Teachers are already busy. Calls for a 'research-engaged profession' can fall on deaf ears when there is quite simply already too much to do. At the of a long day, or when there are books to mark or lessons for a new spec to plan, the very last thing a teacher wants to do is start reading research, let alone do anything with it. Equally, even if there was the time, some teachers have no desire to engage with research - if we consider teaching an art, as many do, is this okay?
Schools should consider carefully how best to impose anything new, particularly something as time consuming as engaging with research. Some schools have appointed specific TLR post holders to filter down the key findings that are useful for teachers. Others have incorporated it into CPD sessions or the appraisal process. This integrated approach may work in some schools, but requires time (again), money and an interest.
I remember David Cameron (not that one) saying at Northern Rocks 2015 along the lines of, "teachers are already spinning lots of plates, we need to work out which are Ikea and which are Wedgewood". If we are adding more, we need to take something away. We can't keep adding more.
Lately on Twitter, I've noticed a few quick wins:
1) Use Chris Moyse's 'Research in 100 words' posters. Download <here>
2) Use the Learning Scientist posters. Download <here>
I made an A5 booklet for 6th formers, I am going to make a display for the corridor and have suggested printing and putting student study booths
3) Share 'The Science of Learning'. Download <here>
In less that 10 pages, staff can have a complete overview of the best we currently know about learning. Cancel a meeting, extend a break time, provide a time to read it
5) Buy a couple of books for the staffroom/staff toilets. I'd start with <this> and <this>.
And if you can get Nick or David to come and do some INSET
6) Set up a time and space to discuss the opportunities and the challenges.
Make sure there is free lunch, tea and cake.
For me, we need to work out what makes good teachers good so that we can help others grow to be even better. We know a lot more now that we ever did. Surely it makes sense to try and use it?
“Every teacher needs to improve, not because they are not good enough, but because they can be even better.”Dylan Wiliam
School leaders just need to create and provide the time, space and resources to make it happen.
Revision is a very odd thing in schools. There is a very important question to be asked which should be at the heart of a schools provision, "Who is working harder? Teacher or student?"
I have worked in schools where the following are provided, even expected by students:
Revision guides - some handwritten by teachers, some photocopied at great expense to the department.
Revision classes - at lunch time or after school, even in the school holidays.
Revision conferences - often provided externally, sometimes funded by students, sometimes by the school.
Revision skills days - often provided at great cost to the school by external providers.
Study Leave
First and foremost, I am not saying these are a waste of time. I am absolutely sure these help students improve their final grades. I think few teachers would want to try research on this and do nothing in the final weeks and months of the GCSE and AS/A2 courses as a RCT. However, I think there some important things to consider:
Does the student see their revision guide as being superior to their two years of notes, activities and carefully crafted lessons?
Is the revision guide more a 'lucky charm' than a genuine tool for learning? (I have seen students hugging one saying that "everything will be okay now".)
Is it good use of the teachers time to be producing an extensive revision guide?
Are revision classes a substitute for time spent learning at home? (I fear students RE revision entails turning up for 20 minutes on a Thursday lunchtime to 'tick that box')
Should teachers be expected to do these extra classes? (I have heard of some schools which pay... the pressure can either come from SLT, colleagues who do it for their classes or students themselves)
How useful are revision conferences? (Are they just affirmation for the teacher that they have indeed taught it right?)
Do revision classes cater for all the needs of the students attending? (Can you help the student working at a D grade get the C while also helping stretch the A to an A*?)
Are revision skills days a good use of budget when teachers in school could be taught how to deliver these with the right CPD?
Do we presume that outsiders have a greater effect on our students than us?
Are we confident that students spend 5hrs or more revising at home each day?
These may sound negative, but I think schools do need to take careful look at their provision. Not only from a budget point of view, but also for staff well-being and actual impact on students.
It reminds me of what my personal trainer at the gym once told me, 'most people put on weight when they join the gym as they overly treat themselves for their hard work'. Do our students over reward themselves when they buy a revision guide or attend a revision lesson?
As always, some do, some don't. It's not as simple as 'revision input is a total waste of time', nor it is 'the best thing we can do for our students'. I've got lots of students asking us for our department revision guide at the moment, plus asking me to give up a full day of my school holiday to do revision lessons. I'm just wondering the best response...
At an Eels gig, many years ago, at the Royal Festival Hall, the lead singer Mr E had whipped the crowd into a frenzy. People were on their feet, screaming "I love you E", waving their arms. His reply to calm the lively audience was, "STOP THE MADNESS"!
This has been the repeated call from a small, but growing, group of teachers in school over the last few years too. STOP THE MADNESS.
This is just some of the MADNESS (read falsities, lies, discredited research...) that still remains in schools, schemes of work, university courses, INSET training:
Andrew Old wrote a great TOP 10 THINGS TO AVOID IN INSET and these make a few appearances. It's a very worthwhile read <here>. This was indeed published at the start of THIS academic year (2014-2015), not in 2007.
So why, write another blog post on this? It's because despite the absolute discreditation of these things, they still keep cropping up on my Twitter TL and various other professional sources of information that I use. The other day I spent time going through being "the voice of reason" asking people if they knew these ideas were nonsense? Sadly, no one entered into discourse with me, which was probably for the best as I was in a grump and argumentative mood. On first hearing, they also sometimes seem like good ideas; that's why they still exist in some peoples educational thinking.
My interest in "stopping the madness" came when I first came across ResearchEd, which lead me to read Ben Goldacre's DfE paper Building Evidence into Education. If you haven't read this, I strongly urge you do so <here>. He then came to speak at the first Research Ed conference (watch <here>) and the words that stuck with me was the label of much teaching being peddled quackery. By this he meant the pseudo-science found worryingly prevalent in education, often promoted by businesses and training providers who have a vested financial interest. He also meant the way in which teaching has, in the past, not been very evidence based. Tom Bennett refers to it as snake oil (this is a great read <here>).
"If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always gotten."
I've found Mark Twain, Henry Ford and Tony Robbins credited with this. Maybe it's another internet-created, made up quote (it just needs an inspirational image in the background, ready to be shared on Instagram; no one ever checks their accuracy either do they?), but the sentiment perhaps is correct. However it does need some further, careful, consideration. If you do do something different, you may get a better result, but you may not. How do you know what will get you a better result? What is your evidence? How do you know?
In December 2013, I was invited to the DfE to take part in some work on EBT (Evidence Based Teaching). This was an interesting evening where a group of teachers offered their thoughts and experience. I had completed my MA and found that the research I had conducted was very meaningful to my practice and I was already considering 'what can I research next?' (and I still am! If anyone fancies funding my PhD, I'm all ears). I chatted to David Laws MP in the lift and he even told me that he "loved EBT".
However the sad reality that was relayed by DfE staff. EBT would be a 10 year project and no minister can undertake a 10 year project... Gove lasted another 8 months and who knows if Nicky Morgan will still be there after the next election. So if not the DfE, then who? As with all the best initiatives, schools and teachers can perhaps do it better than civil servants and those in government office.
I was reminded of this recently when a colleague gave me a flyer in the staffroom with a simple, "You're interested in research, right?". Interestingly it featured Carl Hendrick who I had been chatting to about being a research lead just a few days before over a curry:
Carl works at Wellington College who have embraced the idea of making research useful for staff AND engaging in active research themselves:
Wellington College has launched the first major school-based research centre in the UK, saying that in the future, children should be taught based on what research shows is effective, rather than relying on guesswork, hunches or ideology. [See more <here>]
Some schools which I have come across that are investing in research leads and active use of research include Huntingdon School under Alex Quigley and more recently Highbury Grove School under the new headship of Tom Sherrington. Perhaps the first I came across was Kev Bartle's Cannons High School encouraging staff to investigate marginal gains? Maybe they will be looked back on as the trailblazers of EBT or whatever it ends up being know as, hopefully just 'teaching'.
'Clinical reasoning' in medicine began in the 1960's after a long period of 'clinical judgement' and an 'art of medicine' whereby decisions depended on individual doctors deciding what evidence, if any, they would consider using to treat a patient. This would be merged with personal beliefs and any number of other varying factors. Clinical reasoning or Evidence-based medicine (EBM) optimises decision making and uses acceptable evidence from well designed research. It highlights epistemological strength and results in only the strongest types being recommended for patient use. It involves meta-analysis, systematic review and RCTs.
I really believe that the mid 2010s will be looked on as a pivotal moment in education. It was the moment where teachers, empowered by the new democracy of the internet, facilitated by Twitter, TeachMeets, ResearchEd conferences / Tom Bennett and Andrew Old curries, said STOP THE MADNESS.
This obviously needs time and money. These are two things that most schools do not have. Equally individual teachers are, generally speaking, on their knees, all the time. It is hard to find time to read, let alone undertake, research. When I did my MA, I pretty much had to give up Sundays and all my holidays. To undertake research with my current workload would undeniably shift my work-life balance the wrong way (and hence me abandoning my NPQML). However as previously mentioned, some schools are managing to find the time and money as part of a CPD and school improvement programme. Who's next?
Some recent blog posts on using research in schools:
"Why should teachers engage with, and in, research?" by Sara Stafford (Director of Research at Highbury Grove School) A valuable post that explains concisely, and with diagrams, what a school director of research does and how the school are going to use research to be a 'praxis' that transforms practice by engaging with and in research. Read it <here>
"4 ways to use evidence in education - and 15 places to start" by Harry Fletcher-Wood (History teacher and Teach First researcher)
Harry gives 4 straight forward ways in which schools and staff can use research, He then gives some links to some great starting points. Read it <here> "Why every school needs a research champion" By Carl Hendrick, (Head of Learning and Research, Wellington College)
A useful overview on what a research champion is and why they are important; 7 clear reasons are provided. Read it <here>
"50 shades of uncertainty in educational research" by Jane Pettifer Some key questions asked and answered about using educational research. Read it <here>
There is also a new Journal for Applied Education Research which looks like it will be worth investigating. It promises "Peer led, classroom focused education research". Find out more <here>
Research Ed: "Working Out What Works" - the website <here>
There will be many, many blogs written about ResearchEd 2014. A large of number of these will give a far better and more in-depth insight into the conference than I have the time to even begin to attempt. I'm going to write about a few highlights, some RE particulars and my general thoughts coming away from a really fantastic day.
I tried to put together a Top 5 of things that I took away from the day for those who won't read any further:
Education Research tells us what has been the case, not what could be.
"It's more complicated that that."
CPD needs to be more that a one off session; a project/research model may work well.
We need a balanced diet: experience/tradition/research
"Suspend Your Disbelief": There may be a better future for OFSTED
In the Beginning...
John Bradshaw and Tom Bennett welcomed us to Raine's with the news that, despite the invite, Obama couldn't make it. My only disappointment here was no entrance music; a missed opportunity I felt. Tom said that we were looking a conference that was part of a "modest revolution... a polite rebellion". I agreed whole heartedly; we need to be cautious and curious. He made it clear we are not replacing experience, but augmenting it, "blending research and craft".
This session began with an anecdote from John Tomsett, his wife [a teacher too] asked, "Does it make me a worse teacher that I've never heard of Dylan Wiliam ?". This is perhaps a reason why only one man was genuflecting as he [Dylan Wiliam] walked through the hall during our early morning coffee:
The point being, it's hard to get research to teachers. Even with the conference, 600 in attendance and 150 on the waiting list, we are a small number! I feel that there is only a very small number of staff in my current school who are interested. How do we make research interesting, engaging, useful... and where is the time?
We were then saw a clip from one of my favourite TV series... People Like Us. I wish the whole episode was online and I dug out my DVD when I got home and watched the whole episode with my Chinese takeway:
John pointed out its a brave head who goes in the opposite direction to current trends. Although it is not an experience versus evidence 'battle'; quite simply put, if you put the two together you may get something useful!
Alex asked how we go beyond guesswork when things are constantly changing? By using evidence and research, someone needs to be the devil's advocate for the 'next big thing' (and I would add, particularly when this 'next big thing' comes neatly packaged from a company with a significant price tag). However, how do you take this from the SLT to the classroom? You need to make it easy, attractive, part of CPD and give people time!
Professor Coe rightly said, "In schools we get excited about a lot of stuff and most of it doesn't work at all." He suggested the EEF, <here>, is a good start (and will be going interactive very soon!).
John returned to explain how there needs to be changes in structure; he spoke of a 'leadership wisdom' whereby headteachers need to create culture and structures for research to have impact in schools. It simply won't happen otherwise. He finished with another clip from People Like Us and reminded us that there is still a lot of nonsense going on in schools...
John Tomsett's research project RISE is <here>
Watch the session <here>
Session 2 - Dylan Wiliam: "Why teaching will never be a research-based profession, and why that's A Good Thing"
He started out by saying he doesn't set out to wind people up; perhaps a necessary caveat given his session title, at a education research conference.
Dylan directly re-compared medicine to education (responding to Ben Goldacre at ResearchEd 2013 in some part presumably). He pointed out that 40% of GPs prescribe antibiotics for virus'; there is no effect but patients feel happy. He claims that the successful parts of medicine are compared to the failing parts of education and this is imply unfair. Dylan also said, "When teachers go to the educational research cupboard, it's usually bare."
He did not hold back in his criticism and claimed that , "Most of homework teachers set is crap". Preparation for learning is the most effective form of homework, but is trickiest to set.
Wiliam also addressed setting. He said that teachers queue their lessons with a student reference point. In top set, it is generally the most able student ("You should all be able to do this"). In other sets it is quite often a middle child and in low sets it may well be the least able ("If student X has done this, so should you"). This directly effects progress; it is not the setting itself, it is the teacher influence.
Traditionally the best teachers were given the top sets, now many schools give them the C/D borderline. Rarely are they given the bottom set. However the best teachers have the biggest impact on the bottom sets. This brought about a great sense of relief as there have been times in my career when I regularly got given the bottom sets!
Dylan also pointed out, "In education everything works somewhere, and nothing works everywhere", so we need to be very careful about holding up research that backs up or discredits certain educational ideas.
He also warned schools to be careful of the EEF; one example is that it suggests that TAs are ineffective. However, it is clear that many TAs do have a very positive impact and most teachers realise that. his was the clear message; educational research gives us what was and what has been, not what might be and could be.
He gave another cautionary tale; feedback does improve progress but it has to be right feedback. The EEF is greatBUT teachers are just told where to dig but not why; we are left as the equivalent of "intellectual navvies".
Finally Wiliam began pointing out some problems with research reports in education. Of 3000 tested, only 131 were reliable. It is important we know the science (and neuroscience got a good few mentions during the day), but we must temper with judgment. The purpose of educational research should be to move teachers towards more effective action. Too often the findings of research are what good teachers do already do and others can't or don't (or won't take the time?) to understand. Wiliam said when he first instructed trainees her just said "just do what I do, it works for me."
His final closing comment was that "all teachers should be seeking to improve - that is our moral imperative".
He spoke a lot of sense and it was hard to disagree with his notes of caution.
Session 3 - Andrew Sabisky: Nature and Nurture - the Genetics of Education
Opting to save Andrew Old vs OFSTED for home release (I wanted popcorn for the spectacle) I found my fellow RE teachers, Daniel Hugill and Neil McKain for a bit of psychological research.
Sadly Andrew's PPT wasn't working, which left us doing some mental maths... it was still too early!
However there was some clear messages here: 40-70% of the differences between individuals for some traits (e.g. behaviour, nicotine dependence) can be attributed to genetics.
Many classroom and learning behaviour may be down to genetics but overall behaviour can vastly improve with intervention. A very disruptive 'unteachable' student can become a charming pain in the butt!
This does not make us redundant as teachers, but is an important consideration. We may not be able to 'close the gap', but it may be more of a 'moving the bell curve' which is still raising standards and improving the education for all. Crucially chasing equality of outcome too far is a big mistake.
Andrew left us with the scary fact that cognitive decline begins at 25! But reminded us of his belief that that success "is not in our stars but in our selves".
Session 4 - Martin Robinson: The teacher and the researcher: the time has come to talk of many things...
Martin began with a poem, performed with gusto, which entertained us all. It's worth watching via the link at the bottom of this section).
He began by pointing out that the strength of anything reduces over time: even mice in the lab react differently over time. However schools must ask, "do you want unquestioning teachers or rational thinkers? Would you silence someone who had chance to present research that undermines your institution?” Sadly, as Martin said, headteachers can be the 'ubermensch' attempting to guard against collapse of the system in light of inconvenient truth.
Martin then went to to make some science and health analogies; tummies rumbled at the talk of food and the smell of the near-ready 'Lunch of Champions'. Science has changed over the years... now you can eat butter, he exclaimed!
Firstly were told you needed 5 veg a day, but potatoes don't count (this was only because they were worried peoeple would count chips). Then 5 veg a day, but potatoes DO count. Others say 5 veg plus 2 fruit. Some say there is no difference.
Things change. Does anyone really know what a good diet is? We are just trying to get closer to it; we may need to contradict previous ideas.
As it is impossible to follow 'correct instructions', we must undertake a balance diet. This involves common sense, a bit of everything, a bit of exercise, a bit of educational research, some experience... "don't chase just one flavour!"
He went on to talk about many areas of education that won't be researched. Contact time, pay, & authoritarian school leaders... all things that may well be vital to the success of our schools.
Martin also pointed out that our "best teaching might occur when you're not trying" and that actually a plane without a pilot might actaully be safer.
We were then given a quote from Charles Darwin:
"...if I had to live my life again, I would have made a rule to read some poetry and listen to some music at least once every week; for perhaps the parts of my brain now atrophied would thus have been kept active through use. The loss of these tastes is a loss of happiness, and may possibly be injurious to the intellect, and more probably to the moral character, by enfeebling the emotional part of our nature."
Our schools are not based on pure reason, they are not clinical. They are "not rational places and if you question things too much you may damage its ability to do what it does". Often they are based on traditions and you may well destroy the things that hold it together if you try to get rid of this irrationality. However reason must also be part of the conversation, "It helps with the journey towards truth, but it is not truth itself."
He reached a conclusion asking the question for headteachers, "If you allow teachers to think things through, how far will you let this go?"
RE Networking took place in the Science Garden where we met The Golden Calf. He tweets and blogs a lot of sense about the state of RE today. We investigated the CU posters (apparently very popular and student lead) and admired the views over London town.
Session 5 - Tristram Hunt MP
This was pretty dull, MP speak. Nothing really new, nothing exciting. A well executed script with a few shakily answered questions; I'd worry having him in charge of schools. He raised a laugh by calling ResearchEd "The Woodstock of Research in Education", but that was pretty much the highlight.
He did say that improving teachers was key, still hinted at the license, but played the crowd by saying wanted to give teachers the time & wherewithal to become “practice-informed & research-inspired”.
"I think education is necessarily emotional... We all have a personal stake", Mike began. He made it clear something that is so often evident on Twitter and in the blogsphere: "We don't all agree... It is not self-evident what good is... and it has changed."
He said that RI has improved the system and helped get better deal for students especailly those schools working with HMI.
Mike then started referring to AN Whitehead, "A merely well-informed man is the most useless bore on God's earth. What we should aim at producing is men who possess both culture and expert knowledge ..."
He then stated that any inspectorate should be relentless in pursuit of success and that it's just as important to consider the how as well as the what. We do need to consider what kind of relationship the inspectorate needs to have with schools. It should not be as the 'DeathStar' or as "a toxic toad say on the head of school leaders" (real description of OFSTED given to MC)
Should inspection be war? Could it be more of a dance?
Then the promises began... a new slim, single framework. There will be more HMI and school leaders will be involved. All will be directly employed by OFSTED. There will be a regional structure that offers greater support, especially to struggling schools. Potentially there will be much less focus on grades (1-4) but just 'good enough' and 'not good enough' (I can't see exactly how this works personally!).
He asked whether or not good schools need full inspection. A short, robust, professional dialgue should be suffiecnt with a letter published rather than a report. It will be about redefining relationships. Currently 6/10 schools are Good and 2/10 are Outstanding (and the plan is to still leave them alone). However, it was made clear that inspections or visits can't take place with out visiting classrooms, but not with a clipboard. There is an open consultation taking place and as many people as possible are encouraged to join in; it's hoped at least 23,000 will.
He then began to point out the realities. There will be change from this September and more from next September, and it will continue to evolve. There will be a large consultant: what should we inspect? How? When? WHY?
However individual lessons WILL NOT be graded and heads CANNOT use OFSTED as justification for doing it themselves. He would say to the head "why are you doing it?" It's up to them but they CANNOT say it is for OFSTED.
For RE teachers, it was pleasing to hear that OFSTED realise that they don't inspect SMSC well enough (NOT RE but often closely linked and often the responsibility of the RE department). There is more <here> from Dawn Cox.
The final message was "suspend your disbelief"; OFSTED may well be getting better. Mike Claddingbowl seemed like a good guy, who does want to listen to teachers and does want to make things better. Only time will tell if he can...
Our brains protect us from being wrong - it's not a logical or rational organ. We have confirmation bias and a backfire effect: we don't like being wrong! We also suffer from illusion of asymmetric insight: we even think we know other people better than they know themselves.
There is Sunk Cost Fallacy: we sit through film even if it's crap but we've paid for it. We can't get money back but can get the time... but we can't back out as we'd look like idiots!
We are susceptible to the anchoring effect: if someone tells us a student is a c we believe them
David pointed out that even if we recognise these things, we often don't see our own bias. We prefer a reassuring lie to an inconvenient truth. When others disagree with us, we assume they are ignorant, stupid or evil!
This is the essential problem with educational research. It is not the same as proof; it can be used to prove anything. Context is KING, can we generalise? What do we do if it conflicts with our values? What is the unit of education? Time/progress/amount of knowledge?
SO, what should we do?
What research says?
We've always done?
Works for us?
What gets results?
What OFSTED wants?
Can we make predictions that are meaningful and measurable?
Does a physicist examine all atoms to give predictions about atoms?
Do we believe children are broadly similar or different?
Can we make generalisations about how we learn?
The Burden of Proof means we need to ask how likely is it a duck? Do we need to prove that it is a duck? Or that it's not a duck? Learning styles confirm what we think, "It's a duck!"
Always, always, remember the bias blind spot! (Just like cars with motorbikes)
Some of the things that are probable:
The spacing effect - we forget what we learn, ensure regular review of content
The testing effect - study test test test - test is best way. If we study study study study - test, it creates an illusion of knowing it.
Cognitive load theory - the working memory is finite; greater long term memory assists learning
David left us with the words of Carl Sagan, "a judicious mix is what we need". Ultimately we have to make guesses....
Academies Weekly Special Edition is <here> Tom's reflection is <here>
Afters
We then all piled over to the pub and continued the ed chat, meeting lots of people I follow on Twitter. Lot's of respected educational peeps were all hanging together in the pub... interestingly there didn't seem too many arguments!
This summer has been dedicated to an amazing delayed honeymoon in Dubai, on safari in Tanzania and then a week on the beach in Zanzibar... it was GREAT!
However now it's back to business and a number of education bloggers have been helping with the new years' preparation. I agree with Tom Sherrington when he said, "Over the last two years, I’ve found that I can engage much better with the ideas in some of these books when I’ve seen the authors express their ideas directly – either in person at a conference or through some of the video material on the internet." (<here>). It's also why I love TeachMeets, teachers expressing ideas from the books in a real and practical way!
Tom's post, "Contemporary educational ideas all my staff should know about"<here>, is a great starting point for beginning conversations about the most up to date ideas. This is vitally important, as every now and again I hear staff talking about learning styles and even brain gym!
Shaun Allison has also put together an excellent collection of videos <here>. In time where staff can really take control of their CPD, this is an easy and accessible way into many contemporary ideas. They are ideal as a starting point for discussion in a school or department session, or simply as a bit of personal viewing!
The Educators on BBC Radio 4, <here>, has also brought some up to date educational ideas to the general public; teachers were listening and ready to blog, particularly when John Hattie made an appearance. Two great overviews of this are found <here> (concise from John Smith) and <here> (a little longer from David Didau).
That's me started off... (tickets are also booked for ResearchED 2014: see <here>)
I wonder how I can bring a few more colleagues along with me this year? I got 9 staff to TeachMeet Havering (in our school!) at the end of term and I'm ready and refreshed to start these conversations again.
This was the CPD course that I won at #TMLondonBus and was of great excitement for me as its the kind of course I would never normally get the opportunity to attend. Due to 'rarely cover', the majority of CPD courses at my school can only be exam board courses. However as this prize was non-transferable, I got to go!
Collaborative or cooperative learning features in both Hattie and the EEF's research. I've always found this has mixed results, and keeping all students working and on task can be hard... there are often dominant individuals and those that see it as a way of escaping doing work!
We looked at some strategies that I have already tried (and re-tried since) in my class. Allocating different tasks, separating information and so on can all work, but need careful planning. For me, it has to have a better outcome than working individually, or be looking at developing specific skills. Too often it doesn't.
My Y7 class have recently been working in groups on a wiki (see <here>) and so were all 'experts' in one religion. They then wrote 5 questions and answers based on their area of expertise, which they all had to memorise. Students then went around the classroom with a 25 question and answer sheet and needed to get it filled in. This resulted in them working collaboratively to gain some information about the religions that they hadn't studied. It was just simple, factual knowledge, however for those sharing their area of expertise it reinforced their own learning and helped them grow in confidence to talk about what they had been learning.
4) Peer Tutoring
Again something I've had mixed results with in the past. We used different sections of the room, breaking down questions, teaching one another and moving around the room. For me, the clear thing here was actually the ability of the teacher to break down the questions clearly and in a graduated way.
I often use 'experts' in my classrooms (particularly with Y7), which is something I got criticised for from OFSTED (see <here>). It has made me realise that I need to perhaps think a little more carefully and critically about how I use them to have greater impact. I also should try it with older students, they just tend to be a little more self conscious about being the expert! However if everyone has specific, allocated roles, it may work better. Careful planning again the key here.
5) Digital Technology
This could literally mean anything. When highlighted by the EEF, it is referring to tablets (iPads etc) apparently. Hattie doesn't make any note of this.
The key thing here, which is nothing new to me, is that if it simply used as a ‘glorified toy’or a substitute for laptop, it has no impact. However when focus is on pedagogy they do have an impact… if a tablet is creating challenge, engagement, enabling and demonstrating progress, or giving feedback (the big four considerations). It requires careful thinking about the Apps or websites used.
There was a discussion about funding and finance and that actually many schools could (and do) implement BYOD [Bring Your Own Device]. I have done this on numerous occasions, asking students to use Socractive, making videos or just simple research; they basically have a computer in their pockets!
The two apps that were looked at were Aurasma (augmented reality - digital content linked to physical content) and Educreations (Take photo, record video, mark, upload). Augmented reality is very cool and fun, it grabs attention. However I'm still not overly convinced on it's ability to enhance education. Yes it creates engagement, but equally I'm not sure I want students walking around school using their mobile phones on display boards. Educreation as a tool for marking is again engaging, but ultimately hugely time consuming when I have a heavy workload in this area already.
There is a big place for embracing technology in education, but as an RE teacher, I'm not quite sure how it is best used yet. This said, I do get my students, blogging, creating wikis, engaging via Twitter... None of this has cost me, or the school, a penny to date. The cost versus impact is a debate that will continue to run.
6) Metacognition
This is 2nd on Sutton Trust, 'knowing about knowing', and often cited in current education research talk.
We focused on Mind Maps and looked about 'how we learnt' the story of Leonardo Da Vinci, and detailed our method:
Phase 1 - Listen to short story and create a mind map with pictures only [numbers allowed] (code)
Phase 2 - Retell partner story (decode)
Phase 3 - Add some key phrases
Phrase 4 - Listen and correct (check)
Phase 5 - Organise -> Look at each paragraph and look at topics: skills, early life etc
My students are not fans of Mind Maps. There is a tendency for some girls to get overly obsessed with neatness and as a result, don't like to make them as they get messy! However we then looked at different types of diagrams and I must admit, I gravitate towards one or two styles when it may be better to use alternative models when presenting ideas:
Meta-cognition and associated ideas such as 'Learning To Learn', study skills and so on are very important but rarely do they get taught well. It again gives me something to think carefully about in my provision of Citizenship/PHSE programme next year as Head of Year 10.
Self-evaluation and self-regulation are important, but how do we teach this to our students and is it best done discreetly as part of good teaching, or in separate lessons? This section was more a start point to reflection rather than a simple answer.
7) Feedback
We began by doing the 'house drawing task', where criteria was given afterwards. This is always a powerful exercise and reminder of why we need to make criteria explicit and why it helps with feedback!
There are four types of marking:
Specific
Non Specific
Positive
Non Positve
This leads us to Feedback (specific positive) and ‘Feedforward’ (specific negative). However I admit that I also use non-specific positive when marking KS3 and KS4 to motivate and encourage. It is not possible to mark everything in detail... but I do believe that comments and stamps which give a simple reinforcement of hard work and effort so still have a place.
However everything needs criteria in order to give specific feedback... are they explicit or implicit? Does the teacher know what it is? Does student know what it is?
All types of feedback has positive and negative:
Teacher written feedback
It's personal, formative and expert BUT is it just one improvement? It's time consuming! Do they respond to it? Does it have impact?
Teacher feedback with technology (also includes stickers, comment banks)
It's formative, expert and time saving BUT does it have impact? Is there a perception that its not personalised?
Teacher with coding (includes colours/letter/numbers)
It's formative, expert and time saving BUT does it have impact? Is there a perception that its not personalised?
Teacher marks one and gives whole class feedback using technology
It's formative, expert guidance, time saving and reusable BUT do you access to the technology? How about children (and parents) that object to their work being 'picked on'? Engagement?
Dialogue takes place and has impact, it's formative, expert and time saving BUT there is a perception that the teacher is not doing their job? There may still be errors? Is it suitable for all ages and abilities? Is it time consuming to do for the class?
Peer marking (against the criteria)
It's formative, expert and time saving BUT what are perceptions of the students and parents? What about errors? Is it suitable for all ages and abilities?
Dylan Williams was cited at this point, in saying that 'all marking is a waste of time if no impact, dialogue, response or conversation' (could be a paraphrase here!). This could be as simple as getting students to write exactly what they are going to do to improve on feedback, and time needs to be given to do that (currently known as DIRT time - Directed Improvement and Reflection Time).
There was also the possibly of bringing research into the classroom... Can we do a RCT (randomised controlled trial)? Two similar classes within the school, with all other factors limited, one with an active intervention... what would the results be>
To conclude our session on Feedback we watched this:
Feedback and marking were highlighted as a school in both our Section 5 and Section 48 inspections. As a department, we spend a lot of time marking, but is something we are in the process of reviewing. How can we ensure greater progress? How can we help our students to improve further? How can we better use our time? Again, this didn't give all the answers, but certainly a start point for further thinking.
Overall
I thoroughly enjoyed the Research for Learning (RfL) course and would highly recommend it. Rarely do courses provide hands on Teaching and Learning days that are cross-phase and cross-curricular. Rarely do you walk back into school having had time out to reflect, and come back with new ideas and enthusiasm. People sometimes criticise the EEF and Hattie, but at this point in time, what else do we have as teachers? It's certainly a start point. No-one does know your students like you do, but can we really ask people to take the teaching profession seriously if we are the modern day equivalent of Quacks? RfL is Drangonfly's brand of the DfE's Evidence Based Teaching (EBT)... my question, do we need to brand it as new form of pedagogy or is it simply the only way forward to ensure a robust professionalism that is informed and based on sound research?
This was the CPD course that I won at #TMLondonBus and was of great excitement for me as its the kind of course I would never normally get the opportunity to attend. Due to 'rarely cover', the majority of CPD courses at my school can only be exam board courses. However as this prize was non-transferable, I got to go!
This course was a teaching and learning day that focused on what was labelled 'The Magnificent 7'. These are the seven most powerful ‘impactful’ interventions to improve learning based on Hattie and the EEF Toolkit combined.
The background to this is that there has been a shift from the 1970's uninformed free practice, to a National Curriculum in 1998 that introduced uninformed prescription, before in 1997 there began informed prescription. Potentially (and hopefully!) there will now be a move to a future of informed professionalsim.
The terminology was not lost on me, as a big Western fan. The film's tagline, "They fought like seven hundred" indicating their effectiveness and impact. The Magnificent 7 here were:
1) Piagetian Programs
2) Direct Instruction
3) Collaborative Learning
4) Peer Tutoring
5) Digital Technology
6) Metacognition
7) Feedback
1) Piagetian Programs
Hattie put this at 2/138 so it is worth investigating! SOLO taxonomy was touted as being a bridge between Piaget and practice/pedagogy. It gives a clear hierarchy of learning, including differentiation and can help inform lesson objectives.
For the majority of lessons, it was suggested you need one multi-structural and one relational verb in the objective. Additionally this will help differentiate lesson objectives:
Multi-Structural - All
Relational - Most
Extended Extract - Some
These SOLO terms are from a taxonomy that is lesser used than Bloom's, but as many are now suggesting that as they are linked to Piaget, it is quite possible better. The teacher sees what level they are at, and then actively pushes it on. Students recognise the associated shape and realise they need to move forward:
To try the relational stage we used hexagons in a short exercise. This is the point from where students make progress in bringing together ideas... where they explain and analyse. Justifying the positioning of the hexagons allows this thinking to take place.
This has encouraged me to think about using SOLO in my lessons. I know Sam Betts has been using in A-Level RE and I will revisit some of his resources. We worked together on a grid (see <here>) for students to map their progress and he added SOLO logos. I took them off as I hadn't used this approach before but now think I may readd! A friend of mine, Andy Knill, is passionate about SOLO and runs the GlobalSOLO network which may also be of use.
I think it may also work very well as a consolidation, revision technique. It's important the students know the facts, but often it is then joining them up (relational) and hypothesize (extended abstract). I also don't think this is necessarily changing my teaching, but thinking with greater clarity about where I am headed and how I can help my students realise that too. For any topic, ideally they would get to the 'extended abstract' stage... and if they simply stayed at the prestructual we'd all be in trouble!
2) Direct Instruction
This was called 'the meat and potatoes', or the basis of most of our lessons! The 7 steps to this are as follows:
Step 1 - Decide Topic & Objective
Step 2 - Provide Input (Video/Text)
Step 3 - Give 3 bullet points of what happened on mini-white boards -
pupils reflect/respond to the objective on the white board - the teacher
gets feedback from this
Step 4 - Decision (based on the feedback) - 3 options ->
push on, identify some that need extra support or reteach
Step 5 - Decide a task to meet that objective directly - e.g. write a paragraph with success criteria (see below)
This was a really handy reminder of the basics and what they need to be. It's also 4/138 from Hattie, and if done well can produce regular, good solid lessons. It is important to factor in Step 4 (the most important step I think) and be flexible within lessons. I know I am going to ensure more success criteria are given even for shorter class-based activities and not just assessments.
I have been struggling for over a year now. So many questions fly around my brain about independence. I'll start with what I have in my brain, right now:
What does an independent learner look like?
Is independence simply a final place that a large number of students get to regardless?
How can I make my students more independent, without simply neglecting them and their needs?
What does independence look like on a daily basis? Is it possible to observe in a lesson, for example?
How can I convince my colleagues this is important or even desirable? (If our results are very good)
Where do I go next...? And who can I take with me?
It's been a focus of our ACE (Aspiring for a Culture of Excellence) working party for over a year now. I'm not sure we're even close to cracking it.
Our first step was an 'easy win', placing a 3 B's poster in each room (read <here>) which were initially used quite a lot by staff. It's been nearly a year now; I wonder who was the last person who pointed at it and didn't allow a student to ask a question they could find the answer to?
We also ran a Family Learning Project (read <here> and <here>) which was a huge success and we will be running again this year. Staff have commented on how they have been able to refer back to it in lessons and how impressed they were. However we did this for Y7... and what next?
I have tried to do a few bits and pieces myself in my own classroom. With a Y9 Assessment, I gave the students the task, a selection of resources, my online guidance ( see <here>) and then left them to it. The results were varied, but generally as expected for a mixed ability Y9 class. With Y8, I got them to produce a booklet on the Exodus. They watched the Prince of Egypt (one of my fav films!) and then were left with a set of criteria, the textbook and a lesson in a computer room. Again the results varied greatly.
From these small scale, informal, trial and error pieces of 'research', I realised that the most able really excelled. I had some amazing work, way beyond what would have happened had I been more conventionally teaching them. That raised some important questions of how I deal with the bright students in my mixed ability KS3 classes... do I do enough? However I also realised that the less able can really struggle, especially the panic I heard about in 'Homework Club' with the TAs. I also saw 'middle' children perhaps making a great attempt, while others put in little effort as they did not fully engage without that constant encouragement. Certainly more problems and questions than solutions.
With the Y8s, I did a knowledge based 'quiz' (read, 'test') and the results varied in an expected pattern, and the feedback varied... some enjoyed, some hated, some didn't really have an opinion.
In Y12, with the first A2 module in the summer, I tried some independent work (read what I did <here> and what I found <here>) which again didn't really have any gains, but no 'losses' either. I tried to extend their learning and writing by getting them to blog, which was a reasonable (but potentially unmeasurable) success. Read their postings <here>. Finally, I have tried to up my 'active learning' at A-Level and recently wrote about it for UKEdMag <here>.
Ultimately, I felt a little frustrated and not sure where and how to move forward.
We've sat down in the last few weeks to try and look again at this and below constitutes a few ideas that are currently 'out there'. I'd LOVE some feedback either via the blog or on by email <here>.
6th Form Induction
Possibility of doing things in a 'new way' with introduction to independence and some group based work in the afternoon. Although that great for a first day but the important thing is 'where next?'.
6th Form CP (Citizenship & PHSE) Lessons, General RE and General Studies
Looking at the syllabi of these are seeing them as a 'way in' to looking at skills and approaches that will encourage independence. For example, students were interested but quite passive in my "Science and Religion" module so I am looking to running it more as a 3 lesson - 'key questions', 'research' then 'debate' next year. We need to avoid 'death by woeful Powerpoint' presentations though.
'Extended Project'
Not necessarily the EPQ offered by exam boards but something that students can get very actively involved in... may be signing up to one such project? Young Enterprise is incredibly successful at our school and this is one opportunity. Perhaps an independent student newspaper (see <here>)? Or an essay prize or blogging project? (See <here> and <here>)
Cross Curricular Projects
Encouraging departments to look at ways of working together on different projects. This may work for KS3; we acknowledge there is just not the curriculum time for GCSE classes under the current model.
Lead By Example
Starting a pilot of an independent project and share it with other staff to hopefully inspire them!
Debating
A few colleagues and I have started a debating club which he hope to empower a committee to take control of. These will be our senior debaters (new Y13). In hindsight, we started at the wrong time of the school year, but hope to get it off the ground post-AS exams. This could be an 'extended project' that is worked on during former CP time.
Philosophy Club
Reading David Birch's new book (see <here>), I again wonder if I could run a philosophy club that focuses on philosophical enquiry...
Why?
Our results are excellent, some of the top in the local area. Why the hell would we want to change the way we teach? When students were questioned a few years ago (according to my sources) they responded that their one criticism is that "teachers didn't talk enough". I can assure you there is a lot of teacher talk, particularly in A-Level lessons. We get lots of students on to very good courses at excellent universities... some go straight into very good jobs... are we really doing anything wrong?
"Just Tell us Miss" (@MissDCox)
This, it's SO this. Especially from the most able students. My incredibly bright Y11, Set 1 students got obsessed with the 'textbook definitions' for the key words despite me over and over saying as long as it was correct, it would get full marks, it didn't need to be word for word from an Edexcel approved textbook! On the other hand, there is a culture of what can only be called laziness, especially from low level disruptive students where it is far easier to just give them the answer to keep them vaguely on task and essentially quite.
Another thing?
This year we've started Open Door Week, formal SLT book monitoring... probably more things that I can't remember. How do we encourage staff to get on board? Change their established SoW? Extra meetings with people from other departments? Replan lessons that work perfectly well? Also some ACE peeps are wary that there could be a feeling of "Them again with their 'new' ideas?".
What's in it for me? UCAS points? No? Not interested. There has to be motivation. In General RE, we stopped doing the NOCN qualification which had an external verification and, as such, certification, for our own syllabus this year. Thankfully, we have good girls who did the work for an in-house, but pretty (I made it!), certificate. 6th form is a hectic time... unless it will help with UCAS statement or gives UCAS points or a qualification that will actually get them a job, how do you get students to see the point? I think Tom (<headguruteacher>) is on to a winner with substantial cash prizes!
Ultimately we are working very hard as teachers, but are we working hard at the right things?
Could our energy be better spent instead of doing a lot of the hard graft for our students?
Over to you...
Tweet me <here>, email me <here>, comment below and challenge me, console me, fight me, inspire me....
