Reading up on the Pupil Premium

Now would be as good a time as any to do a brief update on my thesis research question (RQ) which, admittedly, is still at the proposal stage. I am still planning on a focus on student perception of feedback, with the help of student researchers, but I've added a new element as well; the Pupil Premium (PP). For those of you not in the know, the PP was created in 2011 as a way to narrow the achievement gap between 'disadvantaged' students and their more 'well-off' counterparts. The reason for this is that pupils who are economically disadvantaged have an increased risk of falling behind, failing to achieve their expected targets, and are unlikely to attend University. By providing schools with direct funding for each of these students, the hope is that schools can better address the gap in achievement.

The reason I've made this change to my RQ is two-fold; first of all, as part of the school improvement plan this year (or maybe it's called an Action Plan - I'm not sure) there is a school-wide focus on addressing the achievement gap between PP students and their peers; the second reason is that the SUPER M.Ed group is also making the PP gap an area of focus. Obviously it would be killing two (or three) birds with one stone if I tried to find a way to incorporate PP into my thesis study. 

In fact, I'm already a part of the Research Enquiry Group, which is going to focus on conducting action research regarding strategies teachers can undertake to narrow the gap. Within my group, we're going to focus on building resiliency among PP students so that they are less likely to 'give up' on difficult tasks. This is partly why I've started reading so many books on making thinking visible within lessons. 

I've also spent the last week researching the PP itself. It's led me through a lot of Department for Education documents (snore), Ofsted documents (which actually aren't that bad - reading them has made my dislike of the Inspectorate slightly intense; I can actually see the merit of some of their concerns), and various 'independent' studies. I say 'independent' rather sarcastically because many of the reviews of the PP are made on behalf of either the DfE or Ofsted, so I sometimes doubt their objectivity. I also very easily found the Sutton Trust PP Toolkit, which outlined a number of programmes of use for the PP, and read through a number of criticisms as well. 

The point I wanted to make for the time being is that there's a lot of talk about the merits of the PP, and a lot of preliminary 'study' has gone into its effectiveness, but ultimately we can't really judge the value of the PP until more time has passed. I think we also need to ensure, as schools, that we're rigorously tracking the effect of any intervention programmes we conduct with PP money, for PP students, before we make any claims about what works and what doesn't. 

That being said, I do think the PP is a very worthwhile initiative. If used the right way (which means careful planning) there is no way it can't be helpful.  Things that seem to be 'sound investments' include tailoring programmes to suit individual students needs, working with students on long term learning gains (opposed to one-off intervention sessions), getting parents involved so that they can become better enablers of learning at home, making use of effective and frequent feedback (I knew that one would be on there) and tackling the issues when students are young, before the gap grows.

Obviously there is much more to it than that, but that's about all I feel up to discussing at the minute. I think it's time for me to finally start my half term break. I've already spent the firsts 4 days doing research and other such things, and you know what they say;  all work and no play make Jack a dull boy. 

I'll see you next week. 

KC

Review: Visible Learning for Teachers

The next text in my quest for knowledge on thinking is John Hattie's Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximising Impact on Learning (2012). I've spent the last two days reading through the text from from to back (leave no stone unturned, right?), taking notes, so that I can provide for you (and me, really) a summary of the best bits. So here we go...

The main message of the book is that teachers need to 'Know thy impact'; essentially, we need to constantly evaluate our impact on the learning of our students. As such, 'teachers and school leaders need to be critical evaluators of the effect that they are having on their students'. This isn't to say that we should focus on external results though; instead, it's about being able to recognise when we do (or, just as importantly, when we don't) have a positive effect on the learning of our pupils. When they don't make the progress that we expect of them we need to think about why that may be and devise ways to bridge the gap.

While there is 'no fixed recipe' for doing this, he does suggest that there are 'practices that we know are effective and there are those that are not'; good teachers (and school leaders) will be able to recognise the good and the bad, and make changes to ensure that the best practice is being used to suit the needs of our learners. When students do not learn, good teachers and leaders should realise that they don't need 'more'; they need 'different'. 

Hattie goes on to suggests that 'the best results come from a community of teachers and learners'. He goes on to cite Paul Brock's (2004) three fundamental principles for creating these types of communities; the ability to nurture intellectual and imaginative capacities, fostering a caring environment, and striving to maximise potential (this should be the role of teachers and students alike). Teachers and students should work together to 'find out what students can do and make them exceed their potential and needs'. Students should be taught how to evaluate their own progress, become responsible for their own learning, and be involved in the learning of others. Like anything, this isn't something that can be changed overnight; it requires the community coming together to learn how to best learn. 

Just like the last text I read, the focus seems to be on making thinking 'visible'. This is defined as making the learning visible to the teacher and teaching visible to the student. According to Hattie, visible teaching and learning occurs when the 'learning is the explicit and transparent goal, when it is appropriately challenging and when the teachers and the student both...seek to ascertain whether and to what degree the challenging goal is attainable'. Furthermore, learning should include 'deliberate practice' which is 'aimed at attaining mastery of the goal, where there is feedback given and sought [which, to me, is quite an important point] and where there are active, passionate and engaging people...participating in the act of learning'. 

Attaining mastery isn't done through 'skill and drill' exercises (which I took to mean busy-work), but instead what Hattie refers to as 'deliberate practice'; this is when students concentrate on completing a task while being monitored and given feedback while the task is ongoing. It is therefore not the amount of practice that matters, but the amount of 'deliberate effort to improve performance that matters'. This is formative feedback; it is the type of feedback that students 'thrive' on. Essentially, giving students feedback at the end of the lesson is too late; 'students do not want to wait until the end of the lesson to know that they are on the right track'. In fact, students who are 'motivated by the desire to master the process invest more in strategies to enhance the process'. 

This leads us on to my hobby-horse, feedback. Hattie describes feedback as 'among the most common features of successful teaching and learning', while also recognising that 'its effects are [also] among the most variable'. He states that feedback is 'in the top 10 influences on achievement' which makes it a very important aspect of teaching and learning. (Incidentally, I totally agree with him.) The whole point of feedback, according to Hattie, is to 'reduce the gap between where a student is and where they are meant to be'. Good feedback 'thrives on error' (which I will discuss in more detail later in the post). 

The three feedback questions and the four levels of feedback.

There are three feedback questions that Hattie lays out: these include the setting of challenging goals (Where am I going?), clarifying and sharing progress (How am I going there?), and choosing appropriate challenges (Where to next?). As such, effective feedback allows for students to gauge their prior knowledge and understanding, recognise their current skills, and make plans for progressing from what they know now (or can do now) to what they want to know (or want to do). If used correctly, feedback will provide the 'conditions of ongoing learning' as students continue to build upon their knowledge and skill set, tackling more challenging topics as they grow and develop. 

Effective feedback must set challenging targets though, because a lack of challenge means a lack of growth. As such, 'providing feedback of successes not only has little or no effect, but...may also be costly as the students wait for the feedback, do not go on to new or more challenging tasks, and become dependent on the presence of feedback'. I found this interesting because it implies that the 'two star' part of our current 'two star and a wish' feedback policy is perhaps amiss. 

Hattie goes on to describe how studies have shown that 'providing feedback with no praise compared to feedback with praise has rester effect on achievement'. He also says that 'premature and gratuitous praise confus[es] students and discourag[es] revision' and that 'praise dissipates the message' of feedback. However, when I delved a bit deeper I came to the conclusion that Hattie meant praise for the sake of praise, as opposed to giving specific praise of criteria that have been successfully achieved; so long as the two stars are clearly linked to the success criteria, I can't see them being of any real harm. However, if they are merely 'good job' or 'good effort' then they're best left off; as Hattie says, 'leave praise out of feedback about learning' if it's not directly related to the learning itself.

Interestingly, and something that I have long suspected myself, Hattie describes how teachers view their feedback as more important than the students who receive it. Unsurprisingly, students 'find the feedback confusing, non-reasoned and not understandable'. He also suggests that most students think they've understood the feedback they've received, but often they have not. However, he does admit that little research has been done on how students actually receive their feedback; again, this is something I've found already in my review of the literature, and it's a gap that I hope to address in my thesis! 

Hattie talks at one point about passion, stating that it is the passionate teachers that students remember most. These are the teachers that know how 'every resource (especially peers) can be used to play a part in moving students from what they can do now to where the teacher considers they should be'. In fact, he goes so far as to suggest that 'passion may be the only natural resource that we [teachers] have'. He feels that teachers are 'activators'. We are the starting point, but we should never be the answer; we should instil in our students a desire (perhaps I should say 'passion') to find that for themselves. 

I find the use of the word 'passionate' interesting, as it is one that I feel gets thrown around a lot. People will often wax on about how passionate they are for their subject, their job, the attainment of their students, etc., but I would argue that sometimes this is just paying lip-service to what they think people want to hear. I would be lying if I said I was still 'passionate' about my job; that isn't to say I hate my job, I just don't have the same 'get-up-and-go' enthusiasm that I had when I first entered the profession. I used to be full of energy and wild ideas, but within my first year I soon realised that heady optimism and 'flashy' teaching isn't what students need (it may be what they want, mind). Besides, teaching like that all the time is physically and emotionally draining. It's not sustainable. No, that kind of passion died for me long ago, but I feel that it's been replaced with a much more realistic passion. What I am passionate about is making sure that I'm a good (or perhaps even Outstanding) teacher; to make sure that I continue learning and growing. To me this means constantly re-evaluating my teaching (and learning) and never taking anything for granted; to be stationary, to be resistant to change, or blind to the fact that what worked one year ago, one month ago, one week ago might not work today. 

But I digress. Hattie reiterates much of what I've found already in the literature on effective feedback (and learning): the need for clear success criteria; a way to measure any successes, coupled with steps to move forward; and a safe environment where failure is celebrated and errors are welcomed as an opportunity to grow.

I am a firm believer that mistakes are what drive us forward; challenge should be embraced, risks should be taken, and failure should be seen as a stepping stone to success. I've tried very hard this year to take away the negative stigma associated with 'failure' or making a 'mistake'. In my first lesson with each class, I told them that my favourite thing in the world was mistakes. Every single group was puzzled by this fact, but after getting them to try to explain why, I think they made the connection. 

However, building a classroom culture where failure is seen as an opportunity is no easy feat. It certainly doesn't change overnight. Hattie suggests that we need to teach strategies for 'using errors...seeing them as a positive thing'. By acknowledging errors we allow students the opportunity to make improvements. He goes on to say that 'succeeding at something that you thought was difficult is the surest way ins which to enhance self-efficacy'. 

According to Hattie, effective visible teaching and learning is the product of well planned lessons. For a lesson to be well planned, it has to have a clear purpose and set of outcomes, with a clear idea of what the expected impact will be on both the students and the teacher. He suggests working 'backwards' to create lessons, by first starting with the desired outcome and then deciding how to first instruct students and then scaffold their approach towards completion of the outcome. Within this type of lesson, opportunities should be given to students to become better at monitoring their own learning (and subsequent progress). Emphasis should be placed on having students gain mastery of skills, opposed to focusing on social or performance goals (as these are superficial). He states that 'when students invoke learning rather than performance strategies, accept rather than discount feedback, set benchmarks for difficult rather than easy goals, compare their achievement to subject criteria rather than that of other students...then they are much more likely to realise achievement gains and invest in learning'. 

A critical factor is to ensure that there is clear and understandable success criteria; this needs to be accessible to the students because 'the more a student can see and appreciate the actions needed to attain these criteria' the better their likelihood of success. For example, he gives 'to use effective adjectives' as an example of unclear success criteria, instead suggesting that 'to use an adjective just before a noun in at least four different occasions to paint a detailed picture' is a much clearer, and achievable, target. 

This is probably one of the most fundamental and helpful suggestions I got from the text, in terms of my own practice. I pride myself on including 'success criteria' in many of my lessons, often in the forms of a 'checklist for success'. However, I now realise that most of my criteria are vague and general, and don't allow for easily recognisable achievement. I will definitely be putting more 'specific' success criteria into my lessons from here on in.

Prompts that could be used when students are
working with feedback

Hattie continues by stating that students should be given opportunities, usually through 'rapid formative' feedback, to 'see' their progress within a lesson (or group of lessons) so that they can then monitor their 'investments and confidence in learning'. He also says that teachers should talk less and listen more, which is something I've been told myself after recent lesson observations. According to Hattie, teacher talk 'demonstrates to students that teachers are the owners of subject content, and controllers of the pacing and sequencing of learning'. The negative effect of this type of lesson is that the students will not take ownership of their own learning, because they (wrongly) believe that the teacher is the only one with valid contributions. I know from experience that letting go of the reins can be daunting, but the research clearly suggests that teacher talk is not beneficial to the students; it's the conversations that classes have together that are the most valuable. Accordingly, he goes on to cite Alexander (2008) who devised the following features of good classroom talk: it should be collective, reciprocal, supportive, cumulative and purposeful. 

In terms of intervention, which is a pretty hot topic at my school this year, particularly around Pupil Premium students, Hattie states that 'spaced schedules of studying produce better long-term retention than a single session'. I think that this has been taken on board at my school, as the intervention programmes that I've seen started up are ones that are long-lasting, with clear support and structure provided. This must surely be a step in the right direction. 

Gan's (2011) graphic organiser.

Finally, he discusses at length how students should be better trained to peer and self assess. He cites a study done by Gan (2011), where students were coached on how to formulate peer feedback at task, process and self-regulation levels; he found that this coaching had a 'significant effect on the quality of feedback that the students provided'. I've included an image of the graphic organiser (seen here) used by Gan to scaffold the use of peer assessment targets; my plan is to modify this and make use of it within my own classroom, as I think it has a lot of potential to make peer and self assessment more straightforward and accessible for students.

Anyways, that's about all of my thoughts on the text. It doesn't seem like much, now that I've finished typing up my review. I know that I've found reading then book useful, and hopefully my little summary will be of use to someone - it should save you the task of reading the whole text for yourself, at any rate!

Until next time. 

References

Alexander, R.J. (2008) Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.) York: Dialogos.

Brock, P. (2004) A passion for life. Sydney: Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Gan, M. (2011) The effects of prompts and explicit coaching on peer feedback quality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Auckland, available online at https://researchpace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/6630

Hattie, J. (2012) Visible learnings for teachers: maxi zing impact on learning. Routledge.

Exploring Thinking Routines

I've just finished voraciously reading "Making Thinking Visible" (Ritchhard, Church & Morrison, 2011) front to back, and I must admit it's probably the most interesting and useful text I've read in awhile (that wasn't linked to student voice). It's packed full of amazing and extremely user-friendly ideas for teachers in any subject, at any level, to incorporate into their classroom practice. I am already buzzing with ideas that I am going to take away and use within the next week. If you're looking for a text to help invigorate your own practice, then I would highly suggest purchasing the text; it's a worthy investment.

That said, I will try to summarise some of the best ideas here, for those looking for a quick dose of ideas. 

First of all, I really liked how the authors used the word 'routine' instead of 'technique' or 'strategy' to describe the ideas they share within the text. They justify their choice of the word 'routine' by saying that 'strategies' are only used on occasion whereas 'routines become part of the fabric of the classroom through their repeated use' (48).  They also suggest that the word routine 'carries with it notions of ordinariness, habit, and ritual' which suggests that they are longer lasting and can (and should) be incorporated into daily teaching practice, as opposed to being strategies used or trialled in one-off lessons (48). By thinking of the concepts as 'routines' it suggests that they will become a part of the 'pattern of the classroom' (49). 

The text is then broken down into a series of different sections, offering ways to engage higher level, visible thinking at various stages in a lesson or unit. These sections are: Routines for Introducing and Exploring Ideas; Routines for Synthesising and Organising Ideas; and Routines for Digging Deeper into Ideas. What I will do for you here is sample a few of  my favourite ideas, so that you can have something to take away; if you like what you see here, I would again suggest that you purchase a copy of the text for yourself. Failing that, if you'd like to borrow my copy, I'd be happy to lend it out. Of course, you'd have to know me in real life to take advantage of that offer. 

3 Sample Routines for Introducing and Exploring Ideas

The first routine in the text, and possibly the simplest to use in any classroom (and one of my favourites) is See-Think-Wonder (55). The purpose of using this routine is to provide an 'opportunity to look carefully, to more fully observe, and to notice before interpreting' (55). It would be well placed at the start of a new topic, unit or the introduction of a new skill. 

Essentially, you (the teacher) should select an image or object to present to the class. Students should then be given time to observe the image/object in silence, taking note of the things that they can See on the surface. At this point, students should only be noting what they can observe, nothing more. To clarify, the authors suggest telling students that 'an observation is something  you could actually put your fingers on' (56). 

Next,  you extend their thinking by asking them to explore what they Think is going on. To quote the text: 'This general, interpretive question may be modified to suit the image/object. For instance, you might ask, 'Based on what we are seeing and noticing, what does it make us think? What kinds of interpretations can we form based on our observations?'' (56). 

Finally, you allow students time to Wonder, based on what they have seen and think. This is where you should encourage students to challenge what they think; to what extent are their thoughts valid? Could there be alternative ways to view things? The point of this stage is to 'push [students] beyond [their] interpretations to look at issues and ideas raised by the image/object' (57).

Another routine that I liked was called Chalk Talk (although I think the name could be adapted for British schools, since I haven't seen a chalk board in ages, and the routine itself doesn't require the use of chalk at all! If anything, it's a variation of a Jigsaw). This routine allows students to partake in 'silent conversations' where they can anonymously absorb, build on, and debate thinking. 

To use this routine, you would need to write a series of prompts on large sheets of paper, placing them on various tables around the room. You may choose to put markers out as well, but students can just as easily use their own pens. You can also choose to have students circulate each prompt from table to table, staying in a set group, or give students free roam of the room; I think that this would vary for each teacher, depending on the group. Anyways, the task works by allowing students time at each prompt to record their ideas and responses. Prompts, or students, circulate around the room and students are meant to read and add to what has been previously written. At the end, you hold a discussion where students share the themes that have emerged from throughout the process. 

The 3-2-1 Bridge (86) is another excellent idea that I felt could be used at the start and end of a lesson to show progress. The purpose of the routine is 'all about activating prior knowledge before a learning experience begins' (86). 

To start, you need to ensure that you've selected a topic that your students should have some prior knowledge in. Present this topic to your students at the start of the lesson, then have them write down 3 words that quickly come to mind when they think of the topic; these should be quick, rapid fire associations. Next, have then generate 2 questions that quickly come to mind. Finally, they should create a metaphor or simile for the topic. You may need to provide prompts to start, such as 'Planets are like....' (88). 

You'd then go into the main part of the lesson, where you'd hopefully give the students new information, or teach them a new skill. After this, you can come back to the 3-2-1 part of the process, getting them to repeat the steps as above, this time with their new-found knowledge. This is when the bridging comes in; students should now compare their initial responses to their new responses, noticing how their thinking has shifted throughout the course of the lesson. This might be best facilitated through a discussion with a partner. 

The 3 words provide an 'accessible' way to 'activate ideas', the 2 questions 'push a bit further', and the metaphor/simile works to 'test how one is understanding and framing a topic or idea' (86), while the Bridge section of the routine acts to 'help learners recognise and name their own learning and development' which means it's a great way to show progress within a lesson (something that Ofsted and PM observers love to see) (87). 

3 Sample Routines for Synthesising and Organising Ideas

I'm going to refer to one of the adapted versions of Headlines (111) here, because I feel that it is a more creative way to approach the routine. Basically, if you're exploring themes or ideas within a given unit, an interesting way to have students revise their understanding is to have them choose a song that they feel best captures that theme/idea; they then need to link the song to the theme/idea and explain their choice in detail. This pushes students to reflect on their learning by having to justify their choices, therefore making their understanding of the topic clear. It could make for an interesting Speaking and Listening activity in a number of different subjects. As the authors say, this activity shouldn't be about 'coming up with a superficial but catchy phrase' or song choice - instead, it should be about 'inviting learners individually and as a group to gear their thinking towards core, central ideas and elements that are at the heart of a topic being studied' (115). 

Another routine, which builds on the oft-used technique of concept mapping, requires students to Generate-Sort-Connect-Elaborate (125). I'm going to share this technique because I think we, as teachers, often get students to mind map or create concept maps, but not in a way that clearly shows their thought processes, or extends their thinking beyond the basic writing down of key facts. This routine works best when there is a difficult concept or big idea that needs to be explored. Concepts such as 'freedom, power, and electricity' or processes such as 'designing a science experiment, creating an animated film, or preparing for a debate all lend themselves to this routine' (126). 

To start, you need to share a topic (or topics, if have students produce different concept maps for different ideas) with the class. Having large sheets of paper with the topic in the middle for each group of students would be ideal. Next, you ask students to generate a list of words, ideas or aspects that they associate with the topic. I would suggest that you have students do this on post-it notes or cue cards, as these ideas will need sorting in the next step. 

Once a bunch of words have been created, you should get students to sort these into 'how central or tangential they are, placing central ideas near the centre and more peripheral ideas towards the outside' (126). You can them have the students copy (or glue) their ideas down, so that they're more permanent on the page. 

The next step is to make connections between the ideas, drawing kings between ideas that share a connection, writing a brief explanation of what that connection would be on the line. To elaborate, students should pick a few ideas that they think are most relevant and elaborate upon them. In English or history, for example, this could be done by findings quotes from the text/primary sources and linking them up, to support their ideas. Finally, students should share their work with the class, so that discussion can be had about the choices made, etc. 

My favourite routine in the whole text is the Micro-Lab Protocol (147). This activity is 'designed to ensure equal participation and make sure everyone contributes' (147). As part of my thesis study, I have begun looking at techniques (or maybe routines!) to help engage disadvantages pupils, and so far I've read that what really works is getting students to change their mindset; getting them involved in the learning, so that they actually want to take part. You have to change their approach to education  by engaging them directly in it; that's why I think this routine would be the most useful for my own practice. Anyways, I'll explain to you how it works, and let you judge for yourselves...

Micro-Lab Protocol involves having students work in groups of three to 'discuss and explore perspectives' on various topics or themes (148). To start, get students into their groups of three and have them label themselves as 1, 2 or 3. Next, inform them of what it is you want them to talk about, as well as what you hope they can get out of the discussion. You should time the proceedings closely, to ensure that students don't get bored or begin to muck about. You may wish, at this time, to have students spend a few minutes writing down their initial response to the topic in silence. 

Person number 1 should talk first. No one speaks except the speaker. The other two group members should listen attentively, and takes notes if they want. Allow students up to a minute to speak, then call for silence. If the student runs out of things to say in that minute, they should sit quietly. You should allow for 20-30 second of silence after the initial minute, so that students can think over what has just been said. The authors note that some people can become uncomfortable with the silence, but it's really important that you get past that discomfort/fear, because the thinking time is important. 

You then repeat the process until each member of the group has shared their thoughts. After that, students can have an open discussion. The authors suggest allowing 5-10 minutes for this, depending on your group. You should encourage the students to make connections between what each person has said, or to ask questions to clarify points. 

After group discussion, you can then have students reflect on their thoughts as a class. At this point, they could record how their thoughts changed, or didn't change, throughout the course of the routine. It might also be interesting to get students to discuss their thoughts on the routine itself, as the routine is likely to very different to past techniques re: sharing ideas in groups. 

I think this routine would be an excellent one to use during observation lessons, because it shows that all students are engaged in the lesson, and could also be used to show progress, as students can reflect on their initial thoughts once they've completed the discussion. I certainly plan to make use of it during my next PM observation (not without trialling it first though!). 

1 Sample Routines for Digging Deeper into Ideas

The best suggestion is super simple, and only requires you to use the phrase 'What makes you think/say that?' more often in your lessons. Try it, and you'll see how powerful the phrase really is. 

Well, I must admit, this post has become much longer than I intended. I feel like I've written a mini-novel myself, though I've only been trying to summarise a few of the best ideas I was able to glean from the text. As I said, I really think you should pick up a copy of the text yourself, so that you can judge the routines for yourself; it may be that I've picked out the ones that work best for my own subjects (English, history and media studies), but I assure you, the text has ideas that work in Maths, science, art, and any other subject out there! I also assure that I have not been paid to write this glowing recommendation. I'm just trying to help! 

I do hope that someone will find these tips helpful. I'd hate to think that I spent a large chunk of my Saturday typing this up purely for myself. Then again, so long as it improves my own practice, who am I to care? :) 

Reference

Rirchhard, Ron., Church, Mark and Morrison, Karin. Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding and Independence for All Learners. Jossey-Bass. 2011

Chapter 2: Putting Thinking First

I've managed to breeze through the second chapter, and wanted to quickly jot down my thoughts. First of all, the authors talk about using thinking to 'foster students' engagement with ideas'.  To this end, teachers should create opportunities for thinking and make that thinking visible. 

I must admit, I was sceptical about how you go about making thinking 'visible' when I started this journey, but I think I'm getting it now. It's mostly about encouraging dialogue, listening, and genuine interaction within classrooms. By engaging and listening to our students, we can better support them in their own learning. 

Essentially, it's all about modelling good thinking skills. The authors make a good point when they say that you couldn't aspire to be a great dancer without ever seeing someone dance; it makes total sense then that students can't be great thinkers if we, as teachers, aren't great thinkers ourselves. Just as we scaffold other skills in lesson, thinking needs scaffolding too! 

This requires naming and noticing when good thinking takes place. Instead of praising a response as 'Good' we should instead praise how they got there; for example, saying 'I like how you used your prior knowledge to make that connection!'. It seems so simple, yet clearly could be really effective! 

They briefly touch on the types of questioning teachers use as well, and discuss how, actually, we should allow students to question US more often. Doing so would allow for more inquiry and discovery. 

Constructive questions, ones which challenge students to see things from other perspectives, are mentioned as well. I got a really good idea from the text, in terms of a display I'll put up that challenges students to see each story or fact from another perspective. With anything, there is always another side to the story! 

They also provide a real gem of a question with 'Whst makes you say that?'. This question, used well, will really push students to justify their choices in a way that isn't threatening. I'm definitely

Going to use that one more often! 

Finally, they explore the act of listening, stating that teachers often don't listen enough. They quote the poet Alice Duer Miller (1915) who said, 'listening is not merely not talking, though even that is beyond most of our powers; it means taking a vigorous, human interest in what is being told us.' I love this quote! I almost want to put it up in my classroom as well! It's something staff and students alike could take note of. 

Initial thoughts of 'Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding and Independence for All Learners'

What a day! I've spent a considerable amount of time this afternoon doing research on pupil premium, mostly looking at the official documentation/policies from the Department of Education and Ofsted, as well as the provisions currently in place at my school. I will say more on the topic in later posts, I'm sure, since my research question (RQ from here on in) will (hopefully) revolve around a pupil premium focus re: feedback. Again, more on this will come in later posts, but I wanted to give you a heads up.

In other news, I am continuing my research into visible thinking skills re: making learning more 'visible' within my lessons, as part of my CPD. In that vein, I have started to read Richhart, Church and Morrison's 'Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding and Independence in All Learners' (2011).

While produced in America, I've been intrigued by what the authors have said so far about our (teachers) ability (or lack thereof, in some cases) to foster engagement with thinking itself. They start by getting you to think about the term 'think' itself. What does it mean to think? What do teachers want their students to do when they tell them to 'think'? What do the students 'feel' the teacher wants them to do when they are asked to 'think'?

Are the two things the same? I'd argue that sometimes they're not; that's where the problem lies! I get the impression that the text is aiming to help teachers re-evaluate what they mean when they ask students to 'think'; thinking shouldn't be about rote memorisation,  but instead about accessing higher level skills that require our minds to grow and expand.

I haven't yet got past the first chapter, but I am quite interested to see where the text takes me. Any interesting tidbits or advice I find will be shared here, so fear not.

Update: After finishing the first chapter, I've really started to think about my separate, non-Masters student-voice project. I'd really like to foster greater student metacognition by starting up a student-researcher group that expres 'thinking' around the school. The authors of the text describe an activity where they get students to respond to the following question: What is thinking? When you tell someone you are thinking, what kind of things might actually be going through your head?'   

After discussing group findings, it would be interesting to then think about the different types of thinking that happen around the school, in various subjects. We could explore ways that students could become better thinkers, sharing the findings in assembly or something... But I'm getting ahead of myself. This is what happens when I read interesting, inspiring texts. I get loads of ideas that I can't carry out (yet). Still, it's good to capture the idea when it strikes! More later, I'm off to read Chapter 2! 

Linking to some interesting reads

I've just been made aware of the website that contains a collection of the Essay 1 papers completed by myself and the other MEd students as part of my cohort. If you're interested in having a look at some very interesting literature reviews, on a wide variety of topics that are related to school settings, then have a look at the ISSUU edition linked here. 

Review: More Secondary Starters and Plenaries

Right, so as mentioned in my last post, I'm looking at reading some books on starters and plenaries as part of my Performance Management (PM). Yesterday I reviewed a book that, while hitting the 'condensing metacognition jargon' nail on the head, didn't really satisfy in 'usability'. Today, however,   I think I've managed to find a pretty useful book, by way of Mike Gershon's 'More Secondary Starters and Plenaries: Ready-to-use activities for teaching any subject' (2013). If you have the chance (or the money) to purchase this text, you really must. I haven't even read the whole thing yet, but I'm already taking note of things to trial in my lessons. It's full of really workable and engaging activities, many of which scream 'Mr Inspector Approved'. I'd highly recommend that people give this book a look, especially if you're interested in making your starters and plenaries more engaging and useful. 

I 

Review: How to Teach: The Book of Plenary

As part of my Performance Management (PM) this year I've decided to look at making better use of plenaries in lesson; particularly the use of 'mini-plenaries' within lessons. As such, I've purchased a few preliminary reads to give me some basic insight into the nature of plenaries; over the next few posts, I aim to review some of the literature that I've found. I'm not going to promise a series of in-depth analysis' for each book that I read, but I will do my best to provide some feedback on what I have found interesting, and perhaps less interesting, in the readings I do.

The first book that I will be reviewing is Phil Beadle's 'How to Teach: The Book of Plenary'.

One of the things I enjoyed about the book was the conversational tone that Beadle adopts while writing. He also makes reference to scholarly articles, while at the same time recognising that a lot of good discussion goes on in blogs and online articles (which means that he recognises that teachers, real teachers, can have important things to say too). He also tries to make metacognition sound like something that anyone can understand. He devotes a whole section of the book to trying to explain metacognition in a way that the average person can understand, which, for anyone not recently involved in the university scene, is extremely useful.

Another thing that I find particularly interesting is how he tries to link plenaries to 'what Mr Lesson Inspector' says. He writes that inspectors have stated that teachers are 'good standing at the front of classrooms reading lesson objectives to [their] students from a PowerPoint' and that they're also good 'at giving the student's a pointless activity that takes ten minutes at the beginning of a lesson' but that they're less successful when it comes to using plenaries (Beadle, 2013). Considering my own practice, I'd say that's about right.

Something else I found extremely interesting was that Beadle essentially shoots my PM target in the face by stating that 'progress within lessons is continually promoted by SMT [school management teams] despite Ofsted making almost no mention of it' (Beadle, 2013). He goes on to give his opinion that, in doing mini-plenaries we are 'reaching the empirical point of absolute absurdity...of a profession running everything so that they can please the inspectorate' (Beadle, 2013). He goes on to say that 'Ofsted do not actually insist on progress within lessons' (Beadle, 2013). He quotes Keven Bartle (2013), who writes that, to the inspectorate, ''progress' is simply a numerical measurement of the distance between a start point and an end point and therefore cannot in itself by observed in lessons'. After I read these lines, I felt a bit foolish about making one of my PM targets about the use of mini-plenaries. If we're not doing them for the inspectorate, then why exactly have we been pushed into thinking they're what make an Outstanding lesson? I've been led to believe that in order to be an Outstanding teacher I need to show that students make progress within every lesson, and that I can measure this (usually via mini-plenaries and plenaries). It really makes me question exactly who sets the 'guidelines' for Outstanding lessons, especially if, when we're observed by Ofsted, we don't technically have to show progress within a given lesson. Who exactly am I trying to impress with my 'outstanding' ability to teach and show progress within lesson if it's not Ofsted? I guess it's my line manager... or maybe myself. Arg, it boggles my mind. I could talk myself into a depressed state, pondering over why exactly I can't quite reach Outstanding, but I think I'll leave that for another time...

Beadle splits his plenary 'how to' into two sections, which he labels Analogue Plenaries, which, from what I gather, are the 'tried and tested' methods that have been passed down through the ages, and Digital Plenaries, which are ones that are based on John Hattie's work on visible learning (2012).

I must admit that I had high hopes for what the book would offer me, in terms of practical ideas that I could trial and adapt in my own lessons. Sadly, I wasn't overly impressed with the ideas on offer, particular those within the newer 'Digital' section. If anything, I found the 'Digital' suggestions were a bit vague and under-explained. I think perhaps that I may need to expand my research by looking directly at the source, which means finding Hattie's book. I think that's a fairly easy ask, so I will try to sort that out in a future post. The Analogue section did have some valuable tidbits, but for any teacher who's been experimenting with plenaries in the past, they won't (or shouldn't) offer you much that you didn't already know.

That being said, I wouldn't say that the book was a complete waste. I did enjoy reading it, especially since it clarified some things for me in terms of why a good plenary is so important, as well as working to explain what metacognition really is, in a way that even my thick brain can comprehend. I'd recommend giving the book a look, especially if you're new to teaching, or if you've been in the profession for a long time and are looking for a way to reinvigorate the end of your lessons.

Until next time.

References

Bartle, Keven. 'The Myth of Progress within Lessons' Available at http://dailygenius.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/the-myth-of-progress-within-lessons/ (accessed 22 May 2013)

Beadle, Phil. How to Teach: The Book of Plenary. Independent Thinking Press. Wales. 2013.

Hattie, John. Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximising on Learning. Routledge. Abington. 2012.