that they needed to learn. They said that there needed to be less content and suggested that I bullet-point the information and did only one post a day. This has led me to consider using Facebook to give the pupils some simple reminders that will pop up on their phones and have more detailed notes on another platform (i.e. blog).

One advantage of following these processes was that I now have very detailed revision notes on several of the texts, which I can now reuse for Year 10, although I am going to have to think very carefully about how I do this.

See the orignial blogs  at @englishrevisiononsocialmedia

Featured image: ‘Mobile phone’ by geralt on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

ACE Questioning

A simple questioning strategy to encourage pupils to extend or justify their thinking.

Mrs Humanities

Looking for a way to differentiate and challenge without any significant need for resources?

Try out ACE questioning. A simple idea which can have big results.

I use it several ways dependent on the class and learners ability range.

Basic concept

A = accept
C = challenge
E = extend

image

Approach 1

The teacher asks a student if they would like to accept, challenge or extend the answer of another student. The student decides and does one of the above, ensuring that if they accept they explain why.

Approach 2

The teacher asks selected students certain questions related to A, C or E.

e.g. do you accept what child A said, why/why not?

Approach 3

During peer assessment students state whether they accept the work as it is and explain why, challenge the answers given by asking them a question such as why do you think… or I actually think…

View original post 27 more words

Developing independence and resilience in MFL Lessons

An Action Research Project by Joanne Whalley (MFL)

Reading time: 12 minutes

Context  –  Autumn 2016

Teaching is good within the department but there could be more focus on developing student resilience and independence as this is a subject which is traditionally quite teacher led and reliant on the teacher as the main resource. Evidence in lessons of students being more resourceful and taking ownership of their own learning would help us to achieve a greater degree of excellence.  In addition, this will bring about a welcome sense of student autonomy which could revolutionize current approaches which can be very teacher-centred (and at times, it could be said that the teacher is working harder than the students!).

With the introduction of new GCSE criteria and the removal of National Curriculum levels a whole school approach to grading has been introduced and the first step in developing student independence was to ensure that they understand what their next steps are. Students self and peer-assess using the grade criteria and grade criteria are shown alongside lesson objectives and assessments. This grade criteria document, which is found at the front of all students’ exercise books acts as a useful “how to” signpost for all students in identifying their next steps and setting goals for the coming term. Thus, students have a growing sense of security in what they can do well and what they need to improve in order to achieve a higher grade.

JWH directory-1273088_640

See below an example of the assessment criteria sheet for Key Stage Four students. Through a series of self, peer and teacher assessments early in Year 10 prior attainment is plotted on the criteria (marked in red), the end of Key Stage Target is also marked on the grid (marked in green) and steps that need to be completed to demonstrate progress being made towards those target criteria are marked in yellow and dated by the student or teacher. Students or teachers can also identify current priorities or next steps after an assessment, this is done in blue and signed and dated by the teacher when achieved.

This has enabled students to have a very clear picture of what they are able to do, what they aim to ultimately achieve and what their immediate priorities are, which would bring about a step change in results. This strong sense of direction and ownership has enabled students to ensure that when they are completing new pieces of work that they include the necessary components in order to reach a particular grade.

More importantly it has given students a very clear pathway to follow and they have been able to begin to make significant “jumps” by trying techniques which they might not have ordinarily thought of including. In short, students have been more willing to take a risk rather than producing work at a level at which they feel comfortable, very close to their current level of attainment.

JWH - assessment

Figure 1: Grade criteria for MFL

Development – December 2016

After having completed a work book scrutiny and a peer observation of a colleague within the English department, I trialed marking with a highlighter to improve student engagement with written feedback and their ability to identify targets for improvement. I have adopted a three colour approach (red, amber, green) and have linked these to the success criteria for a given task. Students in Years 7, 8 and 10 have successfully used the guidance provided to peer and self-assess work, grading it, picking out what they have done well and then identify targets for improvement. This approach is more positive and although it should not be the sole type of marking employed as it does not highlight spelling or grammatical errors, it clearly shows what a student is doing well and then by the absence of the next colour, it shows what a student should work on next. In addition, this technique is quick and simple, as well as very visual and can help when undertaking moderation as you can clearly see which grade is the best fit by the colours shown on a particular piece of work. Samples of these pieces of work have been displayed in classrooms so students can see why a certain piece of work has gained a particular grade, furthermore copies of this have been kept centrally as a reference point for sample work at grades 2 – 6 so far ( and all the sub grades between). A development for the next academic year is to have some laminated versions of these to use as models for students when preparing extended written pieces.

Action

Having laid the foundations of student understanding of how to identify their next steps, I became more confident that students would engage with a more student led approach. Thus, I undertook a series of lessons focusing on student-led learning in January 2017 with Year 10 students.

Research before the lesson

In the first few months of this project, I read a number of short publications and blogs about risk taking and there seemed to be common themes emerging.

  1. As a teacher you should model failure / risk taking – we have a choice to do something simple or slowly forever or to try and improve your performance and risk making a mistake.
  2. If you don’t take a risk you are unlikely to get any better but you need to feel safe to take a risk.
  3. Don’t implement too many changes at once.
  4. You need to provide (decent) opportunities for risk taking, you need to invest time in it.
  5. Give students freedom in the way they approach a task
  6. Do something meaningful with a clear purpose
  7. Take student views on board

Risk taking lesson 1

From these key points I decided upon my approach to my first “risk tasking lesson”. I began the lesson by showing the group, my first ever attempt at skiing on my own without an instructor. It was a perfect example of how I was perfectly in control, very safe but taking no risks whatsoever, avoiding all inclines and I explained, that I would have remained at that level if I hadn’t found the confidence to take a risk. In order to make sure the students felt safe, I planned the lesson so that the tasks were achievable, I was working on the basis of proximal development, students needed to feel that the task was (almost) achievable if they were to be willing to keep going when it became challenging. Group work, provided support and in terms of reassurance that the students were on track to meet the challenge, I gave regular verbal feedback throughout the session. I did not direct the students as to how to tackle the task but put at their disposal some suggested resources. I explained clearly how we would be using the knowledge from the lesson in our later work.

JWH freerider-498473_640

Planning

Students were divided into mixed ability groups. There were four groups. Three of the four groups had one more able student, due to the composition of the class, the fourth group was made up of three middle ability learners and one less able.

The groups were given an envelope with a series of 6 challenges to complete over a period of a two hour lesson. They were given a set of rules which outlined the resources they were able to access and what they were not allowed to do. Whilst I circulated the class, I would give hints, reassurance and guide the students through questioning, I would not give them answers to the challenges unless they used one of their 5 help cards, (interestingly, by the end of the two hour lesson the maximum number of cards used by any group was 3, which shows how independent they were trying to be).

The challenges were planned according to Blooms Taxonomy (Knowledge > Understanding> Application) and therefore became incrementally more difficult. The task set was to find out when to use the Imperfect tense, how to conjugate it, to apply it to key phrases on the topic of local area and then use this to translate a paragraph.

The plan for the 2 hour lesson:

Challenge 1 > Acquiring knowledge – When do we use the Imperfect tense?

Challenge 2 > Developing knowledge and understanding – How do we form the Imperfect tense?

Challenge 3 > Developing understanding and applying the rule – Are there any verbs which don’t follow the rule? Apply the rule to familiar verbs

Challenge 4 > Application in the context of current topic –  translation of useful phrases for describing where you used to live when you were younger

Challenge 5 > Application in a translation task.

Lesson reflection

It was fascinating to watch the dynamics of each group. Initially, two of the three most able students were afraid to commit ideas to paper and seemed to be worried about making mistakes. The middle ability learners demonstrated much more of a “have a go” attitude and were very motivated by the points awarded to each team for each challenge. The most able learners tended to monopolise their groups initially when the task was straight forward and the other members of the group initially deferred to them, thinking that their input was not as valid as other students who they considered to better at French than them. However, they demonstrated less resilience when the work became more challenging. A student who is a high achiever due to a very positive work ethic, hard work and determination was plagued with self-doubt and floundered much more than the less able students in the class. The final task completed involved translation and one of the most able students is nearly bilingual and at this point he began to take the lead, interestingly his level of accuracy was not good and the less able students in his group who were actively applying the knowledge that they had acquired by following the rules of the tense were able to correct his mistakes as he was relying on “gut feel”. His over confidence and reluctance to accept help from other members of the group resulted in the group not finishing the translation task as much time was wasted through guessing where he was going wrong rather than consistently applying what he had learned.

JWH african-2029984_640
The most effective group in terms of speed, accuracy and collaborative skills were the group of middle ability learners, perhaps because there was not a clear leader to defer to, they all felt that they had something to contribute which led to greater efficiency. I was most impressed with the way in which they sought to acquire knowledge, with everyone in  the team playing a part and then they rigorously applied the knowledge and when in doubt referred back to the resources available, showing a great deal of determination and resilience as well as resourcefulness.

Conclusions and next steps

Students were mostly positive about the way that they had been learning, though I would note that collaboration seems to be of most benefit to middle ability students who are keen to succeed and who like to receive affirmation from their peers that they are doing the right thing. The very least able can still tend to be passive but towards the end of the lesson was tentatively seen to make more contributions to the group. Most able students, who are used to being right most of time and who perhaps need this regular verbal affirmation from the teacher throughout the lesson, were the students who struggled with the concept most.

On reflection, this was a good first lesson of this nature. I perhaps could have been stricter, giving less hints and I could have forced students to use their help cards more. I could plan to make the task even more challenging, by giving students less obvious resources to find the information, thus making the investigation more open ended, with more chance of failure but for a first lesson this would have made students less likely to engage with this way of working. In this lesson, the level of challenge was appropriate. In the future, during the mid – plenary reflection I would encourage students not only to reflect upon what they are learning, and how they are learning but also the effectiveness of the way in which the group was working.

During the next lesson, I returned the corrected translations to the groups and asked students to consider the success criteria to identify why I have given those particular scores. (I used highlighter marking to identify key parts of the work). The final step was for individual students to undertake a translation task and a creative writing task so that I am able to gain a good understanding of individual’s grasp of the grammar and give personalised feedback to each member of the class. At this point students were better prepared for this challenge and understood what would make a more successful piece, they tackled the task and all performed well in relation to their ability , independently making use of resources to produce work of good quality.

The students were also given a similar type activity for homework. They were divided into 4 groups by ability and were given a research task appropriate for their ability. They had to research the element of grammar and produce a step by step guide of how to form it. They also had to produce a game or activity to practice this grammar point. They then presented their findings to mixed ability groups so that by the end of the lesson all students had presented their findings on a range of grammatical points concerning the perfect tense.

JWH blackboard-2721887_640

In my opinion, this element of the “pilot” was less successful, students worked on this at home and as such two of the vital elements of the risk taking exercise were lacking; peer support and reassurance from the teacher. This meant that students no longer felt safe and therefore displayed less resilience. Several of the less able and less conscientious students, including the only disadvantaged student said they had been confused by the task and had not completed the homework, whereas those who were ordinarily hardworking, determined and well-motivated, tackled whichever task they had been set with a resilient approach. In addition, the homework task was set within the context of the success criteria for Key Stage Four and as such I had felt that the objective for the activity was clear, however, on reflection perhaps students were less comfortable with taking a risk because they could not see a clear enough link, or “the point” of learning in this way. In the classroom, with constant reinforcement and good student > teacher relationships, students are more likely to display a determined approach even when they find the task confusing.

As a result of what I had discovered through my Year 10 experimental lesson, I have drawn out the most successful elements and widened my use of them. Throughout the rest of the academic year I continued to use these strategies with several of my classes:

  • Setting independent research homework based around grammar points
  • Peer teaching of what they have discovered
  • Students producing resources to help each other consolidate knowledge (games mostly)
  • Regular use of these grammar points within classwork and homework, linking closely to assessment criteria
  • Peer assessment / highlighter marking / students showing not only correct use of the grammar but also that they know that by demonstrating use of more complex structures they will achieve higher grades.

These elements have been successful in giving students an increased sense of independence and self-confidence and a clear understanding of the relationship between how learning various grammar points allows them  greater opportunities to climb the grade ladder which we have created. When we have discussed this in class, students have stated that they like to be able to clearly see what ”ingredients” they need for each grade as it sharpens their focus on how to take control of their own progress.

Bibliography

If learning involves risk taking, teaching involves trust building – Marilla Svinicki – University of Texas (The Professional and Organisational Development Network in Higher Education)

Taking risks in your teaching – Maryellen Weimer PHD ( www.facultyfocus.com)

Creating a safe space for students to take academic risks – Kristi Johnson Smith (Learn NC – University of North Canada)

10 risks every teacher should take with their class – A J Juliani ( http://ajjuliani.com)

Creating a risk taking classroom environment – Mr Gilliespies’s Office – http://reedgillespie.blogspot.co.uk

Featured images:

‘Balance, high ropes, about paris’ by Alexas_Fotos on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

‘Freerider’ by Up-Free on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

‘African – Asian’ by OpenClipart Vectors on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Commons CC0

Using pupil workbooks and interactive PLCs to support learning

A Sharing best practice post by Daniel James (Computing and Business Studies)

Reading time: 2 minutes

The development of a structured approach to learning in GCSE Computing lessons came out of a detailed evaluation of students’ books, notes and revision techniques from the previous academic year. It was clear that there was, in some cases,  a huge difference between the quality of lesson notes and the pupils’ ability to find these notes and use them effectively for revision purposes.

It was from this starting point that we decided to create lesson booklets for all modules in the GCSE Computing course. This provides a structure for students when making notes,  removing the anxiety that some felt when they did not know what note to make in a lesson from all that they were being taught.

Structured Learning 2

Structure Learning

Figure 1 and 2:  Pages from the pupils’ workbooks

The lesson booklets also enabled students to find the notes they needed when revising more quickly and thus focus on undertaking the revision rather than trying to work out which of their notes they needed to revise from.

Along with the lesson booklets we have created end of module revision booklets that have a one page module summary sheet and then exam questions taken from previous exams (or the sample material for new GCSEs).  These support the revision process and ensure students get to the point of applying their learning to exam questions more efficiently, which is after all the ultimate goal in exam preparation!

Revision- notes

Revision- Exam Practice

Figures 3 and 4: Examples of revision notes and exam practice from the End of module revision booklets

This term we are introducing an online interactive PLC (Personalised Learning Checklist) that we have created to allow all students to RAG (Red/Amber/Green) rate their learning across the course.  This allows us as teachers not just to see how all the students in a class are doing but to tailor our revision lessons and final preparation to these needs in the run up to an exam.

PLC

Figure 5: Section of the online interactive PLC (Personalised Learning Checklist)

PLC- Analysis

Figure 6: example of the analysis section of the online PLC

Featured image: ‘Workstation’ by Open-ClipArt Vectors on Pixabay.  Licensed under Creative Common CC0