Day Three: Blackburn with Darwen 5 th October, 2006

• Use of products for discussion of quality (using two to compare; using one to model or generate success criteria)

RECEPTION / YEAR 1

Teachers said that this is more of a challenge with younger children.

Displays are up on the walls for showing/modelling how things are done. The process was used more at KS1.

YEAR 2

This was very challenging at the beginning of the school year.

One teacher had held up a painting she had done at home, then they looked at it together and worked out how to recreate it and generated SC. This teacher then compared two pieces of work. All teachers trialled this with previous classes and this year found it very challenging with their new children because they did not have the class boundaries set. Need more time (this was a September feedback day).

One downside was that some really sensitive children felt that their talking partner criticised them negatively, then got upset at the stage when they went had to modify their work. Some of the lower achievers rubbed out what they first had. There was a greater impact on the higher achievers. The process needs to become a habit and the children then learn that they become proud of their work after they’ve made an improvement. Improvements are easier for children to make if they have a model of someone’s work before they begin on their own. Showing the two pieces does improve the quality for all. But in Yr 2 when they got to the improvement part, the higher achievers did better. One teacher created a folder with pieces that can be compared that all can use and this works well. With her younger children the examples had more extreme differences.

The positive impact was that children really liked what they created. Children were more focused, producing higher quality work with better motivation because they knew what they were aiming for.

YEARS 3 & 4

Teachers found it useful to use real examples to begin with such as authors’ work or paintings, leaflets etc then to move on to 2 pieces of anonymous work for the class to critique together. Children pick up on why one piece of writing is better than another. One teacher filmed speaking and listening and used these –good also for PE and games. Impact: increased the pace of the lesson due to less need to regroup because of fewer misconceptions about what they need to change. With modelling in the beginning, fewer children are asking what they need to do. There is improved self-confidence. Higher achievers have exceeded expectations.

YEARS 5 & 6

One teacher had modelled good work by looking at different genres of writing. They looked at 2 pieces of work - children noted the qualities of each piece of work by highlighting and using post it notes. They used lots of visual clues in the classroom – historically rich, geographical environment, picked things off the walls. One teacher compared 2 pieces of work in science, focusing on key vocabulary in the experiments. One piece used the word “it” which was compared to one where the correct vocabulary was used. Talking partners discussed this. The impact: much better written explanations of science experiments. The comparisons at the beginning had an impact on the success and improvement stage.

• On-the-spot success and improvement during the lesson

RECEPTION / YEAR 1

Teachers found that they had used success and improvement with groups. They modelled how to use green & pink pencils. Impact on learning: children highlighted for themselves and their achievement was far greater than it would have been, especially with middle achievers.

One teacher tried to model work with an overhead projector, looking at the best bits. Children then went off with greens and pinks to their own work. The lower achievers got a bit disgruntled. Some can’t read their peer’s work so an adult has to be with them to interpret. Impact: children were more focused and excited. Less writing is produced, but the quality is better. One teacher found that there was no dip in the writing ability over the summer probably due to these strategies.

Anecdote : Topic on wheels: children were asked to make a vehicle with Lego. Some had no structure; some could not even say what they were. During the lesson someone made a good one with wheels, so the teacher stopped the class and said what do you think is good about this? They actually knew and articulated it. The children then went and made good models without being asked of a much higher quality. You can take photos of these models and use them the next time you do the lesson.

Shirley: If that had been shown right at the beginning it would have been a model of an expectation. Everyone might have then made a model with wheels – you all have one – how can we make these vehicles even better?

YEAR 2

Tried mainly in writing. In Yr 2 it needs to be formally demonstrated how to mark work so children can better accept criticisms. Initially how to identify success was needed before you could introduce how to improve. All children were able to participate but the feedback to the class on how to improve the quality of work had to be demonstrated. Children were able choose successes but struggled with improvements until the actual improvement ideas were modelled. The majority took on the teacher’s ideas, but this copying stage is how things are internalised. Quality and motivation were all improved.

YEARS 3 & 4

‘Success and improvement’ had been a bit of a disaster, but this was because teachers had interpreted success as simply including the success criteria, rather than the ‘best bits’, which act as a model of excellence and guide the improvement stage.

Where it had been done as ‘best bits’ and improvement, the impact was that children have more ownership of their work. Children are more prepared to share their work without the “fear” of someone else copying what they had done. One TA said she feels the children take more notice of what peers are commenting on rather than what the teacher says.

YEARS 5 & 6

Teachers tended to use the process mainly in writing – teachers felt that their role as a marker was now to stand back a bit, no longer having the same ownership as the children. A problem: some teachers found that children are becoming highly skilled in finding the good but still have difficulty in doing the improvements (we have only done this 3-4 months) but the improvements are mainly secretarial. We are trying hard to get them to do more.

Shirley: After discussion it was discovered that advice to teachers in this LA from some advisors led them to believe that they should interpret ‘success’ as mere inclusion of success criteria, rather than where they been done most effectively. This had led to children, naturally finding improvements hard, as there was no developing understanding of excellence being modelled at any stage. In no other learning teams (7 more) did this arise, so the negative comments for this team are not significant. However, it proves the importance of identifying the ‘best bits’!

• Further Developments:

RECEPTION / YEAR 1

Still getting children acclimatised to school.

YEAR 2

Taking the best bits is now embedded in each lesson.

Talking Partners can be implemented easily in each lesson and are done automatically. Success criteria might be in every lesson, maybe orally, but every lesson has a learning objective and success criteria by the end.

YEARS 3 & 4

Had generally more confidence in using all the processes – it’s more embedded. In some subjects they can’t teach in any other way, but not across the board. For one, it is embedded as the way she wants to teach.

YEARS 5 & 6

Using different types of questioning – had to work really hard at this to cancel a certain mind set that’s been there of using only recall questions. Using different types of questions gets children involved in lessons right away – turning questions into statements helps children focus on the lesson immediately instead of teacher input for 10 minutes – more handover to the children.