Blog -
The role of Communication in Engaging Parents as a Key Stakeholder
Blog 2 of the series focusing on Parental Engagement, written by guest blogger, Jenny Walker.
Share on:
by Staffordshire Research School
on the
This blog is the third in the series from Staffordshire Research School. Click on these links to access Blogs 1& 2 which focus on Recommendation 1: Lay the foundations for effective feedback and Recommendation 2: Deliver appropriately times feedback that focuses on moving learning forward.
The third in this blog series focuses on recommendation 3 from the EEF guidance report on teacher feedback. This recommendation advises that we:
Plan for how the pupils will receive and use feedback.
This can be broken down into two parts. In my experience, the first part of the recommendation – planning for how pupils will receive feedback – gets short-changed in our thinking.
We, as practitioners, often think carefully about how the feedback we give will be used – I’m thinking peer assessment, DIRT time (Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time) or target setting for the next piece of work. However, actually thinking about planning how the pupils will receive it requires some heavy reflection on your own part – namely asking yourself whether have you paid enough attention to the CULTURE of feedback that is needed in your classroom for there to be an embraced growth mindset developing in all and a hunger for learning and progress.
These things aren’t easy to put in place admittedly. An article I read recently by Guy Clayton (Effective Learning) focuses on the interplay between knowledge, skills and the development of epistemic character. The development of a feedback culture permeates these three levels when we’re thinking about using quality feedback in the classroom to move learners forward.
Pupils need to have the knowledge of their ultimate goal and the criteria against which their work is being judged/evaluated.
Pupils need to be trained in the skills needed to apply the feedback they receive systematically and this takes practice.
‘DIRT’ movement is an example of this. The D boldly stands for dedicated and this is key.
Dedicated here means predictable, systematic ways in which the learners can apply feedback in real time and feel in control of their own improvements.
If we systematise the methods we expect students to use, we free up cognitive space for them to actually process the feedback as opposed to worrying about how they can apply it.
Clayton focuses on the idea that all practitioners are subconsciously (and hopefully sometimes consciously!) transmitting their own views and attitudes towards learning which are likely impacting either positively or negatively on each learners’ epistemic character.
If we model and discuss learning and growth mindset openly, invite colleagues in to give us feedback and let the children in on the importance of this exchange with colleagues (in the interests of helping us to become the most effective practitioners we can be), then we are sending the learners clear messages about the value of feedback in itself, the value of peer feedback and are explicitly modelling the kind of growth mindset and learning culture we want to see in our classrooms.
On the flip side, if we get really embarrassed when we get something wrong, display obvious displeasure at someone being in the back of our classrooms (for example), an opposite and unwanted contribution to epistemic character development is occurring.
The guidance report highlights four factors which may influence a pupils’ use of feedback:
The layer in which practitioners operate, in terms of the development of epistemic character, ties into each of these factors.
We have to model an ever-curious approach to our work and show students how we ALL progress through trial and error.
An example of what this might sound like in a micro script is below:
‘Thank you all for trying hard on this last assessment. Now, I am not worried if you didn’t score in a high band at present: this is all about your individual progress.
What is important is that you apply the feedback you get from this assessment to the new work and thus the quality (or mark) improves. This is where you all are now (display or call up for 1−2−1). This is how I will track this and show you your progress each time.’
I would argue that this (and trust) are more difficult to plan for and think about.
But think about it we should!
Making our learners feel safe and valued in the space, helping ensure that other children (their peers) know how to respond positively and respectfully to incorrect/inaccurate answers is vital. Phrases like the micro script below may be helpful:
‘It doesn’t matter if someone gives an incorrect answer – it is ALWAYS an opportunity for the whole class to learn and improve.
If someone openly makes an error, it means there WILL be others in the group who are not yet correct too and we want to help everyone to get it ‘all the way right’.
So listen carefully to the answer because I will be asking you whether you agree/disagree and asking you to explain your thinking.
If several of you are getting it wrong, it means that I need to address something with the class, so it’s important feedback for me.’
This kind of feedback isn’t ‘set piece’ feedback from a teacher – one would hope that a teacher’s default position is to build confidence and self belief in their pupils – but how we manage the feedback from the peers in the classroom – be it direct from structured commentary or indirectly from a reaction – is crucial.
We are not only preparing a growth mindset for individual learners, we are creating a growth mindset and learning culture in the room itself.
For example, it is important to set up ground rules which make it clear that is never okay to laugh at someone, to respond maliciously, to deliberately make someone feel small or unintelligent.
We know that intelligence is absolutely not a fixed commodity and the children in your room need to know this and feel it.
Ground rules around what you will and won’t accept when students give answers is a crucial part of that feedback climate.
One aspect of this trust dimension comes from the teacher in terms of the way in which a teacher builds their students up to feel empowered and motivated to learn.
Another vital aspect of this trust though comes from credibility and follow through: Making clear what the good intentions of your teaching are; acting on those good intentions and so on.
Look at this example situation below:
Now, in this example, the pupils don’t particularly make a fuss or even ask about the missing feedback, but the reliability of the teacher has now been brought into question as well as the self confidence and self belief of each child in the room.
Each child now (on some level) believes that their efforts in this classroom are not valued, that their work is not valued, that in fact – their work is just no good. AND by extension, their intelligence is ‘no good’.
A terrible contribution to the development of epistemic character has been sown: it’s not worth trying, as people don’t care anyway.
What’s the point?
The damage that this one seemingly insignificant act has potentially had is unseen, but quite difficult to reverse if we don’t consciously counteract this suspicion and doubt in their teacher.
Working memory IS something we can plan for! If we build up the success criteria that pupils will use slowly so that pupils aren’t focusing on too many pieces of criteria at once, we are keeping the working memory freed up to focus on the skill of actually using the feedback and applying it.
Take the example below:
The first time students are asked to self/peer assess against criteria, they only have two foci:
a) all proper nouns have capital letters at the start and
b) three key dates from the list are used accurately.
Once this has been tried and the skill of applying the success criteria to their own work practised, you can add in more focus areas:
c) two heroes of the reform are referenced
d) there are no abbreviations or contractions (adopting a formal tone) and
e) at least one key fact about each ‘hero’ is used.
NB: Examples here are for illustration only of the criteria build.
You might decide to differentiate the feedback being applied depending on the capacity of pupils in your class and this decision will depend on your understanding of your class.
Note that building up the criteria like this will allow you to start building some general literacy based criterion too which can be applied across multiple tasks.
Once the processes around how your learners are expected to use feedback e.g. clear codes for certain errors (such as *1 = use a more sophisticated word from our vocabulary list); regular routines used for DIRT (such as Use of purple pen, always respond to a question in a full sentence) etc., the criteria can become much more complex.
Once the processes around how your learners are expected to use feedback e.g. clear codes for certain errors (such as *1 = use a more sophisticated word from our vocabulary list); regular routines used for DIRT (such as Use of purple pen, always respond to a question in a full sentence) etc., the criteria can become much more complex.
Next time: Recommendation four – Carefully consider how to use purposeful, and time-efficient, written feedback.
This series of blogs is written by Stacey Jordan, Operational Lead at the Staffordshire Research School.
Blog -
Blog 2 of the series focusing on Parental Engagement, written by guest blogger, Jenny Walker.
Blog -
How to minimise gaps in recall impacting on future learning. Written by guest blogger, Neil Randall from Etone College.
Blog -
This website collects a number of cookies from its users for improving your overall experience of the site.Read more