Differentiation overview

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:
ƒ Resource Based Learning
ƒ Independent learning
ƒ 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