  |
|
|
|
|
||
|
               |
|
|
LEARNING TEAMS FINDINGS:
Gloucester Day Two Feedback 22 June, 2006
1. Separating the Learning Objective from the Context Reception / Y1 The impact is that teachers are more specific about what the children are to learn. Planning is more focused because objectives are revisited more often with Y1 and R – a cyclical approach. There is more opportunity for variety. The context can change each time you look at the LO. Children are more focused, less confused and have better understanding of expectations. Anecdote: in maths, the LO was to use Venn diagrams, the context using shapes – children were more aware that the teacher was looking for Venn diagrams, not shapes. Children focus more on the skill than the activity. An OfSTED inspector made the comment that the children who had been experimenting with AFL knew exactly what they were learnng. Children exhibit ability to transfer skills at this level, too. Some as young as three.
Year 2 LOs: the children know from the start what is expected of them and are engaged immediately. They are more attentive and ready to get on with the lesson. Some of the skills are transferable, writing in particular. Teachers have used concept maps/cartoons –even SEN children can add something right away. Children are more confident. Children are excited by their work and are better able to verbalise what they are doing. Children can tell observers what they are learning. Refocusing back to the LO half way through the lesson is really good: more achievement is being made and children move on quicker.
Years 3 / 4 From children’s point of view, they know exactly what teachers want them to do and are more focused and aware of the LO and are more secure. Teachers found that the children can apply the LO and skills across the curriculum. The plenaries are easier as all have a focus. Mixed year groups have difficulty. Anecdote: a HT said that she gets called in to teach often at short notice and sees the LO. In a Yr 5/6 class she looked at the task and forgot to tell them what the LO was and half the class shouted “What are we learning today?”!!!
Year 5 Teachers all understand exactly what they are going to teach and are very clear and focused now from the start of lessons. It was at first difficult to separate the two but now this is more comfortable. Planning has changed to incorporate the context. The focus has changed from teaching the topic to teaching the skills and these are easily transferable between topics now. Anecdote: non chronological reports, context: St. Lucia . Children understood all features of the report. They next did a report about the countries taking part in the World Cup and could immediately use all the skills previously learned from the St. Lucia report.
Year 6 For most teachers planning has been adapted to include focused LOs. Teachers are much clearer about teaching and therefore children are clearer about learning. Skills have become transferable. Children can give specific feedback through their self assessment related to the LO. All are in agreement that the TAs have become more effective in their work with children. Children can talk about their learning and can identify how the activity has helped them to meet the objective rather than the other way around. Behaviour has improved – children are more on task, fewer ask for clarification of teacher’s objectives – they referred a lot to the LOs and SC. Children now expect to be told about the context and LO at some point in the lesson as in Yr 6 they do not always begin with these – but they expect at some point to get to this information. The children know they can be asked to tell the teacher what they think they are learning and as time goes by they quite often now hit the nail on the head . With SATs revision there is evidence that the children are taking learning from other contexts and using it for SATs – this is easier for teachers as they do not have to always start form the beginning and skills are used more and more in different contexts. In Science there are many skills, and this has been effective. Anecdote: a diary account of the Highway Man. Looked at the poem and wrote an account from the view point of Tim. At the end of the lesson, the children said “so what you were actually asking us to do was look at this from other viewpoints”. Children recognised this was a transferable skill when they saw something similar in the SAT.
2. Success Criteria issues Reception / Y1 Planning is now much clearer and children are more focused. Criteria were modelled in the beginning, but children are now generating their own SC through scaffolding. The greatest impact has been on writing. Children can constructively criticise a piece of work given to them and constantly review their work against the criteria. Peer marking is more focused. Across the board children have improved a complete level in a year. In parallel classes there is also evidence that there is greater improvement in standards. Yr 2 SAT writing this year was higher than reading for the first time ever!
Year 2 Teachers are providing children with appropriate scaffolding to support the identification of success criteria. There is a ‘learning wall’ for Foundation and ‘tool kits’ for more specific skills in maths and science. SC provide stepping stones which allow children to make the right move at the right time, using step by step directions to reach the SC. Children can back track to see where errors have been made, and they give support for children with difficulties. Children can self-evaluate effectively and quickly in pairs or in groups. Children are generally engaged in open dialogue providing opportunities for teacher assessment. Sometimes teachers throw in a red herring to talk about what should or not be included – teachers can pick up greater understanding of the SC from this. The HT in a group added that when parents see the LOs and SC they better understand what their children are doing and the partnership between school and parents improves.
Years 3 / 4 All agreed that children are aware of SC and used them for peer marking. In some cases the criteria are in a list so that children can tick off what they feel they have included. This has been very focused and relevant which then raises children’s confidence and self esteem especially lower achievers. Lower achievers cope well with fewer of the success criteria, which can then be added to over the 2 weeks. They were then more keen to verbalise their opinions. It was felt that children need to have ownership of their SC so they have been generating their own, especially in numeracy. They can see exactly where they have gone wrong so can then self-correct.
Year 5 Teachers looked at the difference between higher and lower achievers and decided that SC had a greater impact on high achievers. They know what is expected and good work is not based on secretarial skills or length but on content. In the past they have been complacent because they have been good at these things - using SC knocked them out of this bubble and gave them an idea of how they could push themselves further – progression for them has been a real possibility. Marking is much easier with SC as you can immediately see who understands what. If they have been asked to underline their metaphors, for instance, you can see whether they have understood. One teacher likes to put her SC down on paper first, then thinks about how these can be extended to push the higher achievers. She will say this group we expect to do these three and that group we expect to do all five.
Year 6 Children know exactly what they need to include to be successful and use the word ‘successful’ when referring to their work. This has had a special impact on the boys, especially those with special needs, as they can articulate their success more readily now. Teachers tried to get children’s language in the SC so that they are understandable – they like it simple. Visual diagrams support the children including the SC in their work. When children are identifying SC it allows teachers to nip any misconceptions about the LO in the bud. SC were used during SATs revision and children now have ownership of their work as their self assessment gave them that opportunity. They check the SC as they are working. Marking is much more focused, and SC have had a massive impact on future learning as children understand and take ownership of marking for the future. Inclusion of the SC does not necessarily ensure quality. One teacher showed two openings to the class and ticked off the SC on both and said, OK, both pieces of writing are great. But the children said, no – we know both have all the SC but we like this one better than that one because… the children realise that ticking the SC is not what it’s all about. S then said that with open skills you have to discuss quality: ticking off is only inclusion - how well you’ve done it demands that at the beginning of the lesson you should show the children a good and not so good example for discussion. Anecdote: one of the misconceptions that was picked up (diary account lesson) via the SC was one child who started with “I am writing to you”, confusing the dairy lesson with the start of a letter. A borderline child said that “Knowing the LO is like knowing the rules of a game, but having the SC is knowing how to win.”
3. Unit Coverage (making sure children know how each learning objective fits the unit coverage) Reception / Y1 This strategy was used in a range of topics. Children are more involved, taking ownership. Involving them in the planning helps teachers find out where they are. Children more motivated and involved. Teachers have been surprised by what the children already know and with what they say they want to know: often more than we think they would. Children come up with ideas for how to find out what they want to know. Because children are so involved, they are now bringing in things from home to support their work-making links with their own experiences. Children are learning at a higher level than in previous years as they are more interested and the pitch is now appropriate.
Year 2 Concept mapping in the past tied in with this. It works well for topic and science. Some teachers used one colour to write what children knew at start and another colour for what they wanted to know in the middle and a third at the end for what they’ve learned. This development has made children have more enquiring minds and develop more learning skills. More research methods have emerged. Helps children feel secure because they know where they are going. The kinds of questions they are asking show that there is more interest in forthcoming work.
Years 3 / 4 This approach helps the teacher to know what the children already know and a lot of questions are generated in the process. It works better in some subjects than others: history and science are really good. Some teachers did unit coverage with children before the holidays and then did the detailed planning, which made a big difference to the quality of planning. Sometimes the children knew less than the teacher had assumed and sometimes more. Teachers are now starting from where the children are, not where they think they are. Children can see the bigger picture: they know what they are going to be doing. More home research is happening, books being brought in etc.
Year 5 This approach allows teachers to start at the most appropriate place in terms of children’s learning (needs to be done a few weeks before the unit starts) and wastes less time. It has allowed children to evaluate what they have learned at the end. Children were able to make connections in their learning because they could see the visual chart on the wall at each stage. It has inspired confidence and active participation. Children like to know what’s coming next. One teacher in DT was making musical instruments and had a chart showing what they were to do each week. By Week 2 some had not finished their planning and week 3 was the making: those children asked if they could take their work home and finish it – anticipation and wanting to get ready for the next week.
Year 6 Did not do unit coverage because of SATs taking over.
4. Wait time/no hands up/talking partners Reception / Y1 The impact on social development is huge. All agreed this was the most significant thing in their classrooms. Much more inclusion than before as quiet children are now involved. Respect between children has increased, consideration for each other and different friendships have formed. Children wanted to go to other children’s houses and this has even changed their mum’s friendship groups. They like the reaction time as they need this thinking time. In one school TPs spread to the rest of the school through the children talking about it to other children in the playground. On the playground, if they have arguments, they can actually step back and talk about it and resolve it other than by kicking and punching. Cooperation and respect for each other from the TPs carries through to other things. The boy/girl issue has been broken down, too. Children mix better across the board. Impact on learning is really good as children without exception are focused. They focus on the lessons as they have had time to talk when with their partners – they are really on task. Speaking and listening skills have increased very much. This has led to great impact on their writing and their vocabulary.
Year 2 One teacher said that for her TPs has been the aspect that has had the greatest impact on learning. The group was positive by and large about this with some problems, such as an open plan environment. Social skills: some need to be on board already to balance talking with listening. We need to develop strategies to encourage quiet children to work with dominant children-need more inclusion. Setting ground rules has helped. Children are very excited by and cooperative about TPs. It will get better if they are brought up with TPs from reception. They are all looking forward to starting off the new school year with TPs immediately. They feel they will see a greater improvement then. There are great benefits of swapping every few weeks. More children are actively involved in their own learning as there is no hiding place. They ask each other for help and not the teacher so much. Problems:
TPs has been wonderful for a new boy in class who is Polish and had no English.
Years 3 / 4 Impact on learning: there are greater contributions from children now as they are not so isolated. Children more willing, especially lower achievers, to contribute. There is evidence that the higher achieving child is more helpful to the lower achieving child than before. They take an interest in their partner as they view themselves as being a part of a pair – this is not patronising. They feel a responsibility to their “colleague.” They get upset when TPs do not happen. Impact on social development: before TPs, there was a child that no one wanted to be with. How to manage this child has always been a problem. Now for those children there is less isolation in the classroom. TPs is more fair. There is greater integration of these children and those in the middle. Children now mix with those they never would have. They find they are all normal and OK. This has carried over on to the playground. Anecdote: one child whose mom was worried at the beginning of the year as he had only one friend, a girl, and did not want to mix with the boys Since TPs he’s becoming one of the boys and the teacher is actually pleased the boy is becoming a bit naughty. Someone said that greater respect seems to be coming from children regarding the views of others –less laughing and an understanding that we can have different views and opinions.
Year 5 Social development: the more withdrawn children talked to their peers more readily and were better prepared to answer questions in class. Teachers found more impact on less confident children in general – TPs made them aware that they needed to talk to others to check that their thinking and feelings were right about things. They recognised the impact of hearing others’ opinions. Classroom dynamics have changed and in one case parents noticed that behaviour had improved. Parents say that where their children had a confidence problem this has improved even in the home. In another incident, parents were not so pleased about the behaviour: eg – some children were placed randomly but these partnerships did not work. Behaviour deteriorated and parents were disappointed with how their children had settled in the class. As a result of a bad random partnering the behaviour had changed negatively and the teacher had to step in and manage this. This developed gradually so that by the end of the three weeks the teacher was desperate to swap them. They can do the TPs but it’s the other time when they are sitting next to each other that they get silly. S and another teacher wondered if TPs had been properly modelled – this has not come up before – maybe Yr 5 is a difficult year. Up until now, S said she had not heard this before. What’s the reason? Another teacher said that sometimes two get thrown together that otherwise would not – but they should know that they need to work – maybe if it does not it’s due to their immaturity +starting this off in Yr 5 and not earlier. It should get better if TPs starts earlier and given more time and experience. In cases like these you can not give up but need to push them through the pain barrier until it works. Model it again and again. We owe it to them not to give up – this is a life skill. Impact on learning: they realised they can get help from each other not just the teacher. In terms of different learning styles, the auditory ones have had more opportunity to develop. When they work independently children are more on task – there is a buzz in the classroom. In a science investigation one teacher used TPs and mini white boards – the teacher gave them questions to discuss and they wrote down their notes as they thought of them on the whiteboards. The children were very focused – very labour saving for the teacher. TPs transfer more of the work to the child.
Year 6 Impact on learning: speaking & listening: all children are finding their voice. Skills are improving and they are learning from each other. There is an impact on writing – they value each others viewpoints, take them on board and sometimes include them in their work. One said there were fewer “reptilian responses” – i.e.: those boys that sit and look at their feet when asked a question –children are much more involved and ready to answer if they are not putting their hands up and know the teacher can expect a response form everyone. In maths there has been discussion and debate instead of just saying mine’s right and yours is wrong. Social development: children are now working with others they would not have normally chosen. Respect for each other is growing and opinions are being valued. There is more listening to each other’s answers. Anecdote: two children in a class, one is naughty and picks on the other. They came out as TPs and they actually worked well together and the picking on has stopped. Also fewer problems on the playground between them One teacher had resistance from her TA. The children love to move and get to sit with others. The TA said she could not remember where they were. Parents reported that children are more willing to talk about what they are doing in school. One teacher has a concern with her highest achieving child being with a lower achieving child– concerned for the whole three weeks – worried abut what the higher achiever was getting from it and could not see what it was. S talked about explanation being the highest order skill. This was probably a real learning experience for the more able child – probably a number of things the child learned from how the other operated. All the children in one teacher’s class have come to terms with the fact that there is no opting out. No one sits back and thinks they can not participate because their hand is not up.
Effective Questioning Reception / Y1 Have not spent too much time on this. Used mainly in maths and science. Nobody used opposing standpoint. Children can better focus & listen more carefully. Range of answers Used more in mathematics. Found more effective for higher achievers. Statement Used a lot in topic and science. Right and wrong Lots of use across the curriculum Starting with the endpoint Used with mathematics. Anecdote: PSHE lesson: the teacher told the class about a boy who got cross and hit someone because nobody would play with him -- discuss if this is right or wrong.
Year 2 Range of answers Seemed to be most effective in maths. Impact: students could explain their reasoning rather than just give an answer. Statement Tied in well with TPs - children more confident with discussion skills. Each child had a true/ false card, made a statement, discussed with partner – quick assessment tool. Starting from the answer Effective in maths. Opposing standpoint Least confident with –maybe due to the age of the children? All these things helped when trying to extend the wait time.
Years 3 / 4 Teachers were not all doing all of the strategies but unanimously decided that their questioning techniques have improved. More thought has been put into what they are asking and they are conscious of what they are trying to get from the children. Getting away from recall questions. Range of answers Children finding mistakes and explaining them helps. One teacher uses a timer in maths, e.g. working out multiplication questions and giving 4-5 choices for answers and they have to decide which answer was right in a certain amount of time.
Year 5 Range of answers This encourages children’s confidence even if they could just pinpoint the wrong answer, they could then get involved in discussing why it was right. They could explain the process. Across the board different children of different abilities could get involved. Statement Helped children devise SC in maths. Developed higher order skills in getting children to think and debate – also used with concept cartoons in science. Opposing standpoint Really effective – develops empathy and social and emotional understanding.
Year 6 Range of answers If the answers given represent common mistakes then children have an opportunity to notice mistakes and learn from them as opposed to making the mistake and it going unnoticed. Linked nicely to SC because when the correct answer is identified they can see the SC that led to it. Statement Huge links to speaking and listening. Brings about more focused learning – enables children to discuss and debate ideas—linked to drama and role play and good start to a topic in starting discussions. Children have developed a mature attitude to questioning. E.g. a PSHE lesson –puberty- “It’s harder for a girl to go through puberty than a boy.” Openly discussed things they would not otherwise have discussed. Right & wrong Used mainly in Science and AT1. ‘Why is this circuit working and this one not?’ Results in children questioning themselves and focuses children on the vocabulary they must use in the answer. Starting from answer Children learn that in some cases there might only be one answer but different methods to arrive at it – they learn from each other. Opposing standpoint Good for considering other people’s points of view.
Overall: children know that there are a range of questions and are starting to use these themselves. |
 |