Salford Day Two Feedback 8 June, 2006

1. Separating the Learning Objective from the Context

Year 2

Teachers found it particularly useful in science as it enabled them to focus on skills in a lesson and see how they could be transferred across the curriculum. Children could also see the link between what was being taught in the lesson and how it could be transferred elsewhere. It was difficult to separate the LO from the big picture (the overall unit coverage) because each lesson is part of the big picture. It is easier to teach the skills in Attainment Target 1 and transfer those skills across the curriculum as a result of separating the LO from the context – this is because you are being more explicit about the skills and the context is not in the way. Instead of focusing on ‘snowflakes’, you talk about the particular skill – when you do this skill in a completely different context, it is still the same skill.

Children are clear about what is expected of them in each lesson and the work they produce is of a higher standard than the equivalent year group last year. They are more able to use the correct vocabulary at the end of the lesson, too.

Years 5/6 (Group A)

Teachers felt that they already did separate the LO from the context (probably because they are Y6). Teachers became more aware of the LO and this translated better to the students. It was not always easy to separate the LO from the context: [e.g. electricity – came to a point when the children had to draw circuit diagrams, teacher thought if you want them to draw this the LO is to draw a diagram, the context is how you would get them to draw it (a worksheet, via apparatus, etc.)]. Initially the teacher got hung up on this and complicated the process – the context can, however, be very simple. The lesson in electricity was to draw a circuit diagram. S asked what was the context? The context was to make a complete a diagram. Sometimes one goes down the wrong track then teachers confuse children when they include the whole activity in the LO. Instead, think “What do I really want them to learn today?” It’s about being clear about what you want them to learn today.

As teachers, they became more aware of the context and could better discuss it.

Year 5/6 B

It does put pressure on you as a teacher because you need to be very confident about your subject knowledge subject and how the children learn. It was difficult separating the LO from the context in RE because it is an abstract concept (e.g. empathy).

Children are making cross-curricular links and transferring skills (e.g. data handling taught in maths can be transferred to science/connectives used in literacy were transferred into science writing.)

Anecdote: using cameras to make an animation. The LO included camera operation, storyboarding, editing, etc. The end product was the story. Once they learned the production skills they could make an animation/story of whatever they wanted to so the skills were completely transferable.

Secondary/special (full range of special needs)

Positive comments across the board. This process helps teachers and pupils identify the key skills and transfer them across subjects. This makes pupils better independent learners with clearer ideas of what to do and how to go about it.

Pupils are better able to discuss their own learning. They are able to discuss how good they are at skills in general, an evaluative approach, rather than the particular skills themselves in particular subjects.

The impact on behaviour has been massive – if you increase the students’ independence and confidence, the behaviour improves.

Anecdote: Yr 9 Special school were reading MacBeth for SATS. The LO was based on certain facts about Shakespeare. The context was to do a research project for a presentation at the end. The students managed to learn the research/presentation skills in the context on top of the LO. Weeks later a science teacher, working in a completely different context, said she had done a similar project and said the students’ research and presentation skills were excellent because they had previously done this in an English class.

Secondary

There is more clarity for the pupils due to better teacher planning. Impact: students moving more quickly in their learning than anticipated. Students are transferring skills.

Anecdote: technology…separating the LO from the context was a struggle at first but has really clarified for the students what needs to be done. One lesson was set up where students learned how do X. the next week, an entirely different context was set for a lesson BUT the students just got on with what needed to be done as they had learned the skills the week before.

2. Success Criteria issues

Year 2

Looked mostly at literacy but did use in maths with word problems. Children across abilities had to make improvements. Children are on task straight away or discuss with a partner straight away now. The biggest impact is that the students stop and discuss things…they stop themselves and look at the big list of success criteria on display and decide how they are doing, what they are or are not using, changing the work as they go along. Teachers are seeing more insertions, crossing outs and self-corrections, etc. Formative Assessment is becoming more about constant review.

Success criteria have had a big impact on self esteem – children are much more confident to have a go. They are capable of making improvements. Their attitude towards work and motivation has improved. Another teacher said the biggest impact in her class was on the higher achievers – it has made them ‘up their game’.

One teacher said that at the end of the lesson in literacy they decide where they think they did not do so well and that becomes their target for the next day.

Years 5/6 A

Impact on learning: children are more focused, evaluating their own success and are self motivated and better behaved. We know this because throughout the lesson using mini plenaries children are discussing and checking their work. Success criteria help to focus children long term.

Anecdote: Yr 6 English: children swapped work and ticked off in the margin where the success criteria were met. Talking Partners discussed how well they had met the criteria of the lesson and the objective of the lesson and where something had been missed out.

Children have been able to say where they are achieving success and where they are not so good at something (e.g. introductions). Previously they would have said that they were no good at the whole thing. Children have become more honest about their capabilities.

Years 5/6 B

One teacher described how useful the success criteria were in, for instance, the grid method in multiplication, as the children always had a formula to follow. Children keep this in front of them. Children are now self-correcting and check back to see if elements are included. They have become more analytical.

Literacy: one teacher used SC only here and offered his opinion that there is a danger of using SC too much – if you present them to children in a formulaic way, lesson after lesson, you will lose the children. Constant battle of being inventive. He also does not use the phrase “SC” preferring to use his own language. S asked him toelaborate…he said: it’s almost like falling into a trap of the early literacy hour by following it too closely minute by minute – forces you into a straight jacket. He does not think a list of SC is always good. S: do you not thinkitis fair that children should know what you expect of them? Teacher: sure, but you have to be inventive about how you use SC. It’s a challenge to teachers to present this in original ways.

Another teacher said SC work and students should do this in all things. S: before SC, children sat there the whole time wondering if they were doing it right – children worry about doing it wrong and have no power in the classroom. If they know what your LO is, the SC follow. Children who have the SC have power, they are in control. The success criteria can be as open, as free as you want – what matters is that the children know what is expected. If you want them to make their own choices then the success criteria would say exactly that. Then they know where they stand.

Secondary/special

Success criteria provide an immediate platform for all students to measure their own success. They buy into their own learning process and this then positively impacts on attitude and behaviour in the classroom, particularly among mixed or lower ability students. There are a variety of activities incorporated within a lesson and this makes a successful learning environment and pupils have a clear focus about what they need to achieve. They lose focus and lack success without this.

It is also important to have children come-up with their own SC, often within the middle of a lesson. The teacher can have her own SC and then go back to the students and have them feedback if these were useful or if they can think of something better – challenge the teacher in the classroom – the teacher listens to them and a better teacher/student relationship results.

Some SC can be generic. You do not need to constantly find new SC. For lower achieving pupils, having generic SC on a white board makes the lesson easier for them.

Example: algebra—found that it can be difficult to generate SC when approaching a new concept. So, show examples to help children do this. This has worked well. A good and bad example or not so good example is helpful.

Secondary

Success criteria had increased the focus for a “middle band” of children, getting them to achieve their potential. Teachers are saying what they are actually looking for is important. Increased motivation and confidence resulted. Mini-plenaries: revisiting each time is important.

Example: the lower achievers in a Y8 group have had to think. These children are normally security blanketed through lessons with TAs without ever asking them to think for themselves about what they are learning. With a small pilot group, one teacher found that she is giving more ownership to the children and getting them to build SC for a particular project. Found the classes are better when children have more ownership of their learning. Two things were trialled: creating SC from looking at a piece of work plus having discussions about quality. One teacher learned from her group that asking them what is good about a piece of work is a learning process in itself, indicating where the children need direction.

3. Unit Coverage (making sure children know how each learning objective fits the unit coverage)

Year 2

It is good to have all the key elements displayed. It has helped revision and reflection. There is increased enthusiasm about what is coming up. Children are researching at home and having discussion with their parents about the coverage. Parents knew more about what is happening at school. Displaying the unit in this way has taken away the mystery. You can see how much the children have learnt (e.g. what do you know about forces? At the end of the topic what do you know now?) Lessons have a faster pace.

Year 5/6 A

Teachers thought it beneficial because children always knew where they were. Also found that if done as an actual display it was time consuming. The whiteboard is a good central place to place things to which children can refer during lessons.

Year 5/6 B

Some people found that there was not enough wall space. It really helps to have the big picture. It is better and more effective to have interactive displays. Impact on learning: it has engaged and interested the children and they like knowing what’s coming next. Children read around the subject and they bring in new things.

Sometimes it’s nice to have an element of mystery and not tell the students everything, so framing the content as questions to be explored creates a more investigative approach.

Secondary/special

It has improved focus for completing tasks when students have an awareness of how today’s lessons fits the big picture. Helps with continuity and progression. When they say what they already know it helps inform planning and their key questions bring up misconceptions. Many of our children are visual learners and this has helped students understand the purpose of their work. It has encouraged debate and discussion and led to more transference of skills.

Secondary

Links learning, gives it meaning. More geared towards assessment in their exams. Raises key questions and misconceptions at the beginning of lessons. Gives teachers an idea of what they know already and a process to work to.

4. Wait time/no hands up/talking partners

Years 2

Impact on learning: confidence has increased, it has given lower achievers a voice – they really enjoy it. Speaking skills have improved and the teacher can assess children better.

Social skills used to be limited to friendship groups and this has greatly improved and widened. Less off-task talking.

Children have more respect for each other and give each other a chance to think and speak – more mutual respect.

Years 5/6 A

Children are really eager and love changing partners. Early problems of who doesn’t want to sit with who are quickly overcome. Quiet, shy children have become part of the class or group discussion and sit back less.

Some difficulty at Y6 with no hands up but this gets better with time.

Behaviour has improved as talking partners breaks-up the lesson and stops ‘caller – outers’.

Ability groups for maths and English still had random partners. In maths the higher levels just went through the motions of discussing a problem with the less able but they got a buzz out of explaining how it worked to them.

One teacher had difficulty with a Chinese student with limited English

S: Try threes.

Self esteem was an issue at first as children were heard sighing when they were paired with a lower achiever. Some partners can be frustrating-slow workers, poor listeners etc. When children are happy they say things like ‘I’m clever now I’m working with Ben’. Children came to accept their partners, however, when they realised they would not have to work with them for very long. One child said: “It’s a good way to learn as you work as a team…you have two brains instead of one”. Everyone is on task as there is no where to hide.

Impact on learning across the board: less opting out. Random partners works better as the higher achievers motivate the lower. Peer explanations are often clearer than the teacher’s.

Secondary/Special

Random partnering is fair and working very well. They change every three weeks. One teacher is not comfortable with TPs because of the mix of pupils he has – and prefers to work in groups of four and he selects the groups. He finds it strange that post education focuses on cohesive teams while he must force himself to use random partners. S explained how this came about.

Another secondary group had difficulty with random partners, too. One teacher said if you want this to work, it must be a whole school thing rather than just two teachers in the school. S gave an example of a N Yorks teacher who talked first with the class about issues that might arise. If he had not had these discussions it would not have worked as well.

Another teacher said that after 5 months of using this it got better and she had examples of children with learning difficulties admitting that they were glad she had persisted because they were now able to work with other children where they had before been hidden in their shells. S said it sounds as if it is more important to stick with TPs than to abandon it.

A primary teacher said she had gone to another conference and secondary people were having problems with these kinds of things there, too, whereas primary teachers have more dominance in the classroom. S said she thinks it important to have more discussions about ground rules re: what it means to create and be good TPs.

Overall it has really enhanced communication skills. But the big thing that one teacher found is that the work she has done with her children will eventually have an impact on the whole school. A deaf child signed to her partner that she felt there should be more children taught to sign in the school so more people could understand her and communicate with her. Before talking partners her voice would not have been heard. In this whole school each child has poor communication skills and sensory problems and they rely on the staff to help them communicate – a lot happens second hand. They are now putting measures in place to have more children learning to sign.

Secondary

Impact: talking partners has built students’ confidence and helped them develop a greater range of vocabulary. It helps develop communication skills because you need to talk with students you would not have chosen. Random partners were time consuming to set up (issues about only seeing classes once or twice a week). Some children refused to talk to their partner and turned their backs. Teachers have found other pairings have worked better. A discussion followed about the need to confront children’s prejudices and insist on the pairings as part of their life training. Having a whole school approach is vital.

(See Powys secondary reports of the huge success of random pairings where teachers insisted and students had to learn tolerance etc.)

5. Questioning strategies (range of answers, statements, right and wrong, opposing standpoint, starting from the answer)

Year 2

Found this to be the hardest but when actually planned in it was easier to deal with.

Range of answers:

Encouraged more discussion among the children.

Starting from the answer :

Works well in maths.

Right and wrong:

Gives the less confident children something to say.

Opposing standpoint:

Produces a lot of discussion and uproar!

Years 5/6 A

Links with how well your TPs are working. Made teachers more conscious of how to phrase questions and let children fill in the gaps. We need to get rid of recall questions.

Range of answers:

Used mainly in numeracy – slows down the pace unless pitched at the right level. Statements:

Useful in SAT prep. E.g. Josh thinks the answer is 12 – is he right? Why?

Opposing standpoint:

Widens opportunities for thinking

Years 5/6 B

Better quality answers through framing the question. The strategies keep all children engaged.

Range of answers:

Works well in maths. Particularly successful because it is easy to use and there is plenty of scope for discussion. Use test base software in Y6 to prepare for SATS. Did a mental maths lesson giving answers then they had to discuss the strategies.

Secondary/special

Difficult to open-up questions in a school where so few of the students can actually speak. Plenty of opportunities for recall, sign and symbols…have to rely heavily on questions where the students make choices. Planned-in questions when thinking of units/lessons and linked them to objectives and success criteria.

Opposing standpoint:

A good strategy for citizenship lessons where you can play devil’s advocate.…

Secondary

Students need secure vocabulary in order to respond to open ended questions. We need to approach closed question in a different way. Framing the questions yields better quality answers. More can answer – discussion promoted across the classroom.

Range of answers:

Particularly useful in maths. Science concept cartoons in a safe way of discussing answers.

Opposing standpoint:

Worked well in PSHE with moral dilemmas.

.