The review of Assessment A highlighted the as-yet tentative link between research and understanding of theory and any relevant observation and experience. I needed to develop, demonstrate and apply a fuller understanding across the whole primary CfE, to consider the values base behind the modernisation of the curriculum in Scotland and what an education service means in social terms. The task set for Assessment B is indicative of the fundamental values behind the new curriculum because the principles of curriculum design that underpin the CfE initiative aim to promote inclusion and equality for all pupils. I decided to base Assessment B around a practical experience in a Scottish primary school setting to strengthen the link between theory and practice, to test and apply my research into CfE in a primary classroom and to explore the practical implications of the values behind the CfE initiative.
I wanted Assignment B to be a case-study experience, with the opportunity to reflect on my current status as a developing primary school teacher and to consider the next steps required. The following section examines the key principles in terms of their effectiveness and inclusiveness in primary school learning and teaching, and makes connections with the targets I have set myself in preparing to work with primary school pupils.
The first key principle is cooperative learning. This results from research into the activist theory of learning, and from Chris Watkins's assertion that “new knowledge emerges in the process of social activity and especially in dialogue”. It is motivated by Black-Hawkins, Florian and Rouse's framework of participation and, in particular, the section dealing with participation and collaboration. This includes aspects such as learning alongside other students and supporting students to learn together, and also ties in with Thomas and Vaughan 's advocacy of “groupings whereby the pupil pursues activities in groups of suitable composition, i.e. mixed ability groups for project work”.
The second principle involves the implementation of formative assessment in the primary classroom. My reading of Black and Wiliam and the follow-up study undertaken by Black et al convinced me of the great learning potential contained in the Assessment is for Learning initiative and of the need to experiment with assessment for, as and of learning.
The third principle is derived from the pedagogical or craft of teaching model of analysis discussed by Chris Kyriacou and focuses on teaching skills (managing pupils and activities, appropriateness of material) and teacher and pupil perceptions. Kyriacou highlights the ideas of Kounin regarding techniques used by effective teachers such as “withitness”, “smoothness” and “momentum”, which were important to revisit given my limited experience at primary level. Teacher and pupil perceptions address the issue of “social sensitivity” – whether I can identify the pupils' level of understanding, motivation and competence and whether the pupils understand what I want them to do. In my intention to test all three theories in practice, I taught eight morning sessions (session one 9 am – 10.30 am; session two 10.45 – 12.05) at Hillside Primary School , as part of the P3/4 Vikings project.
I first met with the Head teacher, Carol, who suggested that I teach the P3/4 group. There were a number of reasons for this choice. Firstly, the class had barely started work on the Vikings project so I had plenty of scope for planning material. Secondly, the group's classroom teacher, Jane, is an experienced senior practitioner who could provide thoughtful feedback and advice. Thirdly, two pupils in the class were considered of interest for an inclusive learning experience: Daniel has currently reached an attainment level expected at P1, and Jonathan has in-class support for behavioural issues. My goal was to provide an effective and inclusive series of lessons for all the children, but with a particular focus on Jonathan and Daniel.
An initial consideration was how I intended to provide differentiation in my teaching. In terms of Daniel's learning difficulties, my main focus was to be on differentiation by support (peer support, classroom assistants and myself). With regard to Jonathan, Jane advised me to try a friendly but firm approach to his lapses in concentration and behaviour. I organised our five groups for the (Vikings) topic so that four of the five groups each contained four pupils, one pupil with above average attainment and one of below average attainment for their age range. The fifth group contained only three pupils, all considered to be at an average level of attainment for the age range. My idea was that the able pupils would support the less able in the learning activities (selection by mixed attainment ). A classroom assistant, Mary, told me that on Tuesday (my first teaching day) she would be taking Daniel and Jonathan out of class for one-to-one tuition during my teaching time. Given my objective of providing an inclusive learning experience for all of the P3/4 pupils, I negotiated a postponement of Daniel and Jonathan's removal from the class.
Let us now consider the first of my key principles relevant to effective and inclusive primary school learning and teaching – cooperative learning. I began with team-building and social skills activities to promote successful teamwork and improve the overall learning experience. Each team was given its own name and a separate Viking topic area to focus on. The pupils made flags for their respective teams and wrote a Viking version of their own names. This was to create what Craigen and Ward refer to as positive identity interdependence. They also assigned team member roles such as reader, writer and reporter, materials monitor, checker and timer to create positive role interdependence. The two social skills activities involved personal story telling with quiet voices and the use of encouragement within the team. I had already observed Jane's emphasis on quiet voices in an earlier lesson.
How well did these activities facilitate effective and inclusive learning in the P3/4 class? The pupils were excited by the team names and enjoyed working together on the flags. Jane commented favourably on the personal story-telling exercise. The exercise on Viking name-giving (the Vikings incorporated their father's first name into their second name) was understood by most pupils, but not, at first, by Daniel. The pupils understood the theoretical value of encouragement in teamwork, but it would require much nurturing before they put the idea into practice as a skill. There was a degree of conflict about roles and tasks.
In the second session, I began by brainstorming their current knowledge of the Vikings topic. I encouraged the pupils to spend a few minutes thinking about what they already knew and discuss this with a partner, before feeding back their knowledge to the whole class. The pupils also considered what they would like to find out next. The pupils responded enthusiastically to this activity.
The first writing activity was a gap-filling exercise, with each group working on its own topic-related material. This was less successful in terms of inclusiveness, as Daniel found it difficult to read the gap-filling exercise and lost interest as his more able partner completed the task alone. I discussed some of the gap-filling questions with Daniel orally, but his response was limited and I was left with the feeling that the task had been inappropriate to his level of ability. In a future lesson, I would adapt the exercise to make it more accessible to Daniel and I would differentiate the activity by outcome as well as by support. The final activity of the day was a whole class review of learning so far. Colleagues commented favourably on the pupils' reaction to the day's activities, but I felt that there had been insufficient ‘down time' – not just for Daniel, but for the class as a whole. I was grateful for the support I received from Mary with Daniel and Jonathan, as this allowed me more time to listen to the discussions and help with the questions of all five Vikings teams.
After reflecting on the first day's teaching, I reviewed the material for Wednesday, adopting a “less is more” approach and including more fun activities, such as a word search, and a drawing activity. I became aware of a balancing act between taking the pressure off the pupils at times whilst also maintaining momentum and challenging the pupils. In terms of cooperative learning, conflict within the teams was sometimes a problem. For instance, my attempt at providing peer support for Daniel with the more able Amy was only partially successful due to an argument between the two.
In the afternoon session, I observed the head teacher, Carol, taking the class. She adopted a different approach to Jonathan's attention-seeking behaviour. I had frequently challenged him to sit properly and not to shout out and talk over others. She ignored this kind of behaviour for far longer, allowing him to regain self-control, rather than attempting to exert control over his behaviour. It was interesting to reflect on a different approach adopted by a very experienced teacher and here also, there is a balancing act between encouraging Jonathan to behave in an appropriate manner and giving my attention to the rest of the class. I felt Carol's approach to Daniel's attention seeking to be appropriate, but outside my personal comfort zone.
I wanted to integrate some literacy and numeracy practice into the project and introduced one literacy-related exercise ( matching halves of sentences) and one numeracy related topic ( Viking timelines) in the first Thursday session. This was followed by a guided written activity ( writing frame) in pairs. The teams performed these activities well orally and less well in a written exercise. Daniel in particular, still struggled with the reading and writing aspect of the activity. I realised that I was relying too heavily on differentiation by support via myself, the classroom assistant and peers. As the week progressed, I felt that greater variety of differentiation was required, such as through outcome and materials.
The final group activity, on the Friday morning, was a simulation of a Viking market involving interaction between all the teams. This was commented upon favourably by both pupils and Jane and it was heartening to see harmonious collaboration between team members and the enthusiastic participation of all pupils. On the whole, there were clear positive aspects to the group work over the four days. Pupils certainly identified with their teams although I was not consistent enough in my promotion of roles within each team and this aspect was largely forgotten by the end of the week.
Cooperative learning practises the discussion skills that are integral to my second key principle for effective and inclusive learning: formative assessment. The teams discussed prior knowledge and set goals for future learning (assessment as learning); I gave extra time to ponder questions so that all pupils had time to think about their answers (assessment for learning). I intended my planning to be flexible enough to meet all the desired goals for future learning (such as the interest expressed in learning about runes), but found myself running out time as I attempted to accommodate my own material. On the whole, I was constantly aware of my intention to integrate formative assessment into my teaching, but it was sometimes lost in the other day-to-day classroom activities. As with cooperative learning, formative assessment needs careful nurturing for both pupils and teachers.
The third key principle, pedagogy, refers to my teaching skills and my ability to gauge the pupils' level of understanding and their understanding of what I wanted them to do. My classroom management was aided by observing techniques employed by Jane with the same pupils. For instance, she gained and maintained the pupils' attention by raising her hand or counting to five when she wanted their full attention. I used the same techniques and the pupils responded appropriately. With regard to Kounin's “withitness”, “smoothness” and “momentum”, I was generally aware of what was going on around me in the classroom and knew when it was time to introduce a new activity. I was initially unsure of the appropriateness of the materials, but adapted these and grew in confidence as the week progressed. On reflection, I was too reliant on materials as the drivers of learning. When they failed Daniel on the first day, I had to react spontaneously because I had not provided for relevant alternative material. I failed the “social sensitivity” test, at least initially, with Daniel, as I misjudged his level of understanding and did not differentiate materials for him sufficiently throughout the four-day teaching period. I was more comfortable in dealing with Jonathan's behaviour, as he generally responded readily to my reminders.
The project experience emphasised the need for a variety of materials and activities to sustain interest and motivation. I experimented with formative assessment and would seek to explore this further in subsequent lessons. The group work was partially successful as teams forged an identity and worked together on activities. No one was isolated for long periods. The skills of cooperative learning cannot be assumed and must be thoroughly practised. I spent considerable time preparing the content of the lessons, but would now conclude that the learning experience would benefit from greater structure and specificity in the planning. I shall attempt to address this issue in Part Two.
WATKINS, C., (2003). Learning: a sense-maker's guide . London : Association of Teachers and Lecturers, pp.14-16
BLACK-HAWKINS, K., FLORIAN, L., AND ROUSE, M., (2007). Achievement and
Inclusion in Schools. London : Taylor and Francis Ltd, p. 150
THOMAS, G. AND VAUGHAN, M., (2004), p.94
BLACK, P. AND WILIAM, D., (1998). Inside the Black Box. London : King's College.
BLACK, P., HARRISON, C., LEE, C., MARSHALL, B., AND WILIAM, D., (2004). Working Inside the Black Box . London : Nfer Nelson
KYRIACOU, C., (2001). Effective Teaching in Schools. 2 nd ed. Cheltenham : Nelson Thornes Ltd, p.18
The name of the school, pupils and staff were all changed in the interests of confidentiality.
BLACK-HAWKINS, K., FLORIAN, L., and ROUSE, M., (2007), p. 150
CRAIGEN, J., WARD, C., (2009). Cooperative Learning. Creating a Curriculum for Excellence. North Lanarkshire Council, p.49