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
  
|
Posted By Keith Watson FCCT,
08 March 2021
|
Dr Keith Watson, NACE Curriculum Development Director and former CEO of Portswood Primary Academy Trust
“I once estimated that, if you price teachers’ time appropriately, in England we spend about two and a half billion pounds a year on feedback and it has almost no effect on student achievement.”
– Dylan Wiliam
So why do we do it? Primarily because the EEF toolkit identified feedback as one of the key elements of teaching that has the greatest impact. With this came the unintended consequence of an Ofsted handbook and inspection reports that criticised a lack of written feedback and response to pupils’ responses to marking which led to what became an unending dialogue with dangerous workload issues. At some point triple-marking seemed more about showing a senior leader or external inspector that the dialogue had happened. More recently, the 2016 report of the Independent Teacher Workload Review Group noted that written marking had become unnecessarily burdensome for teachers and recommended that all marking should be driven by professional judgement and be “meaningful, manageable and motivating”.
So what is “meaningful, manageable and motivating” in terms of marking and feedback for more able learners? Is it about techniques or perhaps more a question of style? At Portswood Primary Academy Trust our feedback has always been as close to the point of teaching as possible. It centres on real-time feedback for pupils to respond to within the lesson. Paul Black was kind enough to describe it as “marvellous” when he visited, so not surprisingly this is what we have stuck with. Teachers work hard in lessons to give this real-time feedback to shape learning in the lesson. The importance of this approach is that feedback is instant, feedback is relevant, and feedback allows pupils to make learning choices (EEF marking review 2016). But is there more to it for more able learners?
Getting the balance right
In giving feedback to more able learners the quality of questioning is crucial. This should aim to develop the higher-order skills of Bloom’s Taxonomy (analysing, evaluating and creating). A more facilitative approach should develop thinking. The questions should stimulate thought, be open, and may lead in unexpected directions.
A challenge for all teachers is how to balance feeding back to the range of attainment in a class. The recent Ofsted emphasis on pupils progressing through the programmes at the same rate is not always the reality for teachers. Curriculum demands are higher in core subjects, meaning teachers are under pressure to ensure most pupils achieve age-related expectations (ARE). The focus therefore tends to be more on pupils below ARE, with more time and effort focused there. The demands related to SEND pupils can also mean less teacher time devoted to more able pupils who have already met the standards.
Given that teachers may have less time for more able learners it is vital the time is used efficiently. For the more able it is less about the pupils getting the right answer, and more about getting them to ask the right questions. Detailed feedback in every lesson is unlikely so teachers should:
- Look at the week/unit as a whole to see when more detailed focus is timely;
- Use pre-teaching (such as in assembly times) to set up more extended tasks;
- Develop pupils’ independence and resilience to ensure there is not an over-reliance on the teacher;
- Identify times in lessons to provide constructive feedback to the more able group that would have the most impact.
Another tension for teachers is the relationship between assessment frameworks and creativity. For instance, at KS1 and KS2, the assessment criteria at greater depth in writing is often focused on technical aspects of writing. But is this stifling creativity? Is the reduction in students taking A-level English because of the greater emphasis on the technical at GCSE? As one able Year 10 writer commented, “Why do I have to focus on semicolons so much? Writing comes from the heart.” Of course the precise use of semicolons can aid writing effectively from the heart, but if the passion is dampened by narrow technical feedback will the more able child be inspired to write, paint or create? Teachers need to reflect on what they want to achieve with their most able learners.
Three guiding principles
So what should the guiding principles for feedback to more able learners be? Three guiding principles for teachers to think about are:
1. Ownership with responsibility
More able learners need to take more ownership of their work; with this comes responsibility for the quality of their work. Self-marking of procedural work and work that has a definitive answer (the self-secretary idea) allows for children to:
- Check – “Have I got it?”
- Error identify – “I haven’t got it; here's why”
- Self-select to extend – “What will I choose to do next?”
Only the last of these provides challenge. The first two require responsibility from learners for the fundamentals. The third leads to more ownership for pupils to take their learning further. The teacher could aid this self-selection or only provide feedback once a course of action is taken. Here the teacher is nudging and guiding but not dictating with their feedback.
2. Developing peer assessment
There is a danger that peer assessment can be at a low level so the goal is developing a more advanced level of dialogue about the effectiveness of outcomes and how taking different approaches may lead to better outcomes or more efficient practice. For instance, peer feedback allows for emotional responses in art/design/computing work – “Your work made me feel...”; “This piece is more effective because...”. For some more able pupils not all feedback is welcome, whether from peers or teachers. The idea that I can reject your feedback here is important: “Can you imagine saying to Dali that his landscapes are good but he needs to work on how he draws his clocks?”
3. Being selective with feedback
The highly skilled teacher will, at times, decide not to give feedback, at least not straight away. They are selective in their feedback. If you jump in too quickly, it can stop thinking and creativity. It can eliminate the time to process and discover. It can also be extremely annoying for the learner!
In practical terms this means letting them write in English and giving feedback later, not while they are in the flow. In a mathematical/scientific/humanities investigative setting, let them have a go and ask the pertinent question later, perhaps when they encounter difficulty. This question will be open and may nudge rather than direct the pupils. It might not be towards your intended outcome but should allow for them to take their learning forward, perhaps in unexpected directions.
In summary, this gets to the heart of the difference in feedback for more able learners compared to other pupils. While the feedback will inevitably have higher-level subject content, it should also:
- Emphasise greater responsivity for the pupil in their learning
- Involve suggestion, what ifs and hints rather than direction, and…
- Seek to excite and inspire to occasionally achieve the fantastic outcome that a more rigid approach to feedback never would. They may even write from the heart.
What does this look like in practice?
Jeavon Leonard, Vice Principal at Portswood Primary School, outlines a personal approach for more able learners he has used: “Think about when we see a puzzle in a paper/magazine – if we get stuck (as adults) we tend to flip to the answer section, not to gain the answer alone but to see how the answer was reached or fits into the clues that were given. This in turn leads to a new frame of skills to apply when you see the next problem. If this is our adult approach, why would it not be an effective approach for pupils? The feedback is in the answer. Some of the theory for this is highlighted in Why Don't Students Like School? by Daniel Willingham.”
Mel Butt, NRICH ambassador and Year 6 teacher at Tanners Brook Primary, models the writing process for her more able learners including her own second (and third) drafts which include her ‘Think Pink’ improvement and corrections. While this could be used for all pupils, Mel adds the specific requirements into the improved models for more able learners based on the assessment requirement framework for greater depth writing at the end of Key Stage 2. She comments: “I would also add something extra that is specific to the cohort of children based on the needs of their writing. We do talk about the criteria and the process encourages independence too. It's also good for them to see that even their teachers as writers need to make improvements.” The feedback therefore comes in the form of what the pupils need to see based on what they initially wrote.
Further reading
From the NACE blog:
Additional support
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
differentiation
feedback
metacognition
pedagogy
questioning
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Lauren Bellaera,
03 March 2021
|
Dr Lauren Bellaera is Director of Research and Impact at The Brilliant Club, a UK-based charity which aims to increase the number of pupils from under-represented backgrounds that progress to highly selective universities. In this blog post (originally published on The Learning Scientists website), Dr Bellaera explores research-informed approaches to develop critical thinking skills in the classroom – ahead of her forthcoming live webinar on this theme for NACE members (recording available to watch back when logged in as a member).
What is critical thinking?
Many definitions of critical thinking exist – far too many to list here! – but one key definition that is often used is:
“[the] purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which judgment is based” (1, p. 3).
Despite the different definitions, there is a consensus regarding the dimensions of critical thinking and these dimensions have implications for how critical thinking is understood and taught. Critical thinking includes skills and dispositions (1). The former refers to reasoning and logical thinking, e.g., analysis, evaluation, and interpretation, whereas the latter refers to the tendency to do something, e.g., being open-minded (2). This blog post primarily is referring to the development of critical thinking skills as opposed to dispositions.
Critical thinking can be subject-specific or general, and thus can either be embedded within a specific subject or it can be developed independently of subject knowledge – something that we will revisit later.
How are critical thinking skills developed?
Developing critical thinking is often regarded as the cornerstone of higher education, but the reality is that many educational institutions are failing to develop critical thinking consistently and reliably in their students, with only around 6% of university graduates considered proficient (3), (4), (5).
Thus, there is a disconnect between the value of critical thinking and the degree to which it is supported by effective instruction (6). So, what does effective instruction look like? Helpfully, cognitive psychology provides us with some of the answers:
1. Context is king: the importance of background knowledge
The important question at hand here is: are some types of critical thinking more difficult to develop than others? The short answer is yes – subject-specific critical thinking appears to be easier to develop than general critical thinking. Studies have shown that critical thinking interventions improve subject-specific as opposed to general critical thinking (7), (8). This is also what we have found in our own research (9).
Possible reasons for why this is the case include the fact that the length of time needed to develop general critical thinking is much greater. This is coupled with the idea that general critical thinking is simply not as malleable as subject-specific critical thinking (10). For balance, though, some studies have reported improvements in general critical thinking, indicating that under the right circumstances, general improvement is possible (6), (11). The key message here is that background knowledge is an important part of teaching critical thinking and the extent to which you aim to develop critical thinking beyond the scope of the course content should be assessed dependent on what is achievable in the given context.
2. Be explicit: approaches to critical thinking instruction
The importance of background knowledge also has implications for critical thinking instruction (12). There are four main approaches to critical thinking instruction; general, infusion, immersion and mixed (13):
The general approach explicitly teaches critical thinking as a separate course outside of a specific subject. Content can be used to structure examples and activities but it is not related to subject-specific knowledge and tends to be about everyday events.
The infusion approach explicitly teaches both subject content and general critical thinking skills, where the critical thinking instruction is taught in the context of a specific subject.
Similarly, the immersion approach also teaches critical thinking within a specific subject, but it is taught implicitly as opposed to explicitly. This approach infers that critical thinking will be a consequence of interacting with and learning about the subject matter.
Lastly, the mixed approach is an amalgamation of the above three approaches where critical thinking is taught as a general subject alongside either the infusion or immersion approach in the context of a specific subject.
In terms of which are the best instructional approaches to adopt, evidence from a meta-analysis of over 100 studies showed that explicit approaches led to the greatest increase in critical thinking compared to implicit approaches. Specifically, the mixed approach where critical thinking was taught explicitly as a separate strand and within a specific subject was the most effective, whereas the implicit immersion approach was the least effective. This research suggests that developing critical thinking skills separately and then applying them to subject content explicitly works best (14).
3. Be strategic: effective teaching strategies
The knowledge that critical thinking needs to be deliberately and explicitly built into courses is integral to developing critical thinking. However, without the more granular details of exactly what teaching strategies sit beneath this, it will only get us so far. A number of teaching strategies have been shown to be effective, including the following:
Both answering and generating higher-order thinking questions have been shown to increase critical thinking (8) (14). For example, psychology students who were given higher-order thinking questions compared to lower-order thinking questions significantly improved their subject-specific critical thinking (8). Alison King’s work on higher-order questions provides some useful examples of question stems (15).
Ensuring that critical thinking is anchored in authentic instruction that allows students to engage with problems that make sense to them, and that enables further inquiry, is important (6). Some ways to facilitate authentic instruction include simulations and applied problem solving.
Closely related to higher-order questions and authentic instruction is dialogue – essentially discussions are needed to develop critical thinking. Teachers asking questions is particularly beneficial to the development of critical thinking, in part because teachers will often be asking questions that require higher-order thinking. A meta-analysis study showed that authentic instruction and dialogue were particularly effective for developing general critical thinking (6).
Engaging pupils in explicit self-reflection techniques promotes critical thinking. For example, asking students to judge their performance on a paper can increase their ability to understand where they need to improve and develop in the future (16). Other formalisations of this include reflection journals (17). In my current role, we also employ self-reflection activities to increase critical thinking.
So, to conclude, remember when developing critical thinking skills that context is king, always be explicit and always be strategic!
Find out more… On 29 April 2021 Dr Bellaera presented a live webinar for NACE members exploring the research on critical thinking and how to apply it in your school. Watch the recording here (login required). Plus: Dr Bellaera's research paper on critical thinking is available to read and download here until 4 August 2021.
References:
(1) Facione, P. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi Report).
(2) Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical thinking. Upper-Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
(3) American Association of Colleges and Universities (2005). Liberal education outcomes: Preliminary report on student achievement in college. Washington, DC: AAC&U.
(4) Dunne, G. (2015). Beyond critical thinking to critical being: Criticality in higher education and life. International Journal of Educational Research, 71, 86-99.
(5) Ku, K. Y. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: Urging for measurements using multi-response format. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4, 70- 76.
(6) Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85, 275-314.
(7) Williams, R. L., Oliver, R., & Stockdale, S. (2004). Psychological versus academic critical thinking as predictors and outcome measures in a large undergraduate human development course. The Journal of General Education, 53, 37-58.
(8) Renaud, R. D., & Murray, H. G. (2008). A comparison of a subject-specific and a general measure of critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3, 85-93.
(9) Bellaera, L., Debney, L., & Baker, S. (2018). An intervention for subject comprehension and critical thinking in mixed academic ability university students. The Journal of General Education.
(10) Facione, P. A., Facione, N. C, & Giancarlo, C. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character, measurement, and relationship to critical thinking skill. Informal Logic, 20, 61-84.
(11) Halpern, D. F. (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. The Journal of General Education, 50, 270–286.
(12) Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson's Research Reports, 6, 1-49.
(13) Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18, 4-10.
(14) Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78, 1102-1134.
(15) King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 13-17.
(16) Austin, Z., Gregory, P. A., & Chiu, S. (2008). Use of reflection-in-action and self-assessment to promote critical thinking among pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72, 1-8.
(17) Mannion, J., & Mercer, N. (2016). Learning to learn: Improving attainment, closing the gap at Key Stage 3. The Curriculum Journal, 27, 246-271.
Tags:
cognitive challenge
critical thinking
metac
questioning
research
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Jonathan Doherty,
17 February 2021
|
Dr Jonathan Doherty, Leeds Trinity University
The pandemic has significantly changed how and where learning takes place. For the first time in history, teachers are tasked with providing education remotely, beyond the school. Not without its challenges, this does provide an opportunity to rethink the core principles of teaching and learning and at the same time promote high standards of achievement.
Technology can help excite, engage and empower more able learners. It opens new channels of communication. It is a chance for learners to own and shape their own learning and it creates opportunities for tailored learning. In his podcast, Assessment and feedback in an online context (February, 2020), Jamie Scott suggested that the principles of good feedback and assessment apply to the online environment; they just need to be reframed to fit a new context. This blog post discusses one important aspect of teaching and learning – feedback – and provides some strategies to promote this in the context of remote teaching.
The power of effective feedback
Hundreds of articles have been written about feedback and its role in knowledge and skill enhancement and on motivation to learn. When effective feedback is combined with effective teaching, it can be very powerful in facilitating learning. John Hattie (2007) placed it in the top 10 influences on pupil achievement. So what is it and why is it such a powerful facilitator of learning? Feedback is “the process in which learners make sense of information about their performance and use it to enhance the quality of their work or learning strategies" (Henderson et al., 2018, p. 16). This definition of feedback goes beyond just providing comments about pupils’ work. It describes the process of using information resulting from a task to make improvement. Feedback can come from different sources: beginner learners require much scaffolding, while prompts to do with self-regulation are appropriate for more able pupils.
Task prompts include:
- Does the answer meet the success criteria?
- Can he/she elaborate on the answer given?
- Is there other information that could be included to meet the criteria?
Process prompts include:
- What strategies were used and why?
- What does this tell me about his/her understanding of key concepts and knowledge?
Self-regulation prompts include:
- How can he/she monitor this work?
- How can he/she reflect on his/her own learning?
- What learning goals has the pupil achieved?
- Can you teach another pupil to…?
Decades of education research support the idea that greater learning comes from teaching less and providing more feedback. In remote teaching, there are reduced opportunities to pick up on pupils’ non-verbal cues such as nods, frowns and expressions of elation from new understandings normally seen in a classroom. Whilst these might be interpreted as important cues, they are not the most reliable sources of feedback and are in effect poor proxies for learning. In remote teaching and learning, it is more difficult to get such feedback, which means we need to be much clearer on the purpose of the activity, its assessment and the ways in which feedback is given.
Effective feedback, given remotely or face-to-face, reduces the “gap” in learning – that is the space between current and desired understanding. Feedback is most powerful when it helps learners negotiate the gap between where they are and where they need to be. It should address three fundamental questions:
Where am I going? Pupils must understand their goals and what success at those goals looks like. Goals relate to feedback by informing learners on what is needed (success criteria) so they can direct and evaluate their actions. It allows them to set reasonable goals ahead.
How am I doing? This entails feedback about past, present or how to progress from the starting point to the next or endpoint. It is information about progress, about personal performance and attitude to learning. It offers information about what is and what is not understood and allows learners to track their performance.
Where to next? This feedback helps learners in choosing the next appropriate challenges, to achieve self-regulation, the strategies to work on for greater fluency and ultimately deeper understanding. Feedback allows pupils and teachers to set further appropriately challenging goals for ongoing learning.
Effective feedback is NOT… supplying only a mark for a piece of work or giving a generalised comment. “This is a poor piece of writing” is a value judgement and not good feedback. Similarly, “You might want to use more paragraphs”, is advice and not helpful feedback either.
10 essentials of effective feedback
- Feedback resides in what is received and interpreted by a student, rather than what a teacher believes has taken place.
- Feedback is only successful if pupils use it to improve their performance.
- Feedback is more effective when the criteria for success are known in advance and where the goal to achieve success is shared by pupil(s) and teacher.
- The purpose(s) of the feedback should be made clear and be specific.
- It should be timely and given as soon as possible.
- It must assure learners that meeting cognitive challenge is part of learning.
- It should be elaborative, i.e. telling the learner something about their work that they were not able to see for themselves.
- It works best in a positive, affirming climate (including online classrooms).
- It should help to teach more able learners to answer their own questions and develop self-regulation skills.
- Feedback must challenge pupils to invest effort in moving forwards.
Conclusion
Effective feedback is one of the powerful enablers of learning. Consistently asking “Where am I going? How am I doing? Where to next?” embeds this in deep learning and aligns with classroom assessment. It is not an isolated nor time-consuming process.
References
- Hattie, J.& Timperley, H. (2007) The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. Vol. 77, No. 1, pp. 81–112
- Henderson, M., Boud, D., Molloy, E., Dawson, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., & Mahoney, P. (2018). Feedback for learning: closing the assessment loop. Australian Government Department of Education and Training.
- Scott. J. (2020) Assessment and feedback in an online context. Evidence-based Education. Podcast 24th February. Accessed 14 February 2021.
Additional reading and support:
Tags:
assessment
feedback
lockdown
remote learning
research
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Keith Watson FCCT,
27 January 2021
|
Dr Keith Watson, NACE Associate
In recent years many new developments in teaching have been most welcome and have helped the shift towards a more research-informed profession. NACE’s recent report Making space for able learners – Cognitive challenge: principles into practice provides examples of strategies used for the design and management of cognitively challenging learning opportunities, including reference to Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction (2010) which outline many of these strategies.
These principles of instruction are particularly influential in current teaching, which is pleasing to the many good teachers who have been used them for years, although they may not have attached that exact language to what they were doing. These principles are especially helpful for early career teachers, but like all principles they need to be constantly reflected upon. I was always taken by Professor Deborah Eyre’s reference to “structured tinkering” (2002): not wholesale change but building upon key principles and existing practice.
This is where “cutaway” comes in – another of the strategies identified in the NACE report, and one which I would like to encourage you to “tinker” with in your approach to ability grouping and ensuring appropriately challenging learning for all.
What is “cutaway” and why use it?
The “cutaway” approach involves setting high-attaining students off to start their independent work earlier than the vast majority of the class, while the teacher continues to provide direct instruction/ modelling to the main group. In this way the high attainers can begin their independent work more quickly and can avoid being bored by the whole class instruction which they can find too easy, even when the teacher is trying to “teach to the top”. Once the rest of the class has begun their independent work, the teacher can then focus on the higher attaining group to consolidate the independent work and extend them further.
There are more nuances which I will explain later, but you may wonder, how did this way of working come about?
An often-quoted figure from the National Academy of Gifted and Talented Youth (NAGTY) was that gifted students may already have acquired knowledge of 40-50% of their lessons before they are taught. If I am honest, this was 100% in some of my old lessons! With whole class teaching, retrieval practice tasks and modelling (all essential elements in a lesson), there are clear dangers of pupils being asked to work on things they already know well. There is the issue of what Freeman, (quoted in Ofsted, 2005:3), called the “three-time problem” where: “Pupils who absorb the information the first time develop a technique of mentally switching off for the second and the third, then switching on again for the next new point, involving considerable mental skill.” Why waste this time?
The idea of “cutaway” was consolidated when I carried out a research project involving the use of learning logs to improve teaching provision for more able learners (Watson, 2005). In this project teachers adapted their teaching based on pupil feedback. The teachers realised that, in a primary classroom, keeping the pupils too long “on the carpet” was inappropriate and the length of time available to work at a high level was being minimised. One of the teachers reflected: “Sometimes during shared work on the carpet, when revising work from previous lessons to check the understanding of other pupils, I feel aware of the more able children wanting to move on straight away and find it difficult to balance the needs of all the children within the Year 5 class.”
It therefore became common in lessons (though not all lessons) to cutaway pupils when they were ready to begin independent work. By using “cutaway” the pupils use time more effectively, develop greater independence, can move through work more quickly and carry out more extended and more challenging tasks. The method was commented upon favourably during a HMI inspection that my school received and has ever since been a mainstay of teaching at the school.
Who, when and how to cutaway
So how does a teacher decide when and who to cutaway? The method is not needed in all lessons, the cutaway group should vary based upon AfL, and at its best it involves pupils deciding whether they feel they need more modelling/explanation from the teacher or are ready to be cutaway. In a recent NACE blogpost on ability grouping, Dr Ann McCarthy emphasises that in using cutaway “the teacher constantly assesses pupils’ learning and needs and directs their learning to maximise opportunities, growth and development” and pupils “leave and join the shared learning community”. This underlines the importance of the AfL nature of the strategy and the importance of developing learners’ metacognition, which was another key finding in the NACE report.
Sometimes the cutaway approach is decided on before a lesson by the teacher based upon previous work. In GCSE history, a basic retrieval task on the Norman invasion could be time wasted for a more able pupil who has secure knowledge, whereas being cutaway to do an independent task centred on the role of the Pope in supporting William would be more challenging and worthwhile. It comes down to one key question a teacher needs to ask themselves when speaking to the whole class: “Who do I need here now?” Who needs to retrieve this knowledge? Who needs to hear this explanation? Who needs to see this model or complete this example? If a small group of higher attainers do not need this, then why slow the pace of their learning? Why not start them either on the same work independently or more challenging work to accelerate learning?
Why not play around with this idea? Explain your thinking to the pupils and see how they respond. Sometimes, at the end of one lesson, a task for the next lesson can be explained and the pupils could start the next lesson by working on that task straight away. The 2015 Ofsted handbook said, “The vast majority of pupils will progress through the programmes of study at the same rate”, and ideally, they will. However, a few pupils will progress at a faster rate and therefore need adapted provision. The NACE research and accompanying CPD programme suggests the use of “cutaway” can achieve this and it is well worth all teachers doing some “structured tinkering” with this strategy.
References
Additional reading and support
Share your views
How do you use ability grouping, and why? Share your experiences by commenting on this blog post or by contacting communications@nace.co.uk
Tags:
cognitive challenge
differentiation
grouping
independent learning
pedagogy
research
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Hilary Lowe,
14 January 2021
|
Hilary Lowe, NACE Education Adviser
Despite and also because of what is happening around us currently, we are returning to the big questions in education – what should schools be teaching, and how should we assess that on a day-to-day basis and for the purposes of public accountability and progression throughout all phases of education?
All the big questions are complex, but assessment is a particularly devilish one. It raises issues of course such as what we should be assessing (and ‘measuring’) and when, but also of how to reflect the different rates of progress and the learning capacities of different young people, of how to assess skills as well as knowledge, and of the place of current and possible future technologies in educational assessment. Assessment must also address wider questions of educational equity.
The smaller questions are also important – of how everyday formative and summative assessment practices in all classrooms, real and virtual, can be as effective as possible. All teachers must become as proficient in assessment as they are in pedagogy – two sides of the same coin. We return therefore to the central importance of high-quality, evidence-informed professional development and evaluation and planning tools for schools.
Your chance to contribute: NACE member survey
NACE has a keen interest in contributing to the debate about how everyday assessment practices and public accountability systems may be improved and reformed to the benefit of all learners, including the most able. As an organisation serving schools directly, we plan to start by looking at aspects which have current and practical application for teachers, informing the development of resources (including enhancement of the NACE Curriculum Audit Tool) and training programmes to support schools. Our engagement will also take account of the rapidly evolving context in which schools are working, and of the importance of improving day-to-day formative and summative assessment practices.
Our initial focus will be on:
- The assessment of remote learning;
- Assessment literacies and practices to promote the learning of more able pupils.
Both areas will of course make reference to issues of educational equity.
As a membership organisation we very much want to involve our members in our work on assessment, and to that end we are inviting members to respond to an online survey focusing on remote feedback and assessment. This will be used alongside a review of emerging best practice and theory in everyday assessment practices, including assessment of remote learning. Your survey contributions will be an important part of our work in this area, and we will feed the initial results back, so that you can benefit from others’ experiences. .
To contribute, please complete the survey by 4 February 2021.
Contribute to the survey.
Tags:
assessment
CPD
feedback
lockdown
pedagogy
remote learning
technology
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Ems Lord,
13 January 2021
|
NACE is proud to NACE is proud to partner with Cambridge University’s NRICH initiative, which is dedicated to creating free maths resources and activities to promote enriching, challenging maths experiences for all. In this blog post, NRICH Director Dr Ems Lord shares details of the latest free maths resources from the team, and an exclusive opportunity for NACE members…
In this blog post, I’m delighted to introduce NRICH’s new child-friendly reflection tool for nurturing successful mathematicians – part of our suite of free maths resources and activities to promote enriching, challenging mathematical experiences for all. We very much hope that you enjoy exploring it with your classes to support them to realise their potential. Such innovations are developed in partnerships with schools and teachers, and we’ll also be inviting you to work directly with our team to help design a future classroom resource intended to challenge able mathematicians (see below or click here for details of our upcoming online event for NACE members).
At NRICH, we believe that learning mathematics is about much more than simply learning topics and routines. Successful mathematicians understand the curriculum content and are fluent in mathematical skills and procedures, but they can also solve unfamiliar problems, explain their thinking and have a positive attitude about themselves as learners of mathematics. Inspired by the 'rope model' proposed by Kilpatrick et al. (2001), which draws attention to the importance of a balanced curriculum developing all five strands of mathematical proficiency equally rather than promoting some strands at the expense of others, we have developed this new model and image which uses child-friendly language so that teachers and parents can share with learners five key ingredients that characterise successful mathematicians:
- Understanding: Maths is a network of linked ideas. I can connect new mathematical thinking to what I already know and understand.
- Tools: I have a toolkit that I can choose tools from to help me solve problems. Practising using these tools helps me become a better mathematician.
- Problem solving: Problem solving is an important part of maths. I can use my understanding, skills and reasoning to help me work towards solutions.
- Reasoning: Maths is logical. I can convince myself that my thinking is correct and I can explain my reasoning to others.
- Attitude: Maths makes sense and is worth spending time on. I can enjoy maths and become better at it by persevering.
Using the tool during remote learning and beyond
This reflection tool helps learners to recognise where their mathematical strengths and weaknesses lie. Each of the maths activities in our accompanying primary and secondary features is designed to offer learners opportunities to develop their mathematical capabilities in multiple strands. We hope learners will have a go at some of the activities and then take time to reflect on their own mathematical capabilities, so that when full-time schooling returns for all they are ready to share their excitement about what they have achieved, and are eager to continue on their mathematical journeys.
At NRICH, we believe that following the current period of remote learning, success in settling back into schools will be aided by recognising and acknowledging the mathematical learning that has been achieved at home, and encouraging learners to reflect on how they see themselves as mathematicians. It may be that some learners will not recognise the value of what they have achieved while they have been out of the classroom, because what they have been doing at home may be quite different from what they usually do in school. We want learners to appreciate that there are many ways to demonstrate their mathematical capabilities, and to recognise the ways in which they behave mathematically. By inviting children and students to assess their mathematical progress on a broad range of measures, we hope to change the narrative to recognise what learners have achieved, rather than focusing on what they have missed.
Get involved….
As the current period of remote learning continues, we’re continuing to develop new free maths resources, and we always value input from teachers. On 3 February 2021, the NRICH team is hosting an online meetup for NACE members during which we’ll share an exciting new classroom resource, currently under development, intended to challenge able mathematicians. The session will involve an opportunity to explore this new resource and share your insights to help inform its future development. We look forward to working with you. Details and booking.
Very best wishes for 2021 – the NRICH team.
Ref: Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J. and Findell, F. (eds) (2001) Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Mathematics Learning Study Committee: National Research Council.
Tags:
confidence
free resources
lockdown
maths
metacognition
mindset
motivation
remote learning
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Emma Sanderson,
12 January 2021
|
Emma Sanderson, Head of English at NACE member and Challenge Award-accredited Hartland International School (Dubai), shares advice for successful use of “Genius Hour” project-based learning to challenge and motivate learners, inspired by Google’s “20% time”.
As teachers, our awareness of the importance of challenging questions is always at the forefront of our minds, particularly with our more able learners. However, the onus of asking challenging questions shouldn’t always be placed on the teacher. Cue Genius Hour, an idea inspired by Google’s “20% time”, in which employees are encouraged to spend 20% of their time working on any project of their choosing, on the condition that it ultimately benefits the company in some way, and which is famously credited with giving rise to many of Google’s most successful innovations.
Google’s “20% time” is similar to the use of Genius Hour in our school: encouraging students to take ownership of their learning by using a proportion of curriculum time to focus on topics they are passionate about. By coming up with their own driving question to focus their research, students manage their own learning journey and subsequently become even more engaged with the learning process.
Here are three key steps to use Genius Hour project-based learning effectively:
1) Support students to develop their driving question.
The driving question of the project will become the focus of the students’ research. Whilst students may be tempted to simply find out more information about a topic close to their heart, the key is to construct a question that allows for in-depth research and is also broad enough for students to include their personal opinions. Even our most able learners will need support with this task, and for this, question stems can be incredibly useful:
- What does _______ reveal about _________?
- To what extent does…?
- What motivates_________?
- How would you develop…?
- What alternatives are there for…?
- How can technology be used to…?
- What assumptions are there about…?
- What are the [ethical] implications of…?
- How can we challenge…?
- What would happen if…?
- How can we improve…?
- What might happen if…?
Students might be encouraged to come up with solutions to real-life problems or delve into ideas linked to current affairs that they are intrigued by. Either way, these broad question stems allow for thorough exploration of a topic.
2) Help students develop their research skills.
Left to their own devices, students may be tempted to simply Google their question and see what answers come up. Instead, offer guidance on the best and most reliable sources of information for their project.
It may be that students are directed towards relevant reference books in the library. Additionally, online resources can prove invaluable; the Encyclopaedia Britannica offers a wealth of knowledge for students, whilst news websites aimed at teenagers (for example Newsela and The Day) encourage students to form their own opinions on current affairs and offer suggestions for further reading.
Our more able learners may be more adept at focusing their internet searches and filtering through the vast array of results. If this is the case, students would be expected to determine whether a source is reliable or biased and should be confident at citing their sources.
3) Encourage creativity in how students present their findings.
Ideally, students will be excited and motivated to complete their Genius Hour project, and originality in how they present their results should be encouraged. Students may want to create a video, make a presentation, write a passionate and persuasive speech, design an informative leaflet… The more freedom the students have, the more their creativity will flourish.
One of our students gave a rousing speech on the question, “What alternatives are there to living on planet Earth?” (ultimately concluding there were none and that we need to change our lifestyles in order to save the planet). Another offered a passionate presentation on the theme “How can we improve Earth’s biodiversity while allowing people to still eat meat and plants?” And after witnessing the impact of Covid-19 first hand, one student wrote an insightful article to answer the question, “What has Covid-19 revealed about our society in 2020?”
This approach to project-based learning can also be effectively applied during distance learning – students can be given the success criteria for the project and set the challenge of managing their own time. There is ample opportunity to use technology to give presentations remotely, either live through Zoom or Teams, or recorded individually using a platform such as Flipgrid.
In summary…
Overall, Genius Hour is a fantastic tool to promote deeper thinking in the classroom, whilst also having huge benefits across the wider curriculum. We have found this approach has worked particularly well with Key Stage 3 students and is the perfect opportunity to refine the research and presentation skills required at GCSE, whilst also impacting positively across the curriculum in all lessons. Furthermore, it sends the message to students that their passions outside of school are valued, which in itself can prove to be hugely motivational. Presenting their findings at the end of the project instils confidence in our learners, giving them the vital communication, leadership and time management skills necessary for life beyond education.
Further reading: “Cognitive challenge: principles into practice”
NACE’s report “Cognitive challenge: principles into practice” explores approaches to curriculum and pedagogy which optimise the engagement, learning and achievement of very able young people, combining relevant research and theory with examples of current practice in NACE Challenge Award-accredited schools. Preview and order here.
Not yet a NACE member? Find out more, and join our mailing list for free updates and free sample resources.
Tags:
confidence
creativity
enquiry
enrichment
independent learning
motivation
problem-solving
project-based learning
questioning
research
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Ann McCarthy,
06 January 2021
|
Dr Ann McCarthy, NACE Associate and co-author of NACE’s new publication “Cognitive challenge: principles into practice”.
To group or not to group: that is the question…
The organisation and management of cognitively challenging learning environments is one of three focus areas highlighted in NACE’s new research publication, “Cognitive challenge: principles into practice”, which marks the first phase in our “Making Space for Able Learners” project. Developed in partnership with NACE Challenge Award-accredited schools, the research examines the impact of cognitive challenge in current school practice against a backdrop of relevant research.
As teachers, we aim to provide a cognitively challenging learning environment for our more able and exceptionally able pupils, which is beneficial to them. The organisational decisions surrounding this should therefore optimise opportunities for learning. Teachers and school leaders must not only consider content to be studied, but also the impact of classroom management decisions from the perspective of the learner. The NACE research showed that these classroom management and organisational decisions were one of three key factors impacting on cognitively challenging learning, alongside curriculum organisation and design and the use of rich and extended talk and cognitive discourse.
 One aspect of managing cognitively challenging learning environments is any choice relating to mixed ability teaching versus a variety of designs for selection and grouping by ability. Within the classroom the teacher also balances demands to provide opportunities for all, while simultaneously identifying the nature and opportunity for challenge.
Does ability grouping benefit learners?
There is a paucity of strong evidence that ability grouping is beneficial to academic outcomes for all. However, Parsons and Hallam (2014) did find that grouping can benefit more able pupils. This benefit is not necessarily associated with the act of setting, but with the quality of teaching provided for these groups. Pupils also have opportunities to work at a faster pace, but against this aspiration, Boaler et al. (2000) found pace incompatible with understanding for many pupils. Regardless of the choice made to group or not to group, there is a need to reflect on whether teaching is homogenous or designed to meet the needs of the pupils. Often the weakness is the assumption that grouping alone will drive the learning experience, without an understanding of the cognitive and emotional impact this has on the pupils themselves.
The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) has examined the use of setting and streaming, which are usually related to attainment rather than ability, and has found that there is often a small negative impact for disadvantaged pupils and lower abilities. When designing learner groupings, it is important to be aware of the impact for all learners and create a beneficial model for all.
How should teachers and schools approach ability grouping?
First, decide what you hope to teach and what it is pupils have the potential to achieve, given enough learning opportunities. Remember, learning is not limited to reproducing planned content by rote, but instead its success lies within a growth of knowledge, its complexity, and its application. Pupils bring a wide range of prior learning, knowledge and experiences which they can share with each other and use to construct new schema. In a well-designed learning environment, pupils have the potential to develop their knowledge, skills and understanding beyond the delivered content. Young et al. (2014) demonstrate the importance of powerful knowledge which takes pupils beyond their own experiences. The development of metacognition and exposure to wider experience should therefore be included in decisions related to the organisation of groups and lesson planning.
Second, decide what environment will provide the best learning experience for the pupils.
- Is it best to present advanced curricula at an accelerated rate?
- Does teaching include multiple high-order thinking models and skills?
- Is learning pupil-centred?
- Are multiple modality enquiry methods in play?
- Will grouping take account of the complexity of ability and enhance its manifestation?
- Will pupils benefit from a wide range of perspectives?
- Will pupils utilise the learning experiences of others to reflect upon and refine their own learning?
The answers to these questions will help teachers to make decisions regarding the nature of grouping and classroom organisation. The choice of model should be one which most benefits the learner, one which is not driven by systemic organisational requirements, and one which recognises the impact of external factors on perceived ability.
Finally, what models are available and how can cognitive challenge be achieved within them?
- Mixed ability grouping has the benefit of exposing pupils to the wider knowledge, background, and experience of others. In these environments, problems with different layers of complexity and multiple learning routes are often used. The big question or cognitively challenging proposition often promotes the learning with supporting systems and prompts in place for those challenged by the learning.
- Cutaway models are an alternative to the simpler mixed ability model. In the cutaway approach, the teacher constantly assesses pupils’ learning and needs and directs their learning to maximise opportunities, growth, and development. Pupils join and leave the shared learning (“cutting away” as appropriate), based on prior learning and their response to the existing task. This model develops and utilises independence and metacognition.
- Grouping by task is often used when it is possible to create smaller groups working on different tasks within the same classroom. The teacher uses very specific knowledge relating to pupils’ prior learning and abilities to organise the classroom groups. The teacher can therefore target the teaching to respond to more specific learning opportunities, which in turn can increase pupils’ enjoyment and engagement in their learning.
- Grouping by subject is an extension of grouping by task. If pupils learn all their subjects within the same class group, this enables the teacher to note the different strengths within the subject. In larger schools, pupils are often grouped by overall performance in specific subjects. This model might include advanced curriculum and require higher-order thinking skills. Pupils might be given opportunities to research more deeply into areas of interest. For this model to be successful there needs to be fluidity between the groups so that pupils are well-placed to enjoy cognitively challenging experiences.
With these ideas in mind, schools will then create an overarching model which reflects the school vision, ethos and culture. Teachers will consistently strive to provide cognitively challenging learning opportunities which benefit all. They use their knowledge of the pupils’ past and present learning and their vision of what the pupils can be and can achieve in the future to design the learning environment. They then organise the classroom to excite, engage and challenge their pupils – remembering that regardless of the sophistication of the approach, every group will be mixed ability as no two pupils are identical. If high-quality and engaging teaching is child-centred and not homogenous, then pupils will excel in cognitively challenging classrooms.
References
- Boaler, J., Wiliam, D. and Brown, M. (2000). Students’ experiences of ability grouping – disaffection, polarisation and the construction of failure. British Education Research Journal, 26 (5), 631–648.
- Education Endowment Foundation, Teaching and Learning Toolkit
- Parsons, S. and Hallam, S. (2014). The impact of streaming on attainment at age seven: evidence from the Millennium Cohort Study. The Oxford Review of Education, 40 (5), 567-589.
- VanTassel-Baska, J. and Brown, E. (2007) Toward Best Practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 342.
- Young, M and Muller, J. (2013). On the Powers of Powerful Knowledge. Review of Education1(3) 229-250.
Additional reading and support
Share your views
How do you use ability grouping, and why? Share your experiences by commenting on this blog post or by contacting communications@nace.co.uk
Tags:
cognitive challenge
CPD
differentiation
grouping
leadership
pedagogy
research
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Alison Tarrant,
07 December 2020
|
Alison Tarrant, Chief Executive, School Library Association (SLA)
I struggle with addressing the importance of diversity accurately, but fundamentally I think Ruth Bader Ginsberg sums it up best:
“When I'm sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court] and I say, 'When there are nine,' people are shocked. But there'd been nine men, and nobody's ever raised a question about that.”
Every child should read about how other children live and about alternative experiences, and I don’t think we should limit this to a certain percentage or context. Until children can pick up a book and not be surprised that a character looks like them (or doesn’t look like them), we have work to do. It’s vital that the resources children engage with are noticeably representative (there are many studies which show even animals are more likely to be male in books, so the argument that animals or monsters are equally representative doesn’t work). For more on this, watch the SLA's webinar " Representation for All" – available for NACE members until the end of January 2021.
- 3% growth in the number of authors and illustrators of colour published in the UK in the last two years.
- 7% of the children’s books published in the UK over the last three years feature characters of colour.
This is progress, but the pace of change doesn’t yet seem to match the level of the discussion which has taken place. I’m hopeful that the new initiatives launched in light of the events of this year will lead to a significant increase on these figures next year. In the meantime, how can schools ensure their resources are diverse, representative and inclusive?
Key questions to consider
For many schools, the topic of diversity and inclusion prompted self-evaluation this year. An audit of the curriculum and/or resources may have taken place, though this can be done in many different ways. Here are some core questions to ask when thinking about diversity within your resources:
- How many of your resources are written by ethnic minorities or people seen less in the public eye? This may include consideration for UK-based ethnic minorities, authors with disabilities, authors from working-class backgrounds.
- How many of the resources reflect stories from these groups? When thinking about this, consideration should also be given to how those characters are represented; if every story which includes a black character shows them suffering abuse, it embeds a story overall. Are these stories “issues” stories, or simply great stories with authentic characters? Are they suitable for discovery alone, or do they need a conversation and some scaffolding beforehand? (There was a very interesting and upsetting discussion around the impact of “Of Mice and Men” on pupils and teachers recently – you can read it about it in this Twitter thread.)
- How often do you create displays around these characters, authors, books? Celebrate these authors alongside their mainstream colleagues, rather than as part of Black History Month or awareness days, as consistently “including” them in this way may actually send a message of “othering” as opposed to inclusion.
- Are your resources providing a broad range of experiences and perspectives? Match the resources to the cohort, absolutely, but include resources for wider awareness as well. For example, resources about travellers are important for the travelling community; but they’re also important for representing an alternative narrative to the stereotype which is so easily absorbed, so should also be available in schools without those cohorts.
- Is your school collection keeping pace? Ensuring representation and inclusion doesn’t happen by accident. It requires an in-depth knowledge of the school’s resource collection, it can be supported or hindered by the collection policy, and it does require funding. There are equity issues with schools which are not funding their resources sufficiently; these schools are often pushed to get resources from donations or charity shops, and while there may be an occasional bargain to be found, these should not form the basis of a collection. Publishers have been increasingly proactive in paying attention to these issues, and are constantly scanning and reacting to the world around them. The books produced in the last year or two will take a long time to filter through to donations (most often as children grow up or out of books), so if schools rely on donations/second-hand purchases, this delays the impact of changes and leaves some children missing out.
Note on diversity in resource formats
Diversity should also be reflected in the type of resource encountered. Throughout this blog I’ve used the word resources instead of “book” – this is not just because schools should be considering all their resources, but also because “book” can be taken to have a very narrow meaning. Resources, in this blog, means fiction books, information books, e-books, audio books, graphic novels, poetry books, wordless books, picture books and much more. Teachers are incredibly good at selecting the right resource for the right piece of work, but we also need to be mindful of the overall messaging when all those resources are put together, and those with responsibility for the school library need to make sure that representation, inclusion, and importantly choice, are available to all pupils.
Further reading and resources
- Free webinar: "Representation for All". The SLA has written multiple articles on this topic and provided a free webinar for SLA members. The webinar recording is available for NACE members until the end of January 2021. Watch the webinar here.
- Share your views: UK School Library Survey 2020. The SLA is partnering with Softlink on a survey into key issues for school libraries in 2020; and indeed one of the questions is about how schools and school libraries have responded to the varying key themes of this year. Children are curious and will have had a huge number of questions about different things throughout this year; schools are key allies in supporting their learning journey through these cultural issues, and we’d like to know how these subjects have been tackled. Take part in the survey here.
- Blog post: Librarians under lockdown: rising to the challenge – Bev Humphrey, Literacy and Technology Consultant and Digital Content Manager at the SLA, shares some of the ways in which school librarians have risen to meet the challenges of lockdown life.
- Blog post: 6 signs your school library is meeting the needs of all learners – SLA Chief Executive Alison Tarrant outlines six signs your school library is providing challenge, stimulation and support for all learners.
- New reading list for able readers at KS3. NACE trustee Sue Mordecai has compiled a list of recommended reading for able readers in key stage 3, available in the templates and checklists section of the NACE members' resource library (login required). This is a working list and one we will continue adding to. To share your suggestions for this list, or for other age groups, please contact communications@nace.co.uk.
Tags:
access
aspirations
diversity
English
enrichment
gender
independent learning
libraries
literacy
literature
reading
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Ann McCarthy,
17 November 2020
|
Dr Ann McCarthy, NACE Associate and co-author of NACE’s new publication “Cognitive challenge: principles into practice”.
When you’re planning a lesson, are your first thoughts about content, resources and activities, or do you begin by thinking about learning and cognitive challenge? How often do you consider lessons from the viewpoint of your more able pupils? Highly able pupils often seek out cognitively challenging work and can become distressed or disengaged if they are set tasks which are constantly too easy.
NACE’s new research publication, “ Cognitive challenge: principles into practice”, marks the first phase in our “Making Space for Able Learners” project. Developed in partnership with NACE Challenge Award-accredited schools, the research examines the impact of cognitive challenge in current school practice against a backdrop of relevant research. What do we mean by ‘cognitive challenge’?
Cognitive challenge can be summarised as an approach to curriculum and pedagogy which focuses on optimising the engagement, learning and achievement of highly able children. The term is used by NACE to describe how learners become able to understand and form complex and abstract ideas and solve problems. Cognitive challenge prompts and stimulates extended and strategic thinking, as well as analytical and evaluative processes.
To provide highly able pupils with the degree of challenge that will allow them to flourish, we need to build our planning and practice on a solid foundation.
This involves understanding both the nature of our pupils as learners and the learning opportunities we’re providing. When we use “challenge” as a routine, learning will be extended at specific times on specific topics – which has useful but limited benefit. However, by strategically building cognitive challenge into your teaching, pupils’ learning expertise, their appetite for learning and their wellbeing will all improve.
What does this look like in practice?
The research identified three core areas:
1. Design and management of cognitively challenging learning opportunities
In the most successful “cognitive challenge” schools, leaders have a clear vision and ambition for pupils, which explicitly reflects an understanding of teaching more able pupils in different contexts and the wider benefits of this for all pupils. This vision is implemented consistently across the school. All teachers engage with the culture and promote it in their own classrooms, involving pupils in their own learning. When you walk into any classroom in the school, pupils are working to the same model and expectation, with a shared understanding of what they need to do.
Pupils are able to take control of their learning and become more self-regulatory in their behaviours and increasingly autonomous in their learning. Through intentional and well-planned management of teaching and learning, children move from being recipients in the learning environment to effective learners who can call on the resources and challenges presented. They understand more about their own learning and develop their curiosity and creativity by extending and deepening their understanding and knowledge.
2. Rich and extended talk and cognitive discourse to support cognitive challenge
The importance of questions and questioning in effective learning is well understood, but the importance of depth and complexity of questioning is perhaps less so. When you plan purposeful, stimulating and probing questions, it gives pupils the freedom to develop their thought processes and challenge, engage and deepen their understanding. Initially the teacher may ask questions, but through modelling high-order questioning techniques, pupils in turn can ask questions which expose new ways of thinking.
This so-called “dialogic teaching” frames teaching and learning within the perspective of pupils and enhances learning by encouraging children to develop their thinking and use their understanding to support their learning. Initially, pupils might use the knowledge the teacher has given them, but when they’re shown how to use classroom discourse effectively, they’ll start to work alone, with others or with the teacher to extend their repertoire.
By using an enquiry-orientated approach, you can more actively engage children in the production of meaning and acquisition of new knowledge and your classroom will become a more interactive and language-rich learning domain where children can increase their fluency, retrieval and application of knowledge.
3. Curriculum organisation and design
How can you ensure your curriculum is organised to allow cognitive challenge for more able pupils? You need to consider:
- What is planned for the students
- What is delivered to the students
- What the students experience
Schools with a high-quality curriculum for cognitive challenge use agreed teaching approaches and a whole-school model for teaching and learning. Teachers expertly and consistently utilise key features relating to learning preferences, knowledge acquisition and memory.
Planning a curriculum for more able pupils means providing a clear direction for their learning journey. It’s necessary to think beyond individual subjects, assessment systems, pedagogy and extracurricular opportunities, and to look more deeply at the ways in which these link together for the benefit of your pupils. If teachers can understand and deliver this curriculum using their subject knowledge and pedagogical skills, and if your school can successfully make learning visible to pupils, you’ll be able to move from well-practised routines to highly successful and challenging learning experiences.
Taking it further…
If we’re going to move beyond the traditional monologic and didactic models of teaching, we need to recast the role of teacher as a facilitator of learning within a supportive learning environment. For more able pupils this can be taken a step further. If you can build cognitive challenge into your curriculum and the way you manage learning, and support this with a language-rich classroom, the entire nature of teaching and learning can change. Your highly able pupils will become increasingly autonomous and more self-reliant. They’ll become masters of their learning as they gain a deeper understanding of the subject matter. You can then extend your role even further, from learning facilitator to “learner activator”.
This blog post is based on an article originally written for and published by Teach Primary magazine – read the full version here.
Additional reading and support:
Tags:
cognitive challenge
creativity
critical thinking
curriculum
independent learning
metacognition
mindset
oracy
pedagogy
problem-solving
questioning
research
student voice
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
Blog Home
All Blogs
Print Page
RSS