Blog

Helping high achievers extend their math skills

This

Gifted in maths: six ways to keep your high achievers engaged

Maths education adviser Steph King suggests some activities for key stage 2 students who are highly able in maths

Engaging maths lesson
Engaging high achievers: Steph King shares valuable tips on keeping students engaged in maths. Photograph: Linda Nylind for the Guardian

In my role as a mathematics education adviser for a local authority I am frequently asked to provide training for schools focused on the more able mathematicians. In too many cases these pupils leave key stage 1 above or well above national expectation, then make insufficient progress at key stage 2 and fall short of their potential. Here are my key considerations when supporting more able students in mathematics at key stage 2.

Even the able learners have weaknesses

The first step that we so often forget is that even the more able pupils have weaknesses in their mathematics. It is vital to identify these as well as their strengths. There are a range of indicators that I use to help teachers identify more able pupils in the primary phase such as "needs fewer steps in each process", "enjoys increased pace" and "thrives on independent study". I always try to be careful that the identification of these behaviours is fair and transparent, without discriminating against particular groups.

Don't rely on the column method

As children advance through key stage 2, many are taught algorithms (for example, column methods), a step-by-step procedure to calculate the correct answer. In my experience, I find there is an over-reliance on column methods. For example, in one year 6 lesson, the children had the task of finding the difference between 400 and 250 as the first step in a problem. Virtually every child carried out their workings using a column method of subtraction. While this is certainly one way of answering the question, is not the most efficient and should be challenged by teachers.

Choosing the right tool for the job

Aim to challenge new methods and explore a range of strategies that allow children to make choices about the efficient method to use, depending on the numbers involved and their stage in learning. Ensure that children understand how the mathematics they have learned is going to help them in a particular context; choosing the right tool for the job.

Would the children use a mental method or written method to calculate the following sums?

246.29 – 10.29
124 x 501
266 – 283 + 24
64 x 2.5
630 ÷ 35
2/5 of 700

Playing with numbers

From this point I always recommend exploring how to encourage learners to play with numbers and become problem-solvers rather than simply followers of rules.

One activity to support this is to ask the students how many different ways they can solve a calculation, such as 36 x 25. I encourage them to think about all the relationships and connections to help them.

The discussion afterwards may reveal that they recognised that 25 is one quarter of 100, so they calculated 36 x 100 and then found one quarter by halving and halving again.

Others may have rearranged the calculation to find 30 x 25 using their knowledge of 3 x 25 and then multiplying the product by 10 before adding 6 x 25 by using 3 x 25 (already found) and doubling, for example; 750 + 150.

Ways to develop problem solving and reasoning skills

I then try to create opportunities on a regular basis for all pupils to 'play' with numbers and operations so they can discover the effect they have on each other.

Solving problems requires students to; make sense of the problem; find a starting point by deciding what needs to be done; have a go, but recognise when you have gone down an incorrect path; recognise when a problem has more than one possible solution and to check that your solution makes sense in the context of the question.

One example of a problem solving activity is to say to the children "I am thinking of a number. When I round my number to the nearest hundred, it rounds to 200. However, when I subtract 10 from my number and round it again to the nearest hundred, it now rounds to 100. What could my number be and is there more than one possibility?" I ensure that each child explains their thinking process.

Another example of a supporting activity would be to ask the children to explain what the next two terms in this sequence are or perhaps reason as to why the next two terms could/might not be say, 40 and 32.

75, 65, 56, 48, _ , _

The application of knowledge and skills

Another example of how children can be challenged to use and apply knowledge and skills through a problem-solving approach is by using a question, such as the KS2 test example below. This question has been chosen to encourage children to think about all the possible relationships and connections to help them solve the problem in different ways.

In a supermarket storeroom there are:
7 boxes of tomato soup
5 boxes of pea soup
4 boxes of chicken soup
There are 24 tins in every box. How many tins are there altogether?

You may initially find that many children either add up the total number of boxes and multiply by 24 or sum the number of tins of each flavour using a variety of column methods.

Prompt the class to consider tools such as rounding, doubling and halving, partitioning in different ways, knowledge of place value and multiplying/dividing by 10, and so on, to guide any further possible methods. Commonly, the floodgates opened and reasoning such as, "Well, we know 10 times the number of tins, so we can simply halve this amount for five times the number of tins" and "24 is nearly 25 and I know there are 4 lots of 25 in 100 so I can adjust my answer" will ensue.

Steph King is a mathematics education adviser for a local authority. She has more than 20 years' experience in primary education, including senior leadership, subject leadership and more than nine years in her current role. She has extensive knowledge and understanding of mathematics progression and pedagogy and has recently written the latest Essential CPD online training course entitled Supporting the more able in Mathematics at Key Stage 2, in partnership with Rising Stars and Guardian Teacher Network. is placeholder text for your new blog entry. Replace it with your own.

0 comments

Helping Struggling Readers

The Common Core State Standards Initiative focuses on rigor and raising expectation in classrooms nationwide. It calls for an increase in reading complexity for students of all ages. As principals and teachers work hard to ensure their curricula are standards aligned, are struggling readers at risk of being left behind?

The 10th reading standard says that by the end of the year, students will read and comprehend texts at their respective grade level independently and proficiently. The first question to ask when familiarizing yourself with the standards: “What is grade level when it comes to reading?” This is a question that many special-education teachers and literacy coaches grapple with daily.

The common core website provides guidance on Page 4 of Appendix A, where readers will find a chart with updated information about text complexity by grade band and associate measures. Still, what’s “appropriate” for each grade level is not black and white and doesn’t fit neatly into a chart, especially when working with a wide range of readers.

As a classroom teacher, it is immensely challenging to ensure that all students get what they need at their level, especially in large classes. The pressure that comes with this increase of text complexity makes this even more difficult. Perhaps now more than ever, it is crucial that teachers are creative in finding ways to meet the needs of our readers, while ensuring that our curriculum is standards aligned. Some steps you can take to get there:

  • There is a common misconception that in fourth or fifth grade, teachers can stop teaching decoding. If you have students who are struggling in this area, make sure to find time to teach them how to improve decoding, no matter what grade level you teach. A great resource might be the first- or second-grade teacher in your building.
  • Give students an opportunity to read materials that are appropriate for them, even if the level does not fall within the grade band in Appendix A. This can be in addition to other texts that they read. If you are crunched for time, try incorporating an independent reading routine in class or for homework and use that time to have students reading at their level.
  • For students who are stronger at comprehension than decoding, try pairing them with a partner for decoding or having them listen to a text read aloud. That way, they can have access to higher-level texts with increasingly difficult vocabulary in a way that is appropriate for them.
  • Include a variety of reading techniques with your class. If you usually have students read independently, try reading a text aloud and focusing on comprehension. If you usually read aloud, try using centers so you can have certain readers using headphones and listening, while others read independently or in pairs. This variety will set you up for differentiation.

You know your learners. If the level of instruction doesn’t feel appropriate for your whole class, it is time to rethink the structure of instruction. That might mean teaching in small groups or revisiting certain strategies one-on-one with a student. Raising our expectations is a good thing, and being in tune to what students need can help us pinpoint exactly where our expectations should be.

Three additional resources that can help you support struggling readers:

  1. ReadWorks.org: This website is free and provides access to nonfiction passages organized by grade level, skill or strategy, and keywords.
  2. Scholastic Action magazine’s Differentiated Articles: This is an intervention magazine for grades 6 to 12, and the link offers differentiated articles at three Lexile levels so you can differentiate in your classroom.
  3. BiblioNasium: This is a free, protected social network for children ages 6 to 12 designed to engage, encourage and excite young people about reading. It is used by parents and teachers.

Marisa Kaplan (@EdGeeks) is a special-education teacher and literacy coach in New York City. She has a master’s degree in learning disabilities and has taught in settings from early childhood to middle school. She writes a blog, EdGeeks, consults with local education technology startups and frequents educational meet-ups and conferences in the New York City area.

xt for your new blog entry. Replace it with your own.

0 comments

SEED project increases engagement in math

0 comments

Five Minute Film Festival on the Future of Education

0 comments

Using Data: What about homework?

The following article presents the data on homework and whether it is instructionally useful. A very interesting read!
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-homework-myth/201211/homework-unnecessary-evil

0 comments

Missoulian Reports on RTI successes

MCPS leaders say test scores prove curriculum is rigorous

November 18, 2012 5:45 am

As Missoula County Public Schools moves forward, graduating more students than ever and closing in on its 100 percent graduation target, test scores prove the district is not a diploma mill, officials say.

Should critics think MCPS has adopted a less rigorous curriculum to achieve a higher graduation rate, the test scores tell a different story, said Mark Thane, MCPS executive director of Region 1.

“MCPS students are exceeding state and national averages, fairly significantly,” Thane said last week while studying the data and assembling it into readable charts.

There are many tests that assess student achievement – a key one of which is the ACT, a national college entrance exam.

While the ACT results show there’s still room for improvement, they also show MCPS students are more knowledgeable than their peers across the state and nation.

In the college English composition tests, for example, 82 percent of MCPS test takers score above the benchmark, which is the minimum score needed on an ACT subject-area test to indicate a 50 percent chance of obtaining a B or higher in a credit-bearing college class, or a 75 percent chance of earning a C.

Statewide, Montana students score a 74 percent, and nationally the number is 67 percent.

The same results echo in the college algebra, college social sciences and college biology subject-area tests. In those tests, MCPS outperforms and far exceeds the state and national scores. For a complete look at the data, go to this story on Missoulian.com.

The same outcomes hold true in other assessments, such as the state’s Criterion Reference Test, which measures proficiency on state and national standards.

***

While the news is welcome to school administrators and parents, the statistics beg yet another question: Why are MCPS students doing so well, and what is driving the steady improvement of test scores over the past five years?

“We have had significant work done in the district, something we call ‘Response to Intervention,’ ” Thane explained. “Teachers must ask themselves what can I do differently so that kids can achieve a certain level of mastery?”

It used to be common that when teachers had a student who wasn’t succeeding in their class, that student would be sent down the hall for remediation.

“What we are saying and doing now is that students don’t have to leave the classroom for academic reinforcement or reteaching,” Thane said. “The student will get additional learning opportunities in the classroom to which they have been assigned.”

This way of flexible and responsive teaching, in some ways, harkens back to one-room frontier schools, where students at all levels of learning were taught the same material and then given time to learn it and master it at their own pace in smaller groupings and independently; all the while, the classroom stayed intact.

“We are more successful with this on the elementary side of schooling with grouping and regrouping within the classroom,” Thane said. “And we are better at it right now with reading than at math, but this system has paid dividends for us.”

Student achievement is improving because of these kind of changes, and also because not only is the teaching high quality, there are high expectations for students to learn to the best of their ability, Thane said.

The best part is that students are well aware of those expectations and are working to achieve those goals. The test data prove that, Thane said.

“We are proud of our five-year trend and of the achievement of our students, and we will continue to encourage students to achieve,” he said.

***

As the MCPS district moves forward, so too do its strategies to continue the successful academic trajectory.

The two concepts of “summative” and “formative” assessment are the current buzzwords and priorities.

Using two different tests – Measures of Academic Progress and Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literary Skills – teachers and schools will test students up to six times throughout the year at some grade levels.

The frequent testing will identify areas where students need additional support. If teachers choose, students can be tested every two to three weeks, if some students need to be watched more carefully.

The testing creates a learning environment in which teachers have the creativity to develop their own materials but can also collaborate to achieve established, common goals.

“This is about consistency not conformity,” Thane explained. “We want similar goals and outcomes and achievements, but teachers have license as to how to get that achieved.”

The “formative” part of the teaching agenda is frequent testing, done a bit more informally, and incorporates the use of things like chapter tests in reading.

Meanwhile, MCPS is gearing up to set in motion the federally mandated “Common Core State Standards.”

In 2015, all states will have new assessments, and MCPS will be part of a consortium that has agreed to the “Smarter Balanced Assessment.”

It’s a long-overdue change, Thane said, because as it currently stands, each state writes its own assessments and that leads to vastly different state standards across the nation.

When Common Core assessments gets under way in 2015, all tests will be administered electronically, and the old pencil and paper format will be history.

“It will be a huge historic shift requiring technology enhancements,” Thane said, “and we are working on that shift now.”

At the state level, the Office of Public Instruction will ask the 2013 Montana Legislature for $30 million to spend on classroom technology, said Madalyn Quinlan, OPI chief of staff.

Specifically, the request is for $15 million per year for the upcoming biennium.

“What we are asking for is the hardware, the computers and tablets for classroom use so students can use them for day-to-day learning,”Quinlan said. “The idea is that when it’s time for assessment, they will be ready to take the assessment online.”

Technology is changing the world and the way students are assessed, and Quinlan believes that change is for the better.

“The whole notion of assessment is much more integrated into day-to-day operations of a classroom, so providing data back to teachers and students more quickly than once-a-year tests will be a big improvement,” she said.

After much research, OPI is requesting the $30 million with the goal of providing a minimum of one computer for every three students in Montana.

District taxpayers will likely be asked to help augment the state funding, Thane said, but that amount hasn’t been determined.

“I think this will be a high-profile issue during this session,” Quinlan said, “as this is an important piece in helping students become career ready when they graduate from high school and prepare to be job ready and college ready.”

0 comments

Invest in Teachers

Teacher Quality: Investing in What MattersBy Arthur L. Costa, Robert J. Garmston, and Diane P. Zimmerman

Spurred by awards of federal funding under the Race to the Top competition, many states are adopting teacher-evaluation systems with student achievement as the ultimate goal. This drive to create robust evaluation systems places far too much emphasis on inspecting and testing. A system of quality control founded on the belief that inspection and multiple-choice tests are valid measures of effectiveness is flawed. The investment in external measures hides our most valuable assets—the cognitive resources of teachers. Too often, standards are the basis for inspection, with minimal dialogue and little attention to teachers' intellect, wisdom, intuition, and creativity.

Quality matters. How we assess it is important. However, the idea that the complex processes of teaching can be easily inspected or measured by answers on a bubble test is erroneous. As educators, we are puzzled that more people are not voicing concerns about this trend toward an oversimplified system of quality control. A few in the field have become outspoken and urge a more thoughtful approach. Policymakers ought to heed the collective wisdom of these thought leaders.

Notably, Diane Ravitch changed her direction and advice, which was pro-standards, when the emphasis moved toward an obsession with test scores. Charlotte Danielson, a leading expert on research-based frameworks for instruction, cautions against simplistic "drive by" observation models. She advises that even after training, "most observers require multiple opportunities to practice using [her] framework effectively and to calibrate their judgments with others." Despite her cautions, far too many policymakers advocate for an inspector's toolbox full of rubrics and a singular focus on making inspections better.

In a recent Wall Street Journal article, Thomas Kane, a Harvard University professor and the director of the Gates Center for Policy Research, and Stanford University professor Linda Darling Hammond debate the use of tests for teacher evaluation. Kane, a proponent of the value-added system of measuring gains and evaluating teacher quality with tests, admits that "student-achievement gains are imperfect measures," and then justifies his position by saying that "the same is true for all measures."

"When external evaluators treat a prescribed map as complete and do not engage in deep and meaningful conversations, they lose sight of the fact that educators have vast storehouses of tacit knowledge."

Darling-Hammond cites the wide variation in test scores, pointing out the many variables that impact test scores, including one of the most startling: summer vacations. Researchers at John Hopkins University foundRequires Adobe Acrobat Reader that summer vacations make a large difference in the variation in test scores. After the three-month vacation, upper-middle-class students show the most gains in test points, while students from low-income families show the most gains across a school year. That the enriched summers of upper-middle-class students could make so much difference in test scores should shake anyone's faith in these reductionist measures of teacher quality.

How have we ignored the years of inner wisdom developed from practice, from teachers' cognitive capital? Within teachers' repertoire, there is layered expertise including, but not limited to: knowledge of content, pedagogy, child development, learning styles, culture, classroom management, and, importantly, knowledge of self. More often than not, teachers have valid reasons for why they might deviate from a prescription. When being assessed, however, they are seldom asked, nor do they proffer explanations.

When external evaluators treat a prescribed map as complete and do not engage in deep and meaningful conversations about the larger territory of teaching and learning, they lose sight of the fact that educators have vast storehouses of tacit knowledge based on experience.

The often-cited research on adult learning by Norman Sprinthall and Lois Thies-Sprinthall demonstrated that teachers with higher conceptual levels are more adaptive and flexible in their teaching styles. They act in accordance with a disciplined commitment to human values and produce higher-achieving students who are more cooperative and involved in their work. More recently, Daniel Pink, the author of the popular book Drive, and the researchers Carol Dweck and Albert Bandura have argued that an emphasis on external criteria over which professionals have no control oversimplifies and negates the complex decisions that are the nexus of professional learning.

In our years of coaching teachers and training future coaches, we have learned that teachers whose schools support cognitive engagement and growth have the advantage when it comes to instructional quality. With regular coaching, teachers develop a strong internal sense of control or efficacy through reflecting on their classroom decisions. When teachers are reflective, flexible, and adaptive, students learn and professional knowledge expands.

—Susan Sanford

Cognitive capital—what goes on in a teacher's head that allows for complex decisions in the classroom—is a missing aspect in the current quality-control paradigm. How teachers think about their thinking and reflect on their actions—before, during, and after instruction—is an important measure of quality instruction. It is one thing to hold teachers accountable to standards, and yet another to pair this knowledge with a practitioner's internal maps and mental models for teaching and learning. When teachers weave internal expertise and external criteria together into an intricate tapestry of teaching and learning, they gain confidence in their ability to make a difference for all students. Rather than spending time becoming better inspectors, informed leaders can focus on helping educators investigate, articulate, and expand practices that yield high returns for their students. When teachers find success and share it, they propagate this vast pool of internal resources to colleagues and the next generation of teachers.

The best path to self-efficacy—and, indeed, collective efficacy—found to overcome even such barriers as social-economic conditions is for a teacher to take time with colleagues for personal and collaborative reflection about the effects of his or her teaching on student learning, in a continuous spiral of inquiry. When teachers join together and become more conscious of their ability to make the difference, and they are in control of their multiple options, they demonstrate true craftsmanship. Furthermore, when they begin to meld the complexities of external and internal resources, they develop a vast storehouse of knowledge that enriches and expands their conversations about teaching and learning.

Growing numbers of teachers, administrators, university professors, and policymakers agree that the current evaluation system, which evolved over the past 100 years as an educational expression of an industrial model of efficiency, is broken. Too many people are placing their hopes on standardization and a deeply flawed belief that teachers and students are interchangeable parts, rather than thoughtful, unique, caring, experienced, and often passionate human beings. We should be supporting systems that develop the essence of teachers who inspire a love of learning and inquiry, in contrast to those who just get students to demonstrate mastery on achievement tests. Are we educating for a life of tests or for the tests of life?

Arthur L. Costa is a professor emeritus of education at California State University, Sacramento, and co-founder of the Center for Cognitive Coaching, based in Denver, and of the Institute for Habits of Mind, in Westport, Conn. Robert J. Garmston co-founded the Center for Cognitive Coaching and the Center for Adaptive Schools, which is based in Highlands Ranch, Colo. Diane P. Zimmerman is a writer and consultant who worked for 36 years in public education, as a teacher, principal, and superintendent.

0 comments

Oral Formative Feedback Strategies

Oral Formative Feedback – Top Ten Strategies

20121102-170503.jpg

People who have read my #marginalgains blog posts will know I am going over old ground here – intentionally so – as I am looking to dig deeper towards the key marginal gains that have the biggest impact on learning. For me, formative oral feedback and questioning are the two key ‘hinge point marginal gains’ that make for great teaching and learning. My previous #marginalgains blog identified new teaching strategies for these tow key area ad pedagogy, but here I wanted to use this blog to reflect on what I view as the most high impact formative oral feedback strategies that I have been using in my everyday practice. I want to use my list as a reminder, each time I plan lessons, of the key strategies to use – as it is too easy to forget and slip into autopilot planning, forgetting even our most effective of strategies.

In the latest OFSTED guidance, they have clearly stated that lesson planning should not be inflexible, that teachers should react to the progress, or the lack thereof, of their students. This is heartening recognition of what we have known all along – and that is that teaching and learning are contingent activities. Learning is often problematic, changeable, non-linear, beset by a host of unique factors that cannot be exactly replicated (but with experience we can determine common patterns). We must therefore be constantly tracking the evidence of learning with as much precision and skill as we can. That is why effective teaching hinges absolutely on oral formative feedback and questioning on a lesson by lesson basis. It appears to me that the greatest benefit of experience that I observe in excellent teachers is the recognition of how and when to elicit feedback, with the nuanced understanding of what questions to ask, how and when. I have drawn upon this wealth of experience for my top ten – indeed it is my inept stumbling near the shoulders of giants that is responsible for the whole lot!

In nearly all of these examples the feedback includes all three parties possible in the class: the learner, peers and the teacher. I dispute the idea of peer feedback as an undertaking exclusive of the teacher – we are always there steering the feedback, establishing ground rules and success criteria, modifying and adjusting the feedback of peers – that is why we are the paid experts! Therefore I do not differentiate between ‘teacher led’ or ‘peer’ feedback in my list.

My Oral feedback Top Ten

‘Making the Learning Visible’ – Oral Feedback on Worked Examples:

This heading captures a variety of methods and tools to essentially do the same thing – showing student work in the midst of the process. Whether it be through an iPad and Apple TV; a Visualiser; a video camera or still camera, or more simply pinning ongoing work up onto the wall or a display; making the work ‘visual’ is a powerful tool for assessment for learning. For one, it raises levels of pride, giving students a keener sense of purpose, and it often instills a healthy competitive edge to the learning. It is also evident that most successful students have an innate sense of what ‘good work’ looks like, but many students simply don’t have this degree of self-efficacy. Making visible exemplar work, and breaking down its component parts, is a simple and powerful way to modify the learning of each student – helping to enhance what Ron Berger described as the crucial assessment going on “inside students”. Having used an iPad this year, I have repeatedly photographed student work, put it into the ExplainEverything app and immediately annotated through the projector, whilst giving formative feedback. Students are more then willing to get involved (a handy benefit is that good work can be saved and shared through the iPad), given clear modelling and parameters for effective feedback. Student feedback regarding this approach is highly positive.

Guided Writing:

Ostensibly, the strategy is a writing task – but it is the ongoing oral feedback at the heart of this strategy that is essential in establishing where the learners are and where they are going with their learning. This is one of those activities that teachers often shy away from, perhaps through a sense of fear of making a mistake in their writing, or not having absolute control of behaviour whilst undertaking the writing (a neat trick is to select a student to scribe the guided writing to allow you to freely roam the room; or going one step further and having an object passed around, like a conch(!), for which students need to hold to contribute). Working effectively, it can harmonise a symphony of understanding. Given any topic the teacher can begin with a prompt to the writing to oil the wheels, before students are asked to contribute subsequent ideas and sentences. As an English teacher, I love getting embroiled in debate about the semantic meaning of one individual word choice over another! Once more, it has the attendant benefit of modelling excellence in a very collaborative and fulfilling fashion.

Peer Response Partners (or ‘think-pair-share’):

This style of peer feedback is well trodden and nothing new, but it is worth reflecting that it is the aggregation of understanding provided by learning in groups which provides the positive impact inherent in collaborative learning. Some people complain about the aggregation of misunderstanding that can occur in group work; however, that ‘failure’ isn’t necessarily negative at all, for it gives the teacher the chance to modify the misapprehensions in whole class feedback, indeed, it opens up new avenues of learning – coming back to the contingent nature of learning! The ‘think-pair-share’ approach has been elaborated upon better than I could possibly explain – so here is a useful blog on the activity and its importance from @headguruteacher:
http://headguruteacher.com/2012/07/17/the-washing-hands-of-learning-think-pair-share/.
I would add that it is crucial that success criteria is shared with students and that they have a rigorous structure for feedback – whether it be a ‘Two Stars and a Wish’ approach, or something similar. Ideally, it follows from some quality modelling, as exemplified in points 1 and 2 of my list.

Critique:

Once more, it is Ron Berger I have to thank for this. Put simply, it is a systematic approach to peer feedback that is structured, clearly and positively, depersonalising the feedback, whilst honing in upon the steps required to improve towards excellence. A fuller explanation can be found here by the venerable @DKMead: http://pedagogicalpurposes.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/by-josie-and-emily.html
and here, by the man himself:

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=1znB1ox0_EI&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D1znB1ox0_EI

One-to-one Teacher Feedback:

This is as old school as ancient Athens I know! Yet, in the hurly burly of thirty GCSE students rumbling along in unison, the prospect of one-to-one feedback appears slim to non-existent far too often. Yet, we all know the power of the swiftest of one-to-one oral interventions. Too often our elegant written commentaries are ignored or simply misunderstood. We need to talk it through. With our KS3 groupings in our English and Media Faculty we have allocated one-to-one weeks for each class each term. We are going to ensure students work with peers collaboratively ‘marking’ prep books for SPaG in their preparatory writing, before undertaking independent reading and writing challenges. Every student will spend five minutes with their teacher reflecting upon their progress, targets and their finished, or ongoing, work. At GCSE, you may find that mock feedback would be doubly useful given an oral one-to-one to supplement a written commentary. How about setting up a small group task where students devise their own exam questions and answers – a higher order thinking task that requires some scaffolding support, but which is a tried and tested success – whilst undertaking that crucial one-to-one feedback.

Opinion Lines:

A lively debate can ensue from this kinaesthetic strategy. Select topic sentences that convey a clear opinion and then use both sides of the room as an opinion continuum, from ‘Strongly Agree’ to ‘Strongly Disagree’. This is an ideal task at the beginning of a topic, to determine their understanding, or at the end – perhaps it is a good way to book end learning to identify changing opinions after a topic has been studied. Students must orally feedback their opinions, justifying their ideas with evidence, building upon or challenging feedback from other students. The feedback can be made visible by a student scribing the continuum on the board in note form (photograph it and save it for later, or use it for ideas for a subsequent written activity).

The Secret Teacher – ‘The Power of the Post It’:

I must commend Zoe Elder aka @fullonlearning for ideas related to the humble post-it note, found in her luminous book ‘Full On Learning’. I have embedded these techniques with real success and with real ease – even though their aim is moving slightly away from oral feedback as such. Firstly, the ‘secret teacher’ aspect comes in when you have students work independently, for example, on a piece of writing (for me it was students working on Recreative writing in preparation for a controlled assessment). Students were asked to note any questions on a post it and place it on the ‘questions wall’, as they worked away. This small step was helpful in eliminating those helpless and distracting questions, like ‘How do I spell such and such…’, when a dictionary is in a box in front of them! The freedom from answering these questions meant my teaching assistant and I could go around quickly giving feedback with limited interference, whilst casting surreptitious glances upon the work students were doing. Rather than interrupt the flow of the whole group by stopping to talk with individuals (students, like adults, are inherently nosy!), we simply made a note on a post it and placed it on the desk of the student – from a simple ‘Proof read your punctuation’ to ‘Should you develop your scene direction further?’ These little nudges actually moved away from the notion of oral feedback explicitly, but the nudge and modify approach is exactly in tune with the notion of oral formative feedback. In reality, you cannot simply use the post it notes without some verbal feedback at times, but that feedback becomes very precise and concise. The hum of learning when this strategy goes well really is a pleasure to behold.

TSSSTSSS:

This simply strategy relates to the method of questioning to elicit oral feedback. The ‘Teacher-student-student…’ approach explicitly rejects the ‘tennis style’ teacher led questioning, to instead encourage students to feedback upon the ideas of one another – bouncing ideas around the room like a basketball team (without the heavy ball obviously!). It is a timely reminder to ensure students still own their learning, building upon the ideas of one another.

ABC feedback:

Closely related to the previous point is the very simple model for students to respond to one another – A = Agree with… B = Build upon… C = Challenge. When students know this structure it is a finely tuned short-hand for effective collaborative learning that enriches the quality of feedback. The teacher is the ultimate guide, but students can develop their thinking more independently. This style does work better with a meaty topic where students are grappling with an argument, or questions, that requires higher order thinking. It also helps if students are given notice that they will respond, as it ensures they listen ever more keenly.

‘Learning Spies’ Feedback:

Taken from the eponymous @LearningSpy himself, David Didau, this strategy works great for group work where you want students to remain on task purposefully throughout the lesson. It is a great way to celebrate and feedback upon positive learning, making explicit what good learning looks like, sounds like and feels like. I used this strategy a lot in the last couple of years with eager Year 7s, who were energised by the opportunity to seize some teacherly control! By making explicit before the task what behaviours you expect of good group work, the two ‘spies’ (I found a gender and ability mix for the pairing worked well), would note each group at work; making notes about skilful contributions, good leadership, levels of engagement and active listening. At the end of the lesson, they would feedback with real skill about the learning habits displayed by the group, identifying the best insights and behaviours on show. Try it with one of your most ‘challenging’ students – we all know the type – it really gets them reflecting and can be very powerful way to get your group learning about how to learn. Admittedly, it isn’t something I would use daily, but with complex group work of some extended length, it is a great strategy. The excellent @davidfawcett27 has produced his own spin on the idea:
http://reflectionsofmyteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/learning-detectives-and-spies.html?m=1.
I particularly like the recording of evidence idea from the blog – with the iPad learning spies could photograph or film exemplary learning – an incredibly powerful strategy that gets students really focused reflecting upon their learning.

div.wpadvert>div { margin-top: 1em; }

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About huntingenglish

A Subject Leader of English in a large, successful state school in York. Looking to share ideas and pedagogy. I am interested in the pleasure and power of reading and writing; the importance of being able to read the media; and the need to embrace technology to enhance learning. I believe teachers should be passionate in all that they do - even in the face of all the flak and obstacles put in our way.

0 comments

Using Co-Teaching with RTI

0 comments

National Center on RTI new training modules

New Training Modules and Facilitator Resources

The National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI) has released a number of customizable training modules to support RTI implementation, training, professional development, and evaluation. The modules should be delivered by a trained, knowledgeable professional and are designed as a component of comprehensive professional development that includes supplemental coaching and ongoing support. The modules include PowerPoint presentations with speaker’s notes for use by the trainer and activities and handouts for use during the training. Many of the modules also have an accompanying training manual.

Facilitator's Guide
To assist facilitators of NCRTI training modules, the NCRTI has developed a Facilitator's Guide that provides information on how the modules are set up and their components, information about delivering the modules including the audience, customizing the modules to fit the audience, engaging the participants, preparing for the training, and strategies for presenting. The guide also includes appendices with checklists and other resources to assist the facilitator. You can view the
Facilitator's Guideon the NCRTI's website.

RTI Implementer Series Training Modules

The NCRTI developed three training modules for beginning implementers of Response to Intervention (RTI). These modules are intended to provide foundational knowledge about the essential components of RTI and to build an understanding about the importance of RTI implementation. The modules were designed to be delivered in the following sequence: Screening, Progress Monitoring, and Multi-Level Prevention System. The fourth essential component, Data-Based Decision Making, is embedded throughout the three modules. You can view the training modulesat:

RTI Implementer Series Module 1: Screening
RTI Implementer Series Module 2: Progress Monitoring
RTI Implementer Series Module 3: Multi-level Prevention System

Things to Consider When Developing an RTI Evaluation Plan
The NCRTI has developed this training modulefor teams implementing a response to intervention (RTI) framework and planning to evaluate their RTI model. This module provides a rationale for conducting an RTI evaluation, information on measuring fidelity of implementation, activities for applying new knowledge, discussion questions for team planning time, and gives examples of tools and data that can be used to measure indicators of RTI success. You can view the training moduleon the NCRTI’s website.

Implementing Response to Intervention (RTI)
The Implementing RTI training moduledeveloped by the NCRTI illustrates how using effective implementation strategies is critical for successful RTI outcomes and provides guidance for districts and schools at any stage of implementation. The module provides advice on how to avoid common implementation pitfalls and highlights the importance of implementing with fidelity and using data to inform decision making at each implementation stage. The module includes activities that encourage teams to think critically about their district or school’s RTI implementation and how to improve it. You can view the training moduleand activities on the NCRTI’s website.

Selecting and Developing Technical Assistance Resources: Things to Consider
This training module discusses considerations pertaining to identifying and selecting technical assistance resources to support RTI implementation. Participants will have an opportunity to identify existing and needed technical assistance resources at the local level and also develop a plan for selecting and developing needed resources in target areas. You can view the training moduleon the NCRTI’s website.

Developing an RTI Professional Development Plan: Things to Consider
This module is designed to help participants plan effective and appropriate professional development based on research, data, and best practices. Through the module participants will increase their understanding of the necessary considerations for developing a professional development plan, increase awareness of available professional development tools, and draft a professional development plan. You can view the training moduleon the NCRTI’s website.

Self-paced Learning Modules

RTI Implementer Series Self-paced Learning Modules
NCRTI has developed a series of 11 self-paced learning moduleswith embedded handouts and activities based on NCRTI training modules. These learning modules are intended to provide foundational knowledge about the essential components of RTI and to build an understanding about the importance of RTI implementation. The series covers the following topics:

Each of the learning modules includes a live and downloadable version, a transcript of the module, an accompanying PowerPoint presentation, handouts, and a training manual. View the learning modules and the accompanying resourceson the NCRTI website.


A Note from the NCRTI

Since 2007, NCRTI has provided technical assistance (TA) to build the capacity of states to assist districts in implementing and evaluating proven models of response to intervention. Through our work, we have identified essential components of tiered instruction based on our synthesis of relevant research and have developed tools and approaches that help states, districts, and schools build and assess their capacity to implement tiered academic instruction with fidelity. The intensive TA supports we’ve provided have included customized training, assistance with developing guidance documents, and on-site and distance supports, and have allowed more than a dozen states to build their capacity to effectively implement multi-tiered, data-driven instructional programs. As many of you are aware, our five year grant from the Office of Special Education Programs ended July 31. Although the NCRTI’s federal funding has end, we will continue to provide technical assistance on RTI on a fee for service basis. Those interested in receiving technical assistance can still make requests through our website. However, it is important to understand that requesting states and districts will be asked to cover the costs of the TA, including travel costs and daily rates of any speakers or trainers. In addition, we will be adding resources, such as those in this newsletter, to our website over the next several months and our website, which currently contains over 1500 resources, will continue to be available to you at no charge. The state database, progress monitoring tools chart, and the instructional interventions tools chart will continue to be available, through the National Center on Intensive Intervention. On behalf of the entire staff of the NCRTI, it has been a pleasure to work with you all and we hope we can continue to meet your needs.


This is the National Center on Response to Intervention's monthly e-newsletter, the RTI Responder. We share the latest research findings about RTI, related information from our partners and the federal Technical Assistance and Dissemination network, as well as the policies, strategies, and techniques that states have developed to implement an RTI model. We hope that you find this newsletter pertinent and informative.

The National Center on RTI Staff

Washington DC
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20007
Tel:(202)403-5000
Fax: (202) 403-5001

Self-paced Learning Modules

RTI Implementer Series Self-paced Learning Modules
NCRTI has developed a series of 11 self-paced learning moduleswith embedded handouts and activities based on NCRTI training modules. These learning modules are intended to provide foundational knowledge about the essential components of RTI and to build an understanding about the importance of RTI implementation. The series covers the following topics:

Each of the learning modules includes a live and downloadable version, a transcript of the module, an accompanying PowerPoint presentation, handouts, and a training manual. View the learning modules and the accompanying resourceson the NCRTI website.

A Note from the NCRTI

Since 2007, NCRTI has provided technical assistance (TA) to build the capacity of states to assist districts in implementing and evaluating proven models of response to intervention. Through our work, we have identified essential components of tiered instruction based on our synthesis of relevant research and have developed tools and approaches that help states, districts, and schools build and assess their capacity to implement tiered academic instruction with fidelity. The intensive TA supports we’ve provided have included customized training, assistance with developing guidance documents, and on-site and distance supports, and have allowed more than a dozen states to build their capacity to effectively implement multi-tiered, data-driven instructional programs. As many of you are aware, our five year grant from the Office of Special Education Programs ended July 31. Although the NCRTI’s federal funding has end, we will continue to provide technical assistance on RTI on a fee for service basis. Those interested in receiving technical assistance can still make requests through our website. However, it is important to understand that requesting states and districts will be asked to cover the costs of the TA, including travel costs and daily rates of any speakers or trainers. In addition, we will be adding resources, such as those in this newsletter, to our website over the next several months and our website, which currently contains over 1500 resources, will continue to be available to you at no charge. The state database, progress monitoring tools chart, and the instructional interventions tools chart will continue to be available, through the National Center on Intensive Intervention. On behalf of the entire staff of the NCRTI, it has been a pleasure to work with you all and we hope we can continue to meet your needs.

This is the National Center on Response to Intervention's monthly e-newsletter, the RTI Responder. We share the latest research findings about RTI, related information from our partners and the federal Technical Assistance and Dissemination network, as well as the policies, strategies, and techniques that states have developed to implement an RTI model. We hope that you find this newsletter pertinent and informative.

The National Center on RTI Staff

Washington DC
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20007
Tel:(202)403-5000
Fax: (202) 403-5001

Self-paced Learning Modules

RTI Implementer Series Self-paced Learning Modules
NCRTI has developed a series of 11 self-paced learning moduleswith embedded handouts and activities based on NCRTI training modules. These learning modules are intended to provide foundational knowledge about the essential components of RTI and to build an understanding about the importance of RTI implementation. The series covers the following topics:

Each of the learning modules includes a live and downloadable version, a transcript of the module, an accompanying PowerPoint presentation, handouts, and a training manual. View the learning modules and the accompanying resourceson the NCRTI website.

A Note from the NCRTI

Since 2007, NCRTI has provided technical assistance (TA) to build the capacity of states to assist districts in implementing and evaluating proven models of response to intervention. Through our work, we have identified essential components of tiered instruction based on our synthesis of relevant research and have developed tools and approaches that help states, districts, and schools build and assess their capacity to implement tiered academic instruction with fidelity. The intensive TA supports we’ve provided have included customized training, assistance with developing guidance documents, and on-site and distance supports, and have allowed more than a dozen states to build their capacity to effectively implement multi-tiered, data-driven instructional programs. As many of you are aware, our five year grant from the Office of Special Education Programs ended July 31. Although the NCRTI’s federal funding has end, we will continue to provide technical assistance on RTI on a fee for service basis. Those interested in receiving technical assistance can still make requests through our website. However, it is important to understand that requesting states and districts will be asked to cover the costs of the TA, including travel costs and daily rates of any speakers or trainers. In addition, we will be adding resources, such as those in this newsletter, to our website over the next several months and our website, which currently contains over 1500 resources, will continue to be available to you at no charge. The state database, progress monitoring tools chart, and the instructional interventions tools chart will continue to be available, through the National Center on Intensive Intervention. On behalf of the entire staff of the NCRTI, it has been a pleasure to work with you all and we hope we can continue to meet your needs.

This is the National Center on Response to Intervention's monthly e-newsletter, the RTI Responder. We share the latest research findings about RTI, related information from our partners and the federal Technical Assistance and Dissemination network, as well as the policies, strategies, and techniques that states have developed to implement an RTI model. We hope that you find this newsletter pertinent and informative.

The National Center on RTI Staff

Washington DC
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20007
Tel:(202)403-5000
Fax: (202) 403-5001

Self-paced Learning Modules

RTI Implementer Series Self-paced Learning Modules
NCRTI has developed a series of 11 self-paced learning moduleswith embedded handouts and activities based on NCRTI training modules. These learning modules are intended to provide foundational knowledge about the essential components of RTI and to build an understanding about the importance of RTI implementation. The series covers the following topics:

Each of the learning modules includes a live and downloadable version, a transcript of the module, an accompanying PowerPoint presentation, handouts, and a training manual. View the learning modules and the accompanying resourceson the NCRTI website.

A Note from the NCRTI

Since 2007, NCRTI has provided technical assistance (TA) to build the capacity of states to assist districts in implementing and evaluating proven models of response to intervention. Through our work, we have identified essential components of tiered instruction based on our synthesis of relevant research and have developed tools and approaches that help states, districts, and schools build and assess their capacity to implement tiered academic instruction with fidelity. The intensive TA supports we’ve provided have included customized training, assistance with developing guidance documents, and on-site and distance supports, and have allowed more than a dozen states to build their capacity to effectively implement multi-tiered, data-driven instructional programs. As many of you are aware, our five year grant from the Office of Special Education Programs ended July 31. Although the NCRTI’s federal funding has end, we will continue to provide technical assistance on RTI on a fee for service basis. Those interested in receiving technical assistance can still make requests through our website. However, it is important to understand that requesting states and districts will be asked to cover the costs of the TA, including travel costs and daily rates of any speakers or trainers. In addition, we will be adding resources, such as those in this newsletter, to our website over the next several months and our website, which currently contains over 1500 resources, will continue to be available to you at no charge. The state database, progress monitoring tools chart, and the instructional interventions tools chart will continue to be available, through the National Center on Intensive Intervention. On behalf of the entire staff of the NCRTI, it has been a pleasure to work with you all and we hope we can continue to meet your needs.

This is the National Center on Response to Intervention's monthly e-newsletter, the RTI Responder. We share the latest research findings about RTI, related information from our partners and the federal Technical Assistance and Dissemination network, as well as the policies, strategies, and techniques that states have developed to implement an RTI model. We hope that you find this newsletter pertinent and informative.

The National Center on RTI Staff

Washington DC
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20007
Tel:(202)403-5000
Fax: (202) 403-5001

0 comments