  |
|
|
|
|
||
|
               |
|
|
LEARNING TEAMS FINDINGS:
Day Three East Lothian 27 September, 2006
EARLY YEARS Because children have just started school, it’s hard to compare written pieces of work because of their low reading ability – as long as it was obvious, visual and a bit silly, children could pick up on the difference between good and bad. Impact on learning and teaching : Generating success criteria from these materials resulted in ownership, remembering more, and they liked being the teacher, as it were. Teachers said they had cut back on the amount of teaching needed by showing them a finished product. It means you don’t have to spread something over 2 or 3 weeks anymore. Teachers felt that the children were motivated by being a ‘teacher’ and teachers are more focused and know better where they are going. Also children are more engaged and focused. One teacher brought in a toy with a description of it which she had written as if she were a seven year old. She put it on an overhead and children went wild over it and wanted to write about the toy. This resulted in more than the usual amount of writing and great enthusiasm.
EARLY/ MIDDLE YEARS Teachers gave specific examples of using two pieces to compare: a) A lesson with a Primary 5 class comparing two bar graphs, one better than the other, and children had to generate the success criteria. They came up with 3: use a ruler, have a proper scale, a title and labels. The teacher needed to review scale work with some of the children but most could come up with the success criteria. The children had greater ownership when they generated their own success criteria. b) A support teacher working with functional letter writing with a child with low language skills gave a good model of an account of a visit to Chester . She had produced this herself and got the children to generate success criteria from it with a lot of support. She carried out a series of lessons on this and the most dramatic impact was when the boy said to her “like… Like …Like” and “not like… not like” – meaning he wanted to change the vocabulary. She knew this was a breakthrough. c) A teacher looked at newspaper head lines and important information carried in them. Children began to set out school rules with important information, set-up and titles with paragraphs to follow. This worked well.
SMALL SCHOOLS early/middle Teachers described a range of ways to model. Some used one piece; some used two pieces of writing across levels. This helped children to be more aware of expectation and progression across the levels. One teacher had examples of four levels and posted models on the board and the children had to put them in order. Impact: this helped raise attainment as the children were able to go beyond recognising the first two levels and on to the third. A lot of teachers decided models would be used to generate success criteria by telling the children what was good about the models. Some decided to then display the success criteria on a flip chart which would later be referred to; others put them in the children’s jotters so children could check when they wanted for themselves. These were used in a personal learning plan so the children know where they are going next.
UPPER PRIMARY One teacher used a letter of a previous child’s writing and the class identified what made it successful. Impact: compared to last year there was an enormous improvement in the quality of work then produced, especially among the lower achievers. Another teacher compared two poems – these were given to the children and she asked lots of questions about what they wanted to know about how to produce a successful poem. They addressed some of these in their own poems.
2. On-the-spot modelling of ‘Success & Improvement’ during the lesson (‘integrated feedback’)
EARLY YEARS A few issues came up: implications for time and planning during the day and the fact that technology is better used if there is a classroom assistant to set things up rather than a lone teacher in the room. When children are very young, improving work is demoralising if they have to rub it out and start again so one teacher was glad to hear about the left side of the page strategy: use the right side page for the children’s writing/work and use the left page for the add-ins/improvements. This is the “Improvement Page.” Another teacher said that she keeps the left hand side free for improvement and for peer assessment. This is a working page for the child – e.g.: can jot down 2-3 different adjectives and decide which to finally use, etc. Teachers agreed that it is important that the teachers have a conversation with the children, asking them to tell the teacher what they would do to make it better and reinforcing the success criteria rather than the teacher telling them what to do. On the spot ‘success and improvement’ lends itself well to other things beyond literacy such as PE and gymnastics. S: re: Improvement & not rubbing out -- the important thing is not to start again but to add more to what you have already done. One teacher said that there was not time to get round to everyone (P1) in the whole class writing lesson as it took the children so long to write. It was difficult to improve all the children’s writing and give them the necessary time. S: doyou think very young children need more explicit modelling? Yes, it has to be very obvious at the beginning. Because the children have only been at school now for 5-6 weeks, the whole success and improvement process might need to be more oral at this time. One teacher found it more successful to be the scribe while the children would give her the improvements so all were working on one story together. Then the children were able to better write independently. Another teacher said a piece of free software called Slide Story can solve these problems – the story develops as they move from one slide to another. The children scribe what they are going to say and improve as they go along.
EARLY/ MIDDLE YEARS Teachers said there had been technological problems because they don’t have the equipment to project work instantly. Art lessons worked well with two pieces of work on the board, asking what has been done well, etc. then children working in partners. Some teachers found difficulties with sensitivity – one child was upset about being told her piece could be improved. If this was a whole school policy children would see this was constructive. The process was used successfully in drama – stopping and asking how did the group do this or that – discussing then continuing. One teacher described how videoing children is effective too – e.g.: a minute’s talk – what went well, how can the next person improve. Impact : teachers said that it is becoming more and more instinctive for them to know where best to stop, where best to do the improvements, etc. Anecdote from parents’ night: one parent said her daughter is really enjoying being in the class, working with learning objectives. This had made a great difference…she seemed to feel more empowered with her learning and it had positively affected her feelings about school.
SMALL SCHOOLS early/middle Teachers said that ten minutes into lesson was a bit soon to stop and use the work so they had stopped 20 minutes into the lesson and found this very effective. Using success criteria along with ‘success and improvement’ had had a huge impact on the amount of writing the children did. Teachers found that the “planning page” for the written lesson was becoming less effective/necessary (obsolete) if the children were using success criteria and therefore had models. Even if there was some negative discussion about the chosen child’s work, these children were happy that their bit had been chosen for the model and were feeling more successful as they knew they were achieving and an improvement was going to be made. S: stopping the children to make improvements – I’m not surprised children are happy with this as they have shorter things to do rather than large tasks to try to achieve. One teacher said this is singularly important for boys –they need simple, shorter instructions coupled with immediate feedback. All thought they now saw general improvement in boys and one said he can prove it: for a few years he has analysed writing in every stage. Girls’ attainment has stayed constant, but after stage 3 the boys’ had dipped. This was attributed to giving the boys too many instructions, and they often reacted by exhibiting bad behaviour and low attainment. Neurological differences in the male and female brain are evident. The same also applies to learning – the psychological impact of finishing then starting again is daunting for boys.
UPPER PRIMARY One teacher described a science lesson in which children were building bridges: children were given a set of instructions/criteria for building a bridge of a certain span with paper which was strong enough to support a small car. The teacher stopped every ten minutes to look at what they were doing, make suggestions, and for the children to get ideas from one another. One group used rolled paper and shared this idea with another. Another teacher described a lesson in which children wrote fairy tales. The scene was set by using weather in the first paragraph. They read a piece that modelled this then after ten minutes of working a piece was discussed which one of the children had written. Children then completed the paragraph. Impact : Lessons are becoming shorter: a typical hour and a half lesson with the first 30 minutes of the teacher talking is now shorter: now a 40-minute lesson with better examples shown. The quality has improved as children can see where they are going. The chance to share during the lesson helps to incorporate everyone’s ideas and yields a better end product.
3. Further developments:
EARLY YEARS Learning Objectives: teachers and children are more focused Success criteria: more pictures are being used; one used a cauldron, cast a spell on it and the children got what they were learning from it Unit coverage : teachers are keeping this very visual such as mind maps kept on display and referred to; children often do a lot of work at home as a result. Questioning: teachers are experimenting with different types of questions which tend to be used to investigate prior knowledge. Paying more attention to the first question of the lesson to keep the interest going often dictates how the whole lesson will develop. Children’s responses show their misconceptions – this is right, this is wrong, why? Talking Partners : stars on the carpet have been used as discussion spots, with children then moving around the class with their talking partners. It has been important to model good and bad talk behaviour and get children to identify the criteria.
EARLY/ MIDDLE YEARS Learning Objectives: has improved the focus of teachers and children. It is important that teachers and children are in partnership. Some children now ask what the learning objective is before it is even given – a positive step forward. Success criteria: children are becoming effective contributors and independent learners as they now have ownership. This fits in well with the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence. Unit coverage : one teacher involved the children in the planning of a topic and had amazing results. They were motivated from beginning to end. She put up a topic board in the classroom so they could see where they were going and each child got a copy of the topic plan and ticked off when they had done something. They researched what was coming up next. This teacher has recently let the children decide how to carry out the next task. Questioning: all need to develop this more. Talking Partners : teachers are still picking random partners.
SMALL SCHOOLS early/middle Learning Objectives: one teacher found that moving from expressing this orally to displaying it visually made a big difference. Teachers felt that they were getting better at separating the learning objective from the context and children were becoming increasingly clearer, too. If the learning objective is not there at the start of the lesson, children ask about it. Unit coverage: when writing the plan teachers now think more about what the children have said. Before a holiday break, discuss with the children what the new topics will be. Talking Partners : One teacher said this had become more negative after the summer and needed to stop and go over how to be a good Talking Partner again. With new P1s coming into the class a bad vibe had developed. Another teacher said that two boys in her class did not join in and were disruptive so she made one a Talking Partner with the teacher. After a while the child asked if he could work with the other children. All teachers said they were becoming more confident in their teaching including the traditionalists. In the small school in which P3s go to P4, where Talking Partners were already established, the children went up and fitted in easily. This had not happened in the past.
UPPER PRIMARY Success criteria: for each level in the National Curriculum teachers have a generic list of success criteria. This has changed the whole ethos of the school and spread good practice. Unit coverage : One teacher often uses a mind map at the start of a project. Filing has been greatly reduced because children now know which part of their binder to put things in. They do not have a prescriptive contents page any more but use the mind map instead. Items children come up with are almost identical to what the school wants in the first place. Children are able to record their own progress and pace their progress and plan their development. Peer and self management in a group is quickly picked up. Questioning: quite difficult. One teacher had made a list of the different questioning strategies which she had displayed in the classroom and tried to use a different one every day. With practise this became easier. Talking Partners : there has been a huge difference if the class has had experience the previous year.
Any final, general comments? What’s been the main difference in my classroom? Quotes from teachers……………
|
 |