Swell teacher research

'What's the Plan Stan?' Does working in 4s result in an increase in topic knowledge?

2009-12-15T14:09:00.017+13:00

School: Houghton Valley School
Year Level: 1
Teacher: Adele Murray
Focus area: Participating and Contributing (in co-operative groups)
Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to participate and contribute through the use of small group work?
Question 2. Engagement: What impact does the use of small group work have on student’s engagement during topic lessons?
Question 3. Knowledge: What impact does working in groups of 4 have on their topic knowledge?

Success Criteria for Knowledge
Expert: I can carry out a good/bad chart in relation to our response to the junior school ‘Disaster Day’.
Practitioner: I can discuss how to prepare for the natural disasters that could affect me in Houghton Valley/Wellington.
Apprentice: I can discuss natural disasters and how they can affect me in Houghton Valley.

Novice: I can discuss natural disasters that could occur in New Zealand.

Question 4. Competency: What impact does working in groups of 4 have on their ability to participate and contribute.

Success Criteria for Competency
Expert: I can identify the good and bad points of working in a group of 4, and what I need to do better next time.
Practitioner: I can describe how I could participate and contribute equally in a similar task.
Apprentice: I can state how I participated equally in a group task. Novice: I can partially contribute to a group task.

Learning Story:
At the beginning of the year I had noticed the poor interpersonal skills of my new class. They were reluctant to work with each other in pairs and therefore my random buddy system was being protested against. I kept up with it, slightly rigging the ‘randomness’ of the buddies and eventually we had a class culture of an expectation where everyone will work with everybody.
At the beginning of term 3, I had 6 new students move up from the NE class. They quickly fitted in with our routines, expectations and our class culture. I decided that it was time to put as much effort into the teaching of group work skills as I had into our paired work. Up until then we had done some group work activities, but I hadn’t specifically tought them how to work successfully in a small group.
So I began term 4 by assessing their group work skills, and their knowledge of natural disasters. I started teaching some of the small group skills out of the Socially Speaking Programme, provided by our RTLB. We then began working through the “What’s the Plan Stan?” civil defense unit, gradually building up our knowledge of natural disasters. Next, we applied our new knowledge by doing several small group activities, such as venn diagrams and cause and effect charts. I collected data on their engagement levels.

Children working in their co-operative groups, making a chart about the effects of natural disasters.

By week 8 we were ready for our junior school 'Disaster Day'. This involved 4 classrooms being told that a magnitude 7.4 earthquake and just struck and we were going to be stuck in our classrooms for at least 2 days! We worked through different scenarios and tried to apply our new knowledge. The next week, I did the unit post test, which was the same as the pre test, with a good/bad chart on the back. I also asked them whether they preferred to work in pairs or 4s.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement: SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always
Mean level of engagement of students ...
Offered ideas - 3.7
Asked questions - 3.8
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 4.6
Used positive body language related to task - 4.4
Persevered in order to enact related task - 3.9
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 3.7
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 3.8
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.6
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 3.9

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 4.2

Outcome 2. Knowledge: Number of students who were ...
8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 7
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 2
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 1; at end 3
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 2
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 1; at end 1
2. Proficient novices - at start 6; at end 1
1. Beginning novices - at start 13; at end 0

Knowledge effect size = 1.3

Outcome 3. Competency: Number of students who were ... 8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 1
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 7
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 1
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 2
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 3
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 8; at end 3
2. Proficient novices - at start 0; at end 2
1. Beginning novices - at start 13; at end 2

Competency effect size = 1.5

Conclusions: PMI

Plus:

Children loved the 'disasters topic' and it coincided with national/international events.

The 'Teaching Social Skills' programme was very good, and I will start 2010 by using it again.

Children were very engaged during activities.

I choose the cooperative group make up well, and they were very sucessful.

The increase in knowledge was pleasing.

The childrens' self assessment of their participation levels was very accurate, I was surprised but pleased. We had done some of these before and I think this helped. We also have, as part of our class culture the belief that being wrong is ok as it gives us something to strive for.

My 3 new children, whilst not included in this data, improved in both knowledge and competency.

I learnt a lot about teaching co-operative group skills, and good ways to use different co-operative activities in topic teaching.

Minus

I did the post test too late. Some children seemed to have forgotten important information.
I did an example of a 'good/bad' chart just before the post test, but doing some more beforehand would have been good.
I didn't refer to the website enough. I realised too late certain things that needed doing. I will however know better when guiding the next teachers!

Interesting

Although the poutama seemed linear, some children, at the end of the unit, could do the practitioner level but not the apprentice level. I had to use my own judgement as to where to score them.
Exactly half of the students preferred group work to paired work. They were able to give me good reasons as to why, and also the good/bad points about working in pairs and groups.

2009-06-25T16:18:00.017+12:00

School: St Francis de Sales School

Year Level: Middle Syndicate

Teachers: Jacinta, Nik, Marilyn, Lisa

Focus area: Managaing Self in Literacy (Writing)

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: Are students' learning outcomes in writing enhanced through using a rubric?

Question 2. Engagement: Do students use the rubric to assist their learning?

Question 3. Competency: Did the students use the rubrics effectively to increase their learning outcomes?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert:

8. Proficient: Be aware of their own strengths and weaknesses when using a rubric, self reflect on this knowledge and use it to improve their own learning outcomes by setting their own goals andexpressing to others how this was determined and transferring skills to help others.

7. Beginning: Be aware of their own strengths and weaknesses when using a rubric, self reflect on this knowledge and use it to improve their own learning outcomes by setting their own goals.

Practitioner:

6. Proficient: Demonstrate the knowledge and the ability to use a rubric as a self assessment tool and to identify their next learning step.

5. Beginning: Is able to tell others of their positioning on the rubric identifying features to self assess against.

Apprentice:

4. Proficient: Has the knowledge and the ability to use the rubric as a self assessment tool and can identify their next step.

3. Beginning: Able to use rubric and can identify their next learning step.

Novice:

2. Proficient: Knows the rubric represents their level of skill and knowledge in writing and is used to set their next step in learning goals.

1. Beginning: Knows what the rubric is and attempts to use it to reflect on their goals.

Learning Story:

We got together and decided that the area of focus which we wanted to explore was the effect of using rubrics in literacy (writing).

We had previously written the asTTle assessment criteria (for descriptive writing) into rubrics to link with our self-regulated/self-management goal. Our intention was to use the rubrics with the students so that together we could identify where they were meeting literacy functions in writing and what area they needed to focus on. We conferenced with the students to identify their next learning step and shared this in three-way conferences. Through these conferences, we recognised that the rubric (information transferred from asTTle rubrics) were in 'teacher language' and therefore, the students had no control (lanugague barriers).

For our action research, we decided that it was necessary to further develop the rubrics based on these learning steps to make them more child-friendly.

Steps to Implementation:

1. Mid Syndicate Teachers refined existing rubric into ‘child-friendly’ language. This was a very difficult and lengthy process as teachers working at Level 2 needed to juggle between NZ Curriculum Writing Exemplars at Level 1iii and align to asTTle Level 2. There was also the difficulty of simplifying technical terms into 'child speak'.

2. Students' writing samples were gathered using a test topic created on asTTle with the focus being on 'description', (gathered wk 9 Term 2 so that we had data to became conferences straight back into the term).

3. Wk 1, Term 3 - Shared rubric with students using the suggested strategies we developed together:

□ Model by deconstructing exemplar against the rubric
□ Buddy read, deconstruct rubric together, come back with questions
□ Question students as to how they could use this rubric, where and when could it help with their learning etc.

3. Process of Implementation:

a. Using term 1 writing sample - revisit goal from Term 1

b. Students were given back writing sample – asked to self-assess against rubric

c. Teachers conferenced with individual children to analyse writing sample identifying positioning on rubric. This lead to co-construction of new goal by assessing writing sample together.

d. Every child has a copy of their own goal to readily access and implement.

In Reflection: Positives, Minuses, and Suggestions after Implementation:

Working with the Rubric:

Positives:

1. Students can see areas of ability/strengths/weaknesses

2. Tool for motivation

3. Most can identify next step easily

Negatives:

1. Some langauge barriers still/ambiguous areas

2. Time factor involved (3 weeks of guided writing instructional time dedicated to conferencing)

3. Steps between levels were unclear in some areas

4. Doesn't allow instructional writing to be taught - unable to feed-forward, feed-back

Suggestions:

1. Revisit some areas

2. Concentrate/focus on one writing function

3. Feedback on specific goal only

Conferencing with student:

Positivies:

1. Valuable 1:1 time

2. Able to identify child's abilities, informed to find next step

3. Creates class discussion = all students are involved

Minus:

1. Time factor involved

Suggestions:

1. Working together in groups with students who have the same goal and asking them to self/peer assess

Reporting: (writing up feedback)

Positives:
1. Many falling in same area - ability to transpose comments

2. Written feedback valuable to students and parents informed

Minus:
1. Time consuming
2. Editing - who??

Suggestions:

1. offer opportunity for parents to comment

2. Rubric to be sent home also, then child could share learning pathways with parents (all informed of criteria)

3. Release time should be given for added work-load

4. Standard formatting form should be developed to be used school wide (standardised)

INDIVIDUAL CLASS FEEDBACK:

Room 2:

In our Year 5/6 class, the students overall comments were positive.

Positives: (high rating overall)

'I learn faster and I like it" Yr 5 student

'Helps me to have a writing goal and shows me where I'm on the scale' Yr 6 student

'To make us better and to understand where we have to learn and achieve" Yr 6 student

"It helps us to see where you need to achieve and what we are good at" Yr 5 student

Minus: (4 comments in total)

'It goes too fast and is complicating sometimes" Yr 5 student

"So much information about what we need to work on" Yr 5 student

Suggestions:

"We could do it with someone with the same score"

"Could compare it with people and get some tips or learn how or what you can do"

Rm 3: Overall, there was a general feeling that students understood the purpose of using the rubric and still needed more guidance as to how to use it for managing their learning pathway.

Comments

"I found it cool. I never knew what I had to learn but now I have something that can direct me."

"I know now that I have different areas to work on."

"I can still see that I have areas to improve."

"I can see what I have to work on."

"I think it good. I can see what I need to include in my writing."

Room 1:
At first the students were nervous about using the rubrics to identify the strengths and weaknesses within their writing. Once it was explained to them most were able to use the rubric successfully, but some needed support to understand the format and the language used. It was used to identify the student's next learning step for their writing.

Comments.

"It allowed me to see what I could do (success criteria)."

"I showed me what to do next."

"I needed help to understand what it was."

Room 4

Some students said that they enjoyed highlighting where they were up to on the writing Rubric and others found this challenging. The students could clearly see their next learning steps in writing but commented that there were so many. Some were overcome with the amount of language that they had to process in order to complete the Rubric task. All students managed to self-assess using the Rubric either independently or with support. The students need to have easy access to these Rubrics and interaction with these regularly to become more familar with the process.

Outcome 1. Room 2 Engagement only: Do students use the rubric? (see above comments)

Room 2: SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ... Offered ideas - [3.0]
Asked questions - [3.2]
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - [4.3]
Used positive body language related to task - [4.2]
Persevered in order to enact related task - [4.1]
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - [3.5]
Showed interest in directing their own learning - [3.0]
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - [1.3]
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - [3.8]

Overall mean level of engagement of students = [3.8]

Outcome 2. Knowledge:
Number of students who were ..
8. Proficient experts - at start [#]; at end [#]
7. Beginning experts - at start [#]; at end [#]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [#]; at end [#]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [#]; at end [#]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [#]; at end [#]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [#]; at end [#]
2. Proficient novices - at start [#]; at end [#]
1. Beginning novices - at start [#]; at end [
Knowledge effect size =

Standard error =

Outcome 3. Competency: Did the students use the rubric effectively to increase their learning outcomes?
Number of students who were:
8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [0]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [2]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [3]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [0]; at end [16]
2. Proficient novices - at start [0]; at end [9]
1. Beginning novices - at start [31]; at end [0]

Competency effect size = 1.24

Standard error = 0.09

Conclusions:
Much of our conclusions can be drawn from the reflective comments above. We have come to the conclusion that the rubric is an essential tool which we will embed into our teaching and learning practice.

Without the rubric, students do not have personal access to their learning path. There are far more advantages to learning than disadvantages (as evident in data gathered).

Next Steps: we will implement our writing rubric into every text form explored - which means writing each asTTle text form rubric into child speak to provide our students with an essential tool for identifying their next steps leading to managing self in learning.

[outline conclusions to be drawn from the research here]

2009-06-03T15:41:00.026+12:00

School:St Francis de Sales

Year Level: 7/8

Teacher: Louise & Denise
Focus area: Managing Self
Research Questions
Question 1. Implementation: How do you implement a senior webquest?
(A webquest is a research tool which has relevant links to safe sites to assist children in their search for information.)
Question 2. Engagement: Does a webquest provide all students with motivation to focus on their inquiry.
Question 3. Knowledge: To develop an understanding of the impact NZ natural disasters have had on people, communities and landscapes.
Success Criteria for Knowledge
Expert: Can independently use their knowledge to plan, create and generate a new learning experience .

Practitioner: Is aware of a range of NZ Disasters and
uses this knowledge in another context .

Apprentice: Can explain to others the effect a disaster has had on people, communities or landscapes.
Novice: Retrieves and reports information orally
Question 4. Competency: To be able to navigate a webquest effectively in order to interpret and present research results
Success Criteria for Competency
Expert:
Can independently create and explain their own webquest
Practitioner:
Uses knowledge of webquest navigating in another context
Apprentice: With support can complete a webquest task
Novice: Select relevant links for research
Learning Story:

Implementation:
We were interested in exploring options that would promote further learning for our senior students when using class sets of laptops, ICT and on line search engines.We decided to design a web quest that which would challenge the way our students usually researched i.e. not to rely on one site such as 'Wikipedia' or on one search engine such as 'Google.’ We were hoping that it would not only provide them with the most informative and direct links to a site but would give them the opportunity to contribute and understand what a web quest was.

Web quest Design:
Our web quest was designed using previous experience. We also sourced materials from the National Library, Christchurch City Libraries and Civil Defence New Zealand. It was important to us that our students had ownership of this web quest so we designed it in such a way that our students could participate and contribute to its effectiveness by adding their own success criteria and choosing their next learning step.

Teaching and Learning:
Children assessed themselves against a knowledge and competency rubric before beginning the web quest. They were then exposed to a variety of texts, video clips and speakers about NZ disasters to provide them with some base knowledge of NZ disasters. This gave them the ability to understand the impact that disasters have on communities and environments.

We then introduced the actual web quest learning and research tool which had been designed using power point. Teachers modelled to students how to navigate their way through the web quest by demonstrating some of the direct links. Other links were left unexplored which gave the students the opportunity to discover what they held without teacher modelling.

The students contributed their own thoughts on what they felt successful measures would be as a final result of their research, investigation and presentation and developed their own success criteria. This success criteria was integrated into the actual web quest design and students were made aware of how important it was to refer back to this during their research. Next, students were given the opportunity to explore and discuss the web quest before beginning their actual disaster inquiry.

Children developed their disaster reports using the links provided in the web quest and any additional resources they located themselves. These were presented to parents and the school community at the conclusion of the investigation.

Students then assessed themselves against the success criteria they had developed in the web quest. This assessment included self, peer, group and teacher feedback. Everyone was required to give specific feedback according to this success criteria and then students reflected on the feedback they had received.

We took this a step further and encouraged students to discuss with a buddy an area that they wanted to improve in their competency when working with a web quest and an area they would like to focus on when writing a report. Together they recorded how they thought they might achieve this.

Finally, students were given time to reflect on their feedback and re assess themselves against their own rubric.

Student Reflection:
We gave all students the opportunity to reflect on the pros and cons of their experiences when using a web quest. We were pleased with the feedback from our students and felt they had enjoyed this learning experience.
· “All the information is ready for you to stop you from using irrelevant info. Good visuals! Didn’t have to spend days researching.”
· “Some of the websites had all of NZ’s disasters and it was faster and easier to source information.”
· “It helped me to see what I had to do for my project.”
· “It helped because it had sites that I could use that gave really good information quicker, faster and had success criteria that we could follow.”

Student engagement:
We found the use of a web quest beneficial and highly motivational for all students. This was reflected not only in the student comments (see above), but in the positive body language that was evident throughout the investigative activity.

We felt there were very high levels of enthusiasm, interest and engagement. It is also clear that knowledge and competency increased considerably as a direct of the students’ engagement with the web quest.

Data Analyses:

Results:
Outcome 1. Engagement:
SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always
Mean level of engagement of students ...
Class One
Offered ideas - 3.4
Asked questions - 2.6
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 4.0
Used positive body language related to task - 4.8
Persevered in order to enact related task - 4.1
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time -
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 3.3
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.4
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 4.

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.8

Class two

Offered ideas - 3.3
Asked questions - 3.3
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 3.1
Used positive body language related to task - 3.1
Persevered in order to enact related task - 4.0
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 3.6
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 3.9
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.8
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 3.1

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.5

Outcome 2. Knowledge: N/A

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...
Class One:

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 0
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 2
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 21
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 4
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 0; at end 1
2. Proficient novices - at start 1; at end 0
1. Beginning novices - at start 27; at end 0

Competency effect size = 1.85
Standard error = 0.09

Class Two:

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 1
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 9
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 17
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 2
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 3; at end 1
2. Proficient novices - at start 27; at end 0
1. Beginning novices - at start 0; at end 0

Competency effect size = 1.57

Standard error = 0.07

Conclusions:
Our webquest proved to be a very effective learning tool for year 7 & 8 students. It is clear through the data that the competency of the students increased and engagement was high throughout the webquest. As a different way of challenging and motivating senior students we would definitely recommend giving this a go!

[outline conclusions to be drawn from the research here]

Peer Conferences Improve Quality of Writing

2009-04-22T21:25:00.011+12:00

School: South Wellington Intermediate

Year Level: 7-8

Teachers: Kathryn Smith and Christine Sangster

Focus area: Student awareness of, and ability to use, key learning tools for their achievement level (e.g. organisational tools, process tools, thinking tools, learning habits, technology, presentation tools, etc)

Research Questions:

Implementation: How can we implement a successful writing programme, within our classrooms?

Engagement: How can we help students sustain motivation for writing throughout the process?

Knowledge: How can we increase student knowledge of how to assist their peers in the writing process?

Competency: How can we implement student driven assessment processes within the writing process?

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Expert: Extensive knowledge of text type, conventions & language features; Tailors writing to specific audience and purpose
Practitioner: Sound knowledge of text type, conventions & language features; understands importance of audience & purpose and writes accordingly
Apprentice: Developing some knowledge of text type, conventions & language features; Developing some understanding of audience & purpose
Novice: Limited knowledge of text type, conventions & language features; Writes with limited understanding of audience or purpose

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: Uses the pair share model as a basis for their own in depth questioning; Can suggest own ideas for improvement
Practitioner: Independently run a pair share interview; Negotiates suggestions for improvement
Apprentice: Can explain how the pair share interview should take place; Can utilise suggestions for improvement
Novice: Can follow written instructions for pair share interview; Does what they are told.

Learning Story:

Our school professional development focus is literacy, with a focus on writing, so we sought a research topic that would support our learning in this area. We were keen to test the idea that students could work cooperatively with each other to apply their knowledge of success criteria in writing, and consequently improve the quality of their work, without the direct involvement of the teacher.

For our students to achieve success we realised that we not only needed to teach them what a good piece of writing looked like (in this case a personal recount) but we also needed to help them develop the interpersonal skills necessary to give and receive critical feedback. While we would be teaching our whole class to write a personal recount, we planned to work intensively with a small group of able students on developing the skills to provide a high level of peer support.
The actual implementation of our plan varied between the two rooms involved:

Room 12 – As there are a number of able students in this class, I selected 7 of the better writers to work with on this project, on the premise that once these students had been trained, they could then work on training other students in the class, providing a “trickle-down” effect and eventually having the whole class able to use this skill.

To get the selected group started, I drew up a PMI format (Plus/Minus/Improvement) for them to work with. This format was chosen because it was simple to explain and a positive form of feedback for the students. (Plus = the good things about the writing; Minus = the not-so-good things; Improvement = the things they could do to improve their writing the next time.) I then selected a piece of writing from a past student for them to read and critique, using the format to provide feedback. This was interesting as the writing was of a reasonably high quality, and the students had to think beyond their initial response of looking at surface features in order to be able to provide feedback. We discussed the writing and the comments from the students, including the difference between specific and generalized comments.

After teaching the personal recount format to the whole class, all students then wrote about an exciting event in their own lives. The group I was working with then swapped their recounts and used the PMI sheets to provide feedback about their buddy’s writing. They then met with their buddy to go through and elaborate on their suggestions/comments, and the PMI sheets were then stuck into their draft writing books for referral when we revisit the format in Term 2. Most of the feedback focused on surface features (punctuation, spelling, paragraphs…), as this seems to be the easiest aspect for students to provide feedback to others. I plan to work in more depth with them on how to focus on deeper features in their analysis of writing, using a simplified version of the relevant AsTTle indicators to help them, before getting them to start training the rest of the class.

Room 9 – I also chose to work with the most able writers in the class. After an initial session with the whole class discussing the features of a recount and the success criteria I met with the group. We discussed the importance of being positive, the need to give specific feedback and to offer suggestions. I reminded the group of the benefits of working with others and sharing our writing (we had previously talked about this in our poetry unit). We also talked about ownership. If students didn’t agree with their buddy, they were not expected to follow their advice or use their suggestions. The success criteria was on display and I had emphasized the opening hook as the one thing that I wanted the class to work on in this recount. Our model conference, therefore, focused on the opening hook. One student volunteered to be my ‘buddy’ and we modeled a peer conference to the group. The focus of this first peer conference was the recount introduction.

The conference….

Identify something that is good or that you like about the writing and be specific about why it is good. ”I really like the way you have used the word…… it makes me think/feel….”
Identify something that needs to be worked on. Words to be added, taken away or changed. “I think you need to use a more interesting word instead of nice, because nice…..”
Offer a suggestion or give an example of how to improve the phrase/sentence. “You could try using lovely instead of nice.”

Students then paired up and discussed their introductions.

The next time the group met we revised the purpose of peer conferences and how to give feedback. In this session students were focusing on paragraph organisation, and specifically looking for topic sentences. I gave the students ‘Post-It’ notes in the shape of hearts & stars to record their feedback comments for “What I really loved” & “I think this is stellar”, and square ‘Post-It notes for feedback comments about things to be improved. The students seemed to enjoy the ‘Post-It’ gimmick.

By this stage students were at different places with their recounts and were encouraged to have a peer conference when they needed them. Most of the group did this and so did some of the other students in the class.

The next step for peer conferences in room 9 is to provide students with scripts & guidelines for conducting peer conferences and organizers for them to record feedback on, as per our original research plan.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas – 3.6
Asked questions – 3.6
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully – 4.6
Used positive body language related to task – 3.4
Persevered in order to enact related task – 4.2
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time – 2.7
Showed interest in directing their own learning – 4.0
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning – 1.6
Show evidence of using what they have learnt – 1.3

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.8

Outcome 2. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 2; at end 2
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 7
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 5; at end 3
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 6; at end 5
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 5; at end 0
2. Proficient novices - at start 0; at end 1
1. Beginning novices - at start 0; at end 0

Knowledge effect size = 0.42
Standard error = 0.12

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7.Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 0
6.Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 1
5.Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 9
4.Proficient apprentices - at start 5; at end 7
3.Beginning apprentices - at start 12; at end 0
2.Proficient novices - at start 0; at end 0
1.Beginning novices - at start 0; at end 0

Competency effect size = 0.64
Standard error = 0.08

Conclusions:

Students increased their competency in conducting a peer conference. Most of their initial low competence is because they have had only limited opportunities to work in this way before. Some students had acted as peer tutors in the past, and were able to make links between their role as a tutor and their role in a peer conference.

At first students sought to discuss the surface features of the text. They had to be explicitly instructed to focus on the deeper features of text listed in the success criteria. It is difficult to establish how much competence increased as our judgements are dependent upon what students wrote. We expect that they gave better feedback verbally (than they recorded), but as we did not formally observe peer conferences to be sure.

The quality of student writing shows clear improvement when comparing first and second writing samples. Some of this increase may be due to the assistance recieved from peers, but we cannot attribute all improvement to the peer conference. It is likely that the teacher's directions to focus on the success criteria has helped students to improve their writing and that this alone would have led to improvements also. When the benefits of peer conferences were discussed with the Room 9 students, most were very positive and stated that the discussion helped them to write better. Others, however, did not find the peer conference useful. Of course there are likely to be a variety of explanations for this.

The Research Toolbelt

2009-04-20T21:03:00.033+12:00

The actual Research Toolbelt being worn by an Expert

School: Berhampore

Year Level: 5-8

Teacher: Richard Goodyear (with help from Carly St. Laurent)

Focus areas:

Authentic Learning:
Student ability to prepare learning intentions for a programme of work

Managing Self:
Student understanding of what it means to be part of a learning community.
Student awareness of and ability to use key learning tools for their achievement level (e.g. organisational tools, process tools, thinking tools, learning habits, technology, presentation tools, etc)

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to develop their ability to seek and present new information?

Question 2. Engagement: What impact can we have on student engagement using the symbol of a "Research Toolbelt"

Question 3. Competency: What impact does using the symbol of a "Research Toolbelt" have on student ability to seek and present information?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert:

Can use all parts of the Research Toolbelt in their own research
Can work with others, including adults, to help them develop their toolbelt abilities
Be actively upskilling beyond the toolbelt in order to seek and present information in new ways e.g. learn interview skills
Is open to new ways of using the research tools

Practitioner:

Can use all parts of the Research Toolbelt in their own research
Confidently applies the tools
Demonstrate that they place importance on getting further guidance in the use of the Research Toolbelt

Apprentice:

Can describe what is in the Research Toolbelt
Knows where to go and who to go to, to increase their competency
Is confident in around half the research tools and is using them to seek and present information

Novice:

Is busy applying themselves to one or two of the research tools in order to seek/present information
Sees their next learning steps and is comfortable seeking guidance
Is using their current research tools to seek and present information

Learning Story

First some background...

This project is about children deciding what they learn, as they work on self-chosen, interest-based projects.

Why?

1) Amongst many valuable statements, Berhampore School's vision statement and Inquiry Learning model speaks of "children engaged in, and contributing to the learning process", and "children immersed in an environment of rich information".

2) SWELL has developed some priorities for the children of South Wellington. Two of the three areas of greatest developmental need are focused on children helping decide what they learn.

3) I work in a Montessori classroom. The Montessori approach is based on some key principles about children's learning. Some of those principles involve viewing the primary aged child (particularly ages 6-12) as in a stage of great intellectual growth. It is a time for logic and imagination and for using these tendencies to explore their world through its geology, history, biology etc.

There are around 70 children being educated through the Montessori method at Berhampore School and there are certain conditions we provide.

Independent Work (individual and small group)

Timelines e.g. the timeline of art, the timeline of humans using maths, the timeline of life on Earth

Kids working on their own interests (within limits!)

Specialized equipment

Freedom of movement

Anyway...

As a teacher embarking on some Action Research I looked at my class and reflected on what they needed as they go about these "self-chosen, interest-based research projects".

I realized that although the children in my class have many and varied interests, and they know they can follow them, sometimes there are hitches. In a nutshell, sometimes these interests get followed for a brief exciting moment and then fall flat.

I settled upon an approach:

1) Guiding children to set a shared purpose and learning intentions for a phase of work.

2) Facilitating lessons including peer teaching.

3) Creating an environment where practice is allowed at the child's own pace.

So we came together as a class and had three key class meetings over a week. I posed them a couple of questions at each meeting and the meetings ran as a Think-Pair-Share.

Here are the questions and a summary of the responses:

Session One:

What is research? What is it for?

Responses: Its useful, helps you get a job, know stuff, find new information, its about discovery and exploration.

Ok so far so good...

Session Two:

Can research be fun? When? How?

Resposes: Yes it can be fun. It can be fun when:

We use it to arrange fun things eg camp; share with people funny and interesting stuff and they like it (either casually or in a presentation); use it to explore amazing places and ideas; it is jaw-dropping and eye-popping; we find we have an urge or instinct for discovery; when we can say we have it is a job well done; it inspires us.

At this point I breathed a sigh of relief as the Action Research clearly had an authentic purpose.

I talked to them about the "wow" moment and they agreed it is both possible and worth aiming for.

Session Three:

Are there barriers in our classroom to the "wow" moment? What are they? What do we need to do as a class to lower these barriers?

They listed some problems they have in this kind of work. We prioritised a handful and turned them around into learning opportunities. They agreed they would need some new lessons and plenty of practice!

Here are the priorities our class identified:

Using the internet, using Microsoft Word, making it so our stuff doesn't get stuck on one computer, typing skills, getting information off a page without just copying it and general reading skills.

Next came some teacher reflection and some things to be organized e.g. loading Mavis Beacon on to all the computers (not as easy as it sounds!)

I thought about the discussions, and it seemed that what the kids needed was a toolkit. A research toolkit. No wait, a Research Toolbelt. This toolbelt could be symbolic but could contain all the basic research tools. It could run alongside things like graphic organizers and rich questioning techniques. It could be a symbol in our class. It could provide the kids with an easy and ongoing self-check of their current abilities in research and their next learning steps.

So what's in the Research Toolbelt?

1) Networked computers

2) A memory stick

3) Microsoft Word

4) Touch typing

5) Notetaking skills

6) Favourites folders on Safari (our internet browser)

7) Keywords to unlock information

8) Google skills

9) General reading skills

At this point we took the student pre-survey. The kids rated themselves on each of the tools in the toolbelt on a scale from 1-8. This was to fit into the SWELL poutama model.

I introduced the Research Toolbelt itself to the kids, they responded well and so we set to work upskilling everybody in its use.

That meant lots of timetabled lessons, some mandatory, some voluntary. It was also a time for plenty of practice.

Towards the end of the project we talked to the children about the idea of a directory of skills. We looked through the Yellow Pages and agreed that a small version could work in our classroom. Kids could advertise themselves in the directory. For instance they may be skilled in Microsoft Word and offer to help people in this area.

At the end of the term we took a post student survey and as teachers we evaluated as many children as we could in their competency at using the toolbelt.

Results:
Outcome: Competency:

On a scale of 1-8 how am I progressing in the use of the Research Toolbelt?

(16 respondents)...

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [1]
7. Beginning experts - at start [2]; at end [3]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [3]; at end [7]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [5]; at end [3]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [4]; at end [1]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [1]; at end [0]
2. Proficient novices - at start [0]; at end [1]
1. Beginning novices - at start [1]; at end [0]

Competency effect size = 0.33
Standard error = 0.61

As judged by the two teachers involved in the project (28 kids evaluated) how are the children progressing in the use of the Research Toolbelt?

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [3]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [3]; at end [6]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [5]; at end [4]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [3]; at end [2]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [4]; at end [4]
2. Proficient novices - at start [6]; at end [4]
1. Beginning novices - at start [7]; at end [5]

Competency effect size = 0.43
Standard error = 0.06

Conclusions:

The effect sizes in this Action Research are small as would be expected in such a short timeframe. However they are in the right direction and it was clear to the teachers involved that trends are emerging.

The children had developed a clear awareness of both the toolbelt itself, and how it could help them, as they attempt to access and share information that is personally fascinating to them. They were generally keen on new lessons on the toolbelt and we will be carrying them on over the next term.

The kids have taken very well to the touch typing computer program and most are now regular users.
Many children now wander round with memory sticks hanging from their neck
Despite the teachers being unable to network the computers thus far, two children worked out how to do it and are currently teaching the other children

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to develop their ability to seek and present new information?

By having a reason to do the work they do, by learning new skills and having the chance for mastery.

Question 2. Engagement: What impact can we have on student engagement using the symbol of a "Research Toolbelt"

The impact appears to be significant. The symbol itself was one the children could identify with. It was simple and humorous. The research tools themselves were generated by the children themselves, thus they wanted to learn how to use them.

Question 3. Competency: What impact does using the of a "Research Toolbelt" have on student ability to seek and present information?

The impact appears to be significant here also. The children can see clear pathways for their learning and the research tools themselves are directly useful to the children.

Ongoing elements:

In all the business of the project, we didn't sit down as a class and reflect: are the barriers to fun research lowering? We will though.

We will continue to build the symbol of the research toolbelt and the student directory of skills. The aim now is to weave them into the fabric of the class such that kids see that there are certain skills that will help them find those "wow" moments, and that they can find many places to seek help to attain them. It seems that this is happening already, for instance in how many children now wander around with their own memory stick. The aim is to have a "research savvy" group of learners. We have also developed a fortnightly presentation slot for their projects where previously they were presented on more of an ad hoc basis.

Co-operative Strategies - Better Learning?

2009-04-20T16:45:00.053+12:00

School: Houghton Valley

Year Level: Y6

Teacher: Peter Holmstead

Focus area: Co-operative Strategies - Participating and Contributing

To investigate ways to improve student capability to participate and contribute including:
- Student inter and intrapersonal skills
- Student ability to work cooperatively in a group
- Student ability to act on the outcome of their learning

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: Is implementing a wide range of co-operative strategies most effective or should students gain mastery of one or two?

Question 2. Engagement: In which co-operative strategies are the students most engaged?

Question 3. Knowledge: Which co-operative strategies significantly increase knowledge?

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Expert: Student can select, discuss, justify, create, predict and improve their knowledge of marine environments
Practitioner: Student can translate, classify, apply and explain knowledge gained when studying marine environments
Apprentice: Student can predict, compare or clarify information on marine environments
Novice: Student can recall, describe or list facts about the marine environment

Question 4. Competency: How able are students to select an appropriate co-operative strategy to apply to a task?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: can offer improvements on each co-operative strategy and justify their thinking
Practitioner: can choose which of the co-operative strategies to use depending on the task, and use it effectively
Apprentice: can describe how each of the co-operative strategies is organised and performed
Novice: can name, and participate in, the co-operative strategies/structures

Learning Story:

General Background
This action research project was chosen so we could develop and study students’ skills when participating and contributing. In 2008 Houghton Valley School undertook a year-long professional development based around the use of co-operative strategies. We decided as a school to learn about and develop a range of co-operative strategies and structures to assist students in developing thinking skills and group abilities.

Although there were dozens of strategies and structures at our disposal, we decided at a teacher-only day in February to focus on a ‘Top 8’ strategies and structures for 2009. These were chosen, through discussion, to be the most effective for a range of uses throughout the curriculum.

These would then be used regularly with students of all year levels, so that in future years they would become a normal part of everyday learning with the school day.
I am most interested in how well the students can master a range of strategies and then use them successfully by applying them to other learning areas. Can a student recognise when one strategy is a better choice than another? Can a student recognise when a strategy is not suitable for an activity? Which strategies best engage the students? Do any of our ‘Top 8’ need changing?

Project Implementation
It was decided to run this project over three terms, using three of the ‘Top 8’ strategies each term. In this way the students would use each strategy a number of times in close succession. I would be comparing the competencies of these students with those in other parts of the school who are using all the strategies spread across the whole year.

The initial part of this research was implemented within an Experiencing Marine Reserves (EMR) topic. EMR is a programme developed and funded by DOC to promote knowledge of the marine environment by getting students snorkeling within their local area and then comparing it to an established marine reserve, in our case Kapiti Marine Reserve. The Term Two topic will be another Science unit based around space exploration and technology, and the final Term Three topic will have a school production context of Social Science and Technology.

The three co-operative strategies chosen for Term One were:

The Donut – two rings of face-to-face students share knowledge then rotate and repeat
PMI (Plus/Minus/Interesting) – Groups analyse a subject into three categories
Venn Diagram – Groups compare and contrast the similarities and differences between two subjects

To gauge the students’ competency with these three strategies, I gave them each a pretest and analysed their answers, placing them into a spreadsheet which I will add to over the next two terms. Each term’s three strategies will have an accompanying pretest. I will assess their competency shortly after the end of each unit.

The initial competency pretest results from the EMR topic are in the following chart. 23 of the students are at the novice stage. They have some experience of some of the strategies as they were used by staff during the professional development in 2008. At the time this blog was posted, the post test had not been administered.

Throughout the term I provided opportunities to use each of the three strategies. As well as within the EMR topic, I used them in other curriculum areas such as writing and reading groups, news sharing, analysing school events, maths and sport.

Already it is apparent that the students can organize themselves quickly into a donut to discuss a subject or to share news. The PMI has wide-ranging uses and most students find the discussions worthwhile and engaging. They have begun suggesting that we use them in a range of contexts. The Venn diagram has the most limited uses, but there are times when a Venn is the best choice. For example, we used them to compare skills and rules between two ball games and it was interesting for the students to see how similar many games are.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 3.1
Asked questions - 2.9
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 3.5
Used positive body language related to task - 3.5
Persevered in order to enact related task - 3.4
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 2.9
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 3.2
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.8
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 3.5

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.1

Outcome 2. Knowledge (EMR context):

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end [#]
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end [#]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end [2]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 1; at end [6]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 3; at end [12]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 4; at end [7]
2. Proficient novices - at start 13; at end [2]
1. Beginning novices - at start 10; at end [2]

Knowledge effect size = 0.82
Standard error = 0.06

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end [#]
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end [1]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end [0]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end [7]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 3; at end [14]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 5; at end [6]
2. Proficient novices - at start 13; at end [1]
1. Beginning novices - at start 10; at end [1]

Competency effect size = 0.95
Standard error = 0.08

Conclusions:

This blog has been updated on May 17 with the above end data. It is clear that both the knowledge and competency of the students has increased considerably, going by the effect sizes of 0.86 and 0.95. The Term 2 competency pretest has been administered and shows that the students start with a greater understanding of the term's co-operative strategies than those of Term 1. I therefore expect the effect sizes to be smaller for Term 2. Once the knowledge pretest on Space has been administered, I will update this blog with the competency and knowledge data. Stay tuned!

Explicit Teaching of Inquiry

2009-04-16T11:46:00.015+12:00

School: Brooklyn

Year Level: 7/8

Teacher: Liz Rhodes

Focus area: Authentic Learning-To investigate ways to improve student capability to implement authentic learning with the inquiry process as per the Brooklyn School curriculum.

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can we develop student knowledge and awareness of the inquiry process in the Brooklyn School Curriculum?

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged were they during this process? How engaged were the students during this inquiry?

Question 3. Competency: How well do the student’s apply the inquiry process?
Can the student’s describe the steps in the inquiry process as per the Brooklyn School curriculum?
Can the student’s use the steps in the inquiry process as per the Brooklyn School curriculum?
How effective was this approach in assisting students to develop the capability to use the inquiry process?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: I can independently define the steps of the inquiry process, I know my strengths and weaknesses and I have a plan to work on my areas of weakness.
Practitioner: I can define the steps of the inquiry process and I can use each of these steps.
Apprentice: I can define the steps of the inquiry process and I can represent this to someone else.
Novice: I can define the steps of the inquiry process.

Learning Story:

1. The inquiry process is part of the authentic learning pillar of the Brooklyn School Curriculum. The inquiry cycle we use is based on the Information Process Learning Overview (ILPO) which includes 6 steps -Defining, Locating, Selecting and Analysing, Organising and Synthesising, Creating and Presenting through to Evaluating the work and planning for next steps.The first step of this action research process was to define the inquiry process at Brooklyn School as a continuum from year 1-8 based on ILPO. This entailed creating a resource for teachers/students to refer to. This resource would then be used for explicit teaching of the inquiry process.

2. The next step involved establishing a clear understanding of the inquiry process with staff involved in this project using the resources developed. (ongoing PD)

3. Baseline data was then gathered through individual conferencing with students of their understanding of the inquiry process. Students rated their understanding of each of the 6 steps of the inquiry process using the poutama.

4. I then collated the interview information. The questions I asked the students:
a). Can you tell me the steps of the inquiry process at Brooklyn School?
b). (Show the inquiry cycle) What happens at the defining stage, locating etc?
c). If descriptions of the inquiry process and the steps are accurate then ask them to describe how you would use the inquiry process to learn or to help you learn.

This photo represents the questioning process where the students are actively taking part in defining their focus for learning.

5. The Teachers directed an inquiry using the above resource to model each step. (Brooklyn School inquiry poster, the steps at each stage and then the overview of the expectations). During this research the children inquired into a topic however the process of the inquiry is the teaching focus. This will achieved through explicit teaching and modelling of the inquiry process and the expectations for year 7/8 children. Each class had a different inquiry focus.

Each part of the inquiry process was broken down with the students.

Collating the end product.

6. The interviews were repeated to measure student’s understanding of the inquiry process.
Questions for the students:
a). Can you tell me the steps of the inquiry process at Brooklyn School?
b). (Show the inquiry cycle) What happens at the defining stage, locating etc?
c). If descriptions of the inquiry process and the steps are accurate then ask them to describe how you would use the inquiry process to learn or to help you learn. It is important at this stage to point out that I could not rate a student as a 7 or 8 as an expert. This was because I didn't ask them what their strengths of weaknesses were. The class teachers did address this in class.

7. Collate interview information.

8. Compare before and after information- note changes and challenges.

9. Feedback results to staff and students. Areas of focus to be targeted in term 2.

Results:

Outcome 1. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [40]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [17]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [5]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [2]; at end [2]
2. Proficient novices - at start [6]; at end [2]
1. Beginning novices - at start [60]; at end [0]

Competency effect size = 2.05

Standard error = 0.14

Conclusions:

My research questions focussed on developing student's competence in applying the inquiry process. In the initial interview 60/68 students couldn't recall the inquiry process at Brooklyn School at all. The questions I asked were:

1. Can you tell me the steps of the inquiry process at Brooklyn School?
2. (Show the inquiry cycle) What happens at the defining stage, locating etc?
3. If descriptions of the inquiry process and the steps are accurate then ask them to describe how you would use the inquiry process to learn or to help you learn.

I did not need to ask this question in the baseline data phase as the student's depth of knowledge wasn't there. After 4 weeks of explicit teaching of the inquiry process I found a huge difference in the student's knowledge and understanding of the inquiry process. This was due to the teacher's having a deeper understanding of the inquiry process themselves coupled with explicit teaching of each step of the process. The classes discussed and defined each step of the process, allowing the students to gain in their understandings.

Here are some comments from the students when asked to describe how they would use the inquiry process to learn or to help them learn.

"Using the inquiry process can help you break down your inquiry into smaller parts so it is easier to find all your information. I think it was better to use the process so you can slowly got through the stages."
"I would use it in everyday life. I would look at individual steps and use parts in everyday life. It helps you think about what you are doing in assignments. It breaks down what you should do in your head to help you understand better."

My research questions were:

Implementation: How can we develop student knowledge and awareness of the inquiry process in the Brooklyn School Curriculum?

This can be achieved through explicit teaching.

Engagement: How engaged were they during this process? How engaged were the students during this inquiry?

This information was anecdotal: the students were all really positive about their understanding of the inquiry process. One teacher wrote up the steps in a poutama which the students found useful as they were then aware of the expectations for an expert in the defining stage etc. This is just like setting out the learning intentions and success criteria for the task.

The students found this really useful as they could see what was expected of them and could then make changes to their inquiries as the expectations were really explicit.

Competency: How well do the student’s apply the inquiry process? Can the student’s describe the steps in the inquiry process as per the Brooklyn School curriculum? Can the student’s use the steps in the inquiry process as per the Brooklyn School curriculum? How effective was this approach in assisting students to develop the capability to use the inquiry process?

Again these questions were answered with the results. Each of the 3 classes showed a significant improvement in the students capability in using the inquiry process.

This video sums up one child's response to the process.

Developing Thinkers From Year 1

2009-04-07T15:48:00.120+12:00

School: Newtown School

Year Level: Year 1

Teacher: Maria Whiting

Focus area: To investigate ways to improve student capability to manage self including: Student awareness of and ability to use key learning tools for their achievement level. We will be using De Bonos Thinking Hats as a thinking tool.

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can the use of a school wide Poutama promote and develop student ability to think?

Question 2.Knowledge: What impact does the use of a school wide Poutama have on student knowledge of traditions and cultures?

Question 3. Engagement: What impact does the use of a school wide Poutama have on student engagement?

Question 4.Competency: What impact does the use of a school wide Poutama have on student competency (ability) to use thinking hats to aid social inquiry?

Success Criteria for Knowledge. The school Knowledge Poutama for this topic was created by teachers. This report shows level one of the school wide poutama .

Expert: To be aware of their own strengths and weaknesses in their knowledge about a tradition in a culture and know that the next step is to explore 2 more traditions.
Practitioner: Be able to say why my tradition is important in my culture.
Apprentice: Be able to describe one or two facts about a tradition in my culture and tell someone else.
Novice: Be able to say one fact about a tradition in my culture / family.

Success Criteria for Competency The Competency Poutama was first introduced by the lead teachersin SWELL but has been further developed to include level four. This part shows Level one of the school wide poutama used.

Expert: Are aware of their strengths and weaknesses in using yellow, black and white hats and are aware that there are other hats to learn about to guide their thinking further.
Practitioner: Can apply yellow, black and white hats when directed to by the teacher (i.e. what are the black hat points).

Apprentice: Can describe what a yellow, black and white hats are used for (when asked).
Novice: Has used each hat in a whole class situation (practised and modelled)

Learning Story:

In the junior area we were learning to use De Bonos thinking hats as a tool to help us develop and to extend our thinking.

The aim for the junior children was to explore our topic of "Communities" and ask questions that reflected their culture, behaviours and values.

The broad aim was to understand how the past is important to people.

The key concepts were how customs of the past are reflected in peoples daily lives through cultural practices such as: behaviours, dress, art and food etc.

We started the research project by introducing the all the new entrant children to De Bonos thinking hats and taught the colours of each hat represented and how they could be used. Each teacher in all classes modelled the use of thinking hats. In the junior area we practised the use of De Bonos thinking hats in other curriculum areas such as maths, writing and art so children could see that the use of DeBonos thinking Hats could be used in variety of situations.

For example in reading we read a shared story called" This Leaf" ( a Ready to Read Reader) and we discussed as a group how a leaf that had been collected could be used in other creative ways. We went outside and wandered about the school and the park collecting different leaves that we found on our walk. We gathered the leaves and put them on a big tarpulin and sorted leaves into categories such as big, small, serated, smooth and rough (using our blue hats) etc. We decided as a class was 'what we wanted to learn was whether we could use the green thinking hat to think of creative ways to use our leaves in a creative collage'. The criteria was that each child had to think of something they could make and talk about and state what leaves they used in their creation?

We put on our green hats and brainstormed things we could do with the leaves that we had collected (new ideas). We wrote down our ideas. All the children were then given paper and were told to choose some leaves to explore and experiment with. They then glued on their leaves.

They made an assortment of things which they then bought back to the group to discuss and share while the teacher wrote up their other new ideas. Later we wrote stories using our pictures to give us inspiration.

We then spent the next 3 to 9 weeks practising up to four thinking hats and engaging in different ways to questioning our parents and grandparents about traditions and practices that they valued and shared with their families. This introduced our school wide topic of "Communities". The children were then to question their families weekly about traditional practices and cultural celebrations they as a family participated in. Then all the children were asked (through homework) to share their findings with the class orally and this lead to further parental involvement such as; parents came in to share some cultural practices that they wanted to share, such as 'Thanks giving', a Pacific Island dance, a talk on Chile and showing children and adults wearing different traditional costumes and how and when they are worn. Children used this information gathering to support their writing and for their reporting.

Big ideas:

Because our children are five years old and have recently started school so we decided our big ideas had to be personalised and realistic, therefore our questions had to reflect what they knew about the thinking hats.... this is what we our big ideas were:

What do I do that reflects my culture?

* That by asking deeper questions we can find out more information about our families cultural traditions and values.

What do we want our learners to understand by the end of this theme?

* That by using Debonos thinking hats we can develop our ideas about what we know about the past and present practices.

* Ideas about society:

* Understand that customs and traditions are part of cultural activities

* Know different cultural practices of other through behaviours and values

Results:

The results of our research project showed that all the junior children except one special needs child engaged and developed their thinking skills through the use DeBonos thinking hats. The children were all engaged in open discussion and were able to state what we used the thinking hats for and could give an example of how a particular hat could be used. The engagement strategy data shows the levels of improvement in the class from beginning to end.

We decided as a class that ' What we wanted to learn was whether we could use the green thinking hat to think of creative ways to use our leaves in a creative collage'. The criteria was that each child had to think of something they could make and talk about why they made and what leaves they used?

This is just an example of how the thinking hats was used in the class. There were opportunities every day to practice thinking hats but not all curriculum areas could be used all the time. In the junior area we focused on using De Bonos Thinking Hats or revising what we had used and practised, 3 or 4 times a week. the two New Entrant to year one classes worked together but the results shown today are only of one class.

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Offered ideas - 2.8
Asked questions - 3.1
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully -3.4
Used positive body language related to task - 3.2
Persevered in order to enact related task - 3.2
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 3.2
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 2.8
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 2.4
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 2.9

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.1

Outcome 2. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 0
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 0
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 0
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 3
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 0; at end 3
2. Proficient novices - at start 0; at end 6
1. Beginning novices - at start 13; at end 1

Knowledge effect size = 0.81
Standard error = 0.13

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 0
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 2
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 2
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 1
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 0; at end 4
2. Proficient novices - at start 5; at end 3
1. Beginning novices - at start 8; at end 1

Competency effect size = 1.04
Standard error = 0.16

Conclusion

The use of DeBonos thinking hats opened a lot of new ideas to the children in room 14 as the children were able to state...

Why customs and traditions matter to them (in their own words)
eg; My family has a hangi on Xmas day. It's because we are Maori and that is how we have shared kai(food). We cook it in the ground.

Know that my cultural values are reflected in the way I behave.

eg; I wear this special top and pants when I pray on Fridays. This is because in our religion we all wear this special costume and only men and boys can wear it.

Know how people follow customs and traditions when they participate in cultural activities eg; Powhiri, Waiata a ringa etc

All the children were able to use at least two thinking hats appropriately and were able to answer how" I participate in my cultural practices" by being able to make statements about what they had learnt eg:

the way I dress : "At weddings we dress up and wear our good clothes because a wedding is special and you have to be smart"!(Kawhena)

At fancy dress parties you have to dress up. I will dress as batman because you won't be able to win a prize if you don't dress up. Kids that don't have special clothes can come in fancy stuff, like their going out clothes". (Beau)

the food we eat: "We have boil up with pork bones and watercress because its yummy and because lots of Maori people eat it".( Angel)

" We eat pumpkin pie at Thanksgiving because its a tradition. My mum is from America and we have 'Thanksgiving". Pumpkin pie is nice.( Clemente)

the way we celebrate occasions:" We get dressed up for halloween in costumes like spiderman so we can go trick or treating. Only some people do this. Not everybody".(Zac)

" My family have a umu at parties.We have lots of food. It's got yummy food and then we have dessert. (written as stated) (Ian

the way my family likes to do things:" My family always has Sunday roast and Grandma and Poppa come because it's family day and we get to see Grandma and Poppa".(Rae)

"My family always go to church. We dress up and we

have a big feed after church. We always have to go because that's what we do together.
(Roxanne)

the way my family spend their leisure time: "We always play soccer together when we are at the park. My family likes to spend time together doing family things" (Matt)

"We go out together to the shops. we go to the warehouse and we all get something. We always go together. I like going out with my family.(Julian)

All the children except one could answer all the questions posed to them as they had taken home the questions to share with their families and had answers to bring back to school to share. This is because all the children participated in the thinking up of questions we could ask our families and extended whanau and because all the children could talk about their personal experiences and they felt comfortable about answering questions.

Giving children the tool to explore their own choices and to develop their thinking strategies has helped some of the children open up and be less resistant to sharing cultural experiences. It has given Esol students something to share even though language is a barrier all the children have had some new experiences and have have had the time to research their questions. All the children have accepted each others answers and have had no problem accepting differences in one another.

The use of thinking hats has promoted cultural acceptance and made children question things they normally would just accept and has helped us to answer our school wide research questions ( see questions at the bottom of page).

The data collected proves that De Bonos Thinking Hats is a very useful learning tool and it has given Newtown School a Competency Poutama that we can use in all curriculum areas. This research project is just the beginning of what the school could continue to achieve if we practise skills and strategies.

With practice the children have the potential to progress up the skills (Competency Poutama) rapidly and will be able help make and decide a Knowledge Poutama that helps them to assess where they are and make goals for future understanding.

NB: Photos shown include photos taken of other classes as well as the junior year one class.

Learning to Follow Instructions When Writing

2009-04-06T11:53:00.009+12:00

School: St Anne’s

Year Level: Years 2 – 6

Teacher: Jillian Porter & Peggy Bruce

Focus area:

Participating and Contributing: To investigate ways to improve student capability to participate and contribute including Intrapersonal Skill -Independently follow Instructions to Complete Writing Tasks:

Listen to the instructions given
Be able to repeat instructions
Remain seated at desk/table/mat
Work independently on the required task
Complete the writing task

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: What Strategies are needed to support children to follow instructions and complete the task given?

Question 2. Engagement: Are the children able to follow instructions and complete the task given at the beginning of the project?

Question 3. Knowledge: What impact does this have on their knowledge? What changes in knowledge have occurred as a result of the strategies used to support children to independently follow instructions and complete set writing tasks?

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Recounts – Year 2/3 (Both Observations) Year 5/6 (Final Observation):

Expert: Selects thoughts feelings and ideas that are personally meaningful in relation to an experience, beginning to add some detail and comments, as well as sequencing most ideas logically, linking events to indicate the passage of time
Practitioner: Selects thoughts feelings and ideas that are personally meaningful in relation to an experience. Demonstrates the use of some detail, and sequencing
Apprentice: Forms ideas about an experience and expresses these using mainly simple sentences and some compound sentences
Novice: Forms ideas and attempts to express these using simple sentences

Question 4. Competency: What changes have occurred in the children’s ability to independently follow instructions and complete set writing tasks?

Success Criteria for Competency:

Expert: I know what I need to do in order to complete a writing task, and am able to change what I do in order to improve my writing
Practitioner: : I know what will help me to complete a writing task, and am able to use this to help me finish the writing task
Apprentice: I can describe what I need to do in order to complete a writing task and can tell someone else what is expected
Novice: I am able to follow the criteria given in order to complete a writing task

Learning Story:

General Background: For this action research project we decided to work together as we both wanted to focus on ‘Participating and Contributing’, and link this within a writing context, as writing is our school wide focus for Professional Development.

Our reasoning behind the choice of ‘Participating and Contributing’ relates to a school wide concern that our children find managing themselves difficult in a general sense, and this has an enormous effect on their ability to ‘Participate and Contribute’ in their learning across all areas of school life.

Choice of Children: We chose three children from Year 2/3 and three from Year 5/6 who were of concern, to be our focus children for the project. The small number of children chosen was due to the short period of time in which to carry out this piece of research.

There were different reasons for the choice of ‘focus’ children within the two levels.

Year 2/3:

Children in this age group ‘generally’ are learning about how to participate and contribute within the classroom setting.
The specific children were finding this more difficult than their peers

Year 5/6:

Concerns about children who were seen as fitting within the ‘tail end’ and what kinds of support we need to provide them in order for their learning to move forward
The types of behaviour which they display; specifically - avoidance behaviour which each child is and has been exhibiting
The belief that we need to be more explicit when working with these particular children in order to support their learning.

Background on the Children Chosen in Year 2/3:

Two are year 3, age 7 years (Samoan, Assyrian)
One is year 2, age 6 years (Samoan)

Two year 2 children are both ex Reading Recovery children

The other child has difficulty articulating and has various illnesses which have kept him home extensively last year
All three children have difficulty concentrating, understanding and following instructions and consequently do not finish allocated tasks

Reading and writing is at approximately 1-2 years behind their peers for all three children
Orally all three children have difficulty articulating themselves, do not understand tenses, pronouns etc., and cannot repeat or follow a simple instruction without it made explicit.

Background on the Children Chosen in Year 5/6:

Two children are Year 5, age 8.10 and 8.11 (African, Samoan)

One child is Year 6, age 9.09 (African)

One child (Year 5) has had Reading Recovery
All three children have English as their Second Language
In reading and writing the children are working between 2 -4 years behind their peers

All three children display avoidance behaviour in all aspects of their learning
Orally the children have difficulty articulating themselves and find it particularly difficult to listen to, repeat and follow instructions and require additional support in all situations

The Goals and Expectations for this Research Project: The goals and expectations were focused around investigating ways to improve student capability to participate and contribute within the context of writing.

The main goal was to support the children with their ability to:
Independently follow instructions to complete writing tasks under the following criteria:

Listen to the instructions given
Be able to repeat instructions
Remain seated at desk/table/mat while engaging in the writing task
Work independently on the required task
Complete the writing task

The expectation was that there would be a shift in their ability to do this for themselves following specific support structures.

The Programme: The Year 2/3 programme involved the classroom teacher working with the three children during writing time.

The Year 5/6 programme varied slightly from the Year 2/3 programme in its delivery. The children worked with two teachers for the duration of the programme. One teacher introduced the activities to a small group of children (of which the three target children were a part) prior to the writing session each day. The same activity was then repeated within the classroom setting at the beginning of writing time by the classroom teacher. This included the whole class.

The logic behind this variation was to investigate whether the use of double doses would support the children in their ability to understand what was expected of them at writing time, and to provide them with further opportunities to practice those expectations.

Programme Outline:

Week 5 – Monday 2nd March
Initial Brainstorm – What do we do to manage ourselves during writing time?

Week 5: Tuesday 3rd March
Introduce the knowledge criteria:

Listen to the instructions given
Be able to repeat instructions
Complete the writing task
Remain seated at desk/table/mat while engaging in the writing task

Work independently on the writing task

Focus on specific criteria for each writing session beginning with no.1

Week 5: Wednesday 4th & Thursday 5th March
Criteria 1: Listen to the instruction given using the following process:

Discussion – introduce the specific criteria
Chinese Whispers

Play act – listening to instructions

Verbal word play – introduce Acrostic Poem

L - Look
I - I face the person speaking
S - Sit still
T - Take notice of what is being said
E - Expect to understand what is being asked
N - Need to ask questions when I am unsure

Week 5: Friday 7th March & Week 6: Monday 9th March
Criteria 2: Be able to repeat instructions

Revisit previous criteria (1)

Discussion – introduce criteria 2
Play act – give instructions or phrases for children to repeat

Play follow the leader – take turns giving instructions
Play Simon says

Week 6: Tuesday 10th & Wednesday 11th March:
Criteria 3: Remain seated at the desk/table/ mat while engaging in the writing task Revisit previous criteria (1 – 3)

Discussion – introduce criteria 4

Play act – give scenario’s for children to act out
Problem solving – What will I do if…..
E.g. my pencil breaks; something is bothering me; something else is happening in the classroom; I don’t know what to do; if someone else tells me to do something etc

Week 6: Thursday 12th & Friday 13th March:
Criteria 4: Work independently on the required task

Revisit previous criteria (1 -4)

Discussion – introduce criteria 5
Problem solving – What will I do if…. I don’t know what to do

I know that I can complete the task because …… I will ask myself “What are the steps I need to take?” (Criteria 1 – 4) …. And if I am unsure I will ask the teacher to explain the writing task again

Observations: Observations took place over a period of three days at the beginning and the end of the project. Each observation lasted for 20 minutes during the writing session and was broken into two sections.

Ten minutes during modeling time

Ten minutes during independent writing

Following each observation a photocopy was taken of the children’s writing after ten minutes.

Following the observations the data was transferred onto excel for analysis.

Results:
Outcome 1. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [0]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [1]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [1]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [3]; at end [1]
2. Proficient novices - at start [3]; at end [3]
1. Beginning novices - at start [0]; at end [0]

Knowledge effect size = 0.25
Standard error = 0.17

Outcome 2. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [0]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [1]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [1]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [3]; at end [2]
2. Proficient novices - at start [2]; at end [2]
1. Beginning novices - at start [1]; at end [0]

Competency effect size = 0.42
Standard error = 0.15

Conclusions:

Question 1 -Implementation: The question we asked was: ‘What Strategies are needed to support children to follow instructions and complete the task given?’

We established that the strategies needed to be clear and very explicit in order for the children to gain a greater understanding of what the instructions were in order to complete the task given.

The programme was structured in order that the learning was delivered in small and manageable chunks. The criterion was delivered so that the children were able to build up their knowledge in relation to one aspect at a time. This then was linked together again at the end of the programme.

Question 2 - Engagement: The question we asked was: Are the children able to follow instructions and complete the task given at the beginning of the project?
The initial observations showed that:

Competency – Modeling:

One child was a beginning novice (Year 5)
Two children were proficient novices (Year 6, Year 2)

Three children were beginning apprentices (Year 5, Year 3 x 2)

Knowledge – Independent Writing:

Three children were proficient novices (Year 6, Year 5, Year 2)

Three children were beginning apprentices (Year 5, Year 3 x 2)

The classroom teachers found that as they observed the children it became more and more apparent as to the extent to which they avoided participating within the writing programme. This was seen in both the modeling session as well as the independent writing session. The ways in which the children avoided participating varied from overt avoidance to very subtle ways which were not obviously seen.

In discussion it was agreed that all teachers felt that the children were not avoiding the work on purpose, but rather that the children had developed strategies to deal with continually not understanding what was expected of them. The result was a strategy of - continued avoidance of work.

Question 3 - Competency (Modeling): The question we asked was: What changes have occurred in the children’s ability to independently follow instructions and complete set writing tasks?

The results show that changes did occur in the two groups in both modeling (competency) and independent writing (knowledge). These changes are relatively small, however given the time frame it is evident that the programme did support the children to participate and contribute to a greater extent.

In order to have a greater effect it would beneficial to give more time to the implementation of the programme in order to greater support the children’s ability to participate and contribute during writing. In doing this we would need to further develop the activities within the programme, as this would allow for more opportunities for the children to practice and consolidate their learning.

Final Conclusions:

The results indicate that the strategies used within the programme were useful and allowed the children to build their knowledge. However, it became apparent that the project would need to be extended in order for greater gains to occur, and for the children to consolidate their knowledge and understanding.

Overall the children showed increased confidence in their ability to talk about what they were doing and in their attempts to write independently for themselves. There also was a shift in their enjoyment when writing and when talking with their peers, or if asking for assistance. This would indicate that their engagement is definitely greater when they fully understand the task given them.

Next Steps:

Continue the action research project in Terms 2 - 4 in order to consolidate the children’s knowledge and extend their learning with regard to participating and contributing.
Introduce the action research project as a whole school focus with all classroom teachers participating. The project will continue to focus on three target children; however the whole class will participate in the programme. This project will run for the duration of Term 2 – 4.
Following this the aim will be to deepen the children’s competency and knowledge in relation to the writing process. This will link into our Professional Development in Writing. This project will begin in Term One of 2010.

Co-constructing Poutama Ako with Year 5/6 Students

2009-04-05T17:41:00.017+12:00

School: Owhiro Bay School

Year Level: 5/6

Teacher: Thérèse Young

Focus area:

Authentic Learning: To investigate ways to improve student ability to develop assessment criteria for these key learning intentions.

Managing Self: To investigate ways to improve student capability to manage self by co-constructing and using a Poutama.

Research Questions:

Question 1: Implementation: How can Year 5/6 students be supported to learn how to develop and use poutama to reflect on their learning through establishment of class expectations and routines at the beginning of the year?

Question 2: Engagement: How engaged were students as they developed and used poutama when establishing expectations at the beginning of the year?

Question 3: Knowledge: Can they use a poutama to assess their knowledge of ‘Treasure or Waste’ – reduce, reuse, recycle?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: I…
Take risks and try to do my best at everything.
Know what to do if someone is annoying me.
Almost never break a rule in class and at school.
Know how to be a good role model.
Know the rules really well— and teach others to follow rules.
Know how to stay on task and remind others to stay on task.
Always shows respect to others.

Practitioner: I…
Know the rules.
May occasionally break a rule
Am mostly a role model to others
Work really well most of the time.
Focus my eyes and ears when someone’s talking.

Apprentice: I…
Listen to others most of the time.
Know most of the rules, learning the rest.
Can be really good at working but not always.
Role model some good behaviour.

Novice: I…
Am beginning to work independently
Am beginning to be on task
Am learning the rules in Room 3
Am learning how to behave
Am learning to control their voice.
Am learning to have all my stuff ready
Am learning the school rules.
Am beginning to listen to others.

Learning Story:

In our school this year we are looking at developing Poutama Ako with the students as a form of assessment. We are also looking at the Key Competency of Managing Self. I wanted to integrate these two areas, working with the students to develop a Poutama Ako to help them understand what Managing Self was all about, then use this as a basis for assessing other Curriculum areas, especially Science (our integrated focus for the year).

In weeks one and two we talked about routines and expectations within the classroom and school and created a class treaty.

Then we discussed what Managing Self is. We talked about what the new Curriculum said Managing Self was and what this might mean in our classroom.

I collected some baseline data using a questionnaire about the students understanding of a Poutama Ako, and the terms novice, apprentice, practitioner and expert.

From this I knew that the students needed to have a really good understanding of the terms novice, apprentice, practitioner and expert. So I asked them questions like “Who knows a lot about cars? Who is really good at making pancakes? Who is good at drawing, swimming, running?” and asked them to rate themselves using a ‘line up’ with the terms spread out on the floor.

Because the students had a good understanding of Managing Self and terms novice, apprentice, practitioner and expert we were able to co-construct a Managing Self Poutama Ako together.

The students then assessed themselves on the Managing Self Poutama Ako. They used this as a basis of their discussions for their three way conferences. They identified what they were currently doing and next steps they could take to improve their self management.

The next step in the research was to co-construct a Poutama Ako to assess the students’ knowledge in our Science unit on Recycling. What I discovered was that the students did not have enough knowledge about the topic to help develop the assessment tool.

So even though the students now have a very good understanding of how to assess themselves using a Poutama Ako and can develop a Poutama, I discovered that the students need to have a sound knowledge of the subject before co-constructing a Poutama. This means that if co-constructing a Poutama Ako with students it may be best used as formative and summative assessment tool rather than a diagnostic assessment.

Results:

I gave the students a questionnaire asking them to rate their knowledge of A Poutama Ako, A Noice, An Apprentice, A Practitioner, An Expert and Using a Poutama Ako at the beginning and end of the research project. The blue represents the beginning and the red the end. The results show a significant increase in their understanding of all the terms and how to use a Poutama Ako and what it is.

Conclusions:

Question 1: Implementation: How can Year 5/6 students be supported to learn how to develop and use poutama to reflect on their learning through establishment of class expectations and routines at the beginning of the year?

The students showed that they can develop and use poutama effectively to reflect on their learning. They can assess their learning using a poutama ako already developed in different curriculum areas, however if using as a diagnostic tool the students most probably won’t have enough knowledge to co-construct the poutama.

Question 2: Engagement: How engaged were students as they developed and used poutama when establishing expectations at the beginning of the year?

The students demonstrated high levels of engagement when developing and assessing themselves using the poutama. This was especially evident during their three way conferences where they discussed what a poutama was and what it meant with their parents. Parents commented that Managing Self was a skill many of them could work on at home and it was great to see that they had a framework to discuss this.

Question 3: Knowledge: Can they use a poutama to assess their knowledge of ‘Treasure or Waste’ – reduce, reuse, recycle?

The students showed that they can use a poutama to assess their knowledge of ‘Treasure or Waste’ – reduce, reuse recycle, but could not develop one with me as they did not have enough knowledge of the topic content to do this.

The video below shows one students know of Managing Self and how to use a Poutama Ako at the end of the research project.

Co-constructing success criteria in a new entrant - year one class

2009-03-17T09:11:00.015+13:00

School: Owhiro Bay School

Year Level: Year One/New Entrant

Teacher: Deanne Daysh

Focus area:

Authentic Learning: to investigate ways to improve student ability to develop assessment criteria for key learning intentions.

Managing Self: to investigate ways to improve student capability to mange self, particularly their ability to use Learning Poutama.

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can year 1 students be supported to learn how to use Poutama to develop independence within the classroom through the establishment of class expectations and routines at the beginning year?

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged were students as they developed and started to use a Poutama when establishing expectations and routines at the beginning of the year?

Question 3. Knowledge: For this research project the focus is mainly on engagement and the competency of managing self. However the students will need to have knowledge of the language of using a Poutama. So the knowledge question is ... Can Students use the language of a Learning Poutama?

Question 4. Competency: What impact does establishment of expectations and routines at the beginning of the year have on student competency to develop and use Poutama for self assessment?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: I am helpful and can help others do their jobs.I can listen to the teacher and do what the teacher says straight away.
Practitioner: I practice doing what the teacher says. I can do most things on my own with only a little help.
Apprentice: I listen to the teacher and do what the teacher says most of the time.
Novice: I do what they want and not what the teacher says.I am not helpful to others

Learning Story:

One of the main focuses for our school professional development for the year is for the staff and students to learn to use Poutama/ Rubric's to plan and assess with in their classrooms. Also for the staff and students to learn to use Poutama to self assess and plan next steps in the classrooms and for these Poutama to be co-constructed with the children.
So I wanted to 'give it a go' and see how effective the use of Poutama is in a class of New Entrant (five year old) children.

It was important to use a context that was relevant to both the students and the learning in the classroom for our first Poutama.

We chose to use the context of setting up routines and expectations in the classroom at the start of the year.

So what did we do?

In weeks 1 and 2 of term one we discussed with the students the class rules, expectations and routines. This lead to the creation of a class treaty.

Following on from this and also coming out of this discussion of expectations and routines was a list of “Things we need to do in our class to be good managers of self” so that we could get on to the task of learning.

The children came up with a list of four main things they need to do in the classroom to be independent learners who are ready to learn.

They were:
*Listen to the teacher
*Do what the teacher says
*Unpack/ pack your own bag
*Put away your reading book

At this stage I wanted to introduce the Poutama. However I was aware, having collected some baseline data using a questionaire, that none of the students had ever had any experiences with a Poutama before and had no knowledge of the meaning of the words associated with one e.g. they didn’t know what an Expert did, or a Novice, Apprentice or Practitioner. See the section below about data collection to see this data. So this became my starting point.

For a week I started using these words in the everyday tasks we did in class. Saying things like “You are such an expert at forming the letter ‘O’ from the top”, “You are a great Practitioner when you are pointing to the words in your reading book”.

Later that week I worked with the class to co-construct our first Poutama. After discussion,
these are the words that the students came up with:

I was excited and very happy as the students now seemed to have a good understanding of this.
The students were then able to self assess and place them selves on the Poutama.

As a class we were able to use this information to establish next steps for each child to work on.

We also referred back to the Poutama on a regular basis (and do so on going as well) to remind ourselves what we had to do to be an independent learner in Room 5.

The next step was to co-construct knowledge Poutama for our science focus – ‘Treasure or waste’.

Data Collection:

As I got started on this research journey I was aware that these New Entrant students had no knowledge of what a Poutama was. They also had a very limited understanding of what the ‘Poutama vocabulary’ was. So one of the first things I needed to do was to teach those words and vocabulary to them.

We developed an assessment form to assess their knowledge of this language.

The first assessment was done in Week one of the term.
This was done as a ‘Thumbs up/thumbs down activity”

The followng table records the number of students out of a class of 11 that knew what these words are/mean.

Questionnaire:
I know what a Poutama is… 0
I know what a novice is… 1
I know what an apprentice is…0
I know what a practitioner is… 0
I know what an expert is… 2
I know how to use a Poutama ... 0

We then assessed the students again two weeks later after they had been exposed to the language on a regular basis in the classroom.

Again we did this using a 'Thumbs up/ thumbs down' activity. The results were much different:
Out of the 11 students the following knew what they were/meant:

Questionnaire:
I know what a Poutama is… 11
I know what a novice is… 11
I know what an apprentice is…11
I know what a practitioner is… 11
I know what an expert is… 10
I know how to use a Poutama 11

A teacher assessment of the students engagement was also carried out at the beginning and at the end of the research. The data for this is included below.

Results:
Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 2.9
Asked questions - 2.9
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 2.8
Used positive body language related to task - 3.2
Persevered in order to enact related task - 2.4
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 1.4
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 1.0
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.2
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 1.5

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 2.6

Outcome 2. Competency:
Number of students who were ...
8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 2
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 1
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 1
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 3
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 2; at end 3
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 3; at end 0
2. Proficient novices - at start 3; at end 0
1. Beginning novices - at start 3; at end 0

Competency effect size = 1.36
Standard error = 0.29

Conclusions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can year 1 students be supported to learn how to use Poutama to develop independence within the classroom through the establishment of class expectations and routines at the beginning year?

The regular use of the language associated with a Poutama in the classroom through many different curriculum areas e.g. handwriting, writing, reading has been most effective in establishing a culture of 'using a Poutama' in the classroom. Initially using a relevant context such as the class routines was an important aspect of the success of the research. The students could relate to this and found it easy to then put in their own words what they needed to do. What the expectations of them were.

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged were students as they developed and started to use a Poutama when establishing expectations and routines at the beginning of the year?

The engagement of students definitely increased once the students knowledge of what a Poutama was and the other associated language e.g. expert, apprentice, practitioner, novice was understood. The co-construction of the Poutama with the students absolutely helped to increase their engagment. After the co-construction the students understood what each stage was and were able to quite quickly place themselves on the Poutama and identify the next step for themselves.

Question 3. Knowledge: Can Students use the language of a Poutama?

This was vital to being able to carry out the project. Spending time developing, using and extending their knowledge of the Poutama language and then of how they could then rank themselves using a Poutama was very important. This needed to be done on a daily basis over the weeks and will need to continue daily to keep this knowledge current and relevant, especially as the class continues to grow with new entrant students arriving each week.

Question 4. Competency: What impact does establishment of expectations and routines at the beginning of the year have on student competency to develop and use Poutama for self assessment?

Having completed the research I have realised the impotance of having a context for the students to use (especially for the first time they use a Poutama) that is relevant to them and one they could quite easily relate to and be able to use each day. Choosing to use the expectations and routines of the classroom was a great choice of context as this was easily reinforced to the students through out each day they were at school. It became part of what we did and talked about each day. This made self assessing much easier for the students and they were also familiar with the Poutama by the time they did this assessment. The class are now ready to co-construct a Poutama for our next topic.

Developing Learning Intentions

2009-03-13T15:25:00.016+13:00

School: Ridgway

Year Level: 3-4

Teacher: Rod Scott

Focus areas: Authentic learning and Participating and Contributing

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to develop the ability to prepare their own Learning Intentions.

Question 2. Engagement: What is the shift in engagement as a result of the intervention.

Question 3. Knowledge: What is the growth in knowledge as a result of the intervention.

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Expert: Aware of strengths and weaknesses in the celebration and can plan to improve
Practitioner: Can analyse and use knowledge to create a celebration
Apprentice: Can describe a celebration to someone else
Novice: Can name NZ celebrations

Question 4. Competency: What is the shift in competency in creating LI’s using the trial method

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: Can critique the strengths and weaknesses of the Learning Intentions and plan to improve.
Practitioner: Can use the process to create relevant and meaningful Learning Intentions
Apprentice: Can describe the process to someone else
Novice: Is aware of the process to set Learning Intentions

Learning Story:

Broad Aim

Our broad aim was to investigate ways to improve student ability to prepare Learning Intentions for a programme of work.

Context

As part of the school wide Inquiry work on Celebrations and specifically the deep understanding of “Cultures celebrate the same things in different ways” we looked at what we as a country celebrates and how we could compare it to similar celebrations in other cultures. Our investigation looked specifically at the effect of a particular method for helping children develop skills in preparing their own Learning Intentions.

Assessment

Children self assessed using the criteria above, both before and after the intervention. It was assumed that all children would be at 0 at the outset of the project because of their age and lack of exposure to the method being used. Therefore everyone was a beginning novice with regard to competency in the process of creating their own Learning Intentions.
A specific pre unit engagement survey on input into Learning Intentions was carried out and will be followed up at the end of the unit.

Method

To implement this research we :

1.Split the 4 classes (B2 B3, C1 and C2) into vertical cross groups based on age and maturity. These became their cooperative learning groups.

2.Established the children’s prior knowledge of celebrations in N.Z. using a variety of tools including: Know/Don’t know/Like to find out charts, Brainstorms, De Bono’s thinking Hats and Fishbones.

3.We then provided the class with a range of tune in activities around celebrations that provide a variety of experiences to engage the student’s interest. These included

Youtube clips of a range of celebrations
Children's families and their celebrations

Comparing and contrasting similar celebrations in different countries

Brainstorms on types of celebrations

4. We then determined what the children want to find out more about. We did this by using a variety of sources such as the internet, National Library and school books to help brainstorm all the things that interested them and what they wanted to find out. We then grouped the interest areas into broad categories.

5. After that the cooperative groups looked at using how, what, when, where, why, and who ideas to turn the areas of interest into questions.

6. The children then prioritised the questions in order of interest/importance. We then discussed how we could relate these questions back to our original deep understanding of “Cultures celebrate the same things in different ways”. The discussion at this point needed some clear guidance about how to frame a question so it would reflect what we were aiming to achieve. We looked at a number of ways but settled primarily on a compare and contrast structure.

7. We then tried to turn the questions around into “We are Learning to….” statements. This proved to be a difficult step for most of the children to follow. The idea that a Learning Intention was like a title that covered lots of different questions took a while to grasp. We eventually got there by modelling book titles and how they related to the book contents. The year 7 and 8 leaders were then able to grasp that the idea of a LI wasn't as specific as they first thought. They came to the realisation that a single LI was able to cover many different ideas and questions under a single umbrella. This is still a work in progress however as there was a lot of guidance, questioning and facilitating required on my part to get them to this point.

The Learning Intentions we eventually decided on were:

We are learning to:

Find similarities and differences between celebrations in different cultures or religions
Find out how different cultures use food and dance in celebrations
Compare how different cultures celebrate harvests

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 3.2
Asked questions - 3.1
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 2.8
Used positive body language related to task - 2.2
Persevered in order to enact related task - 3.9
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 1.2
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 3.6
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.9
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - to be completed post topic

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.01

Outcome 2. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0 at end [#]
7. Beginning experts - at start 4 at end [#]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0 at end [#]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 5 at end [#]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 4 at end [#]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 8 at end [#]
2. Proficient novices - at start 4 at end [#]
1. Beginning novices - at start 2 at end [#]

Knowledge effect size = To be determined at post unit assessment

Standard error = To be determined at post unit assessment

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0 at end [#]
7. Beginning experts - at start 0 at end [#]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0 at end [#]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0 at end [#]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0 at end [#]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 0 at end [#]
2. Proficient novices - at start 0 at end [#]
1. Beginning novices - at start 0 at end [#]

Competency effect size = To be determined at post unit assessment

Standard error = To be determined at post unit assessment

Reflections and Conclusions:

Implementation: How can students be supported to develop the ability to prepare their own Learning Intentions.

By giving the students a clear method to follow with regard to determining their own Learning Intentions the class was able to follow the process with relative ease through the initial phases of tuning in, exploring a range of different types of celebrations and thinking about what interested them. With the structure of How, What, When, Why and Who questions they were able to turn the areas of interest into some specific questions. Difficulties arose however in trying to relate their questions back to the deep understanding of " Cultures celebrate the same things in different ways". The idea of comparing and contrasting a variety of celebrations rather than just concentrating on what happens in a specific celebration took a bit of guidance and intervention on my part. Because the children were focussed on areas they were interested in it took a while to get them to the point of looking at the bigger picture.

Engagement: What is the shift in engagement as a result of the intervention.

There is no concrete data yet on the shift in engagement as this is not a one term project. Anecdotal evidence from the tone of the classroom and the observations I made would suggest however that the students were well motivated by the thought of being able to direct their own learning. In the introductory statements and initial lessons I deliberately asked the question of whether they would prefer to learn about things that interested them with regard to celebrations or what I decided they needed to know. Not surprisingly they were unanimous in wanting to direct their own learning. As we progressed I continued to remind them about what we were trying to achieve in this regard. It was obvious to me watching the interactions of most of the class that they were involved in the discussions, the cooperative group participation checkers reported few chidren who were off task and their was a good "buzz" and feel to the class activities.

Knowledge: What is the growth in knowledge as a result of the intervention.

There is no data for this yet as we are still in the finding out process of the unit. I will be posting this data and relevant conclusions when available.

Competency: What is the shift in competency in creating LI’s using the trial method

This was the most difficult area to gauge. As we have only done the process once there won't be any conclusive data until we use the same or revised method again and observe how the children cope with the method. It has become apparent however that the children struggled at the point of turning their many specific questions into broad learning intentions. With hindsight this is not surprising as the staff at the school took a years worth of professional development in setting relevant learning intentions and success criteria and we were trying to guide the children in the same direction over the course of 3 or 4 weeks!

The children needed a lot of support in turning their questions into LI's. As mentioned earlier they found it difficult to get the idea that a single LI could cover many different types of question. For future use it seems apparent that the students need to have a clear understanding of what a learning intention is by posting a definition on the whiteboard. They see them every day however in those instances the LI's are given to them so they don't necessarily have to think about them. A possible definition to help the children might be that an LI is a short or medium term goal for their learning. It can be specific if being used to teach a certain skill or in the case of an Inquiry topic a broader goal that covers the areas of interest.

Where to next?

Now that the children have developed the LI's we are now ready to begin the finding out phase. It is our intention to use the knowledge gained through this process to create our own Ridgway celebration that reflects the variety of cultures present in the school and utilises some of the ideas the children will have gained from their research.

Watch this space!

Using 'Fishbone' Organisers in our School Production

2009-02-25T20:43:00.022+13:00

School: St. Bernard's School

Year Level: 2,3,4

Teacher: Philippa Rogers

Focus area: Managing Self: To investigate ways to improve student capability to manage self including student awareness of and ability to use key learning tools for their achievement level e.g. organisational and thinking tools

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to develop their ability to use a ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser through repetitive use in the class writing programme?

Question 2. Engagement: What impact does using the ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser have on student engagement?

Question 3. Knowledge: What impact does using the ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser have on the student knowledge of the various components of a school production?

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Expert: Be aware of strengths and weaknesses of components of a production and have a plan to improve this knowledge.
Practitioner: Be able to use the knowledge about components of a production and to help run a production.
Apprentice: Be able to organise knowledge about components of a production and represent this as a report.
Novice: Be able to retrieve information on components of a production.

Question 4. Competency: What impact does using ‘fishbone’ graphic organisers repetitively in the language programme have on student competency to use the tool in other knowledge areas?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: Be aware of strengths and weaknesses of a ‘fishbone’ organiser and develop a plan to improve their ability to use a fishbone.
Practitioner: Be able to analyse when to use a ‘fishbone’ organiser and apply it to help them learn.
Apprentice: Be able to describe the characteristics of a ‘fishbone’ to someone else.
Novice: Be able to use a ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser as a thinking tool.

Learning Story:

The students began with using an ‘information web’ organiser to brainstorm ideas on what they know about what is involved in putting on a production.

The second task was to present to the class a blank ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser (the students had not used one of these before) and without prior teaching, allow the students to organize their ideas around a recent school event. At the outset not many students knew how to use this type of thinking tool and most could not complete it successfully in the time allocated.

(19 children out of 22 were recorded as Novices from the intial task)

The ‘Learning Poutama’ rubric was explained and displayed on the whiteboard.( I used a blank Poutama and copied and pasted in my Knowledge and Competency success criteria from my 'Action Research Planning template' - I think it is important that our children too can learn and speak the language we are using as teachers).

Next learning steps were discussed and how they could achieve or progress to each stage.

During the writing programme, ‘fishbone’ organisers were used on various topics of work, e.g. visits from outside speakers, personal views, current events, etc. This process helped to increase the students understanding of how to use this thinking tool.

During this action research, our school production was in full swing and lots of discussion centered around the many components of managing a show. Each notice that went home asking for help with either costumes, sound, props, lighting, makeup,etc were talked about and analysed. The children worked in co-operative groups to brainstorm ideas on what needs to be organised for the different components of a school production.

At the end of the research, students created a report on their knowledge about components of a production. They were required to use a fishbone thinking tool to help them write this report independently.

I interviewed the students as they were completing their ‘fishbone’ about the strengths and weaknesses of using this tool ('expert' level).

From their report, I could assess what stage they had reached (not expecting 'practitioner' level as the school production was not their own).

However, soon after the class got the opportunity to write how they would run a class play and what components they would need to consider – this was a great way to assess whether they were a practitioner or an expert.

Students also completed an ‘engagement’ questionnaire after we had finished our topic.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 3.3
Asked questions - 2.7
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 3.9
Used positive body language related to task - 3.8
Persevered in order to enact related task - 4.0
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 2.7
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 3.4
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.7
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 3.5

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.4

Outcome 2. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [0]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [9]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [7]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [0]; at end [5]
2. Proficient novices - at start [8]; at end [2]
1. Beginning novices - at start [15]; at end [0]

Knowledge effect size = 1.33
Standard error =0.09

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [4]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [5]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [6]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [3]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [3]; at end [2]
2. Proficient novices - at start [11]; at end [2]
1. Beginning novices - at start [8]; at end [0]

Competency effect size = 1.54
Standard error =0.16

Conclusions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to develop their ability to use a ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser through repetitive use in the class writing programme?

Once the students had used a 'fishbone' organiser initially, we discussed as a class how it could be effectively used to record their ideas. We looked at different samples of the children's work and made class 'fishbones' during our language programme.We discussed the advantages and disadvantages of using this graphic organsier. The process helped immensely with the understanding of this great thinking tool.

Question 2. Engagement: What impact does using the ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser have on student engagement?

It certainly focuses the students on their work and their ideas were a lot more specific than in previous brainstorming activities. As the 'fishbone' organiser was used more frequently, the students settled quickly to the task assigned to them - the children were very engaged and interested in their learning.

Question 3. Knowledge: What impact does using the ‘fishbone’ graphic organiser have on the student knowledge of the various components of a school production?

This was a great topic to link into 'fishbone' graphic organisers as it was able to be broken into the different components quite easily. After unpacking the various aspects of a production in co-operative groups, most students could readily transfer this information onto a 'fishbone' organsier.

Question 4. Competency: What impact does using ‘fishbone’ graphic organisers repetitively in the language programme have on student competency to use the tool in other knowledge areas?

After using this thinking tool in their writing programme, I gave them other opportunities to use the 'fishbone' organiser, i.e. in the Health programme, Religious Education activities and in homework tasks ( here they also had to explain to their parents the characteristics of a 'fishbone', reinforcing the 'apprentice' stage).Co-operative group activities,using an enlarged 'fishbone' template,worked well and was very successful.

Final comment

The competency data shows that at the beginning of the unit 86% of students were at the novice level. They had limited ability or knowledge on how to use a ‘fishbone’ thinking tool effectively. By the end of the Term 68% of the class had become practitioners or experts.

The students’ knowledge about components of a production was also limited at the start (all at the Novice level), but this increased as our school production and lots of discussion took place during the unit. As the show was basically run by teachers it did not allow the opportunity for the children to become experts, but nearly 40% of students achieved at the practitioner level.

The children were highly engaged and enthusiastic throughout this unit and were very motivated to run a production of their own – unfortunately time did not allow this to happen, but would have been great to carry the activity through on another occasion.

Laptops as key learning tools

2009-02-20T09:33:00.017+13:00

School:St Frances de Sales

Year Level: Whole School Focus

Teacher: Joan, Lisa, Louise

Focus area: Managing Self

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How effective is an interactive book as a tool for presenting students' knowledge?

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged are students when interacting with classroom laptops?

Question 3. Knowledge: (only at junior level) What makes a good park?

Question 4. Competency: How effective was the unit in developing student competency to create interactive books?

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Expert: An expert can recall, describe, retrieve, create, learn and explore through another learning area using the knowledge they have gained. They are aware of their strengths and weaknesses.
Practitioner: A practitioner can recall, describe, retrieve and create from their knowledge.
Apprentice: An apprentice can recall and describe the experience and give some detailed information that elaborates on its characteristics from one of the domains .
Novice: A novice can name, recall and label their experience with some clarity.

Learning Story:

COWS FOR RESEARCH

With the arrival of two COWS (computers on wheels) we took the opportunity to investigate the best ways we could integrate ICT and the use of these twenty laptops, into our school wide inquiry practice. A major component of this was our focus on Managing Self as our Key Competency. 'Student awareness of and ability to use key learning tools for their achievement level (eg organisation tools, process tools, thinking tools, learning habits, technology, presentation tools, etc)'

The school has also employed a digital media facilitator, who is experienced in using ICT with children, to work in the school two days per week.

During Term 1, all syndicates were involved in EOTC experiences. The students were asked to identify an area of personal interest or curiosity that resulted from their experiences during EOTC exploration. Success criteria was developed with the students so that they were aware of the ways that they could present their findings. A student rubric for creating an interactive book was then developed.

To measure student knowledge and competency at the middle and senior level, students were asked to identify themselves on this rubric. Children at these levels had a range of abilities within the four aspects (text, sound, toolbars, content) of an interactive book that we choose to focus on. At middle and senior level, all students retained their rubric so they could refer to it as success criteria and to help them identify their next steps.

At junior level, data on individual student ability was gathered using teacher observation. This identification of student abilities gave teachers data to work from and to be able to deliver a targeted digital media facilitated programme.

As part of self management and self regulative learning, the rubric and observation allowed students to select skills they needed to develop to be successful and achieve against the set levels in the rubric.

Year 2 Class

The year 2 class were studying "Our Community" and used a visit to the local park as a context for this unit. The unit involved the following sessions

Session 1
Discuss with students what they know about Shorland Park
Introduce flash cards with - who what when where why how
Gather baseline information on children’s knowledge of the park Children draw or write their own ideas about what they know about Shorland Park.
On the back of the page teacher records child’s ideas
Create class chart of ideas about Shorland Park before visit
Create wall display with class chart and word cards
Session 2 Visit to park
Prior to visit tell children that they will need to visit all areas of the park and find out the names of things they do not know
At park divide class into small groups – each group lead by an adult will visit all activities at the park
Session 3
Using photos from park visit classify into different areas of the park
Children choose a photo that represents the park and write a caption for the photo
Session 4
Show children how to insert a photo into PowerPoint page and add text
Support children in finding a photo and inserting it into their page
Children add text to the photo
Session 5 (assess competency)
children find their photo
add their text to their photo
share the presentation with others
Session 6 (knowledge assessment task)
Recall what children remember about the Park
Children design their own ideal park
Provide art resources for children to create their own ideal park or park activity
Session 7
Children share their designs with other students in the school.

At the Year 2 level children were scaffolded by creating a template page for students to place their picture and text into, allowing time for them to explore finding and inserting pictures, and allowing time for them to explore working with text. A high adult to student ratio of 1:8
was used. At this level one presentation was created by the whole class with individual students contributing one page each.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Junior

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 3.3
Asked questions - 3.2
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 3.3
Used positive body language related to task - 3.7
Persevered in order to enact related task - 3.8
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 3.0
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 2.3
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.2
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 2.3

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.3

Year 5 /6

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 3.0
Asked questions - 2.9
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 3.4
Used positive body language related to task - 4.5
Persevered in order to enact related task - 4.9
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 3.8
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 4.1
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.7
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt -4.9

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 4

Year 7/8

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - 3.4
Asked questions - 2.6
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 4.0
Used positive body language related to task -4.8

Persevered in order to enact related task - 4.1
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time -2.9
Showed interest in directing their own learning -3.3
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 1.4
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 4.0

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.8

Overall school mean level of engagement of students = 3.7

Outcome 2. Knowledge

24 year 2 students were assessed against knowledge.

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 0; at end 0
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 0; at end 3
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 0; at end 2
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 17
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 0; at end 2
2. Proficient novices - at start 7; at end 0
1. Beginning novices - at start 17; at end 0

Knowledge effect size = 1.48

Standard error = 0.09

Outcome 3. Competency:

Year 7/8 students

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [1]; at end [1]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0; at end [4]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [2]; at end [11]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [4; at end [4]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [4]; at end [3]
2. Proficient novices - at start [11]; at end [3]
1. Beginning novices - at start [6]; at end [2]

Competency effect size = 0.79

Standard error = 0.15

Year 5/6 students

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0; at end [0]

7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]

6.Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [3]

5. Beginning practitioners - at start [3]; at end [13]

4. Proficient apprentices - at start [4]; at end [7]

3. Beginning apprentices - at start [7]; at end [6]

2. Proficient novices - at start [16]; at end [1]

1. Beginning novices - at start [0]; at end [0]

Competency effect size = 0.8

Standard error = o.09

Conclusions:

Question 1. Implementation: How effective is an interactive book as a tool for presenting students' knowledge?

All students successfully shared their work with peers and with an audience. The school held an open morning where parents and caregivers along with classes were invited to come along and view the students final pieces of work. It was observed that this opportunity gave children who were reluctant to speak in front of an audience a positive experience in sharing their newly acquired knowledge and work. Having the opportunity to present visually meant that the audience was captured immediately with sound, graphics, moving images etc.

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged are students when interacting with classroom laptops?

Effect size shows that this was an effective tool in all areas of the school. Student engagement was very high throughout all levels. An observer could walk into any level of classroom that was using laptops and see all students fully engaged with their inquiry. Other factors that contributed to the effectiveness were:

a new technology in the school

an ICT facilitator

easy and immediate access to instant research through www

Question 3. Knowledge: (only at junior level) What makes a good park?

At this level, student knowledge was enhanced by visiting and taking photos at a local park. The experience of viewing photos and working to create a page on a PowerPoint proved to be a powerful tool in helping to make students aware of the elements that could be found in parks. This then provided them with the motivation to design their own ideal park.

Question 4. Competency: How effective was the unit in developing student competency to create interactive books?

Data from students' self assessment sheets and teacher observation showed a notable increase in student competency in creating an interactive book. The level of ability changed at the different levels of the school. The junior students still required support but were able to carry out some steps independently.

At year 5/6 the children put a lot of time into researching their chosen area. This meant that there was time spent learning how to research and the time spent in developing skills for the interactive book was limited. In future leaning experiences more time would be allocated to developing the knowledge on how to create an interactive book.

Students in year 7/8 had a higher level of knowledge when using both ICT and research skills. This meant that they had the opportunity to explore more of the components in the student rubric either independently or with the support of the ICT facilitator. Some students chose to develop their competency in one specific area eg: text, sound, tool bars or content while others worked across a number of areas in the rubric.

Managing Self

The use of ICT proved to be an effective tool for teachers to observe students self managing. It was easy to see that children were engaged in their learning, for example, questioning each other and discussing how they could take their next step.

To BE the BEST I can BE

2009-02-12T13:58:00.016+13:00

School: St Anne's

Year Level: 2

Teacher: Peggy Bruce

Focus area: Managing Self

Broad Aim: To develop student’s competency to Manage Self by raising awareness of how they can improve their learning by the choices they make with regards to classroom and personal behavioural protocols.

Fundamental managing self skills aimed for;- being prepared for lessons, working cooperatively to solve problems, asking questions not only from the teacher but from their peers, sharing equipment and ideas, participating and encouraging each other to participate, listening and following instructions, being responsible for their own and others behaviour, striving to finish their work, and having a sense of pride by doing their best.

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How can students be supported to develop the ability to manage themselves at the year 2 level?

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged are students when they are involved in identifying classroom and personal behaviour protocols, and will this lead to improved learning?

Question 3. Competency: What is the growth in competency that can be expected from students around adherence to classroom and personal behaviour protocols?

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: I can manage my self in many different situations. I can explain about managing myself in the classroom, ask for help when required and help others in many different situations.
Practitioner: I can use my awareness to help others and to help myself. I can explain about managing myself in the classroom, and help others to make choices.
Apprentice: I can manage myself and I can explain it to others. I can explain to you about managing myself in the classroom.
Novice: I am becoming aware of what it means to manage myself within the classroom environment. I know what choices I have when managing myself in the classroom.

Learning Story: Managing self so I can learn better

Since this research project started in Term 1, I decided to integrate it with our Syndicate topic; ‘Relationships,’ from the Curriculum area, Health & Physical Well-being. The Key area was Learning Mental Health and the Achievement Objective, “A Positive and Responsible Attitude to Self”. The key competency was Managing self with a particular focus on understanding what it means to be part of a learning community.
I outlined my expectations of how I wished my class to learn:

1. Academic: Taking ownership of their learning through:-

Finishing tasks
Persevering (sticking to task)
Asking questions
Participating
Understanding and acting on the learning strategies being modelled in class, for example, Learning Intentions and Success Criteria thinking skills etc.

2. Behaviour: Taking ownership of their behaviour through:-

Listening
Being prepared – for example having their pencil – books etc. ready.

3. Classroom Environment: Taking ownership of their environment and showing respect through:-

Keeping the class and their desks tidy
Being kind, helpful and thoughtful to everyone in the class.

4. My Own Expectations:

For the children in the class to take responsibility of their own learning, behaviour and environment throughout the day despite having a variety of different teachers in the class.
To provide an environment, an expectation, and an understanding in my class that the children can learn through having awareness of what it requires to become independent life long learners.

I began the process by brainstorming to identify what they understood about classroom and personal behaviour and what exactly did it mean to “Manage My Self so I can learn better?” Students came up with the following ideas.

Keeping my class tidy
Finishing my work on time
Thinking about what I am doing
Listening on the mat
Following instructions when given
Looking after my own things
Being prepared
Being helpful
Asking questions

After the initial brainstorm the children chose the goals that they felt were the most important for us as a class to concentrate on, and these became the basis of my assessment.

The Goals:-

Finish my work on time;
Put my hand up when I want to ask a question;
Keep my class tidy by putting things back where they belong.

To assess the children I used a before an after template for each goal. The template had two rows of five boxes for each goal. The boxes were labeled "always", "often", "sometimes", "not very often" and "never". The top row of top boxes was used at the start of the project, while the bottom was used at the end of the project.The children were asked to colour one box they felt was appropriate to show where they were at, at the beginning of the project and another colour and box at the end of the project.

I allocated and counted points for each child using the following scale:

1 = never; 2 = not very often; 3 = about half the time; 4 = often; 5 = always

I added the number of children in each category and correlated scores with the SWELL Competency Poutama using the following scale:

15 points = level 8, 14 points = level 7 and so on with Level 1 being 8 points or less.

I did this at the beginning and at the end of the project.

Following the initial assessment I planned a number of lessons in order to support the children’s understanding about Managing Myself.

- What does it mean to ‘Manage Myself”
- How we can manage ourselves in the class.;
- Why we need to manage our selves in the class?
- What are the consequences of managing ourselves in the class?

We also worked on a class motto so that the children felt that their class and every one in the class was an extension of their own family.

“Room 1 is our home away from home
And every one in Room 1
Is my family away from home."

Always all our brainstorms and ideas were written up in the children’s topic book or published and displayed in the classroom. The initial brainstorm was broken down further as follows

Keeping my class tidy - how? - Pick up and clean after myself
Finishing my work on time - how? Focus on my work by not talking
Thinking about what I am doing - how? - Knowing the learning intention and criteria
Listening on the mat - how? - Pay attention to the speaker and put hand up to talk
Following instructions when given - how? - Understand the instruction
Looking after own things - how? - Keep my things in my desk bag
Being prepared - how? - Having my books and pencils ready
Being helpful - how? - Help someone who doesn't know something
Asking questions - how? - If I don't know something ask teacher or someone in the class

These became our classroom goals to aspire to on a daily basis. For example our daily Learning Intention might be:

We Are Learning To: keep our class tidy
Success Criteria: putting equipment back where they belong.

The daily Learning Intention was decided on in the morning and displayed. At the end of each day we had a class reflection to see if we were successful. If not then the children would elect to keep the same goal for the next day. The classroom reflection at the end of the day became a vital key to the children’s engagement by making them aware of their actions. It allowed them to think and verbalise what they had done during the day.

The second part of the reflection was to think of new things they learned during the day and slowly over the term their answers became more detailed and specific. This part of the day had become an important time and the children insisted I included it daily in our timetable and reminded me If I had forgotten!

Because of the age of the children it was important that their knowledge of the Swell Learning Poutama was clear, this was done through drama activities and or discussions with a buddy, through art work and writing in their story books, then placing themselves where they thought they belonged on the chart.

Part of our daily ritual was to revise our learning Intentions about managing myself, a checklist was kept on display for the children to reflect on.

When I am Managing My Self do I? ------

Do the best in my work
Finish my work on time
Ask for help when I need it
Help others
Keep my class tidy
Listen when others talk
Ask questions if I don’t know something
Think about and give ideas
Follow instructions straight away
Look after my pencils and books so I can be ready for the lesson

To allow the thinking and reflecting process to continue daily and assess the children I formulated these questions to be used In our story writing.

What does it mean to manage myself by making the right choices?
What are some ways I can manage myself in the class?
Why do I need to manage my self in the class?
What are some ways that I can be helpful in the class?
My goals for managing self are?
List the class goals that you wish us to follow and how we can do this?
Ways that I can manage myself at school but out of our class?

We used the following Learning Experiences in our class:

Play acting games to show how we manage ourselves in various situations
e.g. propose a situation and in their group to think and solve the problem and present to class.
Games, art work etc that allows them to work, solve problems together, etc.
Artwork showing themselves in different situations and the work was then displayed.

Children sat in a circle and identify ways that they can contribute to the class, e.g. keeping classroom tidy, speaking quietly, helping others, follow instructions.
Published writing which was displayed.
Photographs depicting pictures the children at work, at play, during prayers, assembly, mass etc.
Write a “I can Manage Myself” song.
Different topics that we can brainstorm and they can write in their own words and decorate e.g. “Ways to stay Fabulous in Room 1”
Brainstormed words that empower, e.g. “POWER WORDS” and displayed.
A weekly “Star of the Week” was chosen to be the ‘teacher’s special helper.’ The children recalled positive characteristics about the child and we would write them on a special paper which was displayed and then taken home at the end of the week.

These activities were used to build self esteem with them selves and develop confidence with their peers to work together and help each other which aided in managing themselves academically and socially.

Strategies used to support children to focus on Managing Self included ...

Using the same vocabulary e.g. ‘are we managing our selves?’
Encourage all children to talk about their progress
Encourage children to think about their goals
Reflect on what they have done during the day
Encourage children to help each other
Encourage them to take ownership of their learning, behaviour as well as working as a team
Personalise the learning process

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engagement of students ...
Offered ideas - 3.6
Asked questions - 4.1
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - 4.2
Used positive body language related to task - 4.4
Persevered in order to enact related task - 4.2
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - 4.2
Showed interest in directing their own learning - 4.4
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - 2.6
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - 4.3

Overall mean level of engagement = 4.1

Outcome 2. Competency:

Number of students who were ...
8. Proficient experts - at start [1]; at end [7]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [1]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [2]; at end [4]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [1]; at end [6]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [5]; at end [2]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [1]; at end [2]
2. Proficient novices - at start [3]; at end [1]
1. Beginning novices - at start [11]; at end [1]

Competency effect size = 1.60
Standard error = 0.22

Conclusions:

Implementation: How can students be supported to develop the ability to manage themselves at the year 2 level?

Before implementing this project I set out of plan of how I would put it into practice and the results that I expected to achieve at the end;

awareness of managing self;
monitoring themselves;
achieve independence.

The first step was to identify the children’s prior knowledge of ‘managing self;’ We worked as a class to form goals to enable us to learn better e.g., we are helpful and kind to others, keep our class tidy, looking after our belongings etc. We worked to further break these goals into Success Criteria for daily goals that we would reflect upon as a class.
Learning experiences were implemented daily aimed at building self confidence, building a cooperative positive atmosphere where we could work and solve problems as a team.

Engagement: How engaged are students when they are involved in identifying classroom and personal behaviour protocols, and will this lead to improved learning?

The data shows that there was a large movement in the children’s engagement from the beginning to end of the project. The significant areas of improvement included "Asked questions", 78% and "Offered Ideas", 71% both of these involved confidence and interaction in the classroom. Other significant movement was in "Persevered in order to complete task", 75%.

Behaviour showed a positive improvement of 25%, this was not as significant as other movements however it shows that the children did not consider themselves improved in this area.

The reason for growth may be contributed to the length of the project from Term 1 to end of Term 3 enabled the children to:

Gain a further understanding by the end of the project.
Children gained confidence to ask questions and offer their opinions.
Different and varied learning experiences kept them engaged and motivated as well as allowing themselves to monitor and reflect on their learning.
Children had a long period to practice new skills.
Children gained awareness that by managing themselves in the class equated to improved learning.

Competency: What is the growth in competency that can be expected from students around adherence to classroom and personal behaviour protocols?

Knowledge came from growth in awareness of their own and others strengths by setting their own goals and following them. Ultimately the knowledge came from taking ownership and acting on their personal and class goals.

The data shows that the children gained awareness and self confidence in their own abilities with (56%) movement in "I finish my work on time".

They gained an understanding of protocols expected in the classroom, with the highest movement being "keeping the class tidy", with a (59%) movement.

The results also show that there is a link between Engagement and Competency, for example in "persevered in order to complete task", the criteria in the Engagement Assessment, is compatible with the Competency Assessment criteria, "I finish my work on time". Also, "Offered Ideas and Asked questions", is compatible with "I put my hand up to ask questions".

Final Conclusion:-
This research project has proven that success in managing self for young children by;

Setting personal and group goals that empower them to take ownership and strive for and achieve their goals on a daily basis.
Through daily discussions, allow them to constantly reflect about their successes and reflect on what they need to improve themselves.
Encourage them to question and problem solve as a group.
Build confidence in their strengths and abilities.
Use their peers as mentors to aspire to.

Even though the research project ended in Term 3, the continuing success of the children to manage them selves is dependent on constant repetition of what they have learnt. We are continuing with their goals and reflections, I am introducing new ways to manage them selves for example working with a buddy more, mentoring each other and continuing to encourage them to always strive to do their best in all areas.

For me as a classroom teacher this project has been invaluable for it has allowed me to reflect on my own teaching practice and has permitted me to focus on how I personally manage my self in the classroom, and search for strategies to improve not only the way I teach but the way that I relate to the children in my class.

The Expert Jigsaw and the Four Forces of Flight

2008-10-16T17:07:00.100+13:00

School: Houghton Valley School

Year Level: 2

Teacher: Hayden Ray

Focus area:
Participating and Contributing.

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation:
How can students be supported to develop their cooperative skills through the use of the human jigsaw (and other cooperative activities)?

Question 2. Engagement:
What impact does using the human jigsaw (and other cooperative activities) have on student engagement?

Question 3. Knowledge:
What impact does using the human jigsaw (and other cooperative activities) have on student understanding of the principles of flight?

Success Criteria for Knowledge
Expert:
I can carry out a PMI on my flying object in relation to the 4 forces of flight. Also, I can use my PMI to improve my flying object.
Practitioner:
I can use my understanding of the 4 forces of flight to create a flying object.
Apprentice:
I can describe the 4 forces in my own words.
Novice:
I can identify the 4 forces that affect an aeroplane.

Question 4. Competency:
What impact does using the human jigsaw have on the student’s cooperative skills?

Success Criteria for Competency
Expert:
I can identify individual and group pros and cons (goods and bads) and describe what to do next.
Practitioner:
I can describe how to use a human jigsaw in another context.
Apprentice:
I can carry out the role and describe the whole process of a human jigsaw.
Novice:
I can carry out a human jigsaw.

Learning Story:

Learning Story - In a Nut-Shell
During the first half of Term 3, Kowhai began to look at the 4 main forces (thrust, drag, lift and weight) that affect the movement of an object through the air (e.g. a paper plane.) Kowhai learnt from a variety of teacher directed learning and cooperative activities, specifically the ‘expert jigsaws’.

During the second half of Term 3, Kowhai applied their understanding of the 4 main forces of flight to create and improve a paper plane and a rocket. They then fair tested their flying objects and made changes using their knowledge of flight (thrust, drag, lift and weight).

Assessment: At the beginning and the end of the term, children’s knowledge and understanding of the 4 forces was assessed. We assumed that all children were novices with regard to the expert jigsaw and therefore only assessed this at the end of the term.

Learning Story - In more detail
I used a picture disclosure activity to initially hook the children into our Term’s work on flight. I got a photo of the world record paper plane throw (27.6 seconds in the air) and covered up most of the image. The children had to guess what the picture was of and post their ideas into a ‘post box’.

Children then sat a written pre test to assess their knowledge of the forces that affect an aeroplane in flight. The test was very difficult, and only a few children showed a small amount of prior knowledge and understanding about the four forces (thrust, drag, lift and weight).

None of my children had ever used the Expert Jigsaw, so I assumed that all children were a Novice - Level 1, with regard to the Competency Poutama.

Finding out about the Four Forces of Flight

We began our study of flight by looking at the four basic forces of flight (thrust, drag, lift and weight.) At the beginning of our unit, children were involved primarily in teacher directed learning to demonstrate and explore each of the four forces.

We then began to create paper planes in small groups with:

Lots of weight and not much weight.
Lots of drag and not much drag.
Lots of lift and not much lift.

Still in small groups, children then discussed and predicted which planes would fly further, focussing on ‘essential small group skills’, like: listening to each to other and taking turns. We tested them to see which would fly the furthest and wrote statements about the four forces, and how they affect an aeroplane in flight.

I then introduced the children to the Knowledge Poutama, emphasising the different levels of achievement and the things I would be looking for during the rest of the Unit.

To introduce the children to the expert jigsaw, I setup an expert jigsaw activity that recapped information about Pablo Picasso. I found that the activity stretched most of the children to their limits, with regard to their: ability to follow instructions, cooperative skills and to ability to locate information from a text.

We then used the expert jigsaw to find out about ‘a very short history of flight’. We kept the cooperative focus on, listening to each to other and taking turns throughout all of the expert jigsaws.

As the children found the expert jigsaw challenging, and also because Year 2 children find it difficult to locate and understand new information, I decided to use the expert jigsaw as a way to recap information, and not to introduce new information. I also used the rally chart (taking turns to write/draw information) to recap information about flight.

These two cooperative activities were an excellent way to deliver information to children several times in several different ways, maximising the possibility of the children understanding and retaining the knowledge.

After a series of expert jigsaws, I asked the children to write a list of steps that you need to follow to carry out an expert jigsaw successfully. I used this piece of writing to place each child on the competency poutama. From the writing I was able to assess each child’s ability to describe the process of the Expert Jigsaw. I then asked several of the children who achieved highly a few questions to gauge if they were practitioners or even experts according to my competency poutama.

Once the children had demonstrated a basic understanding of the four forces of flight, we all made a number of paper planes, attempting to construct a plane that would fly the furthest. We then discussed how we could find out which one would fly the furthest and how we could make the test fair.

Once we had listed all the things we had to do to make our paper dart throwing a fair test, we got in our cooperative groups or 3 to test how far our planes would fly. First, each group had to measure an ‘air strip’ to test our planes on. They had to measure out 20 m using a metre ruler and chalk, making a mark for every metre.

They then had to help each other (each having a role in the group) to test fly their darts 3 times each. We found that it wasn’t a fair test because of the wind, and decided to test fly our planes in the hall.

This led onto the children working cooperatively in our groups of 3 to design and construct an ‘aerodynamic rocket’ using only a paper roll, card and tape.

Rocket Design and Creation
During the last 3 weeks of the Unit, children had to design 2 or 3 different rockets using a plastic bottle as the body.

They then analysed their designs in their small groups, discussing what make their rocket aerodynamic and which their best design. They then labelled their design, identifying the different parts of their rocket and what they needed to build them.

To build their rocket, children buddied up and helped each other to stick on wings, nose cones etc… Children then painted their rockets ready for fair testing.

Rocket Testing

Earlier in the term, a very talented parent build me a rocket launcher out of a bike pump and a stell pole that fit inside a plastic bottle. During the last week of term, our class measured out a 50 metre air strip on the field and tested our rockets.

After each test we made one change to our rockets that we thought would make them go further. At the end of the week we analysed our results and made conclusions about what made our rockets fly further. The changes we made to our rockets after the very first test flight, resulted in them flying 50% further (averaging 30 metres).

The furthest a child’s rocket flew was 55m. Mine went 60m and a parent made one that flew over 100m. Naturally, it was all very exciting.

Testing our Knowledge about flight

At the end of the Unit, children sat the same written test they did at the beginning of the term. Having found it very difficult at the beginning of the term, it was wonderful to see how much knowledge the children had retained and how eager they were to give detailed answers.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement: (Teacher's opinion - not student self-assessment).

Mean level of engagement of students ...

Offered ideas - [3.4]
Asked questions - [2.8]
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - [3.4]
Used positive body language related to task - [3.9]
Persevered in order to enact related task - [4.0]
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - [3.8]
Showed interest in directing their own learning - [3.4]
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - [1.5]
Showed evidence of using what they have learnt - [3.6]

Overall mean level of engagement of students = 3.5

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Outcome 2. Knowledge: (Four Forces of Flight - thrust, drag, lift and weight).

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [2]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [9]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [7]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [0]; at end [4]
2. Proficient novices - at start [2]; at end [1]
1. Beginning novices - at start [21]; at end [0]

The average knowledge for all students in the class at the beginning of the Unit was: 1.1
The average knowledge for all students in the class at the end of the Unit was: 4.3

Knowledge effect size = 1.61

These figures show that at the beginning of the Unit all students were at the Novice level, with only two students able to identify some of the forces that affect a flying object. Whereas, at the end of the Unit almost 50% of students were at the Apprentice Level, meaning they could describe the four forces and almost 50% of students were at the Practitioner Level, meaning they were able to they could describe the four forces and were beginning to be able to use their understanding to create a flying object.

Outcome 3. Competency: (The Expert Jigsaw)

Number of students who were ...
8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [0]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [5]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [0]; at end [9]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [0]; at end [4]
2. Proficient novices - at start [0]; at end [4]
1. Beginning novices - at start [23]; at end [1]

The average competency for all students in the class at the beginning of the Unit was: 1.0
The average competency for all students in the class at the end of the Unit was: 3.6

Competency effect size = 1.28

These figures show that at the beginning of the Unit all students were at the Novice level, meaning they could not carry out the role in an Expert Jigsaw. Whereas, at the end of the Unit most students were at the Apprentice Level, meaning they were able to carry out the role and describe the whole process of an Expert Jigsaw. In addition, over 20% of students achieved the Practitioner Level, meaning they were beginning to understand the process at a higher level.

Conclusions:
The Expert Jigsaw and the Four Forces of Flight:

The Expert Jigsaw was a good way to focus on taking turns and listening to others in a small group.

The Expert Jigsaw is a very effective way to recap and re-deliver information in a different way to Year 2 children.

The Expert Jigsaw is not very suitable to introduce new information to children in Year 2.

Many of the Year 2 children needed a lot of support and modelling to successfully share information in small groups.

Several children thrived in the Expert Jigsaw activity, being able to lead/guide their group to success.

Students were highly engaged during all Expert Jigsaw activities. Also, students who are usually less engaged, tended to be more involved due to the increased accountability.
The 'real leanring context' of making paper planes and rockets obviously increased engagment of students.

The Expert Jigsaw provided excellent opportunities for children to verbalise their understanding of flight forces in non-threatening small groups.

The Expert Jigsaw was also an excellent way to deliver information about flight because it forced children to see and/or hear the information a few different times in a short time frame.

"Chalk & Talk" versus "Cooperative-Expert Jigsaw"

2008-09-24T13:55:00.006+12:00

SCHOOL: Houghton Valley

YEAR LEVEL: 5

TEACHER: Monica Mercury

FOCUS AREA: To investigate ways to improve student capability to participate and contribute; particularly student ability to work cooperatively.

'CHALK AND TALK'

To do this children learnt using a 'Chalk and Talk' approach:

Teacher talks - children listen.
A brief visual presentation.
children read some text.
Children do a follow-up activity about the text.
Teacher and children have a brief discussion about what they did.

There is no social interaction amongst the students at all - they work independently.

COOPERATIVE 'EXPERT JIGSAW'

The 'Chalk and Talk' method was then compared to a 'Cooperative - Expert Jigsaw' method:

Children form 'home' groups.
They are given sheets of information on a topic.
Children then form 'expert groups' with other students who have the same information as them.
They read and discuss this information and make notes or draw diagrams to reinforce the new knowledge.
Children then return to their 'home' groups and take turns sharing what they have learnt with the others.
Teacher and children then discuss what they did and what they learnt.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

How much information can the students retain and record from using two different learning processes?

Do children learn more through the ‘Chalk and Talk’ method of attaining key information, or do they learn more via the ‘Cooperative - expert jigsaw’ method?

Can the children explain the process of both methods? Can the students say what the most effective method for them is and why?

SUCCESS CRITERIA FOR KNOWLEDGE:

Practitioner: I can take the information I have learnt and compare that country to New Zealand.
Apprentice: I can confidently recall the new knowledge I have learnt in detail.
Novice: I can listen to the information and record at least five facts about the topic.

SUCCESS CRITERIA FOR COMPETENCY:

(Cooperative 'Expert Jigsaw' only)

Practitioner: I can explain how to use an expert jigsaw to someone else and how to use it in another context.
Apprentice: I can listen to information and share what I have seen and heard with others.
Novice: I can listen to information and then record what I have learnt.

LEARNING STORY:

This ‘experiment’ was conducted during several sessions, over a period of two to three weeks.

I split my class into two groups based on an even gender and academic ability ratio - Roopu A and Roopu B.

PART A - "CHALK AND TALK"

In Week one of this project, I conducted a whole-class diagnostic assessment of the childrens’ knowledge of ‘Rwanda’. The initial and summative assessment were; an individual brainstorm with a venn diagram. The students used a different-coloured pen for the diagnostic assessment compared with the summative assessment.

The next step was to conduct, two separate ‘chalk and talk’ lessons. Roopu A started on Day One, (while Roopu B was out of the room), and Roopu B was on Day Two, (while Roopu A was out of the room).

Following that, there was a one-day space of time for the students to think about what they have learnt and then I revisited each group’s original diagnostic assessment separately (one group went out of the room and vice versa) and they added any new information they had learnt or retained. This assessed ‘Student Knowledge’.

PART B - "COOPERATIVE - EXPERT JIGSAW"

In the second week of this project, I conducted a whole-class diagnostic assessment of the childrens’ knowledge of ‘Romania’. The diagnostic and summative assessment was; an individual brainstorm with a venn diagram on the same page. The students used a different-coloured pen for the diagnostic assessment compared with the summative assessment.

The next step was to conduct, two separate ‘Cooperative - expert jigsaw’ lessons. Roopu A started on Day Three, (while Roopu B was out of the room), and Roopu B on Day Four, (while Roopu A was out of the room).

Following that, there was a one-day space of time for the students to think about what they had learnt and then I revisited each group’s original diagnostic assessment separately (one group went go out of the room and vice versa) and they added any new information they had learnt or retained. This assessed ‘Student Knowledge’ and with this method we also assessed ‘Student Competency’

PART C - ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION

In the last week, there was an in-depth analysis and reflection component which evaluated what was done by the students and the teacher.

The class were asked to do a PMI for the ‘Chalk and talk method’ and a PMI the ‘Expert Jigsaw’ method. Conclusions were recorded about which method they felt was the most effective form of learning.

The students were also asked to write a recount of the steps used in the ‘Cooperative - expert jigsaw’ method, which was used to grade them according to the competency success criteria.

The teacher analysed the findings and reflected on what was done, how it was done and what could have been conducted better.

RESULTS:

In terms of knowledge, the following percentage of students demonstrated their knowledge at each of the three levels - Novice, Apprentice and Practitioner

Chalk and Talk: Novice 38%; Apprentice 38%; Practitioner 24%

Cooperative Expert-Jigsaw: Novice 37%; Apprentice 33%; Practitioner 30%

I also counted the amount of knowledge, (the different facts that were known by all the children), that students in each group demonstrated at the outset and at the end of each learning session. The following table shows the comparison:

Chalk and Talk: Beginning: - 57 End: - 140

Cooperative Expert-Jigsaw: Beginning: - 71 End: - 74

At the beginning and then at the end of the topic, I also assessed how many students were at Novice, Apprentice and Practitioner levels for the competency learning success criteria. The following table shows the numbers at each level.

Beginning: Novice: - 20, Apprentice: - 8, Practitioner - 1

End: Novice - 8, Apprentice: - 13, Practitioner: - 8

I also did a PMI with each group to find out what students thought of each teaching method.

Chalk and Talk

PLUS (+)
Really good, I found out heaps more stuff.
Fun! I learnt more about a new country.
I think you (the teacher) explained it really well.
It was very interesting and I learnt new information I didn’t know.
It was cool because we used the big-screen TV! It wouldn’t have been as interesting without the TV!
It was good because you knew nothing about it, but you got to learn.
I have seen Rwanda on a map – it was fun.
It was interesting having it on a TV – otherwise I wouldn’t get it.
I felt sad for the children who were abandoned.
It made me feel really lucky, not being in that situation.
Everyone listened
The presentation was good.
I liked the teacher reading it out.

MINUS (-)
There was not enough time to record information the second time.

INTERESTING
It is an interesting way to learn
It’s easier to remember stuff doing it straight away.
I like how we do the pre-test first, then we learn stuff and after that we did the post-test the next day.
I liked working by myself.
I feel a bit in the middle because it is a good way to learn, but then I was a bit frightened of not remembering.
I felt it was good information and quite fun.
It was exciting to learn about a new country.
It was good way of learning – I was concerned about having to work alone.

Cooperative Expert-Jigsaw

PLUS (+)
We had a continuum which had how much people know.
We had our own paper and information and we only had to remember some information.
This helped you remember information and we wrote it down
The ‘expert’ groups had to discuss things, which was good.
You could share your ideas with others.
We sat in groups to share our ideas.
Groups find out information from each other.
I liked the visual presentation.

MINUS (-)
You did not get as much information
It took longer.
It could be distracting and people could get off track.
Too long and a little boring
The information took too long to read.
We should have had a break in between.
I didn’t like that some people didn’t share properly.
We went from too many things – one to another.

INTERESTING
Some students preferred the traditional method (12 students)

(7 students) enjoyed working in with this method because they picked up more information by writing it down or doing a diagram – this helped them to remember things better.

(8 students) liked it when they were in groups – they felt they helped each other.

CONCLUSIONS:

Roopu A and Roopu B were able to retain and record more information from the ‘Chalk and Talk’ method.

Roopu A and Roopu B were able to record about the same amount of information as their prior knowledge from the ‘Cooperative – expert jigsaw’ method. There was only three more extra facts recorded during the post-test than there had been from the pre-test.

About half of each group preferred to work with the ‘Chalk and Talk’ method probably because they had the skills needed to work alone. The ‘Gifted and Talented’ students were all in this range.

The other half of each group preferred to work with the cooperative method because they enjoyed the social interaction and the ability to share ideas and information. All the children who have remeidal learning needs were in this category.

Using the methods and contexts, I can conclude that the 'Chalk and Talk' way of teaching proved more effective than the 'Cooperative - Expert Jigsaw' way of teaching, where the objective was for students to be able to retain and record the most knowledge and information.

However, this does not mean that the 'Cooperative - Expert Jigsaw' is a totally ineffective way of learning, but that it would be better utilised as a way to reinforce and embed knowledge already known and could be more effective in other contexts.

SIZE DOES MATTER

The students worked extremely well in smaller groups. Smaller class sizes make a difference.

Participating and Contributing at the Rocky Shore Part 2

2008-09-09T13:19:00.031+12:00

School: Owhiro Bay

Year Level: Year 5/6

Teacher: Colin Thompson

Focus area: To investigate ways to improve student capability to participate and contribute including student ability to work cooperatively in a group.

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation:

Question for teachers: How can teachers and students co-construct anticipated knowledge for the theme ‘Caring for Owhiro Bay’?

Questions for students:

What do you know already about Owhiro Bay beach?
What skills do you already have that might help you in this study ‘Caring for Owhiro Bay’ beach?
What attitudes or virtues do you already use or know you will use in this study ‘Caring for Owhiro Bay’ beach?
What do you (the students) think will come out of this study? ie: Outcomes or Learning intentions and success criteria?
What do you (the students) think you will learn in our work on caring for Owhiro Bay beach? ie: Outcomes or Learning intentions and success criteria?
What will you know at the end of the study?
What new knowledge will you gain?
What skills will you learn or practice by the end?

Question 2. Engagement:

Teacher Question: How engaged are the students when they have decided on the knowledge outcomes for the theme ‘Caring for Owhiro Bay’?

Student Question:What do you want to learn in our work on Caring for Owhiro Bay beach?

Question 3. Knowledge:

Teacher Question: What is the growth of knowledge – beginning and end study?

Student Questions:

What have you learnt in this study ‘Caring for Owhiro Bay’?
What new or different skills have you used or developed in this study ‘Caring for Owhiro Bay’?

Success Criteria for Knowledge
Expert: Students will be able to ask "How good is my knowledge and what more do I need to find out?"
Practitioner: Students will be able to find out why there is not more life in the rock pools and at the beach at Owhiro Bay and use this knowledge to take action.
Apprentice: Students will be able to present what they have learnt back to someone.
Novice: Students will be able to find out about rock pools and the Owhiro Bay and the life in it.

Question 4. Competency:

Teacher Question: What is the growth of student capability to Participate and Contribute in a group?

Success Criteria for Competency
Expert: The student knows and can explain their strengths and weaknesses, and knows what they need to do to improve their group skills.
Practitioner: The student will use group skills and apply these in a range of contexts eg playground, classroom, sports field."How can you do this again?"
Apprentice: Students can engage in group activities and explain what this looks like and sounds like.“What do you know about?” “What will I see/hear?”
Novice: Students can engage (take part) in group activities.

Learning Story:

Owhiro Bay’s key competency is Participating and Contributing. Effective Teaching Strategies were weaved into the learning to enhance the participation and contribution. Through the pilot children used co-operative groups regularly and many Effective Teaching Strategies like share, pair, square and bus stops and one stay the rest stray.

This topic was proposed by the community because they felt the children from Owhiro Bay needed to learn about their own local environment. Initially we (teachers) had professional development from Victoria University to prepare us for the direction that we were taking and to increase our background knowledge base. For the children it was essential to build up their knowledge base so that they had enough background to make relevant and considered decisions and eventually take some action to enhance and sustain their community.

The Science focus was integrated into English with Information Reports. This enabled the children to display their findings in a coherent written manner.

The science learning sequence:

LI: To find out what lives in Owhiro Bay’s coastline

The children used brainstorms, donuts and finally a KWL to establish their prior knowledge about their local environment. They were not restricted to identifying Rocky Shore creatures; however that was the direction we ended up taking. The children identified many of the common creatures but were less than forthcoming with the less common creatures.

The children went for two visits to the Owhiro Bay rock pools. The first visit was where the children examined and held different creatures, with a lot of exploring of the rock pools.

The second visit was with DOC who discussed the new Marine Reserve. They also discussed habitats of many of the local creatures. The children also had a visit to the Island Bay Marine Education Centre. Whilst the children were able to view and touch many coastal creatures, the weather prevented us from visiting the Island Bay rocky shore with a local ‘expert’.

LI: to group/classify the different types of living organisms

The children were given access to books cds and the internet. In co-operative groups they set about discussing then grouping and classifying the different type of organisms. Their scientific vocabulary increased with the use of the different resources. They were also starting to make connections about the communities and not just thinking about creatures in isolation.

LI: to investigate the living organisms at Owhiro Bay Coastline

This Learning Intention provided more learning of knowledge, to enable the children to develop further links and understanding of the Owhiro Bay coastal communities.

LI: to select and investigate a living organism

Again the focus was to enhance the children’s knowledge, this time specifying a single creature at Owhiro Bay coast to analyse. This included the implications of their habitats, food and breeding. The children also touched on the environmental impact/situation of their creature.

LI: identifying that all creatures need certain things to stay alive

This LI started with what humans need to survive then the children transferred this knowledge to what plants and animals need to survive. This also introduced the adjustments required for tidal changes.

Results:

Outcome 1. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [1]; at end [1]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [2]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [0]; at end [7]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [2]; at end [4]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [8]; at end [9]
2. Proficient novices - at start [8]; at end [1]
1. Beginning novices - at start [6]; at end [1]

Knowledge effect size = 0.56

Outcome 2. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start [0]; at end [0]
7. Beginning experts - at start [0]; at end [2]
6. Proficient practitioners - at start [0]; at end [4]
5. Beginning practitioners - at start [4]; at end [7]
4. Proficient apprentices - at start [2]; at end [5]
3. Beginning apprentices - at start [8]; at end [4]
2. Proficient novices - at start [7]; at end [1]
1. Beginning novices - at start [4]; at end [2]

Competency effect size = 0.63

Conclusions:

This pilot was a big learning curve for us all. personally it was a little more difficult because I did not get the initial training at the beginning. We originally started off envisaging that our particular pilot would last up to one year. We changed this and significantly reduced our questions after some clarification. Through discussion we finally came to a workable understanding as to how to include our AtoL PD into the pilot. In retrospect the two dovetailed very well, however the initial overwhelming number of questions did cloud our perspective of both.

The use of Effective Teaching Strategies certainly enhanced the children’s participation and contribution. However, as I was relatively new to a lot of the strategies they were used tentatively. As the pilot went on I found that the success that the strategies produced encouraged me to use them more.

Taking Responsibility for the Environment

2008-09-02T09:19:00.026+12:00

School: Ridgway

Year Level: Y6/7

Teacher: Rod Scott

Focus area: Student awareness of and ability to use key learning tools for their achievement level (e.g. organisational tools, process tools, thinking tools, learning habits, technology, presentation tools, etc)

Research Questions:

Question 1. Implementation: How students identify issues, concerns, and interests that could become the focus of learning.

Question 2. Engagement: How engaged are students when they are involved in identifying themes/topics for learning?

Question 3. Knowledge: What is the growth in knowledge that can be expected of students when they learn through a theme that they themselves have identified

Success Criteria for Knowledge

Expert: Is aware of the consequences of their choices and plans to make more choices that have positive effects on the environment
Practitioner: Can analyse the effects on the environment and make choices accordingly
Apprentice: Can describe the positive or negative effects that their choices have on the environment
Novice: Can recognise that choices have positive or negative effects on the environment

Question 4. Competency: What capability can be expected of students to identify themes/topics for learning at the year 3 – 8 level

Success Criteria for Competency

Expert: Use graphic organisers to sort information and then use it to decide on a required next step (Finding out or action.)
Practitioner: Use a graphic organiser to sort information
Apprentice: Can describe how to sort information on a graphic organiser
Novice: Can retrieve information off a graphic organiser

Learning Story:

This aspect of our focus on personal responsibility followed on from our work outlined in the last blog. This time the focus shifted to the deep understanding of:

“Taking personal responsibility for the natural environment will have positive effects for the future of our world”

The unit was run across the middle and senior school.

We began our programme around this understanding with these provocations:

“Do I really care about the environment?”

“Can I make a difference?”

The big ideas we used to facilitate this were:

“Can people make choices that have positive effects on the environment?”

“Can people make choices that have negative effects on the environment?”

“What do people need to live?”

“What is the Natural Environment?”

Assessment was managed through use of the student engagement survey using the endpoint from the first set of surveys as the startpoint for the next.

Student knowledge and competency was assessed by the students self assessing using the standard rubric and a justifying comment. I also did some teacher confirmations across a sample group who verbally explained their self assessment. The rubrics were a result of a cooperative effort across the middle and senior school teachers.

We began the unit with a tuning in phase to try and engage the children. We used a variety of activities to achieve this such as:

If the world was an apple
Pressure on our world
First ideas brainstorm (What do you do that you show that you care about the earth)
Unpacking the big understanding and big ideas
Initial placement on rubric
The web of life
Rubbish Stock take around the school

We came to shared understandings around our big ideas through a variety of small group actions that brainstormed the questions, ordered the degree of effect, and reported back to the class the outcomes. This provided some hearty discussion and disagreement, but we eventually came to a landing on what we thought the big ideas meant.

After this we entered into our finding out phase which centred on two key aspects:

Science Fair
Take Action for Water

Ridgway School has over the past couple of years been encouraging the children to get involved in the Science Fair competition. This year we used it as a vehicle for the children to find out about the environment and the effects peoples actions had on it. The criteria was that any experiments the children undertook were related to the deep understanding and the big ideas.

As a consequence there were some excellent projects undertaken that explored many aspects of the deep understanding and big ideas. They provided a good discussion point and were on the whole very informative pieces of work. They also provided a great lead in to the “What do we do about it?” phase.

The final aspect to our finding out was the Take Action for Water unit run in conjunction with the Wellington Regional Council. It was interesting to note however that the idea of a field trip to study streams and factors affecting water quality met with considerable resistance from the children. The feedback from the children was that for a significant proportion of them, the whole “environment” thing had been over done and they were tired of it. This of course ran counter to our aim of increasing student engagement!

Whist the end engagement data wasn't where we'd hoped it didn't reflect this feeling in the class. The Take Action trip itself eventually proved to be a real motivator in driving the children to take action and possibly diluted the lethargy evident in the class.

At this point it was take action time.

As a result of this trip and the follow up activities the class decided on creating compost bins as an action we could take that would have a positive impact on our environment. To achieve this the children undertook some research into bin design and in cooperative groups went about using this knowledge to design a set of bins for the school.

Presentations were made by each group outlining how their bin met all the criteria a good compost bin should have and the whole class then decided on the winning design.

At the time of posting the bin was under construction.

Results:

Outcome 1. Engagement:

SCALE: 1 = never, 2 = not very often, 3 = about half the time, 4 = often, 5 = always

Mean level of engangement of students ...

Offered ideas- at start 3.2; at end 3.3
Asked questions - at start 2.9; at end 3.4
Listened to and thought about other's ideas and responded respectfully - at start 3.7; at end 3.8
Used positive body language related to task - at start 3.7; at end3.7
Perservered in order to enact related task - at start 4.1; at end 3.9
Showed evidence of being active learners outside school time - at start 2.0; at end 2.1
Showed interest in directing their own learning - at start 3.9; at end 3.7
Had behavioural issues that impacted on their learning - at start 1.8; at end 1.8
Show evidence of using what they have learnt - at start 3.9; at end 3.7

Outcome 2. Knowledge:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 0; at end 0
7. Beginning experts - at start 6; at end 6
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 1; at end 8
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 11; at end 9
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 8; at end 5
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 4; at end 2
2. Proficient novices - at start 0; at end 0
1. Beginning novices - at start 0; at end 0

Outcome 3. Competency:

Number of students who were ...

8. Proficient experts - at start 1; at end 2
7. Beginning experts - at start 8; at end 10
6. Proficient practitioners - at start 14; at end 16
5. Beginning practitioners - at start 8; at end 3
4. Proficient apprentices - at start 0; at end 0
3. Beginning apprentices - at start 0; at end 0
2. Proficient novices - at start 0; at end 0
1. Beginning novices - at start 0; at end 0

Conclusions:

As can be seen in the results there was an upward trend in the students self asssessment regarding their knowledge of the effects their choices had on the environment.

Competency in the use of Graphic organisers was already relatively high so the changes, whilst trending higher were not great.

The most interesting point was the student engagement. As stated engagement waned as the topic went on for a number of reasons.The most significant was the length of time we spent on the environment. Our idea to integrate it into the school curriculm activiies for the whole year proved to be counter productive in terms of student engagement. The intention was to focus on different aspect in different terms but this seemed to be too protracted to hold the children's interest and engagement.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the "take action" phase did act to rekindled some interest. The children were animated and proactive in their efforts to "sell" their bin design and many were seen researching and designing through lunch and morning tea time. However when it came to the final engagement survey these observations were not borne out in their answers.

As a result our first 2009 Inquiry topic will be run over a shorter time frame and without the multiple phases we attempted this time.