Revision in the twenty first century classroom

Revision lessons – how to ensure that it’s the students doing the work? How to ensure they are revising effectively? And, in this century, how to involve the four C’s (collaboration, communication, critical thinking and creativity)? Here is an activity that I adapted a few years ago  from a suggestion made by a colleague. It is probably more suitable for subjects with more fact content such as my specialism (Physics) but I leave that decision to you.

Take a topic, or unit of work and cut it up into statements. For older students the exam board specification or a list from the teaching scheme may be fine.. Younger or less academic students will need such statements to be chunked and/or rewritten. Set up a document with a three column table: Give the columns titles: statement, question, answer. You may wish to number the statements. Copy the statements into the first column. It is the students’ task to invent questions (and supply answers) for each statement. If it is a preparation task I usually set each student a different bank of statements to prepare questions for. If they meet the list at the start of a lesson, students collaborate in pairs for 10 minutes or so to devise, say, 3 questions each pair (again, I allocate these so that the list is covered). 

Then one of each pair stands and moves along to the neighbouring desk. My classes are used to (have become resigned to) these circulation patterns. The students take turns to ask their new partner their questions. If they meet a question they can’t answer the student must write down the question and answer, questioners learn to refine their questions as they pose them to other students. If students do not agree on an answer they ask me to arbitrate. Every 3 minutes or so, the same students move along again to a different partner, with different questions.

Plenary activities can be mini-whiteboard, Socrative, or other tests, votes (again can be with Socrative) for most difficult statement, or things that need explaining next lesson.

Students have worked collaboratively, they have criticised unclear questions and unsatisfactory answers, they have created Q and As, and a great deal of on task communication goes on. The task may be pencil and paper or completed digitally. Students are required to engage with the material when devising questions, not just parrot it. Students learn a revision technique to take and use elsewhere.

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Bloom’s Taxonomy, SAMR, TPACK and the four C’s

Steve Wheeler (Learning with e’s) recently posted a link to a blog he wrote a couple of years ago about Bloom’s taxonomy. This got me thinking how Bloom’s pyramid linked to the different methods we use to analyse digital teaching and learning, and in particular, how I proceed when I’ve learned a new app, or digital technique (or any new wrinkle to improve teaching and learning in my classroom). The following doodle emerged from several mornings thought as I drove to work:
creativity analysis
First comes an injection of knowledge of some new digital technique or device. Comprehension leads me to use my pedagogical knowledge, and apply the technique to help teach some content for which I think it may be appropriate. I’ve invoked TPACK concepts (see below), but I’ll also concede that at this stage I am probably only substituting a digital technique for a previous method (SAMR, notes on this below too). Reflection and analysis, with some communication and collaboration (from students or colleagues) will hopefully lead to Augmentation, so that the results of using the new tool are better than those with previous teaching methods. More collaboration and communication, combined with critical thinking and evaluation should lead to Modification of the original task. Leading to the peak of Bloom’s taxonomy where all the previous inputs are synthesised and in a burst of creativity the original task is redefined and re-imagined to produce results that were impossible to achieve previously.
A practical example: For some years I’ve encouraged students to photograph experimental set ups to help them remember and record what they have done (substitution for traditional science diagrams). Students moved on to analysing their photgraphs to make more precise measurements than they could in the course of the experiment (Augmentation). Then students chose to video experiments so that they could analyse transient phenomena (Modification), and then by employing apps such as SloPro they realised they could plan and carry out investigations that they had not considered possible before.
I’ll save other examples for future blogs – here are some notes on the acronyms in the title. SAMR was devised by Ruben Puentedura as a way of describing adoption of digital technology. At first Substitution, then Augmentation, followed by Modification of the task and finally Redefinition with creation of new tasks. I usually think re-imagination here. TPACK – a Venn diagram of technology, pedagogy and subject content knowledge, the best learning and teaching happens where the three circles intersect. And the four Cs – collaboration, communication, critical thinking and creativity – which need some Content, I think, to be valuable. For Bloom’s taxonomy – I refer you to Steve Wheeler’s two blogs!

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Silent sentences and exit tickets

A less academic set, last period Friday afternoon, a lesson of helping them understand how to solve electric circuit problems – how to engage them, give them some success at the end of the lesson and even better consolidate some ideas?

Silent sentences, a plenary that I first met during the Key Stage 3 science initiative:

Students sit (in silence, which either feels wonderful or creepy) in groups of four or so per table, and deal the cards face up, so everyone in the group can see all the cards. Their aim is to arrange the cards into sentences. At the end each person should have some complete sentences in front of them. The difficulty is players can only give, not take.

The cards – About 8 sentences, each sentence chopped into 3 parts. So cards either start with a capital letter (first in sentence), end with a full stop (last in sentence) or neither (middle card). There is an example set at the bottom of the blog.

The exit ticket – the group has completed the sentences, each person has a photograph of the complete set.

Students collaborate, there’s competition, and once you’ve made the cards you have a resource to re-use in following years – just be careful to bag up each set separately.

Electric current in wires is / a flow of / electrons.
A series circuit has only one / path from positive / to negative.
Components connected in / parallel can be switched on / and off separately.
Connect the voltmeter last and / in parallel / with a component.
Ammeters are connected / in series and measure / electric current.
Resistance is measured in / ohms, work it out by / voltage divided by current.
P.D. stands for potential / difference and is measured / in volts.
A diode only / allows current to flow / in one direction.

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Collaboration within a class, and between classes, using Lino and Smartboard

I have been experimenting with lino, a free web based tool for creating and sharing notice boards. You can create an account at (linoit.com) or there is an app, but going through a browser avoids the scrolling advert.

I thought it might be a useful way to help students to work co-operatively, and discovered some dos and don’ts that might help other teachers. My first problem is probably particular to my college – I discovered that the app was blocked so that the students couldn’t upload it to their (college) iPads, and that the sign-in page on Safari was faulty. So with my first class of 14-year-olds I had to revise my plans quickly and I invited them all to contribute to one public board. It turned out that many of them thought Shrek had some good ideas about comparing light bulbs. So we celebrated their success in posting, moved on, and their (extra) evening task was to open an account for themselves. They did this successfully, and used the web links and tasks I had put on the first board to start their research in the next lesson.  (The students chose who to work with and spent 30 minutes composing a board).

I gave them some feedback and pointers for improvement , as you can see on the yellow stickie.ImageThe class then had a full Evening School assignment to complete the work. My big criticism is that there is a great deal of cut and paste without attribution. Although the task increased co-operation and gave students an opportunity to backed previous experimental work with exemplars from the real world, little critical thought went on.  I included one structured question to answer, I realise I should have put in more demanding, higher level tasks like this, as well as the ‘contents list’ that they started with, in order to encourage higher level thinking.

The next board was a response to a different task. The Advancing Physics course has a pre-release paper. I chose words from the first paragraph and asked students to compose sentences to show they understood the meaning in the context.

Image

After 15 minutes of composition, I sent students the link to the board, with the words on it, and asked them to post their sentences. We could then add corrections and comments on the SmartBoard to think about whether the sentences used the word correctly, and if they made its meaning clear. I have a large number of ESL students in some classes, and all the students were involved in critical thinking, as they judged the sentences.

What next? Students from other classes can be permitted to look at boards – maybe without permission to post notes. I’ll print the best boards for the notice board outside the classroom. Students have been collaborating while physically in different houses, perhaps we can spread that further?

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

System 1 and System 2 and exam technique

During the Easter break I have been reading Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman. Kahneman won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002, this (2011) book describes how (in his view) cognitive and social psychology explains how we think and make decisions; and why we so often ignore statistics and probability, even when we know the facts. Kahneman writes engagingly and convincingly. When he describes a choice, and explains how and why most people make the wrong choice, my first instinct is usually that wrong, popular option.

Kahneman explains this by invoking two systems (1 and 2). System 1 is the default, the before you blink choice, the intuitive feeling, the conditioned response. System 2 is a choice to think rationally, to consider all the facts, draw the probability tree, calculate the percentages, weigh the relevant evidence, and discard the coincidental occasional correlation or plausible explanation unless there is theory and fact to support it. Kahneman describes system 2 as lazy, it doesn’t start to work unless we prod it into action.

In an early chapter he gives a simple example, which I shall anglicise. You are in a café, and want to buy a scone. This is the sort of café where the pat of butter or spread is charged separately from the scone (I know, next time go somewhere nicer or buy a biscuit). The total is £1.10p. The scone costs £1.00 more than the butter. How much was the butter?

Okay, maybe you have resisted the temptation to say 10p. I’ve tried it on several people, only one thought it through and realised that would be wrong – and she acknowledged the temptation as she thought aloud and said,’ I know it’s not going to be 10p.’ Then took a while to calculate 5p. System 1 clicks in as we first read £1.10p and we have to make a conscious decision to think the question through more carefully.

What has this to do with exam. prep.? My plan is to ask a class (with mini white boards) this question. Then, after the students’ response, to talk about ways they can force themselves to read an examination question carefully, using highlighters, arrows and underlining. The aim being to engage a lazy system 2, to think rationally and explore an idea thoroughly so they can demonstrate their academic ability.

I hope if I share this insight from Professor Kahnemann with my students, it will convince some of them that there is a reason for the advice I give them about examination technique.

Posted in education | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

How I learned to love my Interactive White Board

Before I had an  IWB I had no idea of how useful it could be, and how it could help teaching and learning in my classroom. Learning what was possible was the key to seeing what could be useful, so I thought others might like to share in what I now use most often. The IWB in my classroom is a ‘SmartBoard’, but I have used other types so most of what I shall write will apply to other makes.ImageYou will notice the tool bar is on the bottom, I put it there because the board is on the wall behind my desk, so the bottom of the screen is often obscured from students’ view. At least they are not missing lesson content that way. Just like a touch screen on laptop or tablet, you can swipe to move from page to page. I usually find it more useful to be facing the class at transition moments, so I normally use the keyboard on my desktop, or the remote. However I am a slow typist, so I do prefer to write on the board, choosing the pen tool gives the calligraphy option. This makes a dramatic improvement to my handwriting, not only can the students read what I’ve written, text recognition (select text, choose dropdown menu top right of box) works too.

I still tend to prepare work as PowerPoint slides, not all the machines I use have SmartBoard software. I can add to the slides as I show them on the IWB. if I use the computer mouse to hover over the bottom left corner, and select the pen icon that then appears by tapping on the IWB with a pen  I can later choose to save or discard the annotations. But some prepared IWB files do help to make activities student centred.

Examples

Put a diagram/photo/map in the centre of the board, with unattributed label words around it. Students can drag the words into place, or add arrows. If I hand write each word in a different colour, there’s no danger of two words being grouped together.

Let students sort words into columns (factors affecting thinking or braking distance) or Venn diagrams (KE, momentum or both).

Paste exam questions, and either model or have students attempt their answers.

Paste text and ask students to highlight key words e.g. those showing a particular character trait.

These last examples remind me to talk about more of the tools I find particularly useful. If you choose the camera icon, then switch to a different programme, you can snapshot pictures or text. (Don’t forget to give credit). The pen tool has the option of a highlighter. The blind is useful to conceal then reveal (e.g. model answers). The creative pens help with highlighting important points, but I’m sill looking for a good excuse to use the magic pen that spotlights whatever you circle. A brilliant short cut with the ‘eraser/board cleaner’ is to draw a circle with it and then tap the centre – everything within the circle is wiped.

There are more drawing tools, and word processing tools, there are galleries of activities and objects, and the ability to record a presentation with voice. Although I’ve tried them, they haven’t been so useful in the context of my teaching. But two particular actions have been transformational.

in a physics lesson I often want to develop quite a long argument, referring back to previous lines and diagrams. The IWB has a smaller area than many traditional teaching boards. You can keep writing, but it gets long, thin, and the bit you are talking about to the students is on the bottom, less visible part of the board. So duplicate the present slide/page as you fill it, select all, draw, group, then shrink it into the top left corner. It will still be legible, and is there for reference as you develop the argument.

The other action? As well as filing, under ‘file’ is the option to ‘send as PDF’. At the end of the lesson I can email any student who has missed the class with the notes from that day.

This has been a very quick snapshot overview, to try to demonstrate that an IWB is so much more than just a projector screen. My mind is crowded with other ways to increase student involvement and engagement – I’ll save some for another post.

 

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

An ethic of excellence, Stoner – and Showbie!

This spring I have read two very different books that I’ve found inspiring and affirming. The second book was ‘Stoner’ by John Edward Williams. I’d seen it eulogised by Julian Barnes at Christmas, but it took recommendations by colleagues to get past the tagline on many reviews, that at first the tale might seem bleak and miserable, and Stoner’s life a failure. Spring term was hard work, I felt I didn’t need any prompts to believe that effort was pointless. The book’s message turns out to be the opposite. While every other aspect of Stoner’s life seems dire or doomed, teaching is celebrated as worthwhile. More than that, conscientious teaching with integrity is honourable and sufficient to give an individual a justified sense of self worth. I realise that I am biased. Professor Williams is preaching to the choir here, but I am immensely grateful to read such a brilliantly written testament to the teacher’s vocation. On a different tack, Stoner’s wife seems to be a distillation of every woman that Williams has ever hated, and I am now resolved to stop talking to myself when concentrating.

The first volume was very different. It is a memoir (An Ethic of Excellence) by Ron Berger, an American craft teacher. Berger’s thesis is that students need to learn craftsmanship, that they need to have time to draft, and re-draft, to reach standards beyond their initial capabilities. In common with ‘Stoner’ it is engaging and inspiring. Berger’s anecdotes are interesting and convincing, As a teacher, reading the book I was thinking ‘this is what I want to do, this is what we should do, how can I do this with my students?’ In fact I was muttering it, because I hadn’t then read Stoner.

Berger’s method seems to be through Project Based Learning (PBL), something easier to implement in craft subjects and in (in the UK) primary schools, than in Physics in a college teaching students in their five years before university entrance and so driven to prepare for public examinations. We expect students to redraft and improve some coursework, but too often in Physics students have one try at a task, get feedback, move on. I know the tradition is different in some subjects, and I felt that we should be able to do better in mine.

I decided to work on two types of student tasks, recording and explaining students’ practical work, and making explanations of terms and phenomena that they would share with other students. Digital, electronic methods of submitting their work turned out to be a great enabler. Students could compile scanned or photographed handwritten or drawn work, photographs, word processed accounts, spread sheets, etc. and hand them in electronically. I gave feedback and suggestions electronically, something that could be done quickly, and done at any time. It is easier for students to modify on screen than to rewrite several pages of text. I’ll write about feedback in another blog, but the feedback recognised what was good in what they had done, expressed confidence in their ability to improve, and told them what was needed to progress to named higher grades.

This is where Showbie (http://www.showbie.com/ ) comes in. In one folder I can see all of a class, and add instructions/comments/support links for the whole class or just for individuals. Very good work can be projected as a model. Students can submit and resubmit, and trace the history of their improvement. This is a task in progress, not yet embedded in the students’ culture. I can see how peer review and collaboration on tasks should be built in. However the results so far are promising, and I have added the work of several students (with their permission) to our college VLE as a resource for their peers.

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Plenary or Starter – Flashcards and Quizbusters

One plenary activity I like uses Quizbusters (http://www.teachers-direct.co.uk/resources/quiz-busters/quiz-maker.aspx ) a Flash based quiz based on the old TV game, Blockbusters. If I run it as a class activity I have a buzzer and light set (from a University Challenge board game) to monitor who volunteers an answer first. For those unfamiliar with the quiz, there are two teams, each trying to complete a row across or down the board, by answering one word answer questions given the first letter of an answer (What A is a computer programme?). No thinking time allowed after buzzer is pressed.

The website uses Flash, which won’t run on student iPads, so if I want to use the quiz for a longer activity I must be in a computer room. If we are in an IT room then I pair students, email them the link to the quiz. They compete with each other, and, if time, move on to compete with someone else. This makes a useful end to an desktop computer based lesson, maybe a reward for finishing the main assignment. If natural competiveness is an insufficient motivator, hand out 3 tokens to each contestant – must hand over a token if they lose. My measure of success? When a hard-to-engage student told me, ‘I’m cheating Miss, I’ve learned the answers’.

If you need something that is not Flash based, and which may encourage students to create their own revision resources, why not look at StudyStack? It’s free, and uses the questions and answers that have been input to create half a dozen revision games. Here’s a link to one I made on Twenty-first Century Education: http://www.studystack.com/flashcard-1559292 Tap the card to see the answer, tap correct or incorrect to file it. If you decide to make your own, the FAQ link is really helpful.

Posted in education | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

From teacher centred to student centred 1 – moving pairs

How do we get students to care about more than the percentage they achieved on a test? How do we encourage them to pay attention to the model solutions, and look at where they went wrong, and how to do better next time? In other words, how do we make tests formative rather than summative assessments? (My take is that, for any thinking human, the only assessment that will be purely summative will be their obituary).

I used to be really smug about my test follow-ups. I’d make a PowerPoint of questions plus model answers, with whizzy animated highlights pointing up key points in questions, students would have red pens to annotate their returned scripts, would write 2 or 3 bullet points ‘what I’ve learned..’, I’d collect and quickly recheck their work, those with less than X% would repeat the test. Okay, but preparation time consuming, lesson time consuming, students watched model answers for what they’d already got right, not everyone was engaged all of the time.

So now I often turn it round. Students sit in pairs, compare scripts, look to see what they can learn from each other and correct what they can. After 5 minutes one student moves (the mechanics are described below), so everyone has a fresh partner and the task re-cycles. After 3 or 4 moves the students will have sorted out the easier problems, and by then they are asking me to explain the remaining questions. My preparation is to have copied the test questions onto the interactive white board, so I can explain the thinking that goes into solving the hard problems, live in front of them. Those who ask are sent a PDF of the model answers. Response from students is positive (ages 13 to 18). They feel they have learned during the activity. I see critical thinking, communication and collaboration going on (21st Century learning). In the pairs exercise I am free to encourage, chivvy and focus if needed. Red pens, what I’ve learned, a quick check of returned scripts and retests are still there. I’m thinking of a (digital?) collation of ‘what I’ve learned’ so that students can refer to it before tests.

When else do I use this moving pairs technique? When students are working on past papers or problem sheets. During revision periods – I ask students to write questions and answers for specification bullet points, they then test each other, and copy down good Q and As.

How does it work? After the first 5 minutes we choose ‘who moves’. I am grateful to Andy Griffith who mentioned a couple of ways to choose in an Osiris education course. Usually I specify a chain round the room of moves, and the same person moves each time that lesson, so that pairs do not re-form. Sometimes re-forming will not matter so we have a different choice method at each move.

Methods of choosing who moves:

Bigger/smaller hands/feet             Longer/shorter hair         Taller/shorter       First letter of first name closer/further from end of alphabet

Birthdate of the month closer/further from 31       Birth month closer/further from January       Older/younger

and I have a set of plastic cups each containing two coins to play 2-up, but I confess that’s quite desperate!

Posted in education | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

MOOC and SAMR

Alphabet soup! I decided to try a MOOC (Massive open online course), and luckily picked one run by North Carolina called ‘Coaching Digital Learning’. It’s been great, reminded me of things I’d been meaning to follow up, and introducing some new ideas. One of the reminders was the SAMR acronym. SAMR is a model devised by Dr Reuben Puentedura, of the levels as digital learning grows in an institution. S – substitution, use a digital technique as a direct replacement for a previous activity. Not much improvement/functional change e.g. electronic registration, using an IWB as a simple whiteboard etc. A – augmentation, the substitution of an electronic tool produces better results e.g. students add photos to accounts, Socrative feedback is used.. M – modification, the technology allows for significant task redesign e.g. students create solutions to tasks using various forms of electronic media, on line videos enable flipped learning. R – task redefinition, in ways that were not only impossible before, but inconceivable. Students co-operate electronically within the classroom and beyond to create work in formats previously unavailable.

My aim is to try to work on the M and R stages of SAMR, (but only when it’s appropriate). That involves both me and my students learning new skills and going beyond the familiar. That’ll be 21st century education then.

And a new tool that I’ve learned about on the MOOC – ThingLink. Here’s a link to my SAMR tree. See it now at:
http://www.thinglink.com/scene/511124030363795458

Posted in education | Tagged , | Leave a comment