Curriculum, teaching and support

Guidance, ideas and examples to support schools in developing their curriculum, pedagogy, enrichment and support for more able learners, within a whole-school context of cognitively challenging learning for all. Includes ideas to support curriculum development, and practical examples, resources and ideas to try in the classroom. Popular topics include: curriculum development, enrichment, independent learning, questioning, oracy, resilience, aspirations, assessment, feedback, metacognition, and critical thinking.

Top tags: pedagogy questioning enrichment research oracy independent learning curriculum free resources KS3 aspirations cognitive challenge KS4 assessment language literacy feedback resilience critical thinking maths metacognition collaboration confidence English creativity wellbeing lockdown vocabulary access mindset CPD

Using Hodder’s Review magazines: 15 ideas

Posted By NACE team, 10 February 2022

Hodder Education’s Review magazines provide subject-specific expertise aimed at GCSE and A-level students, featuring the latest research, thought-provoking articles, exam-style questions and discussion points to deepen learners’ subject knowledge and develop independent learning skills.

Earlier this academic year, we partnered with Hodder on a live webinar for NACE members, followed by an opportunity to undertake a free trial subscription to the Review magazines, and then reconvening for an online focus group to share experiences, ideas and feedback.

Below are 15 ways NACE members suggested this resource could be used:

Wider reading – encouraging learners to read more widely in their subjects, developing deeper and broader subject knowledge
Flipped learning – tasking students with reading an article (or articles) on a topic ahead of a lesson, so they are prepared to discuss during class time (members noted that this approach benefits from practising reading comprehension during lesson time first)
Developing cultural capital – exposure to content, contexts, vocabulary, and text formats which learners might not otherwise encounter
Independent research and project work – to support independent research and projects such as EPQs, for example by using the digital archives to search on a particular theme
Developing literacy and vocabulary – exposure to subject-specific and advanced vocabulary; this was highlighted by some schools as a particular concern post-pandemic
Shared text during lessons – used to support lessons on a particular topic, and/or to develop comprehension skills
Developing exam skills – using the magazines’ links to specific exam skills/modules, and practice exam questions at the end of articles
Examples of academic/exam skills in practice – providing examples of how a text or topic could be approached and analysed, and ways of structuring an essay/response
Library resource – signposted to students and teachers by school librarian to ensure a diverse, challenging reading menu is available to all
Linking learning to real-world contexts – providing examples of how curriculum content is being applied in current contexts around the world, helping to bring learning to life
Broadening career horizons – examples of different careers in each subject area, giving learners exposure to a range of potential future pathways
Extracurricular provision – used as a resource to support subject-specific clubs, or general research/debate clubs
Developing critical thinking and oracy skills – to support strategies such as the Harkness method, as part of a wider focus on developing critical thinking and oracy skills
Exposure to academic research – preparing students for further education and career opportunities
Fresh perspectives on curriculum content – new angles and insights on well-established modules and topics – for teachers, as well as students!

Find out more:

Discount offer for NACE members

NACE members can benefit from a 25% discount on Hodder's digital and print resources, including the Review magazines (excluding student £15 subscriptions). To access this, and our full range of member offers, log in and visit our member offers page.

Does your school use the Review magazines or a similar resource? To share your experience and ideas, contact communications@nace.co.uk

Tags: aspirations enrichment independent learning KS4 KS5 literacy

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

Lessons from Beijing: a personal reflection on teaching more able learners in China via Zoom

Posted By Keith Watson FCCT, 08 November 2021

The opportunities that present themselves to teachers these days are truly amazing. Last summer the chance to write and deliver a Zoom-based programme of learning to primary-aged pupils in Beijing was presented to me. Yes, Beijing. How could I refuse the opportunity to apply an English teaching style to another culture? Through a partnership between NACE and a private educational provider I embarked upon a programme of 16 two-hour sessions over a period of eight weeks via Zoom, using Google Classroom for resources and homework. The lessons were taught from 7-9pm 9pm Beijing time. Would my teaching keep the nine-year olds awake on a Sunday night?

The context

The education company I worked with offers what it terms ‘gifted and talented programmes’ to all ages and across the curriculum. The pupils mainly attended international schools and had their school lessons taught in English. The programmes have previously been delivered in person during the summer holidays by overseas teachers, primarily from the US. A move to Zoom-based learning after the pandemic has proved successful and now lessons are offered throughout the year in the evening and at the weekend with parents paying highly for the courses. The company organised the programme very well with training and support for the teacher at every stage. It is an impressive operation.

I taught an English literature unit based upon a comparative novel study using ‘The Iron Man’ and ‘The Giant’s Necklace’ – texts familiar to many Key Stage 2 teachers. The pupils worked hard in lessons, listened well and thought deeply. They retained knowledge well and I used retrieval practice at the start of most lessons. They completed these tasks eagerly. They were a pleasure to teach. Off-task behaviour was rare, pupils laughed when jokes were made – though of course humour was lost in translation at times (or maybe my jokes were not funny).

What worked?

Central to the learning was the pupils reading aloud. They loved this. It gave me the chance to clarify meaning, check vocabulary and asks questions at depth. All pupils read, some with impressive fluency given it was their second language. Parents commented they were not used to working this way. I think in other courses they often read for homework and then in lessons answered questions at length and then wrote essays. Despite being young there is an emphasis on academic writing. One pupil referred to his story as an essay, revealing that writing a story was unusual for his studies. Writing the story was a highlight for the pupils, one I suspect they are not used to. The reading also allowed for targeted questions, which the parents seemed to like, having not seen the technique used before. Yes, parents often sat next to their child, out of my eyesight, to help if needed. Hearing them whisper what to say on occasion was a new one for me.

To get an idea of the dedication of the pupils and support of the parents, it is worth mentioning that one pupil joined the lesson while travelling home on a train from her holiday. With her mum sat next to her, she joined in the lesson as best she could and all with a smile on her face. Another pupil said her father had asked her how she was reviewing the learning from the previous lesson each week. Learning is valued. Technical difficulties were rare but when they arose the pupils were proactive in overcoming difficulties, moving rooms and logging on with another device. Resilience and self-regulation was noticeably high. The last lesson included a five-minute presentation from each pupil on what they had learned from the unit. Pupils prepared well, the standard was high and pupils showed depth of understanding of the themes covered.

Addressing the language gap

As a teacher the main challenge to emerge was the gap between the pupils’ understanding of complex literary concepts and the use of basic English. The units are aimed at what is termed ‘gifted and talented’ yet at times I needed to cover areas such as verb tenses at a basic level. In English assessment terms the students were at times working at Year 6 greater depth for reading and some aspects of their writing, but were only ‘working towards’ in other areas.

I have decades of experience teaching EAL learners, the majority of whom attained at or above national expectation at the end of Key Stage 2 despite early language challenges. Here the gap was even more pronounced. Should I focus on the higher-order thinking and ignore what was essentially a language issue? I decided not to do that since the students need to develop all aspects of their English to better express their ideas, including writing. I did mini-grammar lessons in context, worked primarily on verb tenses in their writing and when speaking, and prioritised Tier 2 vocabulary since Tier 3 specialist vocabulary was often strong. They knew what onomatopoeia was, but not what a plough was, let alone cultural references like a pasty. Why would they?

Motivations and barriers

At the start of each lesson, I welcomed each pupil personally and asked them, ‘What have you been doing today?’ Almost every answer referred to learning or classes. They had either completed other online lessons, swimming lessons, fencing lessons, piano practice (often two hours plus) or other planned activities. Rarely did a pupil say something like ‘I rode my bike’. Having a growth mindset was evident and the students understood this and displayed admirable resilience. Metacognition and self-regulation were also evident in learning.

However, one area where the pupil did struggle was in self-assessment. The US system is based on awarding marks and grades regularly, including for homework. I chose not to do this, thinking grades for homework would be somewhat arbitrarily awarded unless something like a 10-question model was used weekly. The research on feedback without grades suggests that it leads to greater pupil progress and this was my focus. It would be interesting to explore with the students whether my lack of grade awarding lowered their motivation because they were used to extrinsic rather than intrinsic motivation. Does this contradict my assertion that growth mindset was strong?

Another issue emerged linked to this – that of perfectionism. One pupil was keen to show her knowledge in lessons but was the only pupil who rarely submitted homework. A large part of the programme was to write a story based on ‘The Iron Man’, which this student did not seem to engage with. At the parents’ meeting the mother asked if she could write for her child if it was dictated, a suggestion I rejected saying the pupil needed to write so that I could provide feedback to improve. It became clear the child did not want to submit her work because it was ‘not as good as their reading’. The child had told me in the first lesson that they had been accelerated by a year at school. I fear problems are being stored up that my gentle challenges have only now begun to confront and that may take a long time to resolve. This was not the case for the other pupils, but the idea of pressure to work hard and succeed was always evident. I realise the word ‘pressure’ here is mine and may not be used by others in the same context, including the parents.

Parental support

So, what of parental engagement? The first session began with getting-to-know-each-other activities and a discussion on reading. After 20 minutes the TA messaged me to say the parent of one pupil felt the lesson was ‘too easy’. Nothing like live feedback! I messaged back that the aim at that point was to relax the children and build a teaching relationship. A few weeks later the same parent asked to speak to me at the end of the lesson. I was prepared for a challenge that did not materialise. She said her child liked the lessons and she loved the way I asked personalised questions to extend her child. She was not used to her being taught this way. I used a mixture of cold-calling, named lolly-sticks in a pot and targeted questions, which seemed novel and the children loved.

Parent meetings were held half-way through the unit and feedback about things like the questioning wasvery positive. The extremely upbeat response was surprising since the teaching seemed a little ‘flat’ to me given the limitations of Zoom but that is not how it was received. The pupils seemed to enjoy the variety of pace, the high level of personal attention, the range of tasks, the chunking of the learning and the sense of fun I tried to create. Parents asked when I was delivering a new course and wanted to know when I was teaching again.

Final reflections

So, what did I learn? Children are children the world over, which we all know deep down. But these children apply themselves totally to their work. They expect to work hard and enjoy ‘knowing’ things. Their days are filled with activity and learning. Zoom can work well but still the much-prized verbal feedback is not the same from 5,000 miles away.

And finally, as a teacher I have learned over the years to be professional and to keep teaching whatever happens. When a pupil said they didn’t finish their homework because they were traveling back home, I enquired where they had been. ‘Wuhan’ they replied. Without missing a beat, I further asked, ‘So what do you think about the plot in chapter two then?’

Would you be interested in sharing your experiences of teaching remotely and/or across cultures? Is this an area you’d like to explore or develop? Contact communications@nace.co.uk to share your experience or cpd@nace.co.uk to express your interest in being part of future projects like this.

Tags: feedback language literature lockdown mindset motivation parents and carers pedagogy perfectionism questioning remote learning vocabulary

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

The importance of language in cognitively challenging learning

Posted By Hilary Lowe, 08 November 2021

NACE Research and Development Director Hilary Lowe explores the relationship between language and learning, and the development of language-rich learning environments as a key factor in cognitively challenging learning experiences.

“We use language to define our world, while at the same time the social world in which we live defines our language. The structure of language and the variation we find within it depend both on the social world as well as the ways in which we create an identity for ourselves and the ways in which we build relations with others. Understanding how language both constrains our thoughts and actions and how we use language to overcome those constraints are important lessons for all educators.” (Silver & Lewin, 2013)

We are sometimes so busy talking in classrooms that we forget about the centrality of language for learning. It is for this reason that this blog post focuses on what is arguably a neglected area in the training of teachers: an understanding of the primacy of language in the learning process, of the link between language and higher-level cognition and high achievement, and the critical role of teachers in developing high-level language skills at all stages of schooling.

The development of language and literacy has long been a tenet of the National Curriculum as well as a significant area of research. Research such as that from Oxford Children’s Language (Oxford, 2018; 2020) has continued to emphasise the importance of linguistic wealth, and the link between paucity of language and academic failure and diminished life chances.

The notion of ‘oracy’ has been less visible in policy developments but has received more recent attention through, for example, the survey undertaken by the Centre for Education and Youth and Oxford University (2021) and the Oracy APPG Speak for Change Inquiry report (April, 2021). The APPG inquiry found that the development of spoken language skills requires purposeful and intentional teaching and learning throughout children’s schooling. It also found that there is a concerning variation in the time and attention afforded to oracy across schools, meaning that for many children the opportunity to develop these skills is left to chance. The inquiry concluded that there is an indisputable case for oracy as an integral aspect of education. The conclusions also emphasised the primordial place of oracy for young people and the critical role of employers, teachers and Ofsted in trying to ensure that these skills are developed to a high level.

In the first phase of NACE’s research initiative Making Space for Able Learners, which focuses on cognitive challenging learning, we were delighted to find examples of effective practices in language development and use, which led us to a renewed interest in the significance of language and discourse in high achievement. The schools in the project which demonstrated consistently excellent practice and high achievement for their most able learners had a systematic and systemic approach to the development and use of high-level language skills alongside wider literacy and oracy development (see below for examples).

Some background: language, thinking and learning

The interaction between thought and language has long been the subject of research and academic debate. The thesis that natural language is involved in human thinking is universally well supported, although research into language and cognition often makes reference to ‘strong and weak theories’ of this thesis. Research suggests that higher-level language processes hold a pivotal role in higher-order executive and cognitive activities such as inference and comprehension, and indeed wider expressive communication skills.

Vygotsky (1978) writes that "[…] children solve practical tasks with the help of their speech, as well as their eyes and hands" (p. 26). In Vygotsky's view, speech is an extension of intelligence and thought, a way to interact with one's environment beyond physical limitations: “[…] the most significant moment in the course of intellectual development, which gives birth to the purely human forms of practical and abstract intelligence, occurs when speech and practical activity, two previously completely independent lines of development, converge.” (p. 24).

This higher level of development enables children to transcend the immediate, to test abstract actions before they are employed. This permits them to consider the consequences of actions before performing them. But most of all, language serves as a means of social interaction between people, allowing "the basis of a new and superior form of activity in children, distinguishing them from animals" (p. 28f). Vygotsky wrote, "human learning presupposes a specific social nature and a process by which children grow into the intellectual life of those around them" (p. 88). Language acts both as a vehicle for educational development and as an indispensable tool for understanding and knowledge acquisition.

In the classroom, therefore, we need to attend to the development of higher-level language processes as explicitly as we do to substantive subject skills and knowledge.

The functions of language in education

The various functions of language most pertinent in the classroom include:

Expression: ability to formulate ideas orally and in writing in a meaningful and grammatically correct manner.
Comprehension: ability to understand the meaning of words and ideas.
Vocabulary: lexical knowledge.
Naming: ability to name objects, people or events.
Fluency: ability to produce fast and effective linguistic content.
Discrimination: ability to recognize, distinguish and interpret language-related content.
Repetition: ability to produce the same sounds one hears.
Writing: ability to transform ideas into symbols, characters and images.
Reading: ability to interpret symbols, characters and images and transform them into speech.

(Lecours, 1998).

All of these functions are key components in the teaching and learning process. Teachers and students use spoken and written language to communicate with each other formally and informally. Students use language to comprehend, to question and interrogate, to present tasks and learning acquired – to display knowledge and skills. Teachers use language to explain, illustrate and model, to assess and evaluate learning. Both use language to develop relationships, knowledge of others and of self. But language is not just a medium for communication – it is intricately bound up with the nature of knowledge and thought itself.

What does this mean for cognitively challenging learning?

For the development of high levels of cognition and to achieve highly, pupils need to develop the language associated with higher-order thinking skills in all areas of the curriculum, such as hypothesising, evaluating, inferring, generalising, predicting or classifying (Gibbons, 1991).

In an educational context it is through iterations of linguistic interactions between teacher and student – and peer to peer – that the process of advancing in learning and knowledge occurs. As Hodge (1993) notes, with limited time in the classroom, teachers often spend much of the available time conveying information rather than ensuring comprehension. This reduces the opportunities for a range of linguistic interactions and for learners to acquire and practise the higher-level language skills associated with high achievement. Planning and organising teaching and learning therefore needs to allow for an increase in opportunities for rich language environments and interactions alongside a cognitively challenging curriculum.

In the NACE research project school visits, we witnessed numerous incidences of highly effective and consistent practices in classroom discourse which clearly contributed to the achievement of highly able learners. These included:

Teachers modelling advanced language and skilled explanation and questioning;
Pupils being taught the language of skills such as reasoning, synthesis, evaluation;
Frequent use of ‘dialogic’ frameworks and enquiry-based learning;
The use of disciplinary discourse and higher tiers of language;
Instructional models which include and prioritise the above.

Examples of effective, language-rich learning environments from the project include:

Portswood Primary School: focus on the early development of vocabulary, language and talk. Teachers use sophisticated language to communicate expectations and learning.
Alfreton Nursery School: teaching develops skills of concentration, as pupils focus on a central stimulus/object and formulate “big questions”. There is also an explicit focus on team working with reference to reasons “why we can agree to disagree” and the importance of listening. The teacher follows these pupil-led ideas in later sessions.
Glyncoed Primary School: a challenging curriculum is achieved through planning and delivery of problem solving-based activities, extended and cognitively demanding tasks, and pupil choice. Teacher talk and high-level and qualitatively differentiated questioning, rich dialogue and cognitive talk is in evidence. Excellent modelling and explanations are also pervasive.
Greenbank High School: pupils are stimulated by differentiated questions prompting them to test hypotheses, make predictions and transfer their knowledge to new contexts. As a result, pupils are working at a strong, sustained pace.

You can read more about the project and order copies of the report here.

Improving the quality and nature of linguistic interaction and discourse within the classroom can better equip learners to engage in cognitive challenge. Learners thus equipped can also move more effectively from guided practice to independence and self-regulation. Teachers working with more able pupils must have a clear pedagogical strategy in mind, with discourse and well-planned questioning an integral part of that strategy. By using a highly interactive pedagogical model, which is language-dependent, teachers get rapid feedback about how well knowledge schemas are forming and how fluent pupils have become in retrieving and using what they have learnt. Working with the most able learners, the quality of questioning and questioning routines must provide the teacher with diagnostic information and the pupils with increased challenge.

Creating language-rich schools and classrooms: implications for teacher development

The development of language is too important to be left to be ‘caught’ alongside the rest of the taught curriculum. We need to give it explicit attention across the curriculum, alongside subject knowledge and skills. To do this expertly teachers should have access to professional development opportunities which give them insights into substantive areas of language acquisition and development – including what that means at different ages and stages and for learners of different abilities and language experience.

NACE’s future CPD and resources will therefore focus on issues in and strategies for language development for high achievement, including:

Case studies of NACE evidence schools with excellent practice in language for high achievement;
The language needs and characteristics of different learners, including the most able;
Creating language-rich school environments;
Approaches to teaching and learning for language development;
EAL learners;
Developing a whole-school language policy.

Schools accredited with the NACE Challenge Award are invited to join our free termly Challenge Award Schools Network Group events (online) to share effective practice in this and other areas. View upcoming events here, or contact communications@nace.co.uk to learn more about NACE’s work in this field and/or to share your school’s experience.

References

Oracy All-Party Parliamentary Group, Speak for Change, oracy.inparliament.uk, 2021
Centre for Education and Youth with Oxford University Press, Oracy after the Pandemic, cfey.org, 2021
Gibbons, P., Learning to Learn in a Second Language, Primary English Teaching Association, 1991
Hillman, D. C. A., https://www.quahog.org/thesis/role.html, 1997
Hodge, B., Teaching as Communication, Routledge, 1993
Hodge, G. I. V. and Kress, G. R., Language as Ideology, Routledge, 1999
Lecours, A. R. et al, Literacy and The Brain in The Alphabet and The Brain, Springer-Verlag, 1988
Lowe, H. and McCarthy, A., Making Space for Able Learners, NACE, 2020
Oxford Language Report, Why Closing the Language Gap Matters, OUP, 2018
Oxford Language Report, Bridging the Word Gap at Transition, OUP, 2020
Silver, R. E. and Lewin, S. M., Language in Education: Social Implications, Bloomsbury, 2013
Vygotsky, L. S., Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, London: Harvard University Press, 1978

Tags: cognitive challenge CPD language oracy research vocabulary

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

Planning effective assessment to support cognitively challenging learning

Posted By Ann McCarthy, 06 October 2021

NACE Research & Development Director Dr Ann McCarthy shares key principles for effective assessment planning and practice, within cognitively challenging learning environments.

Following two academic years of uncertainty and alternative arrangements for teaching and assessment, the conversation regarding testing and assessment has become increasingly important. Upon return to the routines of day-to-day classroom teaching, schools have had to find ways to assess knowledge, progress and understanding achieved through distance learning or redesigned classroom practices. For older pupils there has been a need to provide evidence to examination boards to secure grades and guarantee appropriate progression routes. This inherent need to provide checks and balances before pupils’ achievement is recognised can become a distraction from the art of teaching. In fact, Rimfield et al (2019) found a very high agreement between teacher assessments and exam grades in English, maths, and science.

Could we examine less often and use classroom-based assessment more often?
Should we rethink testing and assessment and their position in the learning process?

Testing vs assessment

The terms test and assessment are often used interchangeably, but in the context of education we need to recognise the difference. A test is a product which is not open to interpretation; it uses learning objectives and measures success achieved against these. Teachers use tests to measure what someone knows or has learned. These may be high-stakes or low-stakes events. High-stakes tests may lead to a qualification, grading or grouping, whereas low-stakes tests can support cognition and learning. Testing takes time away from the process of learning and as such testing should be used sparingly, when necessary and when it contributes significantly to the next steps in teaching or learning.

Assessment, by contrast, is a systematic procedure which draws on a range of activities or evidence sources which can then be interpreted. Regardless of the position teachers hold regarding the use of testing and examinations, meaningful assessment remains an essential part of teaching and learning. Assessment sits within curriculum and pedagogy, beginning with diagnostic assessment to plan learning which best reflects the needs of the learner. A range of formative assessment activities enable the teacher and pupils to understand progress, improve learning and adapt the learning to reflect current needs. Endpoint activities can be used as summative assessments to appreciate the degree to which knowledge has been acquired, alongside varied and complex ways in which that knowledge can be used.

Assessment might be viewed in three different ways: assessment of learning; assessment for learning; and assessment as learning. The choice of assessment practice will then impact on its use and purpose. Regardless of the process chosen and the procedures used, the teacher must remember that the value of the assessment is in the impact it has on pedagogy and practice and the resulting success for the pupils, rather than as an evidence base for the organisation.

NACE research has shown that cognitively challenging experiences – approaches to curriculum and pedagogy that optimise the engagement, learning and achievement of very able young people – will have a significant and positive impact on learning and development. But how can we see this working, and what role does assessment play? When planning for cognitively challenging learning, assessment planning should reflect the priorities for all other aspects of learning.

Areas through which cognitive challenge is made visible in the classroom

A strategic approach to assessment which supports cognitively challenging learning environments

When considering the place of assessment in education, teachers must be clear about:

What they are trying to assess;
How they plan to assess;
Who the assessment is for;
What evidence will become available;
How the evidence can be interpreted;
How the information can then be used by the teacher and the pupil;
The impact the information has on the planned teaching and learning;
The contribution assessment makes to cognition, learning and development.

Effective assessment is integral to the provision of cognitively challenging learning experiences. With careful and intentional planning, we can assess cognitive challenge and its impact, not only for the more able pupils, but for all pupils. Assessments are used to measure the starting point, the learning progression, and the impact of provision. When working with more able pupils, in cognitively challenging learning environments, the aim is to extend assessment practices to include assessment of higher-order, complex and abstract thinking.

When used well, assessment provides the teacher with a detailed understanding of the pupils’ starting points, what they know, what they need to know and what they have the potential to do with their learning. The teacher can then plan an engaging and exciting learning journey which provides more able pupils with the cognitive challenge they need, without creating cognitive overload.

The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) has joined with others to recognise the importance of cognitive science to inform interventions and classroom practice. Spaced learning, interleaving, retrieval practice, strategies to manage cognitive load and dual coding all support cognitive development – but are dependent on effective assessment practices which guide the teaching and learning. The best assessment methods are those that integrate fully within curriculum teaching and learning.

Assessment and classroom management

It is important to place the learner at the centre of any curriculum plan, classroom organisation and pedagogical practice. Initially the teacher must understand the pupils’ strengths and weaknesses, together with the skills and knowledge they possess, before engaging in new learning. This understanding facilitates curriculum planning and classroom management, which have been recognised as essential elements of cognitively challenging learning. Often, learning time is lost through additional testing and data collection, but when working in cognitively challenging environments, planned learning should be structured to include assessment points within the learning rather than devising separate assessment exercises.

When assessing cognitively challenging learning, pupils need opportunities to demonstrate their abilities using analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. They must also show how they use their existing knowledge in new, creative, or complex ways, so questions might include opportunities to distinguish between fact and opinion, to compare, or describe differences. The problems may have multiple solutions or alternative methodologies. Alternatively, pupils may have to extend learning by combining information shared with the class and then adding new perspectives to develop ideas.

Assessing cognitively challenging learning will also include measures of pupils’ abilities to think strategically and extend their thinking. Strategic thinking requires pupils to reason, plan, and sequence as they make decisions about the steps needed to solve problems, and assessment should measure this ability to make decisions, explain solutions, justify their methods, and obtain meaningful answers. Assessments which demonstrate extended thinking will include investigations, research, problem solving, and applications to the real world. Pupils’ abilities to extend their thinking can be observed through problems with multiple conditions, a range of sources, or those drawn from a variety of learning areas. These problems will take pupils beyond classroom routines and previously observed problems. Assessment at this level does not depend on a separate assessment task, but teaching and learning can be reviewed and evaluated within the learning process itself.

Assessment in language-rich learning environments

Language-rich learning environments support cognitive challenge, high-order thinking and deep learning for more able pupils. It is therefore inevitable that language, questioning and dialogic discourse are key elements of formative assessment. They allow the teacher to assess learning in the moment and adjust the course of learning to adapt to the needs of the pupils.

Assessment in the moment, utilising effective questions and dialogic discourse, does not happen by accident, but is planned into the learning. When planning a lesson, the big ideas and essential questions which will expose, extend and deepen the learning are central to the planning and assessment. When posing the planned questions or creating opportunities for discourse, pupils need time to formulate their ideas and think before discussing the responses and extending learning with their own questions and ideas.

Within the language-rich classroom where an understanding of assessment is shared with pupils, the ownership of learning can be passed to them. The teacher will introduce the theory, necessary linguistic skills, and technical language, using these to model good questions and questioning techniques. More able pupils will develop their own oracy, language and questioning techniques, and then develop them together. Through regular practice and good classroom routines, pupils gain the confidence and skills to ask ‘big questions’ themselves and engage in dialogue. At this point, discussion and questioning becomes an effective mode of ongoing assessment. As pupils explain their thinking, misconceptions or gaps in knowledge will be exposed, allowing the teacher to assess, support learning, and encourage deeper thinking.

Priorities for effective assessment

Within the classroom, the teacher needs to use assessment:

To understand what the pupils know already;
To promote and sustain cognitive challenge and progression:
To measure the impact of both the teaching and the learning;
To adapt practice in a timely manner;
To support, extend and enhance learning;
To examine how effectively the knowledge is used in new, varied and complex contexts.

Assessment has the potential to support pupils as learners as they will:

Understand the nature and purpose of activities so that they can benefit from them;
Appreciate the demands of learning;
Engage in the learning journey;
Develop their own cognitive skills and learning attributes;
Take action to improve themselves;
Take ownership of learning;
Become increasingly autonomous and self-regulating.

Assessment is not a separate part of teaching and learning, but should be planned within the teaching. Assessment should not distract pupils from learning, and learning should not be framed to meet assessment criteria. Assessment is not about data gathering and organisational checks, but it should lead to enriched learning and refined practice with teachers and pupils working together to achieve an exciting learning environment.

What next?

This year, NACE is focusing on exploring effective assessment practices within Challenge Award-accredited schools. We hope that many schools will participate in this project, to provide evidence and share examples of effective assessment: what works, how, and why? By sharing our expertise with others we can move the conversation about assessment forwards and provide exciting and engaging learning for our pupils. To find out more or to express your school’s interest in contributing to this initiative, please contact communications@nace.co.uk

References

Education Endowment Foundation (2021), Cognitive science approaches in the classroom (a review of the evidence)
Rimfield. K, et.al. (2019), Teacher assessment during compulsory education are as reliable, stable, and heritable as standardized test scores. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 60(12) (1278-1288)

Share |

Permalink | Comments (2)

Inspiring a love of learning: 3 curriculum enrichment approaches to try in your school

Posted By Kyriacos Papasavva, 26 August 2021

Kyriacos Papasavva, Head of Religious Studies at St Mary’s and St John’s (SMSJ) CE School, shares three ways in which the school seeks to nurture a love of learning – for students and staff alike.

Education becomes alive when educators and students love what they do. This is, I think, the whole point of teaching: to inspire a love of learning among those we teach. Love, however, is not something that can be forced. Instead, it is ‘caught’.

For such a desire to develop in our pupils, there must be a real freedom in the learning journey. From the teacher’s perspective, this can be a scary prospect, but we must remember that a teacher is a guide only; you cannot force children to learn, but it is genuinely possible to inspire among pupils a love of learning. To enable this, we should ask ourselves: to what extent do we as teaching practitioners allow the lesson to go beyond the bulwark we impose upon any limited, pre-judged ‘acceptable range’? How do we allow students to explore the syllabus in a way that is free and meaningful to the individual? If we can find a way to do this, then learning really becomes magical.

While there is the usual stretch and challenge, meta-questions, challenge reading, and more, the main thrust of our more able provision in the religious studies (RS) department at SMSJ is one which encourages independent research and exploration. Here are several of the more unique ways that we have encouraged and challenged our more able students in RS and across the school, with the aim of developing transferable skills across the curriculum and inspiring a love of learning amongst both students and staff.

1. Papasavitch (our very own made-up language)

We had used activities based on Jangli and Yelrib, made-up languages used at Eton College, to stretch our pupils and give them exciting and unique learning opportunities. These activities were so well received by our pupils; they wanted more. So we developed ‘Papasavitch’, our very own made-up language.

This is partly what I was referring to earlier: if you find something students enjoy doing, give them a space to explore that love; actively create it. To see if your pupils can crack the language, or have a go yourself, try out this sample Papasavitch activity sheet.

2. The RS SMSJ Essay Writing Competition (open to all schools)

In 2018, SMSJ reached out to a number of academics at various universities to lay the foundations of what has become a national competition. We would like to thank Professor R. Price, Dr E. Burns, Dr G. Simmonds, Dr H. Costigane, Dr S. Ryan and Dr S. Law for their support.

Biannually, we invite students from around the UK (and beyond) to enter the competition, which challenges them to write an essay of up to 1,000 words on any area within RS, to be judged by prestigious academics within the field of philosophy, theology and ethics. While we make this compulsory for our RS A-level pupils, we receive copious entries from students in Years 7-11 at SMSJ, and beyond, owing to the range of possible topics and broad interest from students. Hundreds of students have entered to date, including those from top independent and grammar schools around the UK. (Note: submissions should be in English, and only the top five from each school should be submitted.)

You can learn more about the competition – including past and future judges, essay themes, examples of past entries, and details of how to enter – on the SMSJ website.

3. Collaboration and exploration – across and beyond the school

The role of a Head of Department (HoD), as I see it, is to actively seek opportunities for collaboration and exploration – within the school family and beyond into the wider subject community, as well as among the members of the department. At SMSJ, this ethos is shared by HoDs and other staff alike and expressed in a number of ways.

Regular HoD meetings to discuss and seek opportunities for implementing cross-curricular links are a must, and have proven fruitful in identifying and utilising overlap in the curriculum. Alongside this, we run a Teacher Swaps programme where teachers can study each other’s subjects in a tutorial fashion, naturally creating an awareness and understanding of other subjects.

The Humanities Faculty offers a ‘Read Watch Do’ supplementary learning programme for each year group, which runs alongside regular home learning tasks. The former also supports other departments through improved literacy, building cultural capital and exploration via the independent learning tasks.

Looking beyond the school, our partnerships with the K+ and Oxford Horizons programmes help our sixth-formers prepare for university, while mentoring with Career Ready and the Civil Service supports our students to gain new skills from external providers. Our recent launch of The Spotlight, a newspaper run by students at SMSJ, has heralded a collaboration with a BBC Press Team. Again, this shows other opportunities for cross-curricular overlap, as students are directed to report on different departments’ extracurricular enrichment activities. The possibilities are endless, and limited only by our imagination.

To learn more about any of the initiatives mentioned in this blog post, and/or to share what’s working in your own department/school, please contact communications@nace.co.uk.

Tags: aspirations CEIAG collaboration creativity enrichment free resources independent learning KS3 KS4 motivation philosophy writing

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

5 benefits of public speaking competitions: developing oracy skills for all

Posted By Gavin Illsley, 30 June 2021

Gavin Illsley, Head of Programmes, English-Speaking Union

Spelling or poetry, complicated maths, explosive chemistry, or predicting the Bank of England’s interest rates. In so many aspects of school life, competitions can be part of a vibrant culture of learning. The English-Speaking Union (ESU) believes that oracy should be at the heart of every classroom, and oracy competitions can help bring it to the heart of every school. Read on to find out more about the ESU’s approach to competitions, and how to register your school for participation in future contests.

1. Competitions provide focus for year-wide activities

While the end result may be a team of three or five students going to a competition, the process is an opportunity to bring oracy to much larger groups. Many of our participating schools use competition season as a time to get everyone involved in oracy activities – the entire school could enter the first round of our Performing Shakespeare competition, while teachers often use our ESU-Churchill Public Speaking Competition as a chance to get everyone giving speeches in class. You can even run your own internal qualifier events.

The successful teams and individuals can be role models and exemplars – there’s no better assembly highlight than a winning team showing off their newly polished oracy skills!

2. Competitions give different ways of engaging with skills

Oracy activities can be intimidating for some students, but very often taking a slightly different approach can make a student feel more comfortable and confident. Wrapping presentation and speech within part of a dramatic performance is helpful for some, while others find their feet in the controlled role of a public speaking chairperson. Finding the right way for an individual to express themselves can unlock achievement in other areas.

3. Competitions provide challenge

All students deserve access to oracy education but, for those who are particularly keen or engaged, classroom opportunities might not be enough. Public speaking competitions give students a place to stretch themselves and take on bigger challenges. Tackling peers at local, regional and even national levels means there’s always more to reach for.

This can also provide a useful outlet for the students, who may otherwise behave in a disruptive way as they try to maximise speaking time in class at others’ expense.

4. Competition can be a motivator

Some people hate running laps of a track, but give them a ball and an opposition and they’ll run all day. Similarly, with oracy, competition can be a great source of motivation.

All steps – preparations, practice, performance – can be given a boost by the chance to compete, progress and win acclaim. As Simon Porter, headteacher at De Aston School in Market Rasen, Lincolnshire, says: “The students really enjoy the competitions. They get to have their voice heard on important topics and it’s been transformative for their confidence and their self-esteem.”

5. Competitions are social and interactive

Public speaking competitions are all about interacting with other students both within a class or year group and from a broad range of other schools, right across the country. Debaters will go head-to-head with opponents, and public speaking teams will host and welcome speakers from other schools as part of the contest.

This benefits students as learners, as they can observe how others approach similar tasks, share ideas, and use their words and actions to motivate and inspire. It also benefits students from a social and emotional development perspective. Engaging outside of the competition itself is a chance (for teachers too!) to meet others with similar passions, share and chat. This is something that teachers often comment on, pointing out that students typically have very little opportunity to talk to other children their age whom they don’t already know. “It’s nice that they are experiencing, very clearly, schools that are from a very different background, seeing the differences, and also knowing that there isn’t as much of a difference as they previously thought,” says Grace Aldridge, teacher, Kensington Aldridge Academy.

Sign up!

Sign up now for the English-Speaking Union’s national competitions: Performing Shakespeare (Y7-9), the ESU-Churchill Public Speaking Competition (Y9-11) and the Schools’ Mace debating competition (Y7-13). All have trained judges and offer extensive feedback opportunities. More details and the registration form can be found here and supporting resources to help train and develop your students can be accessed here.

About the English-Speaking Union

The English-Speaking Union is an educational charity working to ensure young people have the speaking and listening skills and cultural understanding they need to thrive. Our debate, public speaking and cultural exchange programmes help young people to engage with the world, to speak more confidently and to listen to and understand different points of view. These skills improve young people’s attainment, emotional intelligence and social skills, helping them to live their lives to the fullest. To find out more, visit esu.org

Upcoming opportunities:

Webinar: Building your secondary school oracy culture with the ESU - Wednesday 15 September at 4pm
Webinar: Boosting student oracy skills with the ESU’s secondary school competitions - Thursday 23 September at 4pm
ESU secondary school competitions for 2021-22 - register by 1 October

Read more about upcoming ESU opportunities here.

More from the English-Speaking Union:

Blog post: 5 reasons to teach oracy skills in your classroom
Blog post: 5 oracy activities to stretch all learners, in every lesson
Webinar (member login required): Oracy-based challenges to stretch and support more able learners

Tags: confidence enrichment free resources motivation oracy

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

Phiddlywinks: have you tried it yet?

Posted By NRICH, University of Cambridge, 04 June 2021

In March this year, NACE members had the opportunity to preview and trial a new maths game being developed by the team at NRICH – a University of Cambridge initiative providing free online maths resources that promote challenging, enriching learning experiences.

The game in question has now been launched, and in this blog post the NRICH team explain how it works, and how you and your learners can get playing.

Question: What happens when you bring together Tiddlywinks and football?

Answer: You get Phiddlywinks!

In this blog we’ll learn more about Phiddlywinks, including the charismatic mathematician who inspired the game and role of NACE members in bringing it to our screens.

What is Phiddlywinks?

Phiddlywinks is a strategy game for two players. The winner is the first player to get the white counter into the coloured region at the opposite end of the board. Player 1 is aiming for the blue region and Player 2 for the red region.

The game begins with the white counter in the centre circle.

Players take it in turns to either:

Place a black counter on the board or
Move the white counter.

The white counter moves by jumping in a straight line over one or more black counters. A player may be able to make more than one jump when it is their turn.

To get started, consider this screenshot from a game which is underway. Both players have chosen to use their turns to add black counters to the board (you’ll notice that the white counter remains in its starting position). It is Player 1’s turn. Can you see how Player 1 might move the white counter to win the game?

Here’s one possible winning move:

Player 1 clicks on 7E (or 8F) and the white counter moves to 9G
Player 1 clicks on 9F (or 9E) and the white counter moves to 9D
Player 1 clicks on 9C and the white counter moves to 9B
Player 1 clicks on 10B and the white counter will move to 11B, winning the game!

Do take some time exploring the interactivity. To help you learn to play the game, we’ve uploaded more mid-game scenarios here. You can also print off black and white or colour versions of the board.

Who was the inspiration behind Phiddlywinks?

John Horton Conway was a prize-winning mathematician who loved creating new games for all ages. He is best known to many for creating the Game of Life. He also developed a game called Philosopher's Football (also known as Phutball) which challenged players to manoeuvre a ball across a large grid towards their opponent's goal-line. Not surprisingly, the game soon became popular with his university students.

We have taken Phutball as the inspiration for our Phiddlywinks. We piloted the developmental version of the game with NACE members at a specially organised online event attended by both primary and secondary colleagues. The feedback from teachers attending NACE event, and the follow-up response from the classes of NACE members who kindly trialled Phiddlywinks with their classes, enabled our team to prepare the game for its release.

Phiddlywinks is almost identical to Philosopher's Football except that the white ball has become a white counter and the players have become black counters. The rules are the same but Phiddlywinks is played on a much smaller board. The way the counters move reminded us more of Tiddlywinks than football, hence the alternative name.

The NRICH team would like to acknowledge the support of NACE and its members who kindly trialled our initial version of the game, giving us invaluable feedback which informed the development of Phiddlywinks.

What maths games and activities have you and your learners been enjoying this year? Share your ideas in the comments below or in the NACE community forums.

Tags: enrichment free resources maths problem-solving remote learning

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

Providing effective challenge in mixed ability classrooms

Posted By Keith Watson FCCT, 22 March 2021

Dr Keith Watson, NACE Curriculum Development Director

What I Talk About When I Talk About Running by Haruki Murakami is one of my favourite books… even if reading it did not make me run faster. The title did, however, lead me to ask students: “What do you think about when you think about learning?” This is not an easy question to answer. We increasingly recognise the importance of developing metacognition in learning and the need to challenge pupils cognitively, but this is not always easy in the mixed ability classroom.

In the NACE report Making space for able learners – Cognitive challenge: principles into practice (2020), cognitive challenge is defined as “how learners become able to understand and form complex and abstract ideas and solve problems”. We want students to achieve these high ambitions in their learning, but how is this achieved in a mixed ability class with increasing demands on the teacher, including higher academic expectations? The NACE report provides case studies showing where this has been achieved and highlights the common features across schools that are achieving this – and these key themes are worth reflecting upon.

What do we mean by “challenge for all”?

“Challenge for all” is the mantra often recited, but is it a reality? At times it can appear that “challenge” is just another word for the next task. Or, perhaps, just a name for the last task. Working with teachers recently I asked: why do the more able learners need to work through all the preceding the tasks to get to the “challenge”? Are you asking them to do other work that is not challenging? Or coast until it gets harder? A month later the same teachers talked about how they now move those learners swiftly on to the more challenging tasks, noting that their work had improved significantly, they were more motivated and the learning was deeper. This approach also led to learners being fully engaged, meaning the teacher could vary the support needed across the class to ensure all pupils were challenged at the appropriate level.

“Teaching to the top” is another phrase widely used now and it is a good aspiration, although at times it is unclear what the “top” is. Is it grade 7 at GCSE or perhaps greater depth in Year 6? It is important to have these high expectations and to expose all learners to higher learning, but we need to remember that some of our learners can go even higher but also be challenged in ways that do not relate to exams. For instance, at Copthorne Primary School, the NACE report notes that “pupils are regularly set complex, demanding tasks with high-level discourse. Teachers pitch lessons at a high standard”. Note the reference to discourse – a key feature of challenge is the language heard in the classroom, whether from adults or learners. The “top” is not merely a grade; it is where language is rich and learning is meaningful, including in early years, where we often see the best examples.

Are your questions big enough?

The use of “low threshold, high ceiling” tasks are helpful in a mixed ability class, with all pupils able to access the learning and some able to take it further. In maths, a question as simple as “How many legs in the school?” can lead to good outcomes for all (including those who realise the question doesn’t specify human legs). But there is often a danger that task design can be quite narrow. The minutiae of the curriculum can push teachers to bitesize learning, which can be limiting – especially when a key aim has to be linking the learning through building schema. Asking “Big Questions” can extend learning and challenge all learners. The University of Oxford’s Oxplore initiative offers a selection of Big Questions and associated resources for learners to explore, such as “Should footballers earn more than nurses?” and “Can money buy happiness?”. There is a link to philosophy for children here, and in cognitively challenging classrooms we see deep thinking for all pupils.

Can your learners build more complex schema?

All pupils need to build links in their learning to develop understanding, and more able learners can often build more detailed schema. To give a history example, understanding the break from Rome at the time of Henry VIII could be learned as a series of separate pieces of knowledge: marriage to Catherine of Aragon, the need for a male heir, wanting a divorce in order to marry Anne Boleyn, the religious backdrop, etc. Knowing these items is one thing, but learners need to make links between them and create a schema of understanding. The more able the pupil, the more links can be made, again deepening understanding. That is why in cognitively challenging classrooms skilled teachers ask questions such as:

What does that link to?
What does that remind you of?
When have you seen this before?
What is this similar to? Why?

These questions are especially useful in a busy mixed ability classroom. Prompt questions like these can be used in a range of situations, rather than always requiring another task for the more able pupil who has “finished”. (As if we have ever really finished)

Are you allowing time for “chunky” problems?

So, what else provides challenge? The NACE report notes: “At Portswood Primary School pupils are given ill-structured problems, chunky problems, and compelling contexts for learning”. Reflecting upon the old literacy hour, I used to joke: “Right Year 5, you have 20 minutes to write like Charles Dickens. Go!” How could there be depth of response and high-level work in such short time scales? What was needed were extended tasks that took time, effort, mistakes, re-writes and finally resolution. The task often needed to be chunky. Some in the class will need smaller steps and perhaps more modelling from the teacher, but for the more able learners their greater independence allows them to tackle problems over time.

This all needs organising with thought. It does not happen by accident. With this comes a sense of achievement and a resolution. Pupils are challenged cognitively but need time for this because they become absorbed in solving problems. This also works well when there are multiple solution paths. In a mixed ability class asking the more able to find two ways to solve a problem and then decide which was the most efficient or most effective can extend thinking. It also calls upon higher-order thinking because they are forced to evaluate. Which method would be worth using next time? Why? Justify. This also emphasises the need to place responsibility with the learner. “At Southend High School for Boys, teachers are pushed to become more sophisticated with their pedagogy and boost pupils’ cognitive contribution to lessons rather that the teacher doing all the work”. In a mixed ability class this is vital. How hard are your pupils working and, more importantly, thinking?

I wrote in a previous blog post about how essential the use of cutaway is in mixed ability classes. Retrieval practice, modelling and explanation are vital parts of a lesson, but the question is: do all of the students in your class always need to be part of that? A similar argument is made here. More able learners are sometimes not cognitively challenged as much in whole-class teaching and therefore, on occasion, it is preferable for these pupils to begin tasks independently or from a different starting point.

As well as being nurturing, safe and joyful, we all want our classrooms to be cognitively challenging. This is a certainly not easy in a mixed ability class but it can be achieved. High expectations, careful task design and an eye on big questions all play a part, alongside the organisation of the learning. In this way our teaching can be improved significantly – far more than my running ever will be…

Related blog posts

Additional reading and support

Cognitive challenge: principles into practice – NACE publication (2020); accompanying live or recorded CPD is available
Leading and embedding more able policy and provision in your school – on-demand modular courses; including a focus on planning for challenge

Tags: cognitive challenge grouping metacognition problem-solving questioning research

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

Assessment in a remote learning environment: what have we learned?

Posted By Ann McCarthy, 16 March 2021

NACE Research & Development Director Dr Ann McCarthy explores the evolution of remote assessment over the past 12 months, and the challenges and opportunities ahead.

Over the past year schools have been developing remote learning solutions. These are systems, platforms, methods, or tools that enable remote learning. As the year progressed the quality and flexibility of these have improved. The need for improvement does not reflect teachers’ commitment at the start of the first lockdown, but the limitations caused by available technology, training in the use of the technology, and pupils’ access levels.

In October 2020, the Department for Education stated that all children attending state-funded schools must be given immediate access to remote education if they needed to self-isolate, or if restrictions required pupils to stay at home. Schools were expected to have a contingency plan in place for remote education so that pupils had access to meaningful and ambitious work every day. Provision was to include online tools which allow for interaction, assessment and feedback and high-quality online and offline resources and teaching videos. To support this, they aimed to increase pupils’ access to the internet and introduced Oak Academy.

By March 2021, schools were in a much better position to provide high-quality remote learning, having developed a variety of solutions. Live (synchronous) learning takes place when schools have videoconferencing in place for real-time lessons. Dependent on the age of the pupils and the availability of technology both within the school and at home this may be for a few short sessions each week or for all lessons. Self-paced (asynchronous) learning is also being used. This may utilise technologies such as recorded videos, teaching software, quizzes, games or TV programmes. This may also use more traditional learning tools such as textbooks, worksheets or other written or practical activities which do not make immediate use of a computer. Asynchronous learning enables pupils to work on the same work as others in the class but with more control over when they study and how long they spend on each task.

How effective is remote learning?

The EEF's Rapid Evidence Assessment on Distance Learning stated that teaching quality is more important than how lessons are delivered. The EEF found that there was no real difference between synchronous and asynchronous teaching. If all elements of effective teaching are present and teaching builds clearly on pupils’ prior learning, then pupils will learn well.

The EEF found that peer interactions and support for pupils to work independently can both provide motivation and improve learning outcomes. They did, however, note that ensuring access to technology is key, especially for disadvantaged pupils, and this has been seen to be a problem throughout the lockdown periods. Teachers have also had to be aware that different approaches to remote learning suit different types of content and pupils. One strength of remote learning is that it also provides more opportunities for pupils to take more control of their learning and as such they might also engage in a greater degree of individual learning where they can follow their own learning interests or study a whole-class topic in a different way or in greater depth.

Assessment principles when learning remotely

The wide range of possible teaching input, learning access, learning engagement, home support and learning output has led to greater consideration of assessment: its purpose; use and reliability. The Ofsted Handbook (2019) states that: “When used effectively, assessment helps pupils to embed knowledge and use it fluently and assists teachers in producing clear next steps for pupils.” The headteachers’ standards (2020) require headteachers to ensure “valid, reliable and proportionate approaches are used when assessing pupils’ knowledge and understanding of the curriculum”.

The principles are important, but when moving from classroom contact to remote contact teachers and leaders have had to resolve some practical issues. So, how and what do you assess when learning is remote? In some schools, adaptive software is in use for elements of the curriculum. This responds to pupils’ online learning and adapts the content and practice accordingly. This enables the teacher to monitor learning and focus on in depth one-to-one support. In other environments nonadaptive software is used to set the tasks but the teacher must monitor the learning outcomes closely. What must not be lost in the drive to use remote learning and technology to support this is the place of assessment in the learning process.

“Pay particular attention to securing alignment between curriculum, assessment and teaching, and of these to the school’s ambitious goals for pupils.” – NPQH Framework (2020)

The Chartered College (2020) recognises the challenges related to moving from classroom to remote assessment and feedback. They show the principles of good feedback and assessment can still apply if they are reframed to fit this new context. When planning learning activities assessment must be considered in relation to the possible outputs and the potential of the output being the work not solely of the individual student concerned.

The Chartered College’s Distance Learning Resource Pack (2020; member login required) provides some clear tips about successful remote feedback and assessment, including:

Assessment should be purposeful and provides meaningful, actionable information.
Questions should help the teacher to assess what pupils have learned already and where they might need some more support, as well as helping them to test their own learning.
Students should help to design questions, as they will revise study material while they put together a question board.
Students should know when tests are low stakes or no stakes and understand that these are only used to help learning.
Structured responses, prompts and partially completed templates may be helpful for pupils working without a teacher.
Hinge questions can be used to check understanding and allow pupils to move on or receive further support.
Multiple-choice questions with well-planned incorrect answers allow teachers to spot common misconceptions.
In online learning sessions, prepared questions and use of the chat function, whole group or individual responses promote engagement and tracking.
A daily ‘big idea’ question supported by multiple smaller questions can provide the teacher with information about engagement and learning.
Pupils need feedback, which should be task-specific, providing a clear direction. Verbal feedback can be beneficial as an alternative to written feedback. Feedback on independent work is particularly important.
Self- and peer-assessment remains an important part of the assessment process with the use of group chat or breakout rooms and shared learning.

The Chartered College’s report on effective approaches to distance learning (2021) states that “formative assessment is crucial in providing regular feedback to help students improve and to inform future teaching. Therefore, in order to maintain academic achievement, it is important that this continues to take place during distance and blended learning. During distance learning, teachers are less able to rely on incidental formative assessment opportunities and, therefore, will have to be more systematic and intentional about how and when assessment will take place.”

When planning for remote learning, some assessments only need minor adjustment but others need to be completely changed to reflect the change in teaching methods and potentially changes in the learning sequence. Teachers have had to revisit the intended learning outcomes and the assessment strategies needed to measure these. They also must protect academic integrity. The Department for Education (2020) suggested the use of dedicated software for questioning and discussion, and live feedback and marking.

Remote assessment practice reported by NACE member schools

NACE members were invited to respond to a survey on their practice in assessing remote learning, with a particular focus on provision for more able learners. NACE schools provided feedback on their remote assessment practices and the resources used to support these.

When using synchronous practices, teachers reported using online discussion, questioning, the use of the chat function, live view of written work and live marking of work. Assessment of asynchronous learning included low stakes quizzes either produced by the teacher or created by dedicated software, online assessment tools, e-portfolios, work uploaded and marked using a learning platform, and work assessed via email. In some schools the technology makes it possible to live view or mark as well as marking and returning work. This is more often seen with older pupils. Online assessment tools have enabled teachers to provide individual or whole-class feedback and use outcomes to inform planning.

Where pupils have greater opportunities for independent learning, they are likely to be engaged in longer-term projects, essays, or research activities. These tasks are more likely to utilise greater detail in assessment criteria being shared with the pupils and more opportunities for individual feedback. For these and other tasks, GRIT (growth resilience independent task) pupil responses are used to help them to understand and develop their own learning.

The choices made in each school are driven by ethos and existing policies and procedures, but they have been rolled out in accordance with the circumstances. In general, schools report that they are using the available advice from EEF and others. They have had to make choices about the technology being used, including the means of communication, learning platforms, and other online resources. They have then had to make this work based on the availability of technology in pupils’ homes and their ability to engage with the technology.

Many teachers confirmed that pupil voice is effective in assessing during remote learning, especially when learners have been working independently. Teachers have tried many different approaches to assessment and feedback. Peer interaction during remote learning can motivate pupils and improve outcomes. Assessment strategies using peer marking and feedback, sharing models of good work, and opportunities for live discussions of content, are possible and are reported to be increasingly effective as pupils get older.

Feedback to pupils has varied according to the task and between schools. This ranged from a comment “well done” to detailed written feedback. The use of success criteria continues to be important when giving feedback on tasks. Some teachers have given open-ended feedback as they would in a class situation. This has enabled them to adapt and differentiate work to the unique situations of the children as well as their ability. Others have been calling pupils to answer questions raised in online chat, to address outcomes in activities such as group agree/disagree questioning, online quizzes, or independent work. Online comments at the end of a piece of work have been shared with pupils. Emails have been sent to parents where children do not access online learning.

This range of responses reflects the range of practice and the differences in access to technology, training in the use of technology and home learning environments. Where possible, the methods used for teaching, learning assessment and feedback are like those used in class as this provides consistency and stability to the pupils when they are not in school.

Opportunities and concerns when using remote learning

Considering the advice available to schools, the increased availability of internet access, learning platforms and dedicated software, one might assume that there is an equitable learning experience for all pupils. Schools have invested in a distance learning infrastructure and are now able to provide a blended learning approach which will enable pupils to make progress. However, what pupils learn, how quickly they progress and their depth of understanding are not necessarily the same as they would be in school. Pupils spend most of their remote learning time working independently and may not have home support.

NACE member schools have recognised the range of responses to home learning from pupils. Some more able pupils thrive in an environment where they can manage their day and their learning. Home learning provides pupils with time to reflect and research so that mastery, analytical skills, and problem solving can be developed. Not all pupils cope with these greater freedoms and many miss the collaborative nature of the classroom where they can enhance their learning by engaging in cognitive discourse. Others lack resilience or the metacognitive skills needed to learn without the support of the teacher. Teachers raised concerns that some pupils may have developed gaps in learning and understanding. Others were concerned that there was learning fatigue and that continued remote learning impacts on the health and wellbeing of the pupils.

Challenges when using remote assessment

Within a classroom environment visual clues are often used to assess understanding and learners’ confidence, but these are not easy to establish through online learning. When engaged in remote learning, teachers find it more difficult or impossible to use the normal assessment practice of tracking learners' work and assessing their progress in skills. One major barrier to assessment is that teachers do not know the level of support each learner receives at home from family members. Some pupils receive significant input and have considerable access to additional learning materials, support and guidance. Other pupils work in isolation and lack any additional resources, support or learning capital which would enable them to respond well to learning tasks. These differences not only impact on the quality of learning, but also on the teacher’s understanding of what pupils know, understand and can do independently.

A second issue related to assessment and reported by NACE member schools was that not all pupils engage with or complete the work. Written work completed at home is not always submitted and when it is the teacher is not always clear as to whether the child completed the work independently.

Some schools report difficulties in the assessment of foundation phase learning based on outcome alone, which is what is seen from remote learning, particularly for those with limited access to online sessions and activities. Normal assessment practice would be far more fluid and formative questioning part and parcel of the process. This is far more difficult to achieve remotely, especially where parents are present and 'supporting' the child by answering for them.

How does this apply to more able pupils?

The surveyed NACE schools recognised the many difficulties and pitfalls in providing remote learning and assessment. Despite this they remained committed to high-quality provision which embraces assessment as an integral part of the process. As one member commented: “This is very much a work in progress and we are learning as we go, always striving to improve.”

NACE's research suggests that cognitively challenging learning environments are dependent upon curriculum design, management of learning and cognitive discourse (read more here).

In planning learning for more able pupils, schools have made best use of available technology and have adapted the curriculum to reflect the new learning environment. They have created new learning opportunities and adapted existing ones, but cannot manage all aspects of the pupils’ home learning experiences. Some more able learners do not have the same learning advantages as others and as such there will be difference in outcomes and in the responses to assessment measures. The greatest difficulty in using remote learning and assessment to develop cognitively challenging learning for more able pupils results from the absence of rich and extended talk and cognitive discourse which would be found in the classroom. Short periods of engagement online cannot generate the quality of language which would be present in the classroom throughout the day.

Returning to school: what next?

As pupils and teachers return to face-to-face teaching and learning there is much to consider. How will teachers use the assessments undertaken during remote learning to plan for next steps and to resolve any lost learning or misconceptions? Will disadvantaged more able pupils have the same opportunities to achieve as others whose learning has progressed well? Where more able pupils have taken their learning beyond the expected standard, will they have opportunities to continue to deepen learning having returned to a classroom environment?

Teachers are now tasked with the challenge of managing learning recovery, assessment and new learning simultaneously, while rebuilding the relationships and expectations of the classroom.

Assessment of learning summer 2021

As pupils return to school there is another issue related to assessment. Pupils due to complete a course of study this year will have an assessed outcome which is no longer linked to a final examination. Where the remote assessment is well-established and provides a direct link to what has been learnt, teachers will be able to report on pupils’ learning accurately. However, in many schools, pupils will return to school to face a series of activities which provide evidence of what they know. Pupils’ qualifications this year will be based on school assessments.

“Teachers must assess their students’ performance, only on what content has been delivered to them by their teachers, to determine the grade each student should receive.” “Heads of centres will have to confirm that students have been taught sufficient content to allow progression to the next stage of their education.” – Ofqual (2021)

Teachers have increasingly recognised the importance of creating a link between curriculum, planning, teaching, learning and assessment. Is this examination requirement going to mean that pupils spend more time having their learning measured at the expense of developing as learners? How could the examination system work so that it fits with the way in which teaching and learning takes place?

We will continue to consider these inter-related issues as we explore assessment methodology, opportunities, limitations and next steps for more able learners.

With thanks to all the NACE member schools who have so far contributed to our work in this area. To share your own experience, please contact communications@nace.co.uk.

References

Chartered College of Teaching (2020). Distance Learning Support Pack.
Chartered College of Teaching (2021). Education in times of crisis: Effective approaches to distance learning.
Education Endowment Foundation (2020). Best evidence on supporting students to learn remotely: Rapid evidence assessment examining the existing research to support the remote learning of pupils.
Department for Education (2020). Headteachers’ Standards.
Department for Education (2020). National Professional Qualification for Headteachers Framework.
Department for Education (2020). Remote Education Temporary Continuity Direction – Explanatory note.
Ofqual (2021). Decisions on how GCSE, AS and A level grades will be determined in summer 2021.
Ofsted (2019). School Inspection Handbook.
UNESCO (2020). COVID-19 response – remote learning strategy.

Additional resources and support

Read more from our “rethinking assessment” series
NACE spring & summer series: support to reflect, review and develop your provision

Tags: assessment feedback lockdown remote learning research technology

Share |

Permalink | Comments (1)

Using feedback for more able learners to promote self-regulated quality

Posted By Robin Bevan, 08 March 2021

Dr Robin Bevan, Headteacher, Southend High School for Boys (SHSB)

One of the underlying tests of whether a student has fully mastered a new area of learning is whether they have the capacity to “self-regulate the production of quality responses” in that domain. At its simplest level, this would be knowing whether an answer is right or not, without reference to any third party or expert source. This develops and extends into whether the student can readily assess the validity of the reasoning deployed in replying to a more complex question. And, at its highest level, the student would be able to articulate why one response to a higher-order question is of superior quality than another.

Framed in another way, we teach to ensure that our pupils know how to answer questions correctly, know what makes their responses sound and, ultimately, understand the distinguishing features of the best quality thinking relevant to the context (and, by this I mean far more than just the components of a GCSE mark scheme).

This hierarchy of desired learning outcomes not only provides an implicit structure for differentiating task outcomes, but also gives a strong steer regarding our approaches to feedback for the most able learners. Our intention for our most able learners is that they can reach the highest level of critical understanding with each topic. This is so much more than just getting the answers right and hints at why traditional tick/cross approaches to marking have often proved so ineffective (Ronayne: 1999).

These comments may be couched in different language, but there is a deep resonance between my observations and the clarion call – over two decades ago – for increased formative assessment that was published as Inside the Black Box (Black and Wiliam, 1998):

Many of the successful innovations have developed self- and peer-assessment by pupils as a way of enhancing formative assessment, and such work has achieved some success with pupils from age five upwards. This link of formative assessment to self-assessment is not an accident – it is indeed inevitable.

To explain this, it should first be noted that the main problem that those developing self-assessment encounter is not the problem of reliability and trustworthiness: it is found that pupils are generally honest and reliable in assessing both themselves and one another, and can be too hard on themselves as often as they are too kind. The main problem is different – it is that pupils can only assess themselves when they have a sufficiently clear picture of the targets that their learning is meant to attain. Surprisingly, and sadly, many pupils do not have such a picture, and appear to have become accustomed to receiving classroom teaching as an arbitrary sequence of exercises with no overarching rationale. It requires hard and sustained work to overcome this pattern of passive reception. When pupils do acquire such an overview, they then become more committed and more effective as learners: their own assessments become an object for discussion with their teachers and with one another, and this promotes even further that reflection on one's own ideas that is essential to good learning.

What this amounts to is that self-assessment by pupils, far from being a luxury, is in fact an essential component of formative assessment. Where anyone is trying to learn, feedback about their efforts has three elements – the desired goal, the evidence about their present position, and some understanding of a way to close the gap between the two (Sadler: 1989). All three must to a degree be understood before they can take action to improve their learning. (Black & Wiliam, 1998)

Understanding the needs of the more able: a tragic parody

Sometimes an idea can become clearer when we examine its opposite: when, that is, we illuminate how the more able learner can be starved of effective feedback. To illustrate this as powerfully as possible, I am going to employ a parody. It is a tragic parody, in that the disheartening description of teaching and learning that it includes is both frustratingly common and yet so easily amenable to fixing. Imagine the following cycle of teacher and pupil activity.

The teacher identifies an appropriate new topic from the scheme of work. She delivers an authoritative explanation of the key ideas and new understanding. It is an accomplished exposition and the class is attentive.
A set of response tasks are set for the class. These are graduated in difficulty. Every pupil is required to work in silence, unaided – after all, it has just been explained to them all! Each pupil starts with the first question and continues through the exercise. The work is completed for homework.
The teacher collects in the homework, marks the work for accuracy of answers with a score out of 10.
In the next lesson, the class is given oral feedback by the teacher on the most common errors. The class proceeds to the next topic. The cycle then repeats.

This is probably not far removed from the way in which many of us were taught, when we were at school. Let us examine this parody from the perspective of the more able.

It is highly likely that the more able pupil already knows something, or a great deal, about this topic. Nonetheless, complicit in this well-rehearsed didactic model, the most able pupil sits through the teacher’s presentation, patiently. A good proportion of this time is essentially wasted.
Silent working prohibits the development of understanding that comes through vocal articulation and discussion. The initially easy exercise prevents, by its very design, the most able from exploring the implications and higher consequences of the topic. The requirement to complete all the questions, even the most simple, fills the time – unproductively. Then, the whole class faces the challenge of completing the harder questions, unsupported, away from the teacher’s expert assistance. For the most able, these harder questions are probably the richest source of potential new learning. But it is no surprise that for the class as a whole the success rate on the harder questions is limited.
The most able pupil gains 8 or 9 out of 10; possibly even an ego-boosting 10. The pupil feels good and is inclined to see the task as a success. Meanwhile, all the items that are discussed by the teacher were questions that everyone else got wrong, not the learning that is needed to extend or develop the more able pupil.
A new topic is started. The teacher has worked hard. The class has been well-behaved. The able pupil has filled their time with active work. And yet, so little has been learned.

Unravelling the parody

This article is intended to focus on the most effective forms of feedback for the more able learner; but it is clear from the parody that we are unlikely to create the circumstances for such high-quality feedback without considering, alongside this, elements such as: the diagnostic assessment of prior learning, structured lesson design, optimal task selection, and effective homework strategies. Each of these, of course, warrants an article of its own.

However, we cannot escape the role of task design altogether in effective feedback. A variety of routine approaches, often suited for homework, allow students to become accustomed to the process of determining the quality of what might be expected of their assignments. For example:

a. Rather than providing marked exemplars, pupils are required to apply the mark scheme to sample finished work. Their marking is then compared (moderated), before the actual standards are established. This ideally suits extended written accounts and practical projects.

b. Instead of following a standard task, pupils are instructed to produce a mark scheme for that task. Contrasting views and key features of the responses are developed; leading to a definitive mark scheme. (It may then be appropriate to attempt the task, or the desired learning may well have already been secured.) This ideally suits essays and fieldwork.

c. These approaches may be adapted by supplying student work to be examined by their peers: “What advice would you give to the student who produced this?” “What misunderstanding is present?” “How would you explain to the author the reasons for their grade?” This ideally suits more complex conceptual work, and lines of reasoning.

d. As a group activity, parallel assignments may be issued: each group being required to prepare a mark scheme for just one allocated task, and to complete the others. Ensuring that the mark schemes have been scrutinised first, the completed tasks are submitted for assessment to the relevant group. This ideally suits examination preparation.

Although these are whole-class activities, they are particularly suited to the more able learner as they give access to higher-order reflective thinking and the tasks are oriented around the issue of “what quality looks like”.

Marking work or just marking time?

Teachers spend extended hours marking pupils’ work. It is a common frustration amongst colleagues that these protracted endeavours do not always seem to bear fruit. There are lots of reasons why we mark, including: to ensure that work has been completed; to determine the quality of what has been done; and to identify individual and common errors for immediate redress.

The list could be extended, but should be reviewed in the light of one pre-eminent question: to what extent does this marking enhance pupils’ learning? The honest answer is that there are probably a fair number of occasions when greater benefit could be extracted from this assessment process.

The observations of Ronayne (1999) illustrate this concern and have clear implications for our professional practice with all learners, but perhaps the most able in particular. In his study, Ronayne found that when teachers marked pupils’ work in the conventional way in exercise books, an hour later, pupils recalled only about one third of the written comments accurately – although they recalled proportionately more of the “constructive” feedback and more of the feedback related to the learning objectives.

Ronayne also observed that a large proportion of written comments related to aspects other than the stated learning objectives of the task. Moreover, the proportion of feedback that was constructive and related to the objectives was greater in oral feedback than written; but as more lengthy oral feedback was given, fewer of the earlier comments were retained by the class. In contrast, individual verbal feedback, as opposed to whole-class feedback, improved the recollection of advice given.

So what then should we do?

It is usually assumed that assessment tasks will be designed and set by the teacher. However, if students understand the criteria for assessment in a particular area, they are likely to benefit from the opportunity to design their own tasks. Thinking through what kinds of activity meet the criteria does, itself, contribute to learning.

Examples can be found in most disciplines: pupils designing and answering questions in mathematics is easily incorporated into a sequence of lessons; so is the process of identifying a natural phenomenon that demands a scientific explanation; or selecting a portion of foreign language text and drafting possible comprehension questions.

For multiple reasons the development of these approaches remains restricted. There is no doubt that teachers would benefit from practical training in this area, and a lack of confidence can impede. However, it is often the case that teachers are simply not convinced of the potency of promoting self-regulated quality expertise.

A study in Portugal, reported by Fontana and Fernandes in 1994, involved 25 mathematics teachers taking an INSET course to study methods for teaching their pupils to assess themselves. During the 20-week part-time course, the teachers put the ideas into practice with a total of 354 students aged 8-14. These students were given mathematics tests at the beginning and end of the course so that their gains could be measured. The same tests were taken by a control group of students whose mathematics teachers were also taking a 20-week part-time INSET course but this course was not focused on self-assessment methods. Both groups spent the same time in class on mathematics and covered similar topics. Both groups showed significant gains over the period, but the self-assessment group's average gain was about twice that of the control group. In the self-assessment group, the focus was on regular self-assessment, often on a daily basis. This involved teaching students to understand both the learning objectives and the assessment criteria, giving them an opportunity to choose learning tasks, and using tasks that gave scope for students to assess their own learning outcomes.

Other studies (James: 1998) report similar achievement gains for students who have an understanding of, and involvement in, the assessment process.

One of the distinctive features of these approaches is that the feedback to the student (whether from their own review, from a peer or from the teacher) focuses on the next steps in seeking to improve the work. It may be that a skill requires practice, it may be that a concept has been misunderstood, that explanations lack depth, or that there is a limitation in the student's prior knowledge.

Whatever form the feedback takes, it loses value (and renders the assessment process null) unless the student is provided with the opportunity to act on the advice. The feedback and the action are individual and set at the level of the learner, not the class.

In a similar vein, approaches to “going through” mock examinations and other tests require careful preparation. Teacher commentary alone, whilst resolving short-term confusion, is unlikely to lead to long-term gains in achievement. Alternatives are available:

i. Pupils can be asked to design and solve equivalent questions to those that caused difficulty;

ii. Pupils can, for homework, construct mark schemes for questions requiring a prose response, especially those which the teacher has identified as having been badly answered;

iii. Groups of pupils (or individuals) can declare themselves “experts” for particular questions, to whom others report for help and to have their exam answers scrutinised.

Again, in each of these practical approaches the most able are positioned close to the optimal point of learning as they articulate and demonstrate their own understanding for themselves or for others. In doing so, they can confidently approach the self-regulated production of quality answers.

Further reading

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. School of Education, King’s College, London.
Fontana, D. and Fernandes, M. (1994). ‘Improvements in mathematics performance as a consequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary school children’. British Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 64 pp407-17.
James, M. (1998) Using Assessment for School Improvement. Heinemann, Oxford.
Ronayne, M. (1999). Marking and Feedback. Improving Schools. Vol. 2 No. 2 pp42–43.
Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science. Vol. 18 pp119-144.

From the NACE blog:

Additional support

NACE Curriculum Develop Director Dr Keith Watson is presenting a webinar on feedback on Friday 19 March 2021, as part of our Lunch & Learn series. Join the session live (with opportunity for Q&A) or purchase the recording to view in your own time and to support school/department CPD on feedback. Live and on-demand participants will also receive an accompanying information sheet, providing an overview of the research on effective feedback, frequently asked questions, and guidance on applications for more able learners. Find out more.

Tags: assessment feedback independent learning metacognition research

Share |

Permalink | Comments (0)

Filter by this tag »
Show all posts with this tag »
Find everyone who has used this tag »

	Edit This Favorite
Name:
Category:
Share:	Yes No, Keep Private

Edit This Favorite

The context

What worked?

Addressing the language gap

Motivations and barriers

Parental support

Final reflections

Some background: language, thinking and learning

The functions of language in education

What does this mean for cognitively challenging learning?

Creating language-rich schools and classrooms: implications for teacher development

Testing vs assessment

A strategic approach to assessment which supports cognitively challenging learning environments

Assessment and classroom management

Assessment in language-rich learning environments

Priorities for effective assessment

What next?

1. Papasavitch (our very own made-up language)

2. The RS SMSJ Essay Writing Competition (open to all schools)

3. Collaboration and exploration – across and beyond the school

1. Competitions provide focus for year-wide activities

2. Competitions give different ways of engaging with skills

3. Competitions provide challenge

4. Competition can be a motivator

5. Competitions are social and interactive

Sign up!

What is Phiddlywinks?

Who was the inspiration behind Phiddlywinks?

What do we mean by “challenge for all”?

Are your questions big enough?

Can your learners build more complex schema?

Are you allowing time for “chunky” problems?

How effective is remote learning?

Assessment principles when learning remotely

Remote assessment practice reported by NACE member schools

Opportunities and concerns when using remote learning

Challenges when using remote assessment

How does this apply to more able pupils?

Returning to school: what next?

Assessment of learning summer 2021

Understanding the needs of the more able: a tragic parody

Unravelling the parody

Marking work or just marking time?

So what then should we do?

About us

Members

NACE Challenge

Quick links

Contact us

Free updates