The following is a loosely edited post I made on the Tes wesbite this morning.
It is easy to think of practical activities for pupils to do when teaching perecentages: use a catoluge, get on the internet and look at ebay, amazon, finance websites etc. If I'm being honest I find teaching lower school far easier as the topics lend themselves much more freely to "interesting and practical" lessons. I'm not saying that it isn't possible to do interesting things with credit and higher material but it is more of a challenge. I am only teaching higher for the first time just now so at the moment it is the classic "here are the notes, here's how it connects to the previous lesson, these are some questions about it for you to try" all mixed in with some good questioning technique etc and lots and lots of homework. But it is very traditional and not revolutionary at all.
With this in mind I find it easier to comment on credit as I am teaching it for the second time through now. My fourth year set are doing algebraic fractions just now (they are the third out of four credit sets in ability terms). My question to fellow posters is am I wrong to just stick with the good exercises in the 4B textbook mixed in with some "challenging ones" I put on the board myself? I feel to deliver something like this I need to introduce the ideas at the board and "help the pupils to make the connections between exisiting knowledge and what we are doing now". They all know how to add fractions but do they know how to do it when denominators are (x+2) and (x +5) respectively? We could faff around and do this by means of a worksheet etc that leads them to the same conclusions as our class discussion at the board would do. My lesson just now would be a big discussion of various problems as a class and we'd try to solve them together. I woudln't just say "this is what you do". I'd ask them to apply existing knowledge while I write what individuals are contributing at the board. Once we have got this sorted as a class we then get it down into our notes for future reference. I think at the moment - they get to articulate what they are thinking - I try to vary who I get input from and they can inspire each other. If I were to try something more modern and fancy like a group trying a worksheet on the topic and with the worskeet leading them to the same conclusions; we'd get there eventually - only it would take longer and inevitably some pupils still wouldn't be able to get to the correct conclusion. After we've all understood a few examples at the board (by holding up between 1 and 5 fingers to indicate confidence levels) we'd move onto the text for the remainder of the period. By this means they can encounter lots of examples with a good gradient of difficulty and thus improve their own understanding and knowledge. Of course I could use loop cards or another sort of "primary or lower secondary" idea such as that - but I don't see why any other way of delivering the practice questions would be any better for the pupils than just using the text. I don't see an immediate flaw with this style of teaching for this class. It's very effective - my results have been continually good in final exams, prelims, homeworks etc. Also the kids do get to enjoy it - some of them are really relishing the challenge of the maths at the moment - plus we always get directed banter and class jokes when the teacher leads from the front - something that helps to create a nice atmosphere for pupils entering the room. What would other posters do differently? We have time constraints which mean we need to get to the correct conclusions fairly quickly so that we can practice them. I've thought a lot about content delivery at this early stage of my teaching career and know I've got lots to learn - but at the moment I don't see many more effective ways of doing it than that which I employ just now.
For a top set, it would be a very different scenario. When the kids are generally much brighter then it is more of a "sink or swim" scenario. I'd be more prepared to let them experiment and stuff. My top s2's manage to discover indicies lawys, pythagoras and all other sorts of stuff on their own - but I know the same lessons wouldn't have worked with less able pupils - I've tried before!
Basically - what I'm saying is that for more complex maths issues sometimes a traditional teaching methodology seems to be very effective with pupils who are good but not great. Only when you get a right good top set (and in our school we are fortunate that the top sets really are top notch) have I felt that the kids can "step on the shoulders of giants" by themselves, whereas other classes need a shove-up onto the shoulders from me! Any ideas, reactions, thoughts etc much appreciated. Feel free to criticise my naive attitudes - I share my own thoughts purely because I want to improve for the sake of the kids. Cheers.
How do you know that your method is successful? Sometimes a lesson feels successful because there were quite a few pupils joining in the discussion, everyone was well-behaved and you got through lots of content. How do you know everyone progressed and feels confident? How do you know that everyone got to talk about the work? Did everyone get to really *think* or did some just listen and copy?
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have some doubt as to whether your teaching can be improved. Why don't you try something different and see how it goes? From reading your description, I'd ask if you could try: -
- cutting down the time you spend talking at the beginning;
- then, instead of the textbook, try using a Tarsia in pairs or groups (your job, of course, is to circulate and make sure everyone's participating, talking, explaining, convincing...);
- perhaps differentiate it with "confidence-building" questions, "challenging" and "fiendish"; and,
- ask your kids to feedback at the end of the lesson. What did they think of the different style? What worked well? What could be better? What would they like to do again? How often?
Use this along with your own reflections to inform future planning. You might all want to return to your usual style, but at least you'll know you tried and confirmed that what you're doing is best for the kids.
Thank you for your reply.
ReplyDeleteI’ll take each of your points in turn.
How do you know that your method is successful? Sometimes a lesson feels successful because there were quite a few pupils joining in the discussion, everyone was well-behaved and you got through lots of content. How do you know everyone progressed and feels confident? How do you know that everyone got to talk about the work? Did everyone get to really *think* or did some just listen and copy?
I agree with your point about a lesson “feeling successful”. The aspects of a successful lesson that you mention are indicators that I would use, amongst others, as to how good a lesson was. Ultimately though, my main determinant of a successful lesson is whether or not pupils have understood. With the class I was referring to above I would ensure that in every lesson I got round most if not every pupil in the class at least once - to ask if they are ok with what they are doing and to have a glance over their work. I also like to employ some peer marking techniques - this gives pupils a chance to articulate what they have learned. Another benefit of peer-marking is that by spotting a mistake in other pupils work they may be less likely to repeat it themselves. In terms of confidence - I think a lot of this comes down to formative assessment during the period. I always ask pupils to hold up their hand and indicate with between 1 and 5 fingers how confident they are before and after tackling some questions on a topic. Of course my weekly homework ink-exercises allow me to spot who hasn’t yet managed to grasp a topic yet (assuming of course, there are no tutors etc involved.)
The two points you make about pupils thinking and talking - I think these are the key aspects that I shall have to look at in terms of my own style.
You seem to have some doubt as to whether your teaching can be improved.
- I maybe didn’t explain well enough - I have no doubt my teaching can be improved - but I am not entirely sure where to go from my current position - which, on face value, seems to be a fairly effective strategy for learning.
Why don't you try something different and see how it goes? From reading your description, I'd ask if you could try: -
- cutting down the time you spend talking at the beginning;
I do agree with this point. I would love to be confident enough in the activities I had planned for a class to be able to radically cut down on time at the board.
- then, instead of the textbook, try using a Tarsia in pairs or groups (your job, of course, is to circulate and make sure everyone's participating, talking, explaining, convincing...);
- perhaps differentiate it with "confidence-building" questions, "challenging" and "fiendish"; and,
Tarsia is something I have tried before. I didn’t consider asking the kids opinions on it, which in retrospect would have been an obvious thing to do. I used my own reflections upon those lessons. Sure, the kids talked about the work and I’m sure their learning was of a good standard. However, I wasn’t yet convinced that there was a lot of educational benefit to it. I could see why there should be educational benefit - oral and kinaesthetic learning etc. But at the time I felt that Tarsia represented nothing more than something to do when I fancied a little bit of a change from the textbook - when the kids were getting bored. However, your point makes me reconsider this. Perhaps I should try some sort of empirical study. Half the class could be taught via my normal style and the other half via a Tarsia based lesson - then I could compare findings. I would have to do this for a few lessons to get an adequate data set for comparison, but it could be a starting point for me.
- ask your kids to feedback at the end of the lesson. What did they think of the different style? What worked well? What could be better? What would they like to do again? How often?
ReplyDeleteAs I said above, this is something that I didn’t do with Tarsia. I have asked the kids in the past what they thought of particular lessons, and I do issue regular questionnaires for the kids to fill in which contain questions on the teaching style etc, but also their confidence levels too.
Use this along with your own reflections to inform future planning. You might all want to return to your usual style, but at least you'll know you tried and confirmed that what you're doing is best for the kids.
Thanks again for your input. I didn’t want to come across as an old rock of a teacher who has no desire to embrace contemporary teaching styles. I am only 25 - so have a lot of learning to do! I have tried other strategies with the class. One idea I have tried with this class are question carousels where pupils go round the class in pairs attempting questions located round the room. This shares the kinaesthetic and oral learning aspects with the Tarsia puzzles - and I know the kids did enjoy doing this.
Overall, I know my results are going to be good at the end of S4- everything in prelims, end of S3 exams and check-up homework points towards this. That is how I know the teaching isn’t a disaster just now. But like your points above illustrate - it could be so much better.
This first discussion on my new blog has already helped me to make some targets for the coming weeks. I shall be sure to post my progress and findings. Thanks again for your advice! :)
' This shares the kinaesthetic and oral learning aspects with the Tarsia puzzles - and I know the kids did enjoy doing this.'
ReplyDeleteSome people are good at remembering oral things.
Some people are good at remembering kinaesthetic things.
Some people are good at remembering visual things.
But this does not mean that people who are best at learning kinaesthetic things will learn everything best if it is translated into kinaesthetic things.
A dance is a kinaesthetic thing. You learn dance steps best by doing the dance. Even if you are an oral sort of person, you won't learn to dance quicker if the teacher simply describes the dance to you.
No matter how much people insist that oral people learn best orally, listening to a description of a dance will not teach you to dance quicker than doing the dance steps, no matter how much better you are at oral learning than kinaesthetic learning.
People learn maths by thinking.
The only reason to have all of the V,A,K learning styles is to get their attention levels up by having some variety.
The V,A,K learning styles are the medium. But the medium is not the message.