PGCE Primary Core Assignment

Student Number: 8573082

How do you teach for progression in pupils learning? What is the contribution to childrens learning of a teachers subject knowledge?

1 Student Number: 8573082

Contents
Introduction Page 3 Assessment for Progression Page 3 Planning for Progression Page 6 Teaching for Progression Page 7 Personalised Learning, Not Differentiation Subject Knowledge Conclusion Page 10 Reference List Page 12

2 Student Number: 8573082

Introduction
Progression in learning is a vital process in the systems of education used in this country and across the world. Without progression, the system of teaching and learning is not viable, as it would quickly reach a standstill. The Oxford University Press Dictionary defines progression as the process of developing gradually towards a more advanced state, (Oxford Dictionaries Online). Putting it in a very simplistic way, in primary teaching this gradual development focuses on improving a childs understanding in ten subject areas, as outlined in the National Curriculum, with a greater emphasis on progression in the three core subjects (English, Mathematics and Science). A particularly salient question amongst many primary teachers and academics is: how does one facilitate this development and change in order to bring about a successful progression in pupils learning? Over the course of this essay, I will first look at the concept of progression in pupils learning and discuss what this means, and consider firstly how we can track this progression and subsequently how we plan for it. Next, I will move on to talking about facilitating progression in a more practical sense whilst teaching, with particular focus on my experiences of personalised learning during my Guided Professional Placement (GPP). Finally, I will look at what effect teaching has on progression, taking into account subject knowledge of the teacher and its importance in facilitating learning.

Assessment For Progression

A good question to ask at this point would be: what is progression and how do we use assessment to measure it? In my opinion, a simple and easy way to define progression is to see it as an individuals development of understanding, or to put it in a more grandiose way as Bennett does in Bourne (1994, p.43), the extension, elaboration or modification of their schemata. Barmby (2009, p.3) talks about the meaning of understanding in his text on Primary Mathematics, stating that, Understanding is a continuum and is related to the meaning that the learner gives to representations of an idea. It is also the never ending buildup of connections between representations. Barmby therefore sees understanding as an ongoing process, supporting the commonly used definition of progression as a gradual development.
3 Student Number: 8573082

As part of the teaching and learning cycle, it is important to measure this on-going process of understanding that Barmby talks about through the process of assessment, defined by Owen (2008, p.1) as the collecting information about progress of learners. I wholeheartedly agree with Bennett in Bournes text (1994, p.49) who states that, no teacher can decide on the next optimal step for a child or children without a clear view of where they are now. So if we are to use assessment to help teach for progression, the next question is how do we use it?

Instead of just considering assessment as simply formative or summative, or attempting to meta-analyse all the studies done and books written on the subject of assessment, I believe that the approach used by Mary Briggs in her text on Assessment for Learning and Teaching works particularly well. Briggss (2009, 2nd ed.) approach looks at assessment as a three pronged tool: Assessment For Learning, Assessment As Learning and Assessment Of Learning. It is worth noting that this approach is used by several authors, but for the purpose of this essay I will refer to it as Briggss approach.

The first prong of the approach is Assessment For Learning, commonly known as formative assessment. Clemson & Clemson (1996, p.37) believe that formative assessments are continuous assessments which take place at regular intervals and offer opportunities for detailed feedback. From my experiences on GPP, Assessment For Learning is an on-going process designed to give both the teacher and pupil an up to date evaluation of how the teaching and learning cycle is affecting that pupils development of understanding. Black and Wiliam (1998, p.31) believe that the choice of task is crucial for this kind of assessment, It is obvious that formative assessment which guides learners towards valued learning goals can only be generated with tasks that both work to those goals and that are open in their structure to the generation and display of relevant evidence, both from student to teacher and to students themselves. I fully agree with Black and Wiliam with this evaluation of task importance. It is impossible for a teacher to assess a pupil or a class of pupils without a task which allows for the creation of the appropriate evidence. Without this evidence, it is impossible for a teacher to plan progression in learning. The second prong of Briggss approach, Assessment As Learning is particularly relevant to me personally when reflecting on my own GPP experiences. The school in which I was placed had a personalised learning philosophy, which emphasised the importance of
4 Student Number: 8573082

metacognitive learning, defined as knowing about knowing, by Metcalfe J & Shimanura A P (1994). The philosophy was there to provide the children with ownership over their learning, and to give them an understanding of why they were learning. A big element of selfassessment was included in lessons as part of this philosophy something that can be seen in my 6th Lesson Observation (Appendix 7). As Jones (2001, p.61) states, An effective way of enabling children's growth as learners and shifting the control of learning from teacher to pupil is through children's self-assessment. In my GPP school, the pupils used paper trackers that split subjects into concepts, which are self-assessed on an on-going basis. One of my year 1 pupils summed up the use of personalised trackers very well by saying, Our tracker shows us what we have learned and what we still need to learn, (Child, Year 1, South Manchester Primary Academy school). This to me showed an excellent understanding considering the age of the pupil. The next step in the metacognitive learning process would be for the child to understand why, something that in my experience was tough for a year 1 class, but became much more appropriate further up the school. For me, this experience is a great example of Assessment As Learning, as talked about by Briggs. Of the three prongs, this form of assessment, coupled with an understanding of the learning journey, is the most pertinent when looking at progression in my opinion, as a learner who knows why they are learning will be the most successful learner. The third prong of Briggss approach is Assessment Of Learning (summative assessment). Assessment Of Learning is normally carried out through the form of a test or exam at the end of a series of learning or school term. This type of assessment can therefore incorporate smaller class based tests or even formal national tests, such as Statutory Assessment Tests. Clemson & Clemson (1996, p.37) believe that the more formal summative assessments give us a grade or percentage, but no indication of ways to improve our future performance or even to identify particular areas of weakness. From my own experience of the smaller class based summative assessments, I have a different view, which sees summative assessments as a useful tool which can inform the second prong of the assessment approach, Assessment As Learning. In my GPP school, the class were given the chance to review a summative mathematics assessment, in order to give them the chance to see where they had made mistakes, and therefore what their learning targets for the subsequent term would be. This was particularly useful in planning for individual progression. I do however agree with
5 Student Number: 8573082

Clemson & Clemson that the formal national summative assessments could be the least useful in terms of planning for a pupils progression, if not followed up. The three prongs of Briggss approach all have the same reasoning behind them. Each one, in a different way, is used by the teacher to find out in which direction the class, and the individuals within that class, need to move next in order to facilitate learning progression. As Clemson & Clemson (1996, p.37) state, When a teacher finds that a particular child is having problems with an area of learning, he or she tries to find out why. He or she may remediate by re-teaching using a different method, and then if problems persist, he or she will work individually with that child to try to discover where the conceptual difficulties are. It is through the use of assessment, in its various forms, that teachers are able to plan teaching that will address the conceptual difficulties discussed by Clemson & Clemson.

Planning for Progression

Jones in her 2001 paper on self-assessment really encapsulates the interdependence of the different elements in the teaching and learning cycle. She states, Knowing what has been achieved and how effectively it has been accomplished enables both teachers and children to plan for the future and to map out the way ahead, (Jones, 2001, p.61). Once assessment has been utilised to gauge the level of understanding of a pupil or class, a teacher can then plan for progression or development of that understanding. I agree strongly with Owen (2008), who states that, effective planning leads to focussed teaching.

Planning, from my own experience is particularly important for a teacher for progressing pupils learning. Planning allows for clear learning intentions to be formulated, which in turn can be shared with the class. Once these learning intentions are clear, the learning and assessment of that learning can occur. As Owen (2008 p.2) describes, The teachers careful planning provides an experience for the student that scaffolds new learning, that lifts the learner to the next level of understanding, and that in the process provides a new assessment sample for the teacher to evaluate.

6 Student Number: 8573082

In terms of using planning to help teach for progression, long and medium term planning is particularly useful for putting together sequences of lessons and smooth transitions between learning points within a subject. These long and medium term plans can be adapted as a term or school year progresses to reflect the learning progression of the class.

Individual lesson plans give a teacher the chance to further articulate the opportunities for progression within a specific lesson, which as described above are often linked in a sequence. Through communicating ideas in a written format, one can often identify standout issues that focus attention on areas which might otherwise not seem important, for example how you might progress a particular pupils learning by targeted questioning or use of a particular classroom resource. Hayes (1996, p.66) states that the very best lesson plans need to take short and long term perspectives and focus on learning outcomes that are both immediate and cumulative.

Different schools often have varying curriculum designs and usually opt for either a topic based cross-curricular approach to teaching and planning, or go for a more subject specific format. In terms of the effect on pupil progression, the argument for and against crosscurricular teaching is an in depth one, with academics such as Barnes (2007) arguing strongly that a childs natural experience of the world is cross-curricular and that this should be transferred into a meaningful engagement within the classroom. Media critics of the approach, including Paton in the Guardian newspaper (2011) argue that it is simply a fad that is, in effect, dumbing down the curriculum.

Teaching For Progression

Within the teaching and learning cycle, all elements have their own unique importance. Alongside assessment of prior learning and planning of future learning, the practice of facilitating progression through teaching is the most practical element in the cycle. The often quoted Vygotsky (1978), talked about a childs Zone of Proximal Development and the opportunity to achieve more with the help of a more knowledgeable other. This is a crucial point. Through interaction with the more knowledgeable other in the classroom, the child is able to develop his/her understanding and therefore progress.

7 Student Number: 8573082

In my opinion perhaps one of the most important points to make whilst looking at teaching for progression is that each and every single person learns in a different way. These differences in the way we learn are commonly referred to as learning styles. Neil Fleming is one of the forefront academics regarding learning styles and in his 1992 paper with Colleen Mills, split learning into four different styles: Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinaesthetic (VARK). Fleming & Mills (1992, p.137) begin their paper by saying, Over the last four decades the literature from both psychology and education has supported the proposition that learners of all ages have different yet consistent ways of responding in learning situations. For a teacher, this is relevant as each pupil is likely to have a slightly different yet consistent learning style. This means that particular types of learning activities can be targeted at particular groups of learners to match their learning style. In a later journal article, Fleming goes on to say, thinking about strategies for teaching different groups of learners can lead to more, and appropriate, variety of learning and teaching, Fleming & Baume (2006, p.4). When planning, teaching and assessing, taking into account these differing learning styles is particularly relevant when considering how a pupil will learn best.

Looking at more practical teaching, progression in pupils learning can be brought about through the use of specific teacher questioning. During my GPP, I focussed on this questioning as part of a mathematics task (Appendix 4) and was able to see the effective use of questioning from an outstanding teacher. Using targeted pupil questioning is an excellent method of progressing one pupil and indeed the whole classs learning. Through the use of targeted questioning, one can highlight a mistake or misconception that requires addressing or extend your more able students. The teacher that I observed for the Year 5 maths mental starter in Appendix 4 was able to use questioning to gauge understanding of pupils in her class by delving deeper and asking why the answer that was given was correct, instead of just having the pupils recall mathematical facts.

Personalised Learning, Not Differentiation Alongside learning styles, differing ability also ranks highly in my opinion when teaching a class with progression as the target. At this point, if I had taught in a different school during

8 Student Number: 8573082

GPP I would likely start writing about differentiation. However, to account for differences in ability my GPP school used a very different method: personalised learning.

Where differentiation is something imposed upon the children by the teacher, who is the centre of the classroom, personalised learning holds the child as the focal point. Maggie HosMcGrane summed up the personalised learning philosophy recently on her blog. She wrote, In personalized learning, students come to understand how they learn best as they are active participants in designing their learning goals and deciding what they are learning, in fact they own their own learning. In differentiated learning the students are more passive as the teachers have already determined the learning outcomes which are the same for the whole group of students, (Hos-McGrane, 2012).

Indeed, personalised learning is gradually become more and more pertinent within education policy in the UK. David Miliband in his 2004 Education Conference Speech argues that personalised learning is the best way to ensure that each and every pupil achieves the highest standards possible, (Miliband, 2004). Miliband concluded that personalised learning is not a top down approach and must be implemented by individual schools, very much like the personalised learning within a classroom being child-centred. A 2007 DfES Research Report titled An investigation of Personalised Learning Approaches used by Schools, summarised findings of the investigation which showed that schools who have taken on the challenge of implementing personalised learning, have very diverse approaches of realising it, supporting Milibands speech conclusion from 2004.

Relating this to the question at hand, it is clear to me that progression in its most pure form can only be achieved through personalised learning. As the DfES report mentioned above concludes, Schools that might be characterised as strong on personalised learning see learners as co-investors in education, not in the financial sense, but in terms of their aspirations and commitment to learning, (DfES, 2007, p.72). In fully personalising learning, teachers are encouraging the academic buy-in needed for optimal progression. Each child, whether gifted and talented or low ability, progresses at a rate that is correct for them. Subject Knowledge So far in this essay I have covered some of the tools a teacher has to help them teach for progression, but not talked a great deal about subject knowledge. Simmons (1993) proposed
9 Student Number: 8573082

that in order to teach well the teacher needs to know about the subject matter in both width and depth to a degree unlikely to be found amongst those beginning a teacher training course. As a trainee teacher teaching a Year 1 class during GPP, I did not experience big subject knowledge issues. I found the challenge existed more in a pedagogic form. However, I do strongly agree with Simmons in his argument. With depth of correct subject knowledge, a teacher is able to teach in a fashion appropriate to the class, making connections and drawing in other learning that may be difficult with limited subject knowledge. Bennett in Bourne (1994, p.50), sums this up very well by saying, for teachers to effectively diagnose childrens conceptions, to plan appropriate classroom tasks, to present quality explanations and demonstrations and to make curricular choices, requires knowledge and understandings of subject matter.

However, there are those who would say that subject knowledge is not everything. Many academics including Jane Martin (1983) have argued strongly that a hidden curriculum exists and continues to educate those attending our schools. My opinion is that this hidden curriculum is equally, if not more important than subject based curriculum, as it realises learning and progression in an alternative way. In my opinion, the most academically talented individual would struggle without the life skills taught by the hidden curriculum described by Martin.

Conclusion
Teaching for pupil progression, a gradual development of understanding, is the very essence of the UK educational system. In my opinion though, we may be too narrow minded in our view of what progression really constitutes. Gardners text on his theory of multiple intelligences (1983), suggests that there is more to intelligence than just giving short answers to short questions, and that children often excel in many different ways which are not given credit, when compared to say a score in a summative test or exam.

The Cambridge Primary Review (2009, p.31) calls for innovation in summative assessment to give us a rounder picture of the learning of individual pupils, who are not just taught to do well in a test, the Review fully accepts the need for summative assessment at the end of primary school but says it must be broader, more innovative, and conducted under entirely

10 Student Number: 8573082

different conditions than the current system. In my opinion, within the current system, individual progression as we know it is being distorted; there is too much focus on core subjects which make up a narrow part of the curriculum. The summative assessments that primary teaching tends to focus upon do not take into account Gardners multiple intelligences or the hidden curriculum. Progression in childrens learning is not straightforward, and teaching to accommodate each pupil within a class is a major challenge. In my opinion, child-centred personalised learning, coupled with excellent teacher subject knowledge, is a big step towards reaching optimum potential in teaching for progression. With personalised learning, the academic buy-in from the pupil is at its greatest, and progression occurs at a rate which suits the learner. The learner is at the centre of the classroom and the teacher is there to facilitate the learning that takes place.

END

Word Count: 3277

11 Student Number: 8573082

Reference List
Barmby P et al. (2009), Primary Mathematics: teaching for understanding, United Kingdom: Open University Press

Barnes, J (2007), Cross-Curricular Learning 3-14, London: Sage

Black P & Wiliam D (1998): Assessment and Classroom Learning, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5:1, 7-74

Black P & Wiliam D (1998): Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment

Bourne J (1994), Thinking Through Primary Practice, London: Routledge Briggs M et al. (2009, 2nd ed.), Assessment for learning and teaching in primary schools, United Kingdom: Learning Matters Ltd

Cambridge Primary Review (2009) Introducing the Cambridge Primary Review. Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Department for Education and Skills (2007), An Investigation of Personalised Learning Approaches used by Schools, Nottingham, DfES Publications, Ref no: RR843

Fleming N and Mills C, (1992) Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection. To Improve the Academy. Paper 246.

Fleming, N., and Baume, D. (2006) Learning Styles Again: VARKing up the right tree! Educational Developments, SEDA Ltd, Issue 7.4, Nov. 2006, p4-7

Gardner H (1983), Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, New York: Basic Books

12 Student Number: 8573082

Hayes D (1996), Foundations of Primary Teaching, London: David Fulton Publishers Ltd

Jones D (2001), Bridging the gap: Towards a model of children's self assessment, Education 3-13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 29:3, 61-68 Maddern K (2012) Training shake-up will lead to loss of expertise, TES, 14th December 2012, p. 18.

Maggie Hos-McGrane (2012) Differentiated -v- Personalized www.maggieshosmcgrane.com Weblog (Online) 2nd September 2012. Available from: http://www.maggiehosmcgrane.com/2012/09/differentiated-v-personalized.html [Accessed 04.01.12]

Martin J (1983) What Should We Do with a Hidden Curriculum When We Find One? The Hidden Curriculum and Moral Education. Berkeley, California: McCutchan Publishing Corporation

Metcalfe J & Shimanura A P (1994), Metacognition: knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Miliband D (2004), Personalised Learning: Building a New Relationship with Schools. North of England Education Conference, Belfast, 8th January 2004. Oxford Dictionaries Online, Progression. Available: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/progression [Accessed 27.12.12] Owen R (2008), The Teaching and Learning Cycle (online). Available: http://www.rcowen.com/discussionTranscript-TLC.htm [Accessed: 02.01.13]

Paton, G (2011), National curriculum review: children to learn facts and figures in subject shake-up, The Telegraph, 20.01.11.

Simmons M (1993), The Effective Teaching of Mathematics. New York: Longman

13 Student Number: 8573082

Teaching in Primary Schools: Science (online). Booklet from Open University Course. Available: http://labspace.open.ac.uk/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=426160&printable=1 [Accessed 19.12.12]

Vygotsky L (1978), Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

14 Student Number: 8573082