Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Differentiation overview Graduate tasks e.g. from easy to hard on a worksheet. Use “Bloom’s Taxonomy” and mix Mastery and Developmental tasks Set open tasks, because stronger students interpret these in a more demanding way. Expect more from the more able students. Use high-order Q&A: why? how? & which? questions. Differentiate by task; outcome; and time allowed Differentiate resources: e.g. use texts of different depth, breadth, and difficulty Vary your teaching methods • Visual, and verbal • Quiet and noisy, etc “Buddy up” students who can help each other. E.g. one who can write and one who can’t. The buddy needs some ‘training’. Develop Generic skills by : • Feedback proformas • Teaching both Process and Product skills Use self-assessment and ask students to set themselves targets Set different tasks. Use: • ability groups • help sheets and writing frames • extension tasks, or grade criteria + targets Use teaching methods that differentiate well, e.g. require all students to participate, and all students to carry out thought provoking tasks. Differentiate time allowed by: Resource Based Learning Independent learning Mastery Learning Accommodate different preferences & support-needs Integrate Learning Support into your classes Use ILT to give support Use group work so that peers can support each other Make explicit use of for e.g. • peer checking • peer tutoring • learning teams Differentiate feedback, then set individual tasks & targets Use “Medal and Mission” feedback Set individualised goals and targets based on diagnostic tests & assessment; ILP; Oneto-one action planning; etc Reduce the need for differentiation by: • • • • • Accurate initial guidance and course placement Individual Learning Programmes Genuinely Diagnostic testing being used to inform individualised action planning Mastery Learning and similar ‘diagnosis and remediation’ approaches Curriculum Audit (See Topic 1 Inclusive Learning Quality Initiative materials) 37 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Bloom’s Taxonomy and Task Design Reasoning required! Evaluation Evaluation (judge, critically appraise) critically appraise) •(judge, strengths and weaknesses •a) • •b) c) •d) •e) • f) g) advantages andweaknesses disadvantages strengths and give arguments for and against (SWOT) fitness for purpose value for advantages and disadvantages money & value for give arguments foreffort and against compare andpurpose contrast fitness for consider bias etc value for evidence, money & value for evaluate effort my own work compare and contrast consider evidence: Synthesis (create, design, invent) solve a problem write an essay, report, criticism ... design a leaflet, poster, presentation etc. give constructive suggestions for improvement in a given situation • design a policy or strategy or device • do a survey (eg with a questionnaire etc.) • • • • Analysis (consider the parts separately) • • • • • analyse a situation, experiment, case study etc and describe what is happening. • categorise classify • deduce compare • Categoris give reasons, e give causes and effects A mix of reproduction and reasoning tasks is required reproduction so that weaker students can succeed reasoning to stretch the more able, and to ensure deep understanding for all students Set a mix of these tasks for Q&A; lesson tasks; worksheets; assignments; etc Reasoning: ‘Developmental Tasks’ E..g. Evaluate the importance of full to high employment. Report on the leisure time opportunities in Worcester City. Characteristics.: • CAN be difficult • they are highly dependent on prior learning • development is slow and requires considerable effort • they create transferable learning of important thinking skills • they are more interesting, even to weak students • they are vocationally and academically relevant • they create deep learning Application (Doing after being shown how) • • apply use calculate punctuate • • Comprehension • • explain interpret Knowledge • • state recall • • • • classify reorganise define describe Reproduction: ‘Mastery Tasks’ E.g. Recognise and name the main constituents of a cell. Copy and label a diagram of a power station Characteristics: • They are easy. 100% of students can get them 100% right! • they are not dependent on prior learning • They can be attained in a short time, perhaps minutes No reasoning required 38 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Bloom’s Taxonomy Bloom’s Taxonomy is a spectrum of task difficulty. It goes from tasks that require recall or reproduction and no reasoning, to tasks which require resoning and deeper understanding such as evaluating an argument. It deals with cognitive learning*, but a similar approach can be used in other sorts of learning. • ‘Tasks’ include everything you ask students to do: verbal question and answer, tasks set in the lesson; and full blown assignments or projects. It also includes tasks for work inside and outside the class. • In order to differentiate there should be a mix of: • • Reproduction or Mastery Tasks that can be mastered by all learners in a short period of time regardless of their prior learning. This allows weaker learners to succeed. Without this success they will probably give up. • Resoning or Developmental tasks that stretch the more able, develop the skills required for academic success, and for the world of work. These tasks develop the skills required for progression to the next educational level. They also create deep learning, that is, real understanding. Hence they are required for all learners, including those with learning difficulties. It is important to realise that the full spectrum of Bloom’s Taxonomy should appear at every academic level. Entry level students need simple developmental tasks such as ‘which of these is best’ ‘what would happen if…’ or ‘plan how you are going to…’ Similarly, level 4 students need mastery tasks such as to recall the key points in a lesson. *Other domains of learning are psychomotor learning (practical skills such as serving at tennis) and affective learning (learning attitudes beliefs values etc). Reproduction and Reasoning Tasks A mix of developmental and mastery tasks ensures that weak students achieve some success while the able are stretched. Reproduction tasks E.g. Recognise and name the main constituents of a simple cell. Copy and label a diagram of a hydroelectric power station Find the cost of sending a fax in this country and abroad. Express one figure as a percentage of another using (A/B) X 100 ‘reproduction’ or ‘mastery’ tasks have the following characteristics: • they are easy, typically involving only knowledge and comprehension • they are not dependent on prior learning • They can be attained in a short time, perhaps minutes. • 100% of the students should be able to get them 100% right! 39 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Because they are time rather than ability dependent mastery tasks allow weaker students can enjoy the success, reinforcement, self belief and motivation which makes learning possible. Reasoning tasks tasks E.g. Write a clear, scientifically argued laboratory report ...... Evaluate the importance of full to high employment in western societies........ How did the early life of Harold Macmillan influence his political thinking? Survey leisure time opportunities in Your nearestCity, and report on your findings Reasoning or Developmental tasks have the following characteristics.: • they are more difficult • they are highly dependent of prior learning • Students can’t get 100%. Development is slow and requires considerable effort. • they involve higher order skills such as evaluation, synthesis, etc. The importance of reasoning objectives lies in their ability to maximise individual development and to stretch the more able. Continuous development rather than complete mastery is expected. Using Reproduction and Reasoning Tasks in Practice. Difficult reasoning tasks can be broken down into introductory reproduction tasks, followed by a simpler reasoning task. The reproduction tasks should prepare the student for the reasoning task. In this way Bloom’s Taxonomy is used as a ladder allowing all students to climb to success. Take for example “Survey leisure time opportunities in your nearest city, and report on your findings” This is a reasoning task, but could be broken down into a ladder of tasks such as: a. List ten or more leisure time activities which are available in your nearest city b. Find sources of information on other leisure time activities such as local papers and Tourist Information Offices c. Make a fuller list of leisure opportunities in your city. d. Group these opportunities into general categories such as sport, music, theatre etc. You will need to make up some new general categories. e. Group the opportunities by the age of those most likely to be interested in them f. Group your activities by geographical area, and by cost. g. Think of some other useful ways of grouping the activities. h. Use the above to help you plan a report on leisure activities in Worcester. Your plan could either be a mind-map, or an ordered set of headings. i. Write a report on your survey of leisure time opportunities in your nearest city. j. Proof read your report before handing it in. An essay such as “How can learning theory inform the teaching of mathematics” or “In what way did Charles 1 prepare the way for Cromwell?” can be turned into a ladder of tasks, with reproduction tasks being chosen to lead the way to the writing of the essay. Such assignments can allow students without effective essay writing skills to succeed. Try this site for more on learning and teaching: www.geoffpetty.com 40 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching What practical use can we make of Bloom’s Taxonomy? • Do a ‘Bloom Audit’ of assignments, worksheets, lesson plans • Improve oral questioning with reasoning questions: • why questions (analysis) • how questions (synthesis) • which questions (evaluation) • what would happen if…questions • (Give students time in pairs to decide the answers) • Use teaching by asking • Plan suitable questions and tasks in teams To do a Bloom Audit use this ladder. Consider the following to see if the ladder of tasks is there with no ‘rungs missing’: Lesson activities Assignments Questioning Worksheets etc Challenging reasoning tasks Simple reasoning tasks Reproduction tasks 41 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Active, Constructivist, ‘High order’ tasks are required to make ‘nonacademic’ learners learn at a deep level Level of learner engagement Susan Evaluation Synthesis Analysis Robert Application Comprehension Knowledge Passive ‘reproduction’ task is set An active reasoning task is set The Jabberwocky Problem ‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe; All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe. 1. 2. 3. What were the slithy toves doing in the wabe? How would you describe the state of the borogroves? What can you say about the mome raths? Please leave these questions til later: 4. Does the student need to understand material in order to answer low level questions directly related to the texts you give them?! 5. Why were the borogroves mimsy? 6. How effective was the mome raths strategy? Note questions 1-3 were at the bottom of Bloom’s Taxonomy, 5&6 were near the top. This shows that tasks at the very bottom of Bloom can just create ‘surface’ learning without understanding. 42 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Interest and Bloom’s Taxonomy Parky is to interview David Beckham, but has asked you which questions to ask…. Parkinson Questions • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Which level on Bloom’s Taxonomy? Tick the five most interesting questions How old were you when you signed for Manchester United How many goals have you scored for Manchester United this season How many caps have you got for England? What was your wife’s last single called? Where was Brooklyn conceived? Could you explain the off-side rule? What steps do you go through to take a free kick? How do you go about taking a corner? What do you have written on the front of your boots? What would cause you to leave Manchester United? Give reasons why you are such a good midfielder. What is your favourite football moment? What were the main reasons for England’s defeat by Brazil? George Best is your favourite footballer, what were his strengths and weaknesses as a footballer. What is the difference between how Manchester United is coached and how England is coached ? If you were managing United, how would you run the team? What are the characteristics of a great manager? What makes a great coach? How would you improve the quality of England’s game How can Manchester United improve as a team? What star sign were you born under? What’s your favourite colour? What’s your favourite food? What do you and Posh argue about? Could you explain why you re-signed for Manchester United instead of going to an Italian team 43 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching The best way to make your subject boring is to ask questions low on Bloom’s taxonomy! Susan is an able or ‘academic’ student Robert ‘has less ability’ and less motivation ‘High order’ means analysis synthesis, ‘evaluation’ etc Adapted from “Teaching for Quality Learning at University” John Biggs Open University Press (1999) 44 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Teacher Talk/Lecture Buzz Group The teacher gives a verbal input, explaining and describing etc, perhaps with OHP or board to assist. Students work in a small group for a few minutes to answer a question or complete a task. The teacher asks the group for their answer. Teacher demonstrates Students create a leaflet or poster The teacher shows students how to do something. This could be a practical procedure. It could also be showing students how to do something on the board/OHT. For example a teacher showing students how to punctuate a sentence or solve a mathematical problem. Students are given a ‘design brief’ such as ‘design a leaflet/poster summarising the main means of ensuring effective dental care’ and work alone or in pairs to create it. Teacher led whole class discussion Students watch a video or film The teacher asks students a question and then volunteer students, or nominated students give their answer to the class. Some students may also ask questions or make contributions. This just involves watching the video or film, no other activity is set. However you might like to consider as a group how this method might be made to differentiate better Tests and Quizzes: usual style Worksheet This is the usual way of doing tests or quizzes where questions are asked, students respond. The teacher then establishes the correct answers and either students or the teacher mark the students’ responses. Students are given a worksheet with a range of graduated questions: that is, starting easy and getting harder. Tests and Quizzes: formative style Students create a handout Questions are asked by the teacher, and students respond. Students mark their own responses from model answers provided. Students establish which questions they got wrong and work on these. The test/quiz is given again a day/week later but students only do the questions they got wrong first time. Students are given a ‘design brief’ such as ‘design a handout summarising the main means of ensuring effective dental care’ and work alone or in pairs to create it. 44 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Experiment/practical ‘recipe style’ Students are given a task to do along with the materials needed, and are also given a detailed description of how to do the task. Pair Checking Students check each other’s work. For example check each other’s calculations, punctuation etc after this work has been done individually. Case Studies Experiment/practical ‘discovery style’ Students are given a task to do but not told how to do it. Students plan a method, then check this with the teacher before starting. Students who cannot work out how to do it are given a ‘recipe’ style help sheet or helped in some other way. Paired Student Practice Students work in pairs on a written task to complete, which requires them to practise a skill demonstrated by the teacher. For example doing calculations, punctuating a sentence etc. Explaining Tasks Students are given a case study with graded questions. E.g. Business Studies students, after studying marketing, are given the marketing strategy of a small hotel and are asked questions about it. Both reproduction and reasoning questions are included. Maths/science: Students study worked examples and then explain the ‘how’ and the ‘why’ of the method to each other. Other subjects: students explain the key points of a lesson to each other at the end of that lesson. In both cases the teacher then gives model explanations Research: test style Research: assignment style Students are given a topic to research using books, internet, CDRom etc. Students may be given references or asked to find the material for themselves. Students’ understanding is then checked with a short test Students are given a topic to research using books, internet, CDRom etc. Students may be given references or asked to find the material for themselves. Students’ then write an account of what they have discovered and hand this in for marking Student Presentation Reading Students are given a topic to explain to the class. They may work alone or in a small group to prepare, plan and deliver the presentation. Materials and plans are checked by the teacher before the presentation. Students read appropriate texts e.g. handouts, books, or a website 45 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching ‘Which’ Questioning Strategy? version 4 Questioning Strategy (Students anticipate these strategies in advance) Participation Rate Excellent *** Teacher’s feedback good ** Student’s feedback weak * poor !! Thinking Student time comfort Q&A: volunteers answer Students volunteer to answer questions Q&A: nominees answer Students nominated by the teacher answer questions Buzz groups: volunteers answer Students work in small groups to answer a thought provoking question. Teacher asks each group in turn to contribute part of the answer. A volunteer answers for their group. Buzz groups: nominees answer As above, but after the discussion the teacher nominates the student in each group who will contribute that group’s answer(s). Assertive Questioning Groups work on a thought provoking question. Teacher asks individuals to give their group’s answer, and then asks the rest of the class to discuss and agree a ‘class answer’. Only then does the teacher ‘give away’ the right answer. Pair checking Teacher asks a question, then students work alone to answer it. Pairs then compare their answers, giving their partner one good point and one way their answer could be improved while the teacher observes. The teacher then gives the correct answer. Pairs now suggest another improvement to their partner’s answer. Participation Rate: The proportion of students who are engaged in trying to answer the question is high. There are few ‘passengers’. Teacher’s feedback: The teacher gets representative feedback on the quality of students’ reasoning and understanding in the class. Student’s feedback: The students get feedback on the quality of their understanding, e.g. by discussing their understandings with others: ’dialogue’ Thinking time: A given student is likely to spend a good deal of time thinking productively about the question, and the quality of their answer Student comfort: Students are not ‘put on the spot’ and they are unlikely to feel humiliated by the teacher or by others in the class. 46 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching ‘Which’ Questioning Strategy? The precise questioning strategy you adopt can make a big difference to the proportion of students who participate, both mentally and verbally, in your lessons. Here are some alternative strategies. They are evaluated overleaf against important characteristics. You can combine these strategies, or develop your own. Question and answer: volunteers answer Students volunteer to answer questions posed verbally by the teacher This is usually done with ‘hands up’but sometimes students call out their answer. If more than one student volunteers the teacher chooses who will answer. The ‘thinking time’ between asking a question and the answer being delivered is usually less than a second here. There is often low ‘participation’ rate because students learn that if they do not answer, they will not be asked to contribute. If some students call out the answer they reduce the thinking time of the others. Question and Answer: nominees answer Students nominated by the teacher answer questions asked by the teacher. “Pose, pause, pounce” That is the teacher poses the question, pauses for thought, and then ‘pounces’ on an individual to answer. (Optionally, the teacher can choose student who appear not to be attending to answer questions.) Buzz groups: volunteers answer Students work in small groups, or pairs, to answer a thought-provoking question, or do a calculation or similar task. The teacher asks each group in turn to contribute part of the answer. E.g. “Can you give me one advantage of using a laser printer?….Can this group give me another?” A volunteer answers for their group. They are called ‘buzz groups’ because of the buzz of conversation created while they work. Buzz groups: nominees answer As immediately above, but the teacher nominates the student in each group who will contribute that group’s answer(s). The teacher only chooses which student will give the group’s answer after the group discussion. All members of the group are then likely to attend, and to try to understand the group’s answer, as any of them may be asked to explain it. (Optionally, the teacher can choose students who do not appear to be attending to explain their group’s answer.) Assertive Questioning Buzz groups work on a thought provoking question. The teacher asks individuals to give their group’s answer. These individuals are usually nominated by the teacher, but they could be volunteers from the group. The teacher gets a number of answers without giving the correct answer away. The teacher then encourages the class to discuss their various answers, and to agree, and justify a ‘class answer’. Minority views are allowed, but the aim is consensus. Only when the class has agreed its answer does the teacher ‘give away’ the right answer. (See Geoff’s separate handout or ‘Teaching Today’.) Pair checking Teacher asks a question, and students work alone to answer it. Pairs then compare their answers and each individual says something positive about their partner’s answer and one thing that would improve it. The teacher now gives the correct answer. Pairs suggest another improvement to their partner’s answer. This can be done with pairs combining into fours to compare their answers. The teacher listens to some student conversations throughout. 47 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching ‘Which’ Questioning Strategy? version 4 Teaching Strategy Students usually anticipate these in advance Participation Rate Excellent *** Teacher’s feedback good ** Student’s feedback weak * poor !! Thinking Student time comfort Mini whiteboards Students have A4 whiteboards (laminated card) and drywipe pens. 1. The teacher asks a question, and students write their answers. 2. The teacher waits until all or most of students have an answer. Optionally, students check their neighbours’ answers. 3. The teacher then asks students to hold their answers up, all at the same time. Students then look round to see what their classmates have written. 4. The teacher surveys all the boards to see what answers were given. 5. The teacher clarifies any misunderstandings. Q&A nominees ‘basket ball’ version Teacher nominates a student, gets an answer, asks another student what they think of that answer, then another etc to get a number of answers. Sometimes asks ‘who agrees with that answer’ then nominates a student to say why they agree. Sometimes asks ‘who disagrees?’, and chooses a student to explain why. Similar to ‘Assertive questioning’ but no groups involved. Participation Rate: The proportion of students who are engaged in trying to answer the question is high. There are few ‘passengers’. Teacher’s feedback: The teacher gets representative feedback on the quality of students’ reasoning and understanding in the class. Student’s feedback: The students get feedback on the quality of their understanding. Ideally the student improves their understanding as a result. Thinking time: A given student is likely to spend a good deal of time thinking productively about the question, and the quality of their answer Student comfort: Students are not ‘put on the spot’ and they are unlikely to feel humiliated by the teacher or by others in the class. 48 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Getting Interactivity Interactivity is a vital component of good teaching. Researchers found teachers who were in the top one percent of all teachers nationally for six years running in terms of value added. They did not use conventional questioning strategies, but used something like 'assertive questioning' (below) instead. Assertive questioning is part of ‘whole class interactive teaching’ (WCIT). Professor John Hattie has synthesised and compared over 300,000 experiments to improve student attainment, he finds WCIT is one of the very best teaching methods raising students attainment by almost two grades compared to conventional methods. See chapter 15 of 'Evidence Based Teaching' Geoff Petty. Assertive Questioning 1. Buzz groups work on a thought provoking question. 2. The teacher monitors this work asking: ‘does everyone have an answer, ask me for a hint if not’ ‘does anyone need more time?’ If a group does not respond to this offer of help they are ‘fair game’ for the next stage. The teacher does not give the answer away if they do help a group. 3. The teacher nominates individuals to give their group’s answer, and to justify it: “why do you think that?”. The teacher thanks the student for their answer, but does not evaluate it. They might ask supplementary questions such as 'Does anybody agree with that answer?' 'Has anybody got anything different?'. 4. The teacher gets a response from each group in this way, or at least a number of groups, and then points out any inconsistencies between the groups’ answers if any. (If there aren’t any, perhaps the question could have been more challenging, though in early practice easy questions are helpful) 5. The aim now is to get the whole class to agree their ‘class answer(s)’. The teacher encourages the class to discuss and evaluate their various answers, and to agree, and to justify their ‘class answer’. Minority views are allowed, but the aim is consensus. 6. Only when the class has agreed its answer does the teacher ‘give away’ the right answer, or evaluate and comment on the answers given. This method works whether there are right answers or whether different interpretations and answers are likely e.g. in a critical appraisal of a painting. (See the diagram below and ‘Whole Class Interactive Teaching’, chapter 24 in ‘Teaching Today’.) We will learn best if we all work towards a “blame-free” classroom: • It’s okay if you don’t fully understand a concept first time, learning takes time. • what counts is whether you understand the question or task, and its answer eventually, not whether you get it right first time • I ask challenging questions so it is not humiliating to make a mistake. We all make mistakes when we learn. Indeed that is part of how we learn. If we don’t make mistakes the work is too easy for us to learn at our maximum rate. • Mistakes are useful because they tell us where we can improve. • If you make a mistake, bet your life half the class has made it too. 49 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching • • • • It’s good for learning to say ‘I don’t understand’ and to ask for clarification. You should never ridicule another student for their mistakes, even in a joking way because you wouldn’t like it if you were ridiculed, and because it stops us learning. You will only learn from mistakes if you find out how to do it without mistakes next time, and really understand this. Let’s help each other! The helper learns at least as much as the helped. Ground-rules like these are best established very early on, and are best developed Socratically by asking students for their ideas for class ground-rules. “We all want to enjoy ourselves and we all want to learn well, so what should be your ground-rules?” Note it is ‘your’ not ‘my’ ground-rules! Assertive questioning Ask the question must require the student to reason clear and concise wording Monitor the reasoning don’t give the answer away until the last stage (below) use proximity Check for completion ‘Does anyone need more time? ‘Hands up if you don’t have an answer’ Get some answers T he class interrogates the answers Teacher confirms the correct answer Not just volunteers ... be unpredictable about who you ask:. “Do you agree? .. Why?” “Can this answer be improved?” Only now is the answer given by the teacher “who else got the correct answer?.. Well done!!” Reinforcement: thanks and praise 50 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Student demonstration This is an excellent method to test and develop students’ understanding of a simple skill such as mathematics problem solving, punctuation, scientific reasoning, detection of imagery in a poem etc. It is very similar to assertive questioning and is used routinely in Eastern European countries and in Pacific Rim countries such as Taiwan and Singapore, which routinely achieve top ranking in international comparisons. The method is used after a teacher demonstration of a practical or intellectual skill. The aim is to check and correct understanding of a skill before all students practice it. It is initially a bit daunting for students but they will greatly enjoy the method if you introduce them to it properly. Use pair explaining first (see page ???” this prepares them for student demonstration very well. After they have learned to use peer explaining well, set them tasks to do in pairs followed by a student demonstration, perhaps asking for volunteers. Then move on to pair work followed by you nominating the student to demonstrate. Give them fair warning in any changes. The basic procedure for student demonstration is: 1. • • • You set a task: “working in pairs, factorise 6x2 - 6x - 8” “Okay, in pairs, punctuate this paragraph” “Working by yourself this time, can you see any personification or metaphors in the third or fourth verse of the poem?” 2. Students work on the task. This can be done in pairs initially, but after a bit of practice they do tasks individually, perhaps checking each other’s completed answers in pairs. They strive to get the answer, with any justification such as necessary reasoning or working etc. If students are in pairs they make sure that either of them can provide this justification. 3. You monitor the work. You check attention to task and occasionally ask: • ‘Can everyone do this one?’ • ‘Can you all explain your answer?’ Students who can’t answer the question are required to own up and get help at this stage, otherwise they are ‘fair game’ for the next stage. 4. You choose a student to demonstrate their answer to the rest of the class. If students are in pairs you choose one student at random to give the pair’s answer. The student gives their answer on the board, explaining each step and its justification to the class. You ask questions to clarify, but do not yet evaluate the answer. • “Why didn’t you use 6 and 1 as the factors of 6?” • “Why did you choose a full stop and not a comma?” • “So how did you choose between personification and metaphor?” 5. You ask for a ‘class answer’. You ask the class if they agree with the student’s answer and its justification, or whether either could be improved. The aim is not to criticise the student’s answer, but for the class to agree a ‘class answer’. The student who did the demonstration becomes the class scribe, writing up any changes the class agrees to. You again fascilitate without evaluating the answers or the arguments. • “Why do you think it should be plus four and not minus?” • “How many think it should be a comma? Why?” • “So why exactly is it not a metaphor?” 6. You comment on the class answer. Praise any useful contributions and confirm any correct reasoning, and correct any weak reasoning. 51 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching 7. The process is repeated with another task, after sufficient practice the students can do stage 2 as individuals rather than in pairs. Students are often initially resistant to doing a demonstration if they are not used to it. So you could make use of volunteers to begin with, but try to move on to students nominated by you as soon as you can. They will be more confident of answers that they have produced in pairs, than answers produced in isolation so when you first start nominating students do it after pair work. All the arguments in favour of assertive questioning apply also to this method. You might like to compare student demonstrations with other methods you use in similar situations, using the criteria we used earlier in this chapter. Participation Rate Teacher’s feedback Student comfort Thinking time Student demonstration My own method(s) Using mini white-boards This is another brilliant way to get answers, and so feedback. It is possible to buy a class set of A3, A4, or A5 whiteboards, each complete with a dry-wipe pen and eraser in a sealable plastic wallet for just over a pound each. Or you can make your own sets by laminating card. Some people argue that pale cream boards are better than white as this assists some dyslexic students with no disadvantage to other students. The idea was first invented in Primary schools but they are used everywhere now, including university, though there is hi-tech version To use the mini white-board. It starts off very like students demonstration: 1. You set a task: It works well to start off with students working in pairs, and with later tasks working individually. Tell them if you are going to do this so they work towards their own independence: • Working in pairs to begin with, “factorise 6x2 - 6x - 8” • By yourself this time, Punctuate this sentence: “Some people such as farmers work • outside.” “Working by yourself this time, write down any phrase from verses three or four that involves personification” 2. Students work on the task and write their answer on their board. Once students have their answer 3. You check what is on the boards. You ask students to hold up their boards all at the same time so that you can see their answers. Students will crane their necks to see everyone else’s answers! 4. You ask students about their answers. Students need to know not just whether they have the right answer, but whether they arrived at the answer using the correct reasoning. So you can ask students ‘why’ they have the answer they have: That’s right Phil, why did you decide to put the comma where you did? 52 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Alternatively you can withhold your evaluation of the answers to spark a class discussion: “Okay, some of you have a comma after ‘people’ and others haven't. What do we think?” Clearly you can get students to call out their answers and so dispense with the board. “Okay, what is the first word in your sentence with a comma after it?”, but this will only work for very simple questions. It is not that easy to get everyone to call out at the same time and it can be noisy with some classes. For more on mini-white board products: http://www.easyteach.co.uk/dry.html For more on high-tech interactivity: http://www.einstruction.com/ Snowballing solutions to a challenging maths problem This creates real dialogue, participation, and understanding. It needs to be done with supportive ground rules, where errors are accepted without blame, and are seen as an opportunity to learn. In recent studies with underachieving youngsters in low performing schools this method greatly increased students’ interest and enjoyment of maths, and improved their average standardised test results from 45% to 79%! However this degree of improvement took time, about 6 years, but expect improvement of a sort quite quickly. Explain the no-blame ground-rules above. Then give students a challenging maths question, one they can attempt or get started on but which they often won’t be able to finish by themselves. 1. Individuals write down their own answer, or their attempt, working alone. 2. Students then share what they have written in groups of three or four. Each student presents their attempt justifying it to the others. The others give constructive criticism about the pros and cons of each approach after it has been presented. 3. Each group now decides which method is best and why, and presents it to the whole class 4. There is class discussion on which methods are best and why, this can be done assertive questioning style, or student demonstration style as described above. www.edutopia.org/math-underachieving-mathnext-rutgers-newark An alternative is to use ‘snowballing’. 1. Individuals write down their own answer, or their attempt, working alone. 2. Students pair up and show each other their work. They give constructive criticism to each other, and decide on their best method 3. Pairs form fours, which look at each pair’s method and again give pros and cons and decide on the best method. Leave time for this dialogue. 4. The teacher chooses individuals by name from each group of four to present their solution/work to the class, and to justify it to the class. 5. The class as a whole now scrutinizes each group’s work, and decides which method(s) are best and why. This is now assertive questioning, or student demonstration. 53 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching Supported experiments Geoff Petty www.geoffpetty.com This is a continuous improvement strategy. Reviews of research show this strategy works best, and the teaching methods experimented with are also what works best. Teacher Control and Ownership: Each teacher identifies tough topics or concepts that their students find it hard or boring to learn. Effect size Training: Teachers get training in the teaching methods or strategies that work best in trials. Some of these have raised students’ attainment by two grades on average. Team discussion: The teaching team listens to each teacher’s plan as to what they will try, and on what topics. Experiment: Each teacher tries the high effect size methods that they like, to teach their tough topic, perhaps trying them out on typical topics first. skill Peer Coaching: Teaching teams meet, say fortnightly, for an hour to discuss experiments. What has worked? What hasn’t? What will each teacher try next to improve their use of the method(s).? The experiments above are tried repeatedly with this Peer Coaching support. Teachers may also be coached by Advanced Skills Teachers or similar. time Success is celebrated: Teaching teams meet with other teams to tell each other about what they have tried, and what has worked. Success is embedded: The experiments that have worked well are shared and embedded in schemes of work etc, and any resources required are shared with everyone on the team, and perhaps beyond. A new cycle of experiments starts….. Why does this work? Teachers are engaged because they are solving their own problems, and they are in control. They take the credit for the improvements they develop, and tell others about them - can create a real ‘buzz’. Everyone improves, not just the weakest. Major problems are solved and high performance teaching methods are used more often. 54 Geoff Petty: Differentiated Teaching How do we know it works? Two comprehensive summaries of all good research on INSET have concluded this approach is by far the best, and most other approaches hardly work at all. See the references below for Joyce & Showers & Helen Timperley’s reviews. There are hundreds of thousands of rigorous studies that show that high effect size methods work best. They engage students, motivate them, and help them learn. This is probably because they set a challenging task, and then give the teacher and student feedback information on how well the task was done, and the learning understood. References Petty, G. (2009) “Evidence Based Teaching” 2nd Ed, Nelson Thornes www.geoffpetty.com/experiments.html Joyce and Showers (2002) ‘Student Achievement through Staff Development’ 3rd ed. ASCD www.ascd.org Maynard and Martinez (2002) “Pride or Prejudice? College Teachers’ Views on Course Performance” London LSDA. Free download from www.lsneducation.org.uk/pubs/pages/021296.aspx Timperley H et al (2007) "Teacher Professional Learning and Development" www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/series/2515/15341 Hattie, J. (2009) “Visible Learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement” Routledge Marzano R. Pickering, D. Pollock, J. (2001) “Classroom Instruction that works” Alexandria: ASCD 55
© Copyright 2024