Shirley Clarke Education Ltd. - About Shirley Clarke

2008 Day 4 findings:

4. Talk Partners

Foundation Stage/Year 1

Essex

Teachers agreed that this aspect had been the biggest success and had the greatest impact on learning. Children loved the fairness of random partners and all were now included. On occasions, some pairs have needed extra adult support. Because children have discussed things first, their use of vocabulary and clarity of answers has improved. They are more tolerant and supportive of each other and look forward to working together. Peer pressure helps children and behaviour has improved. Lollysticks are very successful and have improved listening skills.

Cowes

Teachers had now moved on to random partners which had led to some additional support needed at times. Having no hands up had enabled all children to be involved and active in their learning. Children feel more secure and listening has improved.

Most teachers had created rules for talk partners and use the partners when appropriate.

One Reception class changes partners weekly via choosing turned over photos of each other, but sometimes talk to the person on the carpet sitting nearest to them. On Fridays, teachers often have goodbye moments and meeting the new partner.

Herts

Teachers agreed that this strategy had worked very well. Changes were made every 3 weeks in Year 1 but more often in Reception. Children are eager to work with a new partner. The impact has been that children are working as a community, speaking and listening skills have improved, there is equality, mutual respect, children value each other and social skills have improved.

One high achieving child felt that he did not need to talk to a talk partner. When he saw the success criteria for being a good talk partner, however, he realised that he could benefit!

Hull

All teachers now use random talk partners, talk partner success criteria and used photographs displayed to show partners.

Children are all involved in discussions and higher achievers have to think about how to explain things to lower achievers.

Children’s social development has been extended.

Parents were generally happy with the pairings and the whole system. One teacher has a small class of 17 with only 4 boys. At a parents meeting one parent said, ‘Why should my child help a thick child?’ in front of the children. The teacher had to try to explain.

Nantwich

Teachers had used random talk partners. This had led to greater class gelling with children getting to know each other better. New friendships were being made and children were working better together. They were also improving their speaking and listening skills. Teachers said there was now less teacher talk and more child talk.

Tameside

Partners were changed weekly or fortnightly and the impact was that low achievers were responding well, listening well to others and behaving with more confidence. Boys and girls were now happy to work together.

Talking with a partner produces detailed ideas. Timers had been used to keep the talk focused.

Year 1/2

Essex

All had found this very successful and are using talk partners across the subjects.

Cowes

All teachers have random partners, using lollysticks or playing cards. Some use lollysticks also for who will answer a question. Partners change fortnightly and are not always used in numeracy lessons.

Some children talk but don’t come up with answers, and one teacher said children did not like the fact that anyone might be asked to answer. Some shy or language impaired children found it difficult to discuss and participate. Occasionally children get paired with someone they don’t get on with.

Herts

Teachers now have random partners and change them more frequently. This works well now that children are used to it. Some teachers were not sure that 2 quiet children together gained as much as other pairings.

One teacher found some software called the ‘Sorting Hat’ which sorts children’s names randomly.

The impact has been more focused talk, more confidence for lower achievers, all are included, social skills have improved, no hands up led to greater concentration and all are learning together.

Hull

All teachers liked random talk partners. This had been well received even with personality clashes. Children respect the random choices.

Quality of talk has improved, along with EAL. Instead of hands up, teachers give extra talk time. There is greater participation since using talk partners.

Nantwich

Teachers and TAs had modelled good and bad talk partners and two teachers asked children to make a positive comment about their partner before they changed. Some children still struggle with social skills and one works with the teacher. New friendships had been generated. Two thirds of the children surveyed in one class said they liked talk partners but all children enjoyed changing partners. Some children do not talk. There had been some parental complaints, underlining the importance of informing parents in advance of the rationale and change system. In one class children sort their partners out if one person is away. One teacher asks children to share their news in the morning orally and children then have to say what their partner said. This has improved their listening skills.

Teachers had trained children how to be good talk partners, developing success criteria. Children could not opt out and they system stops the dominant few taking over. There had been a great positive social impact. Teachers found changing partners weekly or fortnightly worked well. One teacher asks children to give each other a ‘compliment sandwich’ (a god comment, an improvement comment and a good comment) which had led to more constructive feedback between children. Teachers felt that it was heart5warming to see children learning life skills and had had very positive feedback from parents.

Tameside

Teachers had used drama to get children to generate talk partner success criteria. Children were better at listening to each other and quiet children have now gained confidence and are talking more. One teacher told of a Polish child with no English who, through being put into a three, reached Level 2c within months. They were not just talking together, but also learning. Language skills have developed. All children stay focused and responses are valuable. Talk partners had made children have a better understanding of each other’s abilities. One child with autism worked well with talk partners which was a surprise to the teacher.

Year 3/4

Essex

Teachers had found this very successful, some calling them ‘learning partners’.

There are more contributions from all children. Some boys sometimes need prompting when working with a girl. Autistic children are more independent as they feel more accepted. Children like the fairness of random pairings.

Cowes

All teachers now use random talk partners, some changing weekly, some fortnightly. To begin with the choosing was met with smirks and comments but the system is now well accepted. Success criteria for good talk partners are in place and children self and peer evaluate their talking and listening skills.

Children are on task, responsive, listening well and more confident.

Herts(+special)

All children are involved and are engaged in lessons as a result of talk partners. Special schools needed to have talking groups with an adult to support, particularly autistic children. Children enjoy the random choice and the changeovers.

Talk partners encourages EAL children to join in and have role models for good speaking and listening.

Quotes from children:

‘I like to talk to others and get good ideas for methods in maths.’

‘You get to work with children you wouldn’t normally choose to work with.’

Hull

All teachers agreed on the benefits of talk partners, which are well embedded in their practice. Random partners are improving children’s reactions and interactions. Behaviour has improved, noise levels are improved and all children are now on task. They have greater self confidence.

Nantwich

Children had formed new friendships and classrooms were much livelier. There was more speaking and listening and better quality work, with benefits for higher and lower achievers. Children appreciate the fairness of the lollysticks.

One teacher had very positive feedback from a parent of a low achieving child who had been paired with a high achieving child.

One child with Asperger’s Syndrome was now able to speak to different people.

Tameside

Teachers had used circle time to outline talk partner expectations and children had come up with the success criteria believed that some partnerships were more successful than others. Lower achievers now have better ideas and greater confidence, but it was seen as an issue that the higher achiever might do all the work. One child who was not a good partner was subject to peer disapproval through circle time. This solved the problem.

The impact of talk partners is that children have more respect for each other, their behaviour has improved and standards have risen. Isolated children are now included. Children are keen to share their ideas.

Year 5/6

Essex

Some teachers found there were problems at first: trying to get children to work together, but they enjoyed the changeover. Now they don’t argue any more about their partner. They are sometimes called ‘partnership pairs’. Evaluation strategies include making a booklet saying ‘You were a great talk partner because…..’ or writing a letter to your talk partner. One child said ‘It’s good if you argue’ because they got more from discussions if there were differing opinions. Another child said ‘If you sit next to someone better behaved than you, you behave differently.’

Cowes

Teachers reported a mixture of successes. One teacher has ‘support partners’. There are sometimes problems with personality clashes.

Answers are now of higher quality and quiet girls participate more frequently. All are now included. One elective mute was able to find a voice through her response partner.

Herts

Teachers all now have random talk partners, changing weekly or fortnightly, with success criteria. Problems occasionally arise with personality clashes.

Children’s feedback is generally positive. The impact has been ore detailed responses and children are better prepared to answer questions. Children find it easier to work/understand tasks by having a partner. There are higher level thinking and debating skills.

Hull

All teachers had changed talk partners weekly or fortnightly. The impact had been an improvement on children’s relationships and the ability to negotiate. Everyone gets to talk, if only with a partner. Teachers’ questioning had also improved.

Nantwich

Teachers had very positive views about talk partners. The system had improved behaviour and helped classroom organisation. One teacher doing this for a second year had seen the development of social and cooperative skills. Children work cooperatively, there are fewer hands up, children support each other and there a fewer children with low confidence.

One teacher had parental warning that a bully should not be paired with her child, but the bullying was now diminishing with formative assessment strategies.

Tameside

Children were very excited about changing partners. Teachers were doing less talking and lower achievers had become more vocal as they now feel they have something to contribute. Dialogue and vocabulary have improved in quality. Children are much more confident speakers as they are able to rehearse what they then say out loud, which links to their subsequent writing. Social relationships, respect etc. has improved.

Secondary

Essex

Secondary teachers found it difficult to manage random partners. One teacher tried random partners with Year 11 with a pack of cards matching. Students are excited about the change every 6 lessons. Social skills had improved and students said they were getting to know people they hadn’t worked with before.

Cowes

Teachers are using random talk partners (one uses a randomizer on the PowerPoint programme with a child’s name on each slide). All children have to think as they need to be ready to work. Teachers reported no problems with social pairings. Behaviour has improved and boys have had to wake up.

Herts

This strategy has had an ‘amazing’ impact on lessons and learning. Students are more engaged, more confident, and have realized that they can work with other people.

Hull

Teachers agreed that random talk partners is fair and engages children. It was felt that the length of time with a partner should be flexible depending on the type of lesson. Questions need to have real value and purpose. Evaluation was also seen as vital to give the process a sense of real purpose.


		2008 Day 4 findings: 4. Talk Partners Foundation Stage/Year 1 Essex Teachers agreed that this aspect had been the biggest success and had the greatest impact on learning. Children loved the fairness of random partners and all were now included. On occasions, some pairs have needed extra adult support. Because children have discussed things first, their use of vocabulary and clarity of answers has improved. They are more tolerant and supportive of each other and look forward to working together. Peer pressure helps children and behaviour has improved. Lollysticks are very successful and have improved listening skills. Cowes Teachers had now moved on to random partners which had led to some additional support needed at times. Having no hands up had enabled all children to be involved and active in their learning. Children feel more secure and listening has improved. Most teachers had created rules for talk partners and use the partners when appropriate. One Reception class changes partners weekly via choosing turned over photos of each other, but sometimes talk to the person on the carpet sitting nearest to them. On Fridays, teachers often have goodbye moments and meeting the new partner. Herts Teachers agreed that this strategy had worked very well. Changes were made every 3 weeks in Year 1 but more often in Reception. Children are eager to work with a new partner. The impact has been that children are working as a community, speaking and listening skills have improved, there is equality, mutual respect, children value each other and social skills have improved. One high achieving child felt that he did not need to talk to a talk partner. When he saw the success criteria for being a good talk partner, however, he realised that he could benefit! Hull All teachers now use random talk partners, talk partner success criteria and used photographs displayed to show partners. Children are all involved in discussions and higher achievers have to think about how to explain things to lower achievers. Children’s social development has been extended. Parents were generally happy with the pairings and the whole system. One teacher has a small class of 17 with only 4 boys. At a parents meeting one parent said, ‘Why should my child help a thick child?’ in front of the children. The teacher had to try to explain. Nantwich Teachers had used random talk partners. This had led to greater class gelling with children getting to know each other better. New friendships were being made and children were working better together. They were also improving their speaking and listening skills. Teachers said there was now less teacher talk and more child talk. Tameside Partners were changed weekly or fortnightly and the impact was that low achievers were responding well, listening well to others and behaving with more confidence. Boys and girls were now happy to work together. Talking with a partner produces detailed ideas. Timers had been used to keep the talk focused. Year 1/2 Essex All had found this very successful and are using talk partners across the subjects. Cowes All teachers have random partners, using lollysticks or playing cards. Some use lollysticks also for who will answer a question. Partners change fortnightly and are not always used in numeracy lessons. Some children talk but don’t come up with answers, and one teacher said children did not like the fact that anyone might be asked to answer. Some shy or language impaired children found it difficult to discuss and participate. Occasionally children get paired with someone they don’t get on with. Herts Teachers now have random partners and change them more frequently. This works well now that children are used to it. Some teachers were not sure that 2 quiet children together gained as much as other pairings. One teacher found some software called the ‘Sorting Hat’ which sorts children’s names randomly. The impact has been more focused talk, more confidence for lower achievers, all are included, social skills have improved, no hands up led to greater concentration and all are learning together. Hull All teachers liked random talk partners. This had been well received even with personality clashes. Children respect the random choices. Quality of talk has improved, along with EAL. Instead of hands up, teachers give extra talk time. There is greater participation since using talk partners. Nantwich Teachers and TAs had modelled good and bad talk partners and two teachers asked children to make a positive comment about their partner before they changed. Some children still struggle with social skills and one works with the teacher. New friendships had been generated. Two thirds of the children surveyed in one class said they liked talk partners but all children enjoyed changing partners. Some children do not talk. There had been some parental complaints, underlining the importance of informing parents in advance of the rationale and change system. In one class children sort their partners out if one person is away. One teacher asks children to share their news in the morning orally and children then have to say what their partner said. This has improved their listening skills. Teachers had trained children how to be good talk partners, developing success criteria. Children could not opt out and they system stops the dominant few taking over. There had been a great positive social impact. Teachers found changing partners weekly or fortnightly worked well. One teacher asks children to give each other a ‘compliment sandwich’ (a god comment, an improvement comment and a good comment) which had led to more constructive feedback between children. Teachers felt that it was heart5warming to see children learning life skills and had had very positive feedback from parents. Tameside Teachers had used drama to get children to generate talk partner success criteria. Children were better at listening to each other and quiet children have now gained confidence and are talking more. One teacher told of a Polish child with no English who, through being put into a three, reached Level 2c within months. They were not just talking together, but also learning. Language skills have developed. All children stay focused and responses are valuable. Talk partners had made children have a better understanding of each other’s abilities. One child with autism worked well with talk partners which was a surprise to the teacher. Year 3/4 Essex Teachers had found this very successful, some calling them ‘learning partners’. There are more contributions from all children. Some boys sometimes need prompting when working with a girl. Autistic children are more independent as they feel more accepted. Children like the fairness of random pairings. Cowes All teachers now use random talk partners, some changing weekly, some fortnightly. To begin with the choosing was met with smirks and comments but the system is now well accepted. Success criteria for good talk partners are in place and children self and peer evaluate their talking and listening skills. Children are on task, responsive, listening well and more confident. Herts(+special) All children are involved and are engaged in lessons as a result of talk partners. Special schools needed to have talking groups with an adult to support, particularly autistic children. Children enjoy the random choice and the changeovers. Talk partners encourages EAL children to join in and have role models for good speaking and listening. Quotes from children: ‘I like to talk to others and get good ideas for methods in maths.’ ‘You get to work with children you wouldn’t normally choose to work with.’ Hull All teachers agreed on the benefits of talk partners, which are well embedded in their practice. Random partners are improving children’s reactions and interactions. Behaviour has improved, noise levels are improved and all children are now on task. They have greater self confidence. Nantwich Children had formed new friendships and classrooms were much livelier. There was more speaking and listening and better quality work, with benefits for higher and lower achievers. Children appreciate the fairness of the lollysticks. One teacher had very positive feedback from a parent of a low achieving child who had been paired with a high achieving child. One child with Asperger’s Syndrome was now able to speak to different people. Tameside Teachers had used circle time to outline talk partner expectations and children had come up with the success criteria believed that some partnerships were more successful than others. Lower achievers now have better ideas and greater confidence, but it was seen as an issue that the higher achiever might do all the work. One child who was not a good partner was subject to peer disapproval through circle time. This solved the problem. The impact of talk partners is that children have more respect for each other, their behaviour has improved and standards have risen. Isolated children are now included. Children are keen to share their ideas. Year 5/6 Essex Some teachers found there were problems at first: trying to get children to work together, but they enjoyed the changeover. Now they don’t argue any more about their partner. They are sometimes called ‘partnership pairs’. Evaluation strategies include making a booklet saying ‘You were a great talk partner because…..’ or writing a letter to your talk partner. One child said ‘It’s good if you argue’ because they got more from discussions if there were differing opinions. Another child said ‘If you sit next to someone better behaved than you, you behave differently.’ Cowes Teachers reported a mixture of successes. One teacher has ‘support partners’. There are sometimes problems with personality clashes. Answers are now of higher quality and quiet girls participate more frequently. All are now included. One elective mute was able to find a voice through her response partner. Herts Teachers all now have random talk partners, changing weekly or fortnightly, with success criteria. Problems occasionally arise with personality clashes. Children’s feedback is generally positive. The impact has been ore detailed responses and children are better prepared to answer questions. Children find it easier to work/understand tasks by having a partner. There are higher level thinking and debating skills. Hull All teachers had changed talk partners weekly or fortnightly. The impact had been an improvement on children’s relationships and the ability to negotiate. Everyone gets to talk, if only with a partner. Teachers’ questioning had also improved. Nantwich Teachers had very positive views about talk partners. The system had improved behaviour and helped classroom organisation. One teacher doing this for a second year had seen the development of social and cooperative skills. Children work cooperatively, there are fewer hands up, children support each other and there a fewer children with low confidence. One teacher had parental warning that a bully should not be paired with her child, but the bullying was now diminishing with formative assessment strategies. Tameside Children were very excited about changing partners. Teachers were doing less talking and lower achievers had become more vocal as they now feel they have something to contribute. Dialogue and vocabulary have improved in quality. Children are much more confident speakers as they are able to rehearse what they then say out loud, which links to their subsequent writing. Social relationships, respect etc. has improved. Secondary Essex Secondary teachers found it difficult to manage random partners. One teacher tried random partners with Year 11 with a pack of cards matching. Students are excited about the change every 6 lessons. Social skills had improved and students said they were getting to know people they hadn’t worked with before. Cowes Teachers are using random talk partners (one uses a randomizer on the PowerPoint programme with a child’s name on each slide). All children have to think as they need to be ready to work. Teachers reported no problems with social pairings. Behaviour has improved and boys have had to wake up. Herts This strategy has had an ‘amazing’ impact on lessons and learning. Students are more engaged, more confident, and have realized that they can work with other people. Hull Teachers agreed that random talk partners is fair and engages children. It was felt that the length of time with a partner should be flexible depending on the type of lesson. Questions need to have real value and purpose. Evaluation was also seen as vital to give the process a sense of real purpose.