The Research Toolbelt

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.

Explicit Teaching of Inquiry

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.

Co-constructing Poutama Ako with Year 5/6 Students

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

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

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!