2013 Age 7-9: Y3/4 (2/3 Grade US) Feedback from Day 2

Kettle Moraine School District, Wisconsin

In a unit of work on biographies, students were told the learning objectives before the unit and they had to come up with an additional target.

Teachers found it difficult to understand how to separate the objective from the context.

In a non-fiction unit children were first immersed in non-fiction books.  The learning objectives were typed up and students chose how to cover them.  The skills were taught but the students then chose how to apply those skills choosing their own topics.

One teacher had modelled how to be successful in the afternoon and created criteria for that.

Criteria had been generated by asking what does it look like, sound like, and feel like.

What makes good quality had been modelled by some teachers.

Tunbridge Wells, Kent

Children were beginning to generate their own success criteria.  They are more engaged, having more discussion, are clearer about the task and misconceptions are more easily addressed.

Grids had been used for marking, engaging with the success criteria.  Having success criteria for ends of stories had led to remarkable improvement in one class. Children were very aware that the teacher was marking against the success criteria.

Where there was a whole school approach it helped continuity throughout the school.

Giving a bad example of something helped children to generate success criteria.  This strategy builds on a growth mindset, where it’s seen as OK to suggest things to improve.  Children fully understand this and are able to unpick the thinking.

Sticking the success criteria in children’s books enables them to be constantly reflecting throughout their learning.


In the first lesson on bar charts, we looked at an example of a graph and identified the features.  These became our success criteria (e.g. scale, title, labelling the axes etc.)  After marking the graphs, all children had included these features but with some inaccuracies (e.g. scales drawn inaccurately, different width bars).

In the second lesson we looked at an example of a graph similar to the one children had drawn.  We discussed how this met the success criteria but not accurately.  After this recap about accuracy, ALL children produced an accurate graph.

Emma Hancock

Kentucky (math focus team only)

In one school students have a reflection slip to use before they start ‘we are learning to..’.  At the end of the time they reflect on their achievement.

Some teachers have c0-constructed success criteria or step by step rubrics, sometimes as songs.  Children now feel better with ‘I am learning’ and don’t feel they should already know it at the beginning of the lesson.

One teacher uses verbal success criteria, telling them what to do then having them repeat it back.  They then successfully follow the steps.

Success criteria song for rounding:

Find your place, underline it
Look to the right, circle it.
4 or less, give it a rest
5 or more raise the score.
Everything to the right becomes a zero
Everything to the left stays the same.

Kentucky (all subjects)

Success criteria had been used for complex sentences and adding and subtracting on a number line, resulting in students knowing exactly what is expected.

With open skills, with a choice of criteria, students chose what they thought they could be more successful with and there was less reteaching.

Co-constructing success criteria by comparing excellent with not so good led to students being able to generate ideas more easily.

Kettle Moraine School District, Wisconsin, USA

Patricia Deklotz | deklotsp@kmsd.edu

Kentucky, USA

Kim Zeidler | kim.zeidler@uky.edu

Tunbridge Wells, Kent, UK

Mel Shackleton | headteacher@st-james-infant.kent.sch.uk