  |
|
|
|
|
||
|
               |
|
|
LEARNING TEAMS FINDINGS:
Day Three Reading 29th November 2007
Foundation Stage Where teachers had tried this technique, children were clearer about what was expected. They had greater self esteem and a better approach. One teacher had used captions and the resulting captions were all appropriate. It had also been used in PE and, through conversations with their talking partners, children were seen to be more focused. Y1/2 One teacher had tried showing the children a leaf which she had drawn and a very detailed leaf drawing. Children discussed the differences between them and could then do their own drawings and discuss what could be improved and what needed to be included in the first place. Another teachers showed good and bad examples of instructional writing and children followed the good examples in their own work and were heard talking about the importance of including all the criteria while they were working. Using an adult for demonstrating bad practice in PE was advised, although using a high achiever in PE to demonstrate ‘bad’ was also recommended. Giving the children the opportunity to compare pieces of work is making them more critical towards their work and the work of others. They are more willing to question themselves and others, especially teachers! A point was made that it is important for the good example to stay visible while children are working with younger children. Some people had found that the children copy the bad example if that is left up (!)
Y3/4 Teachers found that using this technique was resulting in higher quality work, which was closer to the good example. Some very lower achievers were overwhelmed by the good example and lost confidence. The technique led to quality discussion. One teacher had shown a good piece which used humour. This motivated the children to do their own examples with humour and they couldn’t wait to get started. An example of comparing good and bad jumping in PE had resulted in really tuning children in to what they needed to do. A comparison of good and bad complex sentences resulted in more children being able to write them than before. The biggest impact was on the quality of writing. One teacher had used good and bad examples of speaking and listening and effective group work which had led to children being clearer about expectations.
Y5/6 One teacher described showing tired imagery in a poem compared with effective imagery. Children’s subsequent work was more unusual. Another teacher had an innovative idea of showing 2 pieces of work from one child in the class (one piece from last year and the current work). The class then analysed the progress the child’s work showed from one year to the next. This was easier to do because the class had moved up with the teacher, but could still be done if books were passed up to the next teacher. This strategy had raised the child’s confidence and motivation. Children generally become more enthusiastic and want to improve their learning. A teacher had used DT examples from older children in the school which had led to the younger children trying to match the quality. All children’s work was of a higher standard because the expectations were greater. Another teacher had used younger children’s work to compare with a piece from a Y5 class. Children did not want to make the same mistakes a younger child had made, as a result. Teachers identified a strength of this technique is that children determine the improvements that are needed to get from one stage to another, rather then the teacher simply telling them what they need to do.
2. On-the-spot modelling of ‘Success & Improvement’ during the lesson (‘Integrated feedback’)
Foundation Stage Teachers found that this technique works best with a small group. One teacher used one child’s portrait of a friend for analysis which was very effective and led to children using technical language. At this stage the examples used are very practical and visual, such as finger spaces in writing, letter formation, PE etc. Y1/2 The impact of this technique is that children’s finished work is of higher quality than before, including changes and additions to their work. They are in the process of evaluating and improving their work. Children now edit their work as they go along – at first they were worried about crossings out. Not having a visualiser made this technique difficult to manage, but subjects like art were easy because you could hold the work up. The point was made that this process needs to be a regular feature of lessons and peer evaluation needs to be modelled. Y3/4 Teachers agreed that this technique improved self esteem and motivation. With demotivating teacher marking children just think they are wrong and they don’t take on board suggestions for improvement. Working on work with peers, however, makes them feel supported rather than condemned. The message is that everybody can improve so children are empowered. There is increased progress within a lesson, evidenced by higher quality work. Children comment that they are using the skills learnt in modelling to improve their work. Teachers said that last year’s classes did not produce work of the same quality as current classes can now identify their own errors and suggest improvements. Clear success criteria of course, give children the tools with which to analyse. Children are taking greater pride in their work. They say ‘I’m going to work really hard in case my work is chosen’. Children are now editing their work while they are in the process of writing. They are starting to suggest ideas to each other while they are writing. Children are really excited about seeing their work projected and excited too about joint editing. Y5/6 This technique helps improve children’s quality of work and enables them to see how to peer mark. One teacher described how one child sharing his knowledge in problem solving for maths was able to help other children. He was marking his peer’s work and they were asking for his advice which raised his self esteem considerably. Children are much more eager to work, as they realise their work might be shown to the class. They are inspired and motivated to focus. The lack of a visualiser for one teacher meant that small group discussions were more viable. This led to children being more supportive of each other. One teacher described a child whose work was shown inspired other children, who were refocused to continue their work and make it even better. The sharing of one child’s work leads to increased confidence for that child.
3. Further Developments of techniques from Day 2
Foundation Stage Teachers are taking more time over planning to ensure success and there is clearer understanding for teachers and children as everyone focuses on the learning. Children discuss how they want to cover a learning objective so they are being directly involved in the planning. One school had stopped using stickers and was now celebrating achievements through verbal praise. Y1/2 Planning is more precise and teaching has become more focused. One teacher has packs of laminated success criteria cards (generated by children) or posters, generic writing criteria. Teachers are now better at knowing success criteria. Teachers are planning good questions, thinking about them in advance and children are better at answering them. Teachers are more confident to change their plans. One teacher found that her class knew all about electricity so she asked them what they wanted to know about the topic and developed more in depth planning. Y3/4 Teachers have stopped ‘must, should, could’ because they found it limited children. They now use process success criteria which extend and include all children (differentiating by the support within the activity) There are packs of success criteria cards colour coded per subject. Teachers have introduced themes for maths. One teacher now shows ‘what we are going to learn next’ every week. Y5/6 Teachers are developing their questioning skills and children are asking better questions ands more often to each other. They need no prompting. Children can write their own success criteria from memory when given a test. They use these to refer to in subsequent lessons. Teachers feel it is essential to have real life purposeful contexts for mathematics. They are now able to successfully separate the LO from the context of the learning. Parents are involved in unit coverage and children are able to help plan a unit. Children give feedback about the planning and make suggestions for trips etc.
4. Developing a learning culture
Foundation Stage Teachers summarised the culture as:
Y1/2 Children are less passive, there is greater understanding, more active learning, responses are more positive, there is a more equal relationship between teachers and children, there is a ‘have a go’ culture, children are involved in their learning and learning continues at home. Y3/4 All are more focused, there is increased team work and shared learning, there is equality of the teacher and the learner, more discussion, children are open to improvement and constructive criticism, learning is supported, and there is an expectation that everybody is a contributor to the learning process. Y5/6
The culture of the classroom is supportive, confident, there is a willingness to improve, children are more willing to talk and join in, more focused, children are able to talk about their learning, they have an ability to share, they have higher expectations which are realised, they are more reflective and busy.
|
 |