Day Three Powys 30 th November, 2006

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

KS1

Teachers said that they need to model this process first as children are not sure what they are looking for to differentiate the “why” between the good and not so good. Staff are building up their own copies of good and bad examples. Success criteria and talking partners has become part and parcel of quality discussions and are used naturally now even by the youngest ones. Impact: children can now justify their opinions.

One teacher did music with young children modelling good and bad singing and the same with playing instruments. When asked why were these were good or bad, the young ones said it sounded wrong, then when asked to be more specific they did understand and were able to articulate more.

KS2a

Children were very enthusiastic when this process was used in PE. Showing them how to do things they already had experience with, like throwing a ball, was less successful than looking at video of them doing things where they can really see what they need to improve on. This has positively impacted their skills.

The process was used a lot in writing and some tried maths and science. Impact: teachers felt the children are more focused and motivated and there is less disruption; children are empowered and there is more learning; there is time to extend the higher achievers; the work has improved and teachers can see the link when they have showed a really good piece of work. “The children do not look lost anymore – there are smiles on their faces!”

KS2b

Our group felt that after using success criteria for some time, and showing a piece of work and discussing with talking partners, they could better move on to two pieces of work being compared because they know how to focus on the good elements matched against the success criteria. Problems in the children’s work were pre-empted by showing bad examples. Examples given of two contrasting pieces included limericks, report writing, two ‘fact files’-one full of facts, one opinion. Impact: a higher percentage of children are achieving the success criteria since two products have been shown and discussed and children are producing higher quality work.

Secondary

A geography teacher used the learning objective of an effective description (being in a hurricane) and the teacher produced two pieces of work: one was a description of the noise and force of hurricanes, the second piece focused on how the hurricane impacted on people. They could see descriptive words they would not have initially used. Lower achievers tended to just copy what was there but the positive aspect was that they felt they had produced a really good piece of work and this gave them more confidence. S: this business of copying is a complicated thing…where do children get descriptive words from in the first place? Books, TV, things they’ve heard…nothing is original. Everything we do at some stage is copying. After it is internalised, we can apply it better in other circumstances. The first stage of copying is an important one as it leads to making it yours. There are a lot of young children who do not have access to books at home or parents talking to them or reading to them, so models for them are their only chance of knowing what is possible. One teacher told her children they were not copying but borrowing.

An A level PE lesson on the bi-mechanics of movement (all the forces that apply like gravity or centrifugal force or pushing and pulling) focused on high jumping. Using a white board, the teacher showed an Olympic high jumper and someone from the school sports day – good standards but different. The teacher put up two photos on a normal whiteboard, put the children into two groups, talked about forces before hand, then asked why one was effective and the other less effective. The children had to explain the differences between the bi-mechanical forces used by both. Children could see that an application of one force could change the centrifugal force, etc, making one jumper less effective than the other. Then they swapped over and had a discussion about the other picture, then came together as a whole group to decide on the bi-mechanical examples of a high jumper. Impact: a greater use of technical terminology and students could apply these to the situation more appropriately. Before they could either do the practical bit or the theoretical bit, but now could they are able to put the two together. This teacher said that if he had just given them the task of writing why a school jumper could not do as well as an Olympic jumper, they would have struggled.

In an English Department a teacher who had not been in the meeting where AfL was discussed, tried some techniques with a Yr 7 group and found at the end of the session that many students were intimidated by the high standard of the good example shown. When working with other staff, it is important to give them the whole package before they launch into this.

Secondary with Special

A teacher described using GCSE coursework, giving groups of students 3 pieces of work (A, C and E) and asking them to grade them and justify the grade against success criteria. This developed their awareness of what each grade looks like and why. In different lessons as a longer piece of work, pupils dismantled pieces and discussed how a piece could be moved from a grade d to a grade c. A good piece of work was shown – ‘Why is it good and how can you bring it up to an even better standard?’

Special needs problems: they failed to take on board the idea of two pieces of work and attention wandered so this was moderated to one piece of work and how it could be improved. Maintaining a level of understanding and concentration was worked on. It is more successful when one piece of work is modelled with one or two success criteria and discussed in terms of how it could be improved.

One teacher used three pieces of work. Impact: this made them aware of why some were below standard. One student ripped up his work, saying ‘What I have written in rubbish. I’m going to start again.’ (Importance of modelling before students start to work as well as during)

2. On-the-spot modelling of ‘Success & Improvement’ during the lesson (‘Integrated feedback’)

KS1

Negative story: one teacher did some writing with 5 year olds in the first week and picked a piece at random. The child burst into tears when asked how to make it better. Next day the same thing happened. So, get to know your class first and use an anonymous piece or one you made up.

Maths: it works well with counting on in the basic stages. Sorting activities – by their own criteria – stop and get a group to explain how they are sorting and it helps clarify the thinking of other groups. In a counting-on lesson, showing the work of a child who had started with the number instead of moving forward helped the others to correct theirs. Another tried to catch a child just before they had finished a piece of work and asked the class what needed to be done to finish the work successfully. The child then settles down to finish, rather than feeling he has finished and ‘failed’. (Importance of stopping children half way through rather than at the end when it feels like it’s too late).

KS2a

One teacher described a lesson about instructional writing with the context of putting up a tent. They first looked at an exemplar text, a recipe, and picked it apart as a class to establish the key features which became the success criteria: bullet points or numbers, imperative verbs, ingredients, technical vocabulary, procedural order. The children then watched a tent being put up, noted down the stages straight away working in groups of four and as a class they generated the technical words needed, appropriate verbs and used pictures to order the procedure. They then went out in their groups to put up tents, photographed themselves then noted down what they have done in what order. The next day they came back to write the instructions for putting up a tent. As a class they first looked at one of the photographs, referred to the success criteria and analysed it for things that were missing and where it was effective. They all then had another go and, at this point, all kinds of modifications to the success criteria arose, such as diagrams, colour coding and clearer links. They evaluated what they had done within their group, and were very proud of what they had done. Others came back the next day and had re-done their original attempts. The interactive whiteboard was invaluable in storing all the various discussions. The impact was lots of creativity, adding to the success criteria and improvements developed as a result of this process. S: some people believe that success criteria stifle creativity. This example shows that the success and improvement process alone provides a vehicle for children recreating success criteria….

KS2b

Teachers tried to cover a range of subjects. One teacher described a music lesson in which the children were asked to compose music: rainy day music and sunny day music as they contrasted well. The children were made aware of success criteria at the beginning and it was useful to stop them regularly to listen to taped pieces of their music. It was the sort of activity that lent itself well to ongoing evaluation and immediate feedback because it was so concrete.

Teachers said that literacy was a natural vehicle for providing immediate feedback to children. They agreed that some children were initially embarrassed or intimidated by looking at their work and discussing how it could have been done better, but said it was important to build trust with them and establish a climate in the classroom of things being shared as a way of helping each other. Children have responded well to this.

If you show children extracts of pieces of work of a certain level, and then you show a better piece of work that is slightly better, you can show how something that had features of a level can become something which is more solidly at that level. S: how far have you used the success and improvement strategy with one piece of work, then that acting as a model for the whole class to do the same, there and then, with their work? One teacher’s answer: ‘We are starting to do this now. They first look in pairs to find a best example in their partner’s piece of work, we choose one to write on the white board and discuss together why it is best. Then we look to see how it could be improved or whether something else be improved. Impact: This has cut down on marking. The quality of work is better because they have stopped and looked and thought instead of just ploughing through. If you do not do this, marking can be quite demoralising. It becomes quality, not quantity when you do this process.’

SECONDARY

Two PE teachers said that integrated feedback is used all the time. It is very visual so easy to do this. One teacher said that she uses the flipchart with success criteria written on as a matter of routine now so that pupils can match their success against it.

In geography this process is not so easy to do because of the lack of technology. One teacher described the process used for work on hurricanes. The children were asked to look at the best example of the exemplar material provided after they had been writing for a while. They were then asked to discuss which of the success criteria had been met most successfully. Pupils then swapped their books and highlighted what they felt were the best bits in terms of successfully meeting the criteria.

SECONDARY w/SPECIAL

Technology for getting work projected there and then for all to see has been a problem. To get over this in English, one teacher chooses someone who can write fast, then types it and projects it. This work is then used with the class. In one lesson on similes, the class was asked which success criteria had been met, etc. and how to improve it (e.g. shaking like a leaf was good but what could be put there instead?) There was some peer assessment of work done, too. Impact: all children improved their similes using this strategy. They had ownership of their work, felt they were teacher and assessor and felt fantastic about it. They made positive comments on the work, too. Targets for improvement were put on the work. One teacher said one girl was predicted to get an E, but as a result of this all, got a B.

One teacher described a science lesson in which pupils were asked to summarise what they had learned on acetate. The class then discussed what they liked best and what could still be improved, etc. Pupils said, ‘Can we do this more often? It really helped!’ This process used different learning styles so pupils were really engaged.

Teachers from special schools found this process difficult because it is harder to stop the children when they are into a task. You have to do things more one-to-one. There is less frustration for these pupils doing it this way. There is anxiety evident when you stop them as a group. Teachers would never mark away from these pupils as it is too late for them: it must be done during the lesson.

3. Further Developments

KS1

All schools found that they now focus on the learning rather than the context. Talking Partners are used throughout the schools with children taking more control. Learning and teaching has improved across the board. By sharing good practice of unit planning, etc. with children and staff they are developing a learning and sharing culture and are constantly moving forward. This year some schools have used formative assessment as part of their school improvement project. The whole culture of schools is changing.

Talking Partners helps build confidence in the classroom and behaviour improves as a result. Some of the pupils who used not to be heard can now be heard positively. Marking used to be disheartening and success criteria now allow teachers to structure the work and know what to look for which makes marking quicker than it used to be. Even looking at a long piece of work the teacher can quickly see the main points.

All teachers felt that formative assessment provides them with a whole structure for a lesson from talking partners at the beginning to the improvement later on.

KS2a

Speaking and listening has improved greatly in all schools as has acceptance of talking partners and tolerance of each other. Behaviour has improved.

KS2b

All teachers said that success criteria is something most teachers are happy to adopt. All said behaviour has improved. Children get grumpy if a supply teacher comes in and does not use these strategies. A great buzz of discussion occurs when they go into talking partners.

Secondary w/Special

Unit coverage – one school had not done this before but now breaks it down into smaller parts and pupils are analysing well. One teacher said that the Yr 7 talking partners fuss is in decline. As they got used to the fact that their partner was not permanent, their tolerance improved. Effective talking partners leads to more effective questioning.