Tag: teaching

10 changes to KS1&2 writing assessment with direct impact at KS3

10 changes to KS1&2 writing assessment with direct impact at KS3

The DfE have released further changes to the KS1&2 writing assessment frameworks this term. It is inevitable that these will have real impact on students’ knowledge and language acquisition as they reach KS3. Here are 10 amendments with potentially longer lasting impact.

10 changes and their impact:

1. KS1&2: Proof reading
At the end of Year 2, ‘proof reading’ has been added to the ‘greater depth’ level. To achieve this, students will be expected to make simple revisions to their own writing, checking for errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation etc. This continues into KS2.
KS3 impact: 
It may be that embedding this practice at such an early age will result in students who are better able to use self-assessment as they move through the primary years. It will largely depend on how much investment individual schools put into this – Will the process be modelled? Will students be expected to do this regularly? Do students get effective feedback to know how and where to look for errors, and what to do when they find them?

 

2. KS1&2: Secure fit vs. Best fit
Having previously worked from a ‘best fit’* model prior to 2017, there will be a return to this following the attempt at a ‘secure fit’** model in Summer 2017. 
*Best fit: T’s make a fair judgment of a S’s ability based on their own knowledge of the student and the work they consistently produce.
**Secure fit: T’s must ensure that S’s have met every single criteria from the assessment framework before claiming they have reached a certain level. The DfE states,

“A pupil’s writing should meet all the statements within the standard at which they are judged. However, teachers can use their discretion to ensure that, on occasion, a particular weakness does not prevent an accurate judgement being made of a pupil’s attainment overall. A teacher’s professional judgement about whether the pupil has met the standard overall takes precedence.”

KS3 impact:
There may be greater variation in the opinion of a collection of pupil’s written work. If you have a number of different feeder schools (some secondaries in London have up to 60 of these…) you may find that students arrive with conflicting grades. Schools are moderated at random to ensure accuracy of assessment is upheld, but there will naturally be some discrepancies as a result of greater flexibility. This will also directly address the fact that many students could not reach ‘greater depth’ last year due to poor spelling/handwriting. 

 

3. KS1&2: Writing Conventions
Students will continue to learn writing conventions of different styles and genres. This includes knowing that an autobiography requires first person narrative, in contrast to  3rd person narrative for a biography.
4. KS1&2: Literary Devices 
Teachers are expected to embed the explicit teaching of literary techniques such as similes, metaphors and analogies in their teaching of reading and writing.
5. KS1&2: Awareness of Reader/Author’s Intentions
Students are expected to comment on the impact of certain words and phrases chosen by the author and suggest what effect they may have on the reader.
KS3 impact: points 3-5
Teachers may consider revising their approach to tackling these areas above, reviewing how these are currently mapped out within the KS3 curriculum. It may be that KS3 Leads explore ways to dig deeper into some of these concepts if there is already a surface level understanding. It’s vital that KS3 leaders are mapping their own plans against the KS2 expectations in order to minimise unnecessary overlap, as well as reaching back to ensure students are recalling knowledge learnt previously.

 

6. KS1&2: Increased use of dictionaries
The use of dictionaries has now been added as an explicit statement on the 2018
writing assessment.
KS3 impact:
Students may reach KS3 with greater familiarity of a dictionary – and how they work. Students are sometimes presented with a dictionary or thesaurus at KS3 unable to locate the words they need, having not been shown explicitly how to use one. This addition to the framework may reduce issues around this at KS3.

7. KS1&2: Greater emphasis on composition
Having moved away from a focus on composition in 2017, the DfE have returned to this point for 2018. Students will be required to produce pieces of writing that contain an element of style once again – rather than working solely to a clinical list.
KS3 impact:
Students who may have reached expected standard or greater depth as a result of their ability to meet each piece of criteria on a checklist last year will now need to demonstrate that they can write with style. This may have direct impact on students who are tutored for grammar schools, or EAL students who can use a ‘subordinate clause’ or a ‘fronted adverbial’ but continue to find the syntax of regular sentences particularly difficult. 

 

8. KS1&2: Reduced focus on SPaG in the writing assessment*
In combination with the point above, it seems as though the DfE have realised that the ‘recipe’ model of writing they had moved towards might not be the best answer after all. In ensuring written pieces contain a checklist of certain features with such precise specifications, students are losing the ability to write with style and flair, thus churning out cohorts of students who use endless amounts of extended noun phrases but only produce bland, clinical pieces of work. *Students will still be required to complete the discrete spelling, punctuation and grammar (SPaG) test.
KS3 impact:
Students may arrive to KS3 able to use subject terminology to identify SPaG techniques, but less able to apply them to their own writing. It may reveal that students can demonstrate their understanding of such tools in a discrete way on demand, but less able to embed them. This will be largely dependent on the approach of individual schools.

 

9. KS1&2: The DfE are exploring comparative judgment
In the DfE’s ‘Government Consultation Response‘ document to Primary Assessment
(Sept 2017) it states,

“A significant number of respondents were interested in the potential of comparative judgement as a method for assessing writing. We know that there is promising work taking place amongst the sector to explore the use of comparative judgement in the assessment of writing, notably the Sharing Standards pilot run by No More Marking. We were encouraged by the results of this year’s pilot, which involved 199 schools. We will work with No More Marking to evaluate larger pilots in the near future, to explore the potential of comparative judgement in the assessment system.”

KS3 impact:
These exciting developments in comparative judgment (see the work of @daisychristo and her team) may have direct impact on assessment at KS2, changing the entire process of transition from KS2 to KS3. It makes you wonder whether there will be opportunity here to reduce the vast chasm between primaries and secondaries, promoting greater collaboration of assessment in the best interests of our students.

 

10. KS1&2: The DfE are exploring local peer moderation

In the same document mentioned above, the DfE mention that they are looking into a local clusters model for peer-to-peer moderation. The consultation says,

“Many respondents expressed interest in a peer-to-peer model of moderation that would involve schools working together in local clusters, overseen by a local moderator. It was felt that this approach could further encourage the sharing of best practice, and support teachers’ professional development on moderation. To explore this model, we intend to run a small-scale pilot in the 2017 to 2018 academic year.”

KS3 impact:
As with point 9, we may see these models cascade beyond KS2 if results from the pilot stage look successful and methods are deemed fit for purpose. More information is due to be released later this academic year.

 

References:

DfE Consultation Response:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644871/Primary_assessment_consultation_response.pdf

Shareen Mayers:
http://rsassessment.com/2017/09/27/9-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-ks1-and-ks2-teacher-assessment-framework/

Comparative Judgment: 
https://www.nomoremarking.com/
https://twitter.com/daisychristo

KS2 Teacher Assessment Framework:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/647107/2017_to_2018_teacher_assessment_frameworks_at_the_end_of_key_stage_2_PDFA.pdf

KS2 Exemplar Writing Materials:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2018-teacher-assessment-exemplification-ks2-english-writing

 

 

Advertisements
I bought a piano… and am tasting my own pedagogical medicine.

I bought a piano… and am tasting my own pedagogical medicine.

I love music. Creativity has played a major role in my family for generations. My great grandparents played instruments. My grandma was trained to sing at the Guildhall School of Music & Drama, touring concert houses across the globe with her beautiful voice in the 60s, 70s and 80s. My Dad had earned a place at RADA before opting for church ministry instead (quite a career change, yes) and has mastered jazz piano ever since I can remember. My mum is less musical – more adept at art – but brilliant in her own right. The majority of my wider family can play an instrument of some kind; guitar, drums, piano, didgeridoo, flute, banjo, euphonium etc. You name it; we’ve tried it.

As a child I had piano lessons, but my potential for Beethovenian genius was snatched from my little hands each time we moved for my parents’ jobs, making it difficult to continue successfully. (As an aside: as a result of moving I also studied the Aztecs twice and never learned long division until I had to teach it to my Year 6 class at the age of 22.)

I’m pleased to say that, this summer, I succumbed to my ever-increasing desire to play again and bought a piano. I am totally loving it. Whenever I can in the evenings or weekends, I’ll sit for an hour and strike away at the keys in the hope that the chord I’m reaching for resembles something of the graphical note representation I see on the page before me. It’s still hit and miss if truth be told, but I’m definitely way better than I was eight weeks ago.

Why am I harping on about a piano?

Simply, this process of learning that I’m becoming more and more committed to is opening my eyes to the journey we expect our students to travel. The fact that I possess a novice-level understanding of the piano and how it works already might mean that I am building any further knowledge a little quicker, but it’s certainly not easy. I thought I’d put together a top five set of ‘quick learns’ that seem wholly transferable from my own learning experience to the classroom:

  1. PRIOR KNOWLEDGE:
    Learning anything new must build on prior knowledge, however weak the triggers may be. The brain seems to be constantly trying to make associations; between notes, within chords, from one piece to another.
  2. EXPERTISE:
    Making progress will be faster in the presence (and under the direction) of someone whose subject knowledge is far superior to your own.
  3. INTERLEAVING REHEARSAL:
    Practising in smaller measures – an hour here and there rather than a whole morning – seems to produce better performance. Opportunities for testing, resting and a chance to forget movements or parts of movements, then returning to a piece a day (or more) later is resulting in longer-term learning.
  4. ADDRESSING ERRORS:
    Keeping your fingers locked into the incorrect keys, when you fail to produce the sound you thought you were about to, allows you to check each note and find the misplaced one (or two, or three…). From there, you can find real clarity in the assessment of your own playing over time. Once you’ve identified common error patterns you’re repeatedly making you can focus on the minutiae of specific chord movements and retrain your mind and muscles to move how they should.
  5. FEEDBACK:
    Having an audience who is willing to listen to you and give feed back on specific aspects of your playing is a real win. You can lose yourself in the precision of the notes a little, so to have those who possess a level of musicality themselves offering suggestions for development; this can only be a good thing.

In such a brief reflection as this, I’m surprised as to how much of what we preach in the classroom transfers to learning a musical instrument – and beyond. There’s comfort in that.

Watch this space for an invitation to a wonderful Christmas soiree. Or Summer.
Yes, that has a more realistic ring to it.

Metacognition Series: 3 of 6

Metacognition Series: 3 of 6

Meta Session 3 8Dec
This is the 3rd blog post of a 6-post series on Metacognition. You can find post 1 here and post 2 here.
(If you’ve read the previous posts, skip straight to the key themes below. I’ll keep the intro the same at the top of each post.)

 

INTRO
In my recently-appointed role as a Lead Learner, I have been charged with delivering a series of six enquiry sessions for teachers on the theme of Metacognition*. Both a challenge and a privilege to lead such a great, diverse group of teachers with varying levels of experience and responsibility, I’ve been taking my research very seriously. (*For more information on our CPD Programme, designed by my colleague, Phil Stock, see his blog post here.)
aa
The sequence of posts I intend to write over the course of this year will 1. outline key areas addressed in sessions, 2. share questions that have arisen from our group discussions (sometimes as a result of the pre-reading that has been set), 3. offer points of interest from research studies that I continue to contemplate at each stage.
aa
I should make it clear from the outset – I have no doubt in my mind that metacognitive strategies can significantly enhance the learning of an individual, be they 5 or 95. With a grandparent of 89 who recently completed a BA degree in Humanities, I (and I know he does too) fully adhere to the notion that a high dose of metacognition and self-regulation can vastly improve the educational journey for a learner. It is the whos and whys and whens and hows that I believe need further thought.


 

Prior to this session, teachers were asked to bring two items that would aid them during the planning time allocated within the session:
1. Their research and enquiry question* – these were written independently by teachers, who selected a very specific teaching element and target group to base their research on. Questions were devised in accordance with the guidance* shared with staff and agreed by line managers during appraisal meetings in the first half of the Autumn Term.
2. Any planning or knowledge of subject content due to be covered in the New Year.
*Screenshot taken from Phil’s post
aa
Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 12.06.19

aa
8 themes from session 3:

  1. We addressed a query that arose in session 2
    During one of the rich discussions we have shared as a group, a question was raised regarding the difference between two the concepts of ‘self-control’ and ‘self-regulation’. At the time, I admitted to not knowing what the research would suggest on this and could only speculate at possible answers. After some reading around this, I found the following quotes that served as a basis on which to summarise that:

Self-control: definitions seem to possess a shared trait of explaining a physical reaction to a stimulus. Self-control requires an individual to make wise decisions in the moment.

Self-regulation: definitions suggest that this concept helps an individual to guide or adjust their behaviour in pursuit of some desired end state or goal.

Meta Session 3 8DecbMeta Session 3 8Deca

 

 

 

 

 

aa
It is worth mentioning that these two terms are also often used interchangeably, so it is not quite as black and white as it may initially seem.

2.We recalled key themes from session 2

Once again, teachers were presented with a challenging multiple-choice quiz in order to familiarise themselves with themes from the first two sessions. These were completed independently, after which the answers were shared and discussed as a group. I should declare here that, despite the success of my first recap quiz used in session 2, I came under significant – though entirely civilised – attack from teachers present, for the phrasing of one or two of my questions.

In one section of the test, teachers had to judge statements to be true or false. For one of those statements I had written, “A regimented classroom culture can discourage self-regulation.”

Now, the response I had expected to receive was ‘true’, which was a little disconcerting when the choir of united voices before me replied ‘false’. This harmonious moment of unison soon became a cacophony when I overconfidently responded ‘WRONG!’.

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 12.49.13

In my mind, the word ‘regimented’ looked like a classroom of learners who lacked autonomy, conjuring visions of a teacher who was spoon-feeding curriculum content, denying students opportunities for deep thinking.

In the minds of everybody else, the word ‘regimented’ looked like a calm, orderly classroom.

It was evident where I had gone wrong and apologised without reserve. Needless to say that everybody scored a point for that question, irrespective of the answer they had given.

This was a fruitful learning experience for me, reminding me how careful one needs to be when constructing questions for formative assessments. A high quality test is critical if we hope it might reveal any valuable window of insight into the on-going learning processes of our students.

  1. We shared reflections on the pre-reading**

As has been the case in all three sessions so far, teachers were brilliantly forthcoming in sharing their personal reflections on the reading we have engaged in. Conscious of time constraints on this session (mindful of reserving time for planning), we didn’t spend huge amounts of time dwelling on this though, again, some very interesting points arose. Two comments of note included:
a) The video talk by Dr Derek Cabrera greatly helped in provoking one to think about the value we place on thinking in our lessons. It leads us to question whether the pedagogical approaches we employ to share information about our subjects are the right ones.
b) Reference was given to a concept discussed in John Hattie’s chapter on self-control, called ‘ego depletion’. Many studies, including the work of psychologists such as Roy Baumeister et al (1998), propose that, “Self-control is a finite resource that determines capacity for effortful control over dominant responses and, once expended, leads to impaired self-control task performance, known as ego depletion.”

Teachers discussed the implications of this concept in relation to the demands we put on our students in a variety of learning situations.

**Pre-reading list focus: 
Dr Derek Cabrera, How Thinking Works (online video clip)
John Hattie, Visible Learning and the Science of How we Learn
Chapter 26, Achieving Self-Control

  1. We took a shallow dip into the field of Executive Function
    In response to a dialogue that arose in session 1, a brief amount of time was spent considering the concept of Executive Function. An overview video from Harvard was shown, outlining the premise that EF is, in essence, the CEO of all cognitive processes. According to Harvard,

“Executive function and self-regulation skills are the mental processes that enable us to plan, focus attention, remember instructions, and juggle multiple tasks successfully. Just as an air traffic control system at a busy airport safely manages the arrivals and departures of many aircraft on multiple runways, the brain needs this skill set to filter distractions, prioritize tasks, set and achieve goals, and control impulses.”

We are taught that EF skills depend on three types of brain function:

  1. working memory
  2. mental flexibility
  3. self-control
  1. We attempted a task that challenged our Executive Function ability

To understand the demands our EF skills are consistently required to monitor, we looked to the unfaltering wisdom of the Two Ronnies. While not technically qualified as cognitive psychologists, these men have been pioneers in broadcasting the complexities of EF. Watch their informative Mastermind sketch here.

Following this, teachers were challenged to attempt the same task in pairs, responding with an answer to the previous question instead of the current one. Here is one of the two sheets I devised to test teachers’ mental flexibility.

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 16.28.08

After a few hot minutes of serious brain activity (and much laughter), we reviewed how the task had gone. The two main comments that arose were:
1. It was more difficult to ask the questions, since your brain is having to read, listen, look ahead and score at the same time.
2. It was much more difficult to answer when you had to complete an operation in order to reach an answer, while also storing the next question in your mind.

One teacher raised a concern that this could have a significant negative effect on our learners. A student might easily fail to cling on to an influx of information we have given, if we have not considered the demands we are placing on their working memory at any one time.

6.We made associations between our questions and the Metacognition session content
As mentioned in the intro of this post, staff referred back to their individual research and enquiry questions, making connections between these and the content we have covered so far in sessions. This was a brief discussion, before moving into more tailored groupings for effective planning and preparation time.

7. We regrouped according to enquiry question focus and began planning
Prior to this session, I had spent time reminding myself of teachers’ enquiry questions and carefully grouped them according to the focus of their upcoming trial (not necessarily by department). These were broadly grouped around themes including: self-assessment or self-monitoring, applying technical or higher level vocabulary to work, social or emotional attitudes to learning, ability to apply strategies taught. This list is not exhaustive but incorporates many of the key focuses shared by teachers in our group.

In these subgroups, teachers discussed their hoped student outcomes as a result of new strategies they will seek to implement in the New Year. They also identified relevant strategies from a menu I had collated to best suit their subject area and enquiry focus. Strategies were selected from a range of research studies and articles I’d read in preparation for these sessions, including a reference table outlining many of the great techniques explored in Doug Lemov‘s book ‘Teach Like a Champion 2.0‘.

Meta Session 3 8Decn

8. We looked ahead to January, considering how to monitor any progress
While a six-week period is a short time in which to measure improvement in the deeper learning of students, we will intend to pause and consider how the trial is going in February. Teachers were informed that, when we meet on February 10th, it would be great to hear from each member of the group:
a) what strategies have been implemented
b) what has / has not worked so well and
c) what improvements to learning, if any, have been noticed in that time
aa
Any evidence can be simply anecdotal, video footage, photo evidence, student work, formative assessment, student interviews or surveys etc. It is left to the teacher to make the best decision as to how to measure any change, though it was advised that some form of pre and post comparison might be useful. The trial will continue for the remainder of the year, though this next session will serve as a good review point along the journey to reflect and revise the metacognitive approaches employed.
aa
Following the session, I shared a step-by-step timeline of actions that need to take place between now and February. This includes arrangements for planning, delivery and reviewing. I will also be sharing any reading I find that links to teachers’ questions in the interim period, as well as being available for on-going support.
aa
I’m geekily eager to see how the next phase goes.

Metacognition Series: 2 of 6

Metacognition Series: 2 of 6

Metacognition Session 2daa
This is the 2nd blog post of a 6-post series on Metacognition. You can find post 1 here.
(If you’ve read post 1, skip straight to the key themes below. I’ll keep the intro the same at the top of each post.)
a


INTRO
In my recently-appointed role as a Lead Learner, I have been charged with delivering a series of six enquiry sessions for teachers on the theme of Metacognition*. Both a challenge and a privilege to lead such a great, diverse group of teachers with varying levels of experience and responsibility, I’ve been taking my research very seriously. (*For more information on our CPD Programme, designed by my colleague, Phil Stock, see his blog post here.)
aa

The sequence of posts I intend to write over the course of this year will 1. outline key areas addressed in sessions, 2. share questions that have arisen from our group discussions (sometimes as a result of the pre-reading that has been set), 3. offer points of interest from research studies that I continue to contemplate at each stage.
aa

I should make it clear from the outset – I have no doubt in my mind that metacognitive strategies can significantly enhance the learning of an individual, be they 5 or 95. With a grandparent of 89 who recently completed a BA degree in Humanities, I (and I know he does too) fully adhere to the notion that a high dose of metacognition and self-regulation can vastly improve the educational journey for a learner. It is the whos and whys and whens and hows that I believe need further thought.


8 themes from session 2:

  1. We recalled session 1 themes
    Teachers were presented with a challenging multiple choice quiz in order to familiarise themselves with themes from the first session, putting metacognitive strategies into action from the start. These were completed in silence (I know what a bunch of cheaters some of them are*). Following that, answers were shared in pairs and then “official” answers were revealed and discussed as a group.
    aa
    *Joking. It’s all of them.
    aa
    Screen Shot 2015-12-04 at 20.52.49aa
  2. We grappled with the complexities of the pre-reading
    Engaging in a superb reflective conversation regarding the pre-reading material**, we discussed whether some of the research available on self-regulation might cause a teacher to feel somewhat impotent in attempting to promote metacognitive and self-regulatory strategies. One teacher questioned what impact we have as educators in developing a learner’s metacognitive skills, since the role of genetics appears to play such a significant part in this area. This was a heavy but fruitful discussion and, as the session progressed, many of the questions that were raised at the beginning were responded to in one way or another, thus leading us to resolve that we do have a big responsibility in this area – particularly with regard to:
    a) nurturing a calm, focused learning environment,
    b) modeling thinking strategies we expect our students to use, and
    c) continuing to establish effective teacher-student relationships, all of which can greatly enhance the learning journey.
    aa
    **Pre-reading list:
    1. Daniel Willingham, Can teachers increase students’ self-control?
    2. John Hattie, Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn, Ch. 9: Acquiring complex skills through social modelling and explicit teaching
    3. Education Endowment Fund, Metacognitive and Self-Regulation Strategies
    4. Research Leads Improving Students’ Education (RISE), “Metacognition Short RISE Case Study” (not available online)
    aa
  3. We observed a metacognitive strategy in action
    Soon after the first session was over, one teacher informed me that they had completed the pre-reading and had planned to explicitly model a metacognitive strategy in their lesson the following day. Being the eager soul that I am, I requested that we filmed it and used it to share in Session 2, to which he kindly agreed. As a group, we watched a short clip of this strategy in action. The footage demonstrated the breaking down of a paragraph structure into smaller steps, with the students and teacher together verbalising the process before attempting to write. We considered the strengths of this model, with the teacher commenting on their lesson and expanding on details of the actions that followed.
    aa
  4. We contemplated our current education system
    The question was posed to teachers regarding how much space we allow for thinking to take place in our education system. When we are planning and researching as teachers, we think. Of course we think. I’m certain that any half-decent teacher will be thinking when preparing for an upcoming lesson or series of lessons. I’m also pretty sure, though, that a good teacher will go one step further and think meta-cognitively about how to deliver an idea to a class full of pupils, structuring their lessons in accordance with that. Those good teachers are characterised by their initiative, prompting them to consider these questions when planning:
    aa
    What should I teach? Why is this important? How will this connect to previous sessions? What prior knowledge do my students already have in order to make necessary associations with this new information, to enhance memory storage and future retrieval? What hurdles do I need to anticipate in the learning process? Which questions should I plan to ask that might lead to a greater understanding of this concept? What positive learning outcomes will we see if this is a successful lesson?
    a
    It is the difference in the thought processes between those half-decent teachers and those good teachers that matter.
    aa
    As a profession, we need to be asking,
    ‘Does [our education system/my school/this unit of work/the lessons I plan] provide enough opportunities for learners to think deeply about ideas and concepts? Are we fostering a culture that recognises the value of independent thinking? Or have we taken the burden of thinking away from our students who wait at the ready, through no fault of their own, to be fed from the metaphorical spoon? <- Definitely a loaded question.
    aaa
    Two relevant clips from the same TED Talk by Dr Derek Cabrera, a cognitive psychologist in the US, were shared. The intention was to offer teachers an opportunity to contemplate how vital the process of deep thinking is for learners.
    aa
    Metacognition Session 2b
    aa
    Clip 1: Watch from 3.40m-5.13m
    *Spoiler alert*
    Clip 1 Summary
    Cabrera: “We are, as curriculum designers and teachers and educators, over-engineering the content curriculum, and we’re surgically removing the thinking so that our kids are simply following instructions, painting by the numbers and getting the grade.”
    aa
    Clip 2: Watch from 7.45m-11.50m
    *Spoiler alert*
    Clip 2 Summary
    The 4 universal thinking skills Cabrera insists are essential for learners to engage in are:
  1. Making distinctions: the ability to define terms and create more sophisticated, nuanced ones. If learners can grasp definitions and take ownership of meanings and distinctions, they are “bringing something into existence”.
  2. Looking at the parts and the wholes of systems: the ability to identify the smaller parts that make a whole and that a whole is a combination of smaller parts – “they can construct new ideas and deconstruct old or existing ideas”.
  3. Recognising relationships: the ability to make connections between subjects. Our education system pockets learning into discrete subject areas, isolated from one another. Cabrera acknowledges the stark contrast between this format and the rest of the world. He argues that, “the world is a very interconnected place”.
  4. Taking multiple perspectives: the ability to view a situation/idea/relationship from a number of different perspectives. Cabrera suggests that, “everything looks different when you take a new perspective” and advises that this skill leads to increased empathy, increased compassion, increased pro-social thinking and emotional development.
    aa
  1. We considered the infamous ‘Marshmallow Test’
    Studying the complexities of Walter Mischel’s notorious experiment on self-regulation and its findings, we acknowledged the vast contribution to education that this study and subsequent similar replications have made. Accepting the high correlation between those children who were able to deny themselves one marshmallow in the valiant effort to wait for another (after a substantial amount of waiting time) and their positive SAT scores/ healthy BMI scores/ lower rates of addiction or divorce etc., we agreed that this study did demonstrate plausible helpful findings in the area of metacognition. However, as a result of much research from later studies and the analyses of cognitive psychologists who have publicly critiqued the Marshmallow Test, it remains unclear whether we can safely assume that the results really did demonstrate different levels of self-regulation or not. Critics who find fault with Mischel’s early findings question whether the test revealed less about self-regulation and more, in fact, about an individual’s respect for authority or their response to a reliable stimulus. From this perspective, it could be argued that children who have greater respect or trust in authority are more likely to wait longer in a timed trial, in comparison with those who have lesser respect or trust for authority and are, therefore, less likely to wait.
    aa
    In order to provide a balanced overview of the Marshmallow Test findings, one subsequent research study in particular was shared. In 2010, Rochester University in the USA replicated the study with one additional stage prior to the marshmallow test.
    aa
    Metacognition Session 2aa
    Participating children were asked to sit in a room on their own, where the marshmallow test would be carried out later on. Before the test, each child was asked to wait in the room and decorate a piece of card that would be used to make a personalised plastic cup. All of the children were told by an adult that they could begin decorating the card with the few measly pencils available. The adult promised to return with a much better range of art materials in a few minutes, but the children were encouraged to make a start while the adult was gone.
    aa
    Group 1 (the ‘reliable environment’): After a few minutes, children in this group received the better resources, as promised.
    Group 2 (AKA the ‘unreliable environment’): After a few minutes, children in this group were visited by the adult again but without the resources, apologising that they did not have the art materials they had promised.
    aa
    It was after this additional stage that the original marshmallow test was then carried out. The findings were astounding. The average wait time in the marshmallow test for both groups are shown below.
    aa

Metacognition Session 2 (1)

aa
Average wait times:
Group 2 (the ‘unreliable environment’):   waited 3:02 secs
Group 1 (the ‘reliable environment’):      waited 12:02 secs
aa
This is big stuff.
aa
If these studies reveal what they appear to reveal, this depth of understanding of our learners could offer some serious insight into the influences that shape self-regulatory behaviour. It is this contextual information that teachers could then lay as a firm foundation on which to establish the most effective pedagogical approach for a particular group of students.
a

  1. We learnt that self-regulation is not inherently individualistic
    According to John Hattie, educational researcher and author of ‘Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn’ (2014), one’s capacity for self-regulation is not predetermined by their genetic make-up, but is more a result of the social constructs to which they have been exposed.
    aa
    In his book, he states,
    “What has emerged over recent years is a conception of the individual placing self-control, determination and willpower, at the core. But there is a twist: the ability to use self-control is not an inherently individualistic matter. It is neither stoicism nor moral rectitude. Instead, it is a matter of social development and learning.”
    aa
  1. We identified four possible categories of self-regulation
    A meta-analysis of self-regulation studies carried out in the Netherlands (2012) identified four key headings under which a plethora of self-regulation strategies could be grouped.
    aa
    These are:
    1. Cognitive
    2. Metacognitive
    3. Management
    4. Motivation
    aa
    Metacognition Session 2aaa
  1. We compared ‘self-regulated achievement’ with ‘self-regulated learning’
    Acknowledging the pressures of an education system where teachers have been continually judged on student performance rather than a more natural, steady progression of a much deeper learning, we engaged in a very civil but stimulating debate, where contrasting perspectives on the overall purpose of education were discussed.
    aa
    I’m paraphrasing, but this was the general gist:‘What is our ultimate goal as educators? Are we teaching self-regulation simply for our students to then reach the work force and become exploited by employers? Or do we have a responsibility to guide and support them in their thinking as independent and mindful citizens?’
    ‘But don’t you have to demonstrate compliance in order to fit into the social construct of a workforce?’

    ‘Is an understanding of social norms, then, the same as churning out factory-educated children who are incapable of thoughts?’

aaaa
Questions prompted by this session:

  • In light of the research around the huge influence of those early formative years, what strategies can we employ to enhance the self-regulation habits of our learners?
  • How can the social constructs within a school environment (adult-student, student-student, adult-adult) positively model the power of metacognition and self-regulation?
  • Do we allow our learners enough time to think deeply about new ideas and concepts on a daily basis?
  • Do we offer opportunities for learners to make distinctions/ identify the parts of a whole and the whole as parts of a system/ recognise relationships/take multiple perspectives?
    aa
    It was another energising session, fuelled not only by the research but also by the minds and experience of the teachers present. Following next week’s session (3 of 6), each member of the group – myself included – will have roughly six weeks to trial a number of recommended strategies, deeply rooted within their own subject domain, ready to share feedback on early observations when we meet for our 4th session in February.
Metacognition Series: 1 of 6

Metacognition Series: 1 of 6

 

In my recently-appointed role as a Lead Learner, I have been charged with delivering a series of six enquiry sessions for teachers on the theme of Metacognition*. Both a challenge and a privilege to lead such a great, diverse group of teachers with varying levels of experience and responsibility, I’ve been taking my research very seriously.
(*For more information on our CPD Programme, designed by my colleague, Phil Stock, see his blog post here.)
aa

The sequence of posts I intend to write over the course of this year will 1. outline key areas addressed in sessions, 2. share questions that have arisen from our group discussions (sometimes as a result of the pre-reading that has been set), 3. offer points of interest from research studies that I continue to contemplate at each stage.
aa

I should make it clear from the outset – I have no doubt in my mind that metacognitive strategies can significantly enhance the learning of an individual, be they 5 or 95. With a grandparent of 89 who recently completed a BA degree in Humanities, I (and I know he does too) fully adhere to the notion that a high dose of metacognition and self-regulation can vastly improve the educational journey for a learner. It is the whos and whys and whens and hows that I believe need further thought.
aa

Metacognition Session 1 04.11.15k.jpgaa
8 themes from session 1:

  1. We defined the term ‘metacognition’
    Put simply, metacognition is ‘thinking about thinking’. It is the process by which a learner becomes aware of their own cognitive processes and, as a result of this, makes a deliberate response to any given stimulus.

  2. We considered the theoretical background
    A summary of Jean Piaget’s four stages of cognitive development were shared, comparing the similarities and differences between this earlier work and the later work of John H. Flavell on the Theory of Mind; namely that Flavell perceived metacognition as a skill that occurs much earlier on in development than Piaget first thought.
    aa
    Metacognition Session 1 04.11.15maa
  3. We acknowledged the distinction between cognition and metacognition
    Cognition
    = all mental processes and abilities in which people engage on a daily basis such as memory, learning, problem-solving, evaluation, reasoning and decision making
    Metacognition
    = thinking about thinking. It allows us to complete a given task well through planning, monitoring, evaluating and comprehending, making a person more aware of his/her cognitive processes
    aa
    Metacognition Session 1 04.11.15daa
  4. We identified the two main strands of metacognition
    a) knowing about cognition and b) regulation of cognition
    We considered learning activities that would fall under each of these two headings, understanding that many cognitive psychologists would not consider metacognition to have taken place unless the regulation of cognition stage had been completed. If knowing aspects of one’s own learning does not lead an individual to adjust their working habits in order to lead to greater learning capacity, then the full process of metacognition has not yet finished.
    aa
    Metacognition Session 1 04.11.15z.jpgaa
  5. We analysed research ratings of metacognition
    Sharing the Education Endowment Fund’s (EEF) Toolkit rating, we acknowledged the positive impact that metacognition can have on learning, aware of the low cost and high strength of evidence in employing metacognitive strategies in the classroom.
    aa
    Metacognition Session 1 04.11.15laa
  6. We recognised the importance of teaching metacognition explicitly
    As teachers, we cannot possibly assume that all learners possess an innate ability in metacognition, a skill often determined by inherited traits or exposure to various models witnessed in the home. There is a real need for us to demonstrate how to employ metacognitive strategies in order to enhance the learning journey. Back in 1999, the DfEE stated,
    “There is a need to be explicit about what we mean by better forms of thinking. If students are to become better thinkers – to learn meaningfully, to think flexibly and to make reasoned judgments – then they must be taught explicitly how to do it.”
    I then illustrated this by showing a video clip on John Tomsett’s blog post (the student-student clip at the bottom of the post), where a student verbalises his own thought process, which he undertook to reach a correct mathematical answer. It is this environment of sharing thoughts and strategic steps that will give students the opportunity to question and reflect on their own thinking.
    aa
  7. We considered effective formative assessment techniques
    Drawing on the wisdom of educational researchers such as Dylan Wiliam, we looked at why and how multiple choice questions can act as a great metacognitive teaching strategy for learning, posing a demand on learners to adopt higher order thinking techniques to reach a particular answer.
    aa
    Metacognition Session 1 04.11.15p.jpgaa
  8. We learned that metacognitive strategies MUST be rooted within a subject domain
    A tecnique that requires students to step back from the learning process and consider their own thinking can not be taught as a discrete tool, isolated from a subject area. The purpose of metacognition is to reflect on your own learning in order to enhance understanding and, by the nature of learning, this can only be attributed to a particular subject area at any given time. Without the foundation of subject knowledge, metacognitive tools could be considered somewhat redundant. As Joe Kirby, Assistant Headteacher and Head of English at Michaela Community School, Wembley, states,
    “Over the last three decades, cognitive science has come to a conclusion that is scientifically robust: critical thinking skills require broad background knowledge. This is the reason why teaching abstract skills devoid of facts such as ‘evaluation’, generic strategies such as ‘skimming’ and unchallenging content like celebrities, TV, Twitter and Cirque du Freak doesn’t help academic achievement: the opportunity cost.”
    He goes on to say,
    “When my class struggles to think critically about a text, it’s often because I’ve starved them of the deep knowledge they need.”
    aa

Questions that arose during the session:

  • Aren’t some of us employing some metacognitive strategies already in our classrooms?
  • Do some learners already possess strong metacognitive strategies and therefore require little instruction on how to employ?
  • Is there time to teach these strategies on top of curriculum content pressures?
  • How great is the role of genetics and do we have much influence?
  • What is the role of executive functioning in relation to this?
    aa

It was a super first session with a great range of contributions from the teachers present. Biased for sure, I struggle to think of a better way to enhance our own classroom pedagogy than through collaboration with other teachers who possess a wealth of knowledge and experience that is different from our own. Surely gathering as a group of professionals to wrestle with these complex but game-changing concepts could potentially have significant impact on the lives of our learners.

My Starter for Five Contribution: SEN at Secondary

My Starter for Five Contribution: SEN at Secondary

Starter for Five is a UK based advice blog for new teachers. You can find it on twitter here. Each post gives 5 quick pieces of advice on a particular topic for new teachers and trainees submitted by experienced teachers.

Here’s mine:

Name: Josie Mingay
Twitter name: @JAMingay
Sector: Secondary
Subject taught (if applicable): English and Literacy
Position: Literacy leader / Lead Learner
What is your advice about? SEN at Secondary

aa
1: No SEN label should cause you to lower your expectations of students. Do all you can to remove specific obstacles to learning in order for students to reach ambitious goals.
aa
2: Be explicit about praising students for effort and hard work, rather than achievement. Students with SEN need to see that the journey to the destination is rewarded too.
aa
3: Make use of your SENCo/Learning Support dept – a great resource, often with a wealth of knowledge. Utilise their expertise to aid your planning/teaching.
aa
4: Talk to your students! More than any official document listing suggested strategies, students usually know their obstacles best and can tell you what support they need.
aa
5: Model using metacognitive strategies. One of the best tools for students with SEN is the ability to think about their learning and select strategies to apply to given tasks.
aa
If you have a topic you’d like to contribute advice about, click here.

ROOT MAP: A Vocabulary Instruction Model

ROOT MAP: A Vocabulary Instruction Model

Last July, I wrote the first of a two-part blog post (see part 1 here) sharing some early musings around the best approach for a new vocabulary model that we wanted to introduce at my school. This generated much interest and a number of people since have asked for the second instalment. As a result of the programme’s ongoing evolution, there have been alterations along the way. Nevertheless, I finally present to you the sequel, in the form of a write-up from my session at ResearchED last Saturday. My colleague, Phil Stock, has also written about this here.

Footage of the session will be available here soon.

Slide01

On Saturday 7th November, I was privileged to speak at the first ResearchED Secondary English & Literacy conference at Swindon Academy. (To see my Top 5 takeaway points from the day, see here.) My session explored the importance of direct vocabulary instruction.
aa
To begin, I asked those present to spend a few minutes discussing where they would rank each of these actions on a scale from least energy required to most.

Slide04

aa
When feeding back as a group, two members of the audience beat me to my own teaching point, making the case that this task would be impossible without the semantic knowledge of the words in bold. I then displayed the following slide, which I had composed to exemplify how unfamiliar words can instantaneously become unwelcome hurdles that students must face when trying to comprehend a given text.

Slide05

“Those who know 90 percent of the words in a text will understand its meaning and, because they understand, they will also begin to learn the other 10 percent of the words.” (E.D. Hirsch, 2003)

aa

I proceeded to explain that a study conducted by Beck et al. into the acquisition of new vocabulary resulted in the speculation of a continuum, whereby different texts can present a reader with a variety of scenarios, some which offer the necessary clues to help us learn a word meaning and, for others, no clues at all. More information is given in the PPT slides embedded at the foot of this post.

Slide07

As a result of their studies, Beck’s team resolved that “…relying on learning word meanings from independent reading is not an adequate way to deal with students’ vocabulary development.” Beck, McKeown & Kucan (2013)

I’m in full agreement with this, not least because there are a great number of students who won’t necessarily come into contact with unfamiliar vocabulary through independent reading anyway, as a result of a lack of interest in books, or they may be reading texts that lack enough challenge.

aa

Slide20aa
Next, I outlined the memory process we believe to be true when acquiring new information. I shared Anderson’s theory (1994), asserting that information is stored in biomodal packets, separated into linguistic packets called ‘logogens’ and non-linguistic packets called ‘imagens’.

Slide22Both Anderson’s theory and that of Sadoski and Paivio’s Dual Coding Theory (1994), support the notion that experiences are stored in language terms but also in ways more connected to senses, feelings, emotions, visual perceptions etc. From these theories, it can be ascertained that an individual learns new information by initially creating an episodic memory of an event (ie. a one-off experience) which, with repetition, can become a semantic experience whereby the learner begins to assimilate new information as part of a deeper network of knowledge around a particular idea or theme.

Slide27

I noted the importance of Graham Nuthall’s working memory model here, stressing that three conditions that lead to effective processing are:

  1. Strength – multiple exposures to new information (at least 3 or 4 within a limited time) is essential in order to embed knowledge
  2. Depth – ensuring students think ‘hard’ about new information so as not to allow it to just hover on the surface, instead challenging learners to wrestle with new ideas and concepts to ensure they are deeply rooted
  3. Elaboration – providing opportunities for learners to make connections and associations with previously acquired knowledge, in order for this to ‘latch’ onto something

Slide28

In discussing which words should be targetted for direct instruction, I made reference to three sources:

  1. Rolfus and Ackerman (1999) asserted that subject knowledge has a high degree of specificity i.e. little transfer. The five particular areas they recommend to teach are:
    a) Subject specific words and phrases embody deep, underlying concepts e.g. condensation, genre
    b) Roots and suffixes e.g. gen, anti-
    c) Proper nouns e.g. Carl Lewis
    d) Compound words e.g. drummer boy
    e) Subject and verb phrases e.g. book review
  2. Beck’s contribution of the tiered vocabulary pyramid suggests that words can be categorised into three tiers.
    Slide33

The advice from Beck suggests that it is Tier 2 words that should be taught explicitly, since these are the words that arise less frequently in conversation, more in writing. This theory would suggest that, as a result of teaching Tier 2 words, Tier 3 words can then be accessed more easily by the learner. While there is some sense in this approach, much of the research undertaken in the area of memory would dispute this method, arguing that the teaching of words need to be deeply rooted within their subject domain, in order to connect new information to already-learnt knowledge.

  1. The final source was taken from a synthesis of research studies undertaken by the National Reading Panel (NRP) in the US, 2010. As a result of their analysis, they identified eight findings that provide a scientifically based foundation for the design of rich vocabulary instruction. These were:

Slide34

These findings, as well as the great research undertaken by Robert J. Marzano in his book “Building Academic Vocabulary“, have directly informed our delivery of vocabulary instruction at Greenshaw.

All too aware of the gap between word-rich and word-poor students, we recognise the crucial importance of providing all students with direct and indirect experiences, broadening their understanding of the world, enabling students from both privileged and disadvantaged backgrounds alike to obtain and retain new words taught.

[There is an] estimated difference of vocabulary knowledge of 4,700 words between students of high and low social economic status.” (Templin, 1957)

It is through the mediums of those listed below that we might be able to develop students’ vocabulary in a way that meets their individual needs.

Slide40

aa
Taking direction from Marzano’s work, we have implemented 6 steps of effective vocabulary instruction in our Year 7 research trial.

Slide41See slides 41-60 of the PPT shared at the bottom of this post for more information and the filmed session, which will be available here shortly.

aa

In closing, I will attempt to outline the structure we have designed, in order to deliver two strands of vocabulary instruction, namely subject-specific English words (Tier 2&3) and roots, prefixes and suffixes.

Slide62
As you can see from the image above, one tutor time session a week is reserved for a morphology and etymology focus on words. During this time, tutors across a range of different curriculum subjects deliver 15 minutes of intensive vocabulary delivery, teaching the meaning of common roots required at KS3 and beyond.
aa
Slide68

aa
In addition to this, students are also explicitly taught Tier 2 and 3 subject-specific words in their English classes, directly linked to the text being studied at the time. See the slide below for our first cycle of Autumn term words and roots taught.

Slide63aa

Here is a rough idea of how much direct instruction students might receive over a fortnight’s cycle.

Slide65 As I explained in my talk and, as is the reality for so many teachers, there is never enough time to teach the content of the curriculum, let alone trying to cram in additional vocabulary content. This is why we have moved some of the definitions and connections tasks originally designed to take place in English lessons to our online learning platform, giving students the opportunity to revisit information multiple times by completing multiple choice quizzes and games online between lessons, set as homework. (When I figure out how to share the demo of this on here, I will!)

aa

I hope this has given some insight into the development of our vocabulary curriculum design, but would encourage you to check out the footage from the session when it becomes available for a complete walk through.

PPT slides here: 

Vocabulary Matters – My contribution to ResearchED Literacy, 7th Nov 2015

Vocabulary Matters – My contribution to ResearchED Literacy, 7th Nov 2015

Next Saturday, I will be one of a number of gathered teachers and researchers who share a common aim – hopeful that, through organic grass roots events like @researchED1, it might be possible to reduce the considerable chasm between educational research and classroom practice.
aa
Attending this event for the first time last year, I was surprised by the number of delegates present who had sacrificed a day of their weekend to travel, ready to participate in the workshops on offer and be willing to engage in educational conversations with others there. It was refreshing to experience an approach to teaching and learning so rooted in research and, after a powerful day, I left feeling positively challenged.

researched_logo

aa
That’s why this year I’m really pleased to have been invited to lead a workshop at the @researchED1 Literacy event on Saturday 7th November at Swindon Academy, run by event directors David Didau, Tom Bennett & Hélène O’Shea.
aa
As Literacy Leader in my school, and also recently appointed as a Lead Learner in research too, I will be delivering a workshop on the importance of teaching vocabulary in order to enhance students’ understanding across the curriculum. Incidentally, the session itself is far more interesting than the somewhat tedious title I gave it: “Improving students’ understanding through direct vocabulary instruction”.
aa
Many months ago on my blog, I wrote Part 1 of a 2-part post on the new vocabulary programme we were soon to implement in my school as a result of the research we had carried out called ‘Root Planner’. See here. It was always intended that the second part of the duo (‘Root Map’) would be published soon after, outlining the implementation of the programme. For a number of reasons this failed to transpire and, so, albeit a year later, I will be posting Part 2 of this post following my presentation next Saturday.

screen-shot-2014-06-21-at-22-56-00

aa
A great colleague of mine, Phil Stock, has shared the journey of this whole-school language intervention with me and has recently written about this on his blog here, following the presentation he gave at #TLT15 earlier in October.
aa
I’m very much looking forward to the day; to hearing some super speakers, to reflecting on my own practice and to embracing the possibilities an event of this nature can bring to teaching and learning.

Hope to see you there!

Phonics in the Secondary Classroom – Reading Reform Foundation Conference

Phonics in the Secondary Classroom – Reading Reform Foundation Conference

Reading-Wars-Phonics-vs_-Whole-Language

a

Saturday 28th March 2015 marks the date of the next Reading Reform Foundation Conference.  It’s key focus will be on the use of phonics to teach reading and is entitled “From the Rose Review to the New Curriculum.”

I have no direct link with this organisation in any other capacity than keeping up with their movements on Twitter, but I do hold deep admiration for the work they do in promoting the use of synthetic phonics in the development of language and reading.

Having taught at both primary and secondary school level, and now in my role as Literacy Leader at the large secondary school where I teach, I have witnessed countless times the overwhelmingly positive impact that the systematic teaching of synthetic phonics can have on a weak reader. To be armed with the tool belt of phonics is, in my opinion, the key to unlocking the door of illiteracy for so many children, older students and adults.

Arriving at secondary school as a student unable to read is a sad affair. There is an element of injustice here in that, due to whatever reason – be it difficult behaviour, unstable home life, a physical impairment (e.g. poor vision or hearing), a slower processing speed, poor or inconsistent teaching – students are still failing to access mainstream education at this age. And the truth is that, for some, this obstacle to learning could have been overcome simply through a better delivery of phonics.

On their website, the RRF claim that:

“For too long now the teaching of reading has been affected by the idea that children should learn by discovery, leading to the rejection of systematic, explicit instruction. This idea is deeply ingrained in education and still has a powerful influence on how reading is taught, despite having no scientific validity.”

On the 28th March, my presentation on ‘Phonics in the Secondary Classroom’ will explore the potential drawbacks and advantages of using synthetic phonics with students of an older age. I also intend to give insight into the systematic approaches I have implemented as Literacy Leader at my own school, which have shown to produce real, deep progress for our struggling readers in Years 7-11.

I’m privileged to be speaking alongside some true experts in this educational field and look forward to attending the day myself; to soak up some great teaching from others. More information and the link to book tickets can be found here:

http://www.rrf.org.uk/conference%202015.html

Hope to see you there!

Feedback to Feed Forward

A couple of weeks ago, the focus of our school INSET day was on Feedback. Phil Stock (@joeybagstock), our Assistant Headteacher of Professional Development and Language challenged us as a staff body to consider what we perceive to be the most effective method(s) of feedback, both within and outside the classroom. Following a hearty breakfast, we were gifted a rare hour of our time dedicated solely to reading. Phil had recommended a number of blog posts by a range of different writers within the educational sphere and encouraged us to choose a selection from the menu provided.

Feedback logo

I suppose it was a bit of a risk to kick off a day of training with an hour of silence and solitude, but I loved it. If you’re any kind of educationalist who has spent some time in a school environment, you’ll know how incredibly rare it is to find time in the school day to make room for this kind of personal study. And yet, it’s possibly one of the most important things we really should be doing to develop our knowledge on key principles of teaching and learning. We were invited to read up to 5-6 blog posts or articles within the hour and then reunite later to share findings and consider the potential positive impact these ideas could have within our own classrooms.

The purpose of this post is simply to share my notes on the posts I read (and found to be very worthwhile), as well as offering a simple ‘Top 10’ list I wrote as a result, to share with members of staff I lead who teach lower set Y7 groups. These points are in no way exclusive to SEN, but have been designed around the effective strategies I know to work within my own intervention classroom.
a

Blog Posts
a

Planning

Let’s build it in, not add it on: Andy Tharby (@atharby) 

  • Most useful feedback happens while students are working, not after
  • Should be indistinguishable from other elements of a lesson such as explanation and questioning
  • Feedback from and to students informs every decision we make
  • A balance is required between the challenge of a high level of “correctness” without creation of a dependency culture

20140327-215034

Presentation

improving the basics: Tom Sherrington (@headguruteacher) http://wp.me/p2qGQb-15J

  • Devote time to drafting and redrafting – Austin’s butterfly
  • Maintain higher expectations, and praise for progress/achievement
  • Students just need to know what the standards are and how to reach them
  • Very much about shift of attitude

Frequency

Making time for feedback: ASCD http://tinyurl.com/8jdyysv

  • Work smarter, not harder
  • Focus on errors, not mistakes
  • We recognise simple mistakes by students when we know them – it shows as uncharacteristic
  • Mistakes are ones we can correct using our knowledge
  • Errors are ones we make because we do not possess the necessary knowledge to correct
  • “Correcting errors typically results in new understanding and improved performance; moreover, once teachers implement this practice, students rarely make those errors again.”
  • 4 main error categories:
  1. Factual errors
  2. Procedural errors
  3. Transformation errors – incorrect application to new situations
    e.g. biology and bicycle – not knowing difference between bi and bio roots
  4. Misconception errors
  • Should look for patterns in student errors to be able to target specific areas rather than reteach a whole concept or unit
  • Distinguish between global and targeted errors
  • Use prompts and cues to shift the learner’s attention

TL_Question-05

Focus

Have we got feedback backwards?: Alex Quigley (@HuntingEnglish) http://tinyurl.com/oos78r4

  • Time spent on marking isn’t equal to the impact it has on learning – onus is on the teacher in this model, not student
  • DIRT – Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time – onus moves to student to reflect and respond to feedback, making changes to their work
  • More time spent responding to feedback that marking
  • Feedback vs. feeding forward – should impact future learning
  • Symbols, not comments
  • Dot round to signal error but student must work it out
  • Assess in colour – colour code
  • Self assessment before teacher assessment
  • One to one
  • Active process – oral feedback just as effective

Dialogue

Improving peer feedback with gallery critique: David Didau (@LearningSpy) http://tinyurl.com/pttamzl
I didn’t make notes on this as I had already read it extensively for a workshop I had previously led on peer assessment, but I would highly recommend it.

atop 10

As a result of these brilliant, really gritty, content-packed pieces of writing, I was able to draw ten key points from these to share with colleagues.

For me, the most successful methods of feedback I’ve seen to have the most positive impact in the classroom are those listed below. One beautiful thing about teaching intervention groups is the way in which it is possible for me to reach every student within one lesson. To have the opportunity to get round to each of them and offer targeted, one to one support with their work right there and then is invaluable in their learning journey. It is wholly possible to apply many of these below to the mainstream classroom, though as with most pedagogical approaches, it would take some thought around how to implement them.
a

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK: My ‘Top 10’

  1. Effective feedback often happens most DURING lessons, not after
    a
  2. LA sets will not benefit from long streams of marked written comments
    a
  3. Symbols over work, work best – be careful not to give them the answer
    a
  4. Concentrate on errors, not Remember:
    A mistake = incorrect due to tiredness/one-off mistake that can be corrected with own knowledge
    An error = a common pattern of errors made due to the learner not possessing the knowledge to correct themselves
    a
  5. DIRT (Dedicated Improvement & Reflection Time) – Build time into lessons for valuable drafting & redrafting focus sessions
    a
  6. Model high quality work – show outstanding examples and feedback as a group
    a
  7. 1:1 conversations – be specific, giving high quality feedback
    a
  8. Self-efficacy (praise of tasks/achievement) vs. self-confidence (praise of ego) – see Dylan Wiliam: http://www.journeytoexcellence.org.uk/videos/expertspeakers/selfefficacydylanwiliam.asp
    a
  9. Make peer/self- assessment valuable … model what effective feedback looks like
    a
  10. Maintain highest expectations and don’t accept less than their best