Rethinking the School Curriculum. John White. Managing Pupil Behaviour. Terry Haydn. John Eggleston. The Insightful Teacher. Nancy Bruski. Peter Woods. Brief Overview: Year Round Schooling. Alex Wellar. Teaching as Learning. Jean McNiff. Good Morning, Children. Sophia Pappas. The Death of Progressive Education. Roy Lowe. Thinking about the Lifecourse. Stuart McClean. Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding. Jan Meyer. Philosophies of Research into Higher Education. Dr Brian J. Iain Hay. Applied Linguistics and Primary School Teaching. Sue Ellis.
Eugenia M. Sue Cowley. Senses of Place. John Eyles. I'm the Teacher, You're the Student. Patrick Allitt. Individuals, Groups and Organizations Beneath the Surface.
Pedagogy and implementing new approaches
Lionel F. Richard Harris.
- The Unstruck Drum: Mystical Poetry of Kabir in a New Setting by Jabez L. Van Cleef (Voices of World Religions);
- Split Signals: Television and Politics in the Soviet Union;
- Carrier #20: Hellfire.
The New Math. Christopher J. Anxiety in a 'Risk' Society. Iain Wilkinson. Nature Preschools and Forest Kindergartens. David Sobel. Teachable Moments. Dennis M. Qualitative Research for Physical Culture. Over-Tested and Under-Prepared. Bob Sornson. Leslie Claydon. Overseas Students in Higher Education. Robert Harris. Zo schrijf je een goede recensie. De recensie moet ten minste 50 tekens bevatten. Je schermnaam moet ten minste 2 tekens bevatten. Bij Kobo proberen we ervoor te zorgen dat gepubliceerde recensies geen grof of onfatsoenlijk taalgebruik bevatten, de uitkomst van het boek niet verklappen en dat er geen persoonlijke informatie van de recensent in wordt gegeven.
Je hebt de volgende beoordeling en recensie ingeleverd. We zullen ze op onze site publiceren nadat we ze bekeken hebben. Je winkelwagen is leeg Er bevinden zich momenteel geen artikelen in je winkelwagen. Doorgaan met winkelen. Artikel en niet beschikbaar voor aankoop. Bekijk je winkelwagentje.
Je kunt de niet-beschikbare artikelen nu verwijderen of we verwijderen ze bij de kassa automatisch. Niet beschikbaar voor aankoop. Doorgaan met winkelen Afrekenen Doorgaan met winkelen. This is a salient point in that for any real, sustainable school change, the support and validation of senior leadership is key. The study uses qualitative research methods to investigate the potential of participatory pedagogy.
It explores four research questions: 1. How can participatory pedagogy be integrated into the primary classroom practice and what is the impact? In order to explore these questions I gathered baseline data via a Survey Monkey questionnaire for the teachers and an interview with a selection of pupils, followed by two training intervention sessions for the teachers.
Within the limits of this small research study there was backing and endorsement by the head teacher allowing the class teachers some freedom to engage with the research activities. However, ultimately, this was a time-limited research project run in a busy school with many other commitments that could hinder a truly transformative experience. In addition, I would argue that any future trials would require involvement from the whole staff with a range of teaching experience to ensure momentum and support network to enhance confidence and creativity.
The class teachers were both new to education: one NQT and a second-year teacher both in their first academic year within this school. The pupils interviewed came from both Year 3 classes and included a mix of gender and ability. I had met them previously in class as school governor through my delivery of Philosophy for Children P4C for half a term, which may have influenced their openness to discuss the questions with me. The small sample size limits the ability to generalise on their comments which transfers similarly to the small number of teachers within the study.
The initial data was mainly intended to inform the planning of the CPD sessions and the baseline of participatory activities within these two classrooms so that I could design appropriate extensions and suggested ideas for moving forwards. The reflection journals for the teachers were specifically designed to encourage the teachers themselves, as part of the research process, to reflect critically on their pedagogical choices, so that any changes came from reflection on their own practice and were internal not just external and therefore, arguably, more transformative.
Activities and data collection took place over a school term and are outlined in Table 1. Baseline — pupil baseline 26 April Dictaphone recording of dialogue interview and subsequent transcription. Comments used within teacher 6 pupils interventions Teacher training — session 1 15 May Recorded session; teacher journals handed out.
Drama’s powerful pedagogy: Building a picture of effective drama practice for the primary classroom
Teacher training — session 2 22 May Recorded session Follow-up teacher interview Completed WB 17 July Dictaphone recording of dialogue and subsequent transcription. Analysis is related to the participatory pedagogy model for training and application. Tentative conclusions are drawn in the final section. The pupils have also been anonymised under labels A—F. In terms of confidentiality, the learning needs analysis was engineered to gather individual responses, without names to ensure privacy.
Information on the use of the data and dialogue was provided at the baseline stage and at the training sessions.
- Full text options;
- Similar books and articles.
- Classroom practice.
- Join Kobo & start eReading today.
- Join Kobo & start eReading today.
- Read Japanese Today;
All electronic data has been stored on an encrypted external hard drive or secure server. The training plans for the two sessions can be found in Appendix 1a and 1b. The associated resources in Appendix 4a and 4b. The pupil interview was designed to focus on their learning, what helps or hinders as well as what they enjoy or find challenging within the classroom. They were also asked directly about participating and being listened to by staff at school.
The children can communicate their views and opinions with the class and myself Teacher B. However, I note on further examination that both statements indicate the action of participation but not the impact of it.
What happens with their views and opinions and are these on teaching and learning or issues outside the classroom? This is further illustrated by the answers to the next question when they were asked about examples of pupil voice or participation in their own classroom: We do circle time where the children discuss their day or what they have enjoyed doing over the weekend. I encourage collaborative learning and participation in class discussion during every lesson. The answers illustrate a disparity between the intention of pupil participation and the reality for teacher B.
If pupils are encouraged to communicate or share their views it should be on more significant topics such as their own learning or experience at school. Teachers must also be prepared and should encourage pupils to: Give their opinions and know that what they say will not be held against them, and they should not feel obliged to say what they think teachers want to hear Robinson and Taylor, Teacher A is more pedagogically focused in her response and covers many of the participatory learning techniques as used in global learning.
However, as I argued previously, collaboration is not participation and ultimately who decides on how tasks are completed or run and are pupils influencing these choices? Teacher A later comments that: I think lessons should be led by pupils. I am there to expand their education and learning not to fit them into a mould. This principle closely mirrors that of participatory pedagogy indicating that teacher A already had the potential mindset for the project, if not the practical knowledge of how to get to a point whereby pupils could, in reality, lead lessons.
Among the comments, there were many that highlighted a misconception about the term pupil voice: Some lessons lend more easily to this than others. Pupil voice is often a challenge in Mathematics, however I am developing this further by ensuring we have lots of discussion when reasoning Teacher A. It is not so much about giving pupils a voice or chance to speak but listening to pupils via numerous media and acting on the information or enabling pupils to act. They mainly focused on the school council SC : Pupil B — The SC are special like pupil A said because they have a role in school… they do like assemblies and stuff just to show like… stop bullying and stuff.
Pupil C — I think the SC make the most of the changes, you can make little changes because of your behaviour, be kind and that would help the SC. Int — Does the SC or your teacher ask your opinions? Pupil A — I never really get asked. When asked about their learning in school, they had quite a debate about whether group or individual work was better, agreeing that in fact everyone preferred a different approach.
The use of tools such as lollipop sticks to ensure all pupils are engaged or have the opportunity to contribute were perceived and promoted by the Senior Leadership Team as one form of whole class collaboration. However, on discussion with staff and pupils it is questionable whether their use actually improved learning or whether the innate sense of competition and influence of peer pressure created a stressful atmosphere; some pupils thriving though for others a developing sense of dread which could lead to a paralysing of their thinking.
This quick movement between topics was felt to have a negative impact on them even though they did state they were now enjoying their new topic too. They provided a number of examples where they were participating, such as selecting their class reading book or adding questions on topics they are given. Many schools are aiming to move towards a more creative curriculum, which blends the various curriculum subjects in a more holistic manner. Whether that reduces the amount of learning or pressure of the core subjects on pupils is not reflected in these comments. Global learning practice aims for the transformative learning experience, and I felt it was highly significant that the teachers were part of the research and design in the same way as I ask pupils and teachers to be equal partners in teaching.
This is hoped for both teacher and pupil. Instead it aims to provide a framework for how both pupils and teachers approach teaching in the classroom. Teachers expressed concern during the second teacher twilight that pupils would decide the topics of the curriculum or opt out of learning. It is clear that schools cannot deviate from the prescribed curriculum and expectations, however, it was clarified that how a school or class teacher approaches that curriculum can be decided.
Both of these factors can be engaged within the restrictions of the curriculum. In point of fact, I consider it vital that pupils understand their own responsibility for achieving learning goals and their own accountability in the process: something which has, to my mind, become increasingly neglected within our current education system. I will definitely deploy elements of choice into future teaching practice Teacher A. The feedback was very much teacher-framed in that all pupils had a set of questions to reflect on, which resulted in very similar responses around who they had in their working group, working with friends, and smaller or larger groups.
Although the teacher feedback is very positive and indicates a change of practice and approach, I recognise that these were very small steps in terms of moving towards full participatory pedagogy and understand there is a need for further support, training and collation of examples and ideas for creating a fully participative classroom and equitable teaching approaches. As a new approach to teaching there must be an allowance for impact both positive and negative as all participants work through the process. I consider that engagement is a significant factor in the success of any new approach, and without pupil support the pedagogy would go nowhere.
As Beista argues, democracy cannot be taught but needs to be experienced, felt and reflected upon, therefore our classrooms must be democratic in order to aspire to democratic teaching and learning. There were some concerns from the teachers about changing their approach to the teaching in class, however, their reflections indicated their change of opinion: I thought it would be quite stressful but it was much easier than I thought… you have an easier time as a teacher as they [the pupils] want to do it. Increased confidence, self-respect, competence and an improved sense of responsibility have all been reported by young people who contribute in school.
Schools also report increased motivation and engagement with learning.
The pupils were really motivated; they seemed to want to do well, especially during the reflection bit with their peers. The whole choice idea… they [pupils] had more ownership and were more engaged. When the teachers were asked what they had learnt from the process, they commented: Children feel more invested in their learning when they have taken ownership. This is very positive feedback from the teachers, and to some extent indicates a potentially transformative experience whereby the teachers will change their practice and approach.
However, only further follow-up evaluations and reflections would be able to prove this claim.
No customer reviews
The thoughts from the pupils are somewhat more varied, with much debate on whether or not they enjoyed working in groups, pairs or on their own, though they did confirm they were pleased to have the choice, even if they made the wrong one on reflection. Students at risk of educational failure, particularly those of limited standard English proficiency, are often forgiven any academic challenges on the assumption that they are of limited ability, or they are forgiven any genuine assessment of progress because the assessment tools are inadequate.
Thus, both standards and feedback are weakened, with the predictable result that achievement is impeded. While such policies may often be the result of benign motives, the effect is to deny many diverse students the basic requirements of progress — high academic standards and meaningful assessment that allows feedback and responsive assistance. There is a clear consensus among education researchers that students at risk of educational failure require instruction that is cognitively challenging; that is, instruction that requires thinking and analysis, not only rote, repetitive, detail-level drills.
This does not mean ignoring phonics rules, or not memorizing the multiplication tables, but it does mean going beyond that level of curriculum into the exploration of the deepest possible reaches of interesting and meaningful materials. There are many ways in which cognitive complexity has been introduced into the teaching of students at risk of educational failure. There is good reason to believe, for instance, that a bilingual curriculum itself provides cognitive challenges that make it superior to a monolingual approach.
Working with a cognitively challenging curriculum requires careful leveling of tasks, so that students are motivated to stretch. It does not mean drill-and-kill exercises, nor it does not mean overwhelming challenges that discourage effort. Getting the correct balance and providing appropriate assistance is, for the teacher, a truly cognitively challenging task. Thinking, and the abilities to form, express, and exchange ideas are best taught through dialogue, through questioning and sharing ideas and knowledge. The IC provides opportunities for the development of the languages of instruction and subject matter.
IC is a supportive and collaborative event that builds intersubjectivity and a sense of community. IC achieves individualization of instruction; is best practiced during joint productive activity; is an ideal setting for language development; and allows sensitive contextualization, and precise, stimulating cognitive challenge. This concept may appear to be a paradox; instruction implies authority and planning, while conversation implies equality and responsiveness.
But the instructional conversation is based on assumptions that are fundamentally different from those of traditional lessons. Teachers who use it, like parents in natural teaching, assume that the student has something to say beyond the known answers in the head of the adult. More often, teaching is through the recitation script, in which the teacher repeatedly assigns and assesses.