Bursts and Bubbles

This afternoon the Manaiakalani COL teachers shared the impact of their 2019 Teaching as Inquiry as impact bursts in a panel setting. Here is my journey...

This year I wanted to find out if an ‘increased emphasis on reading comprehension instruction would lead to better subject achievement in reading, writing and maths’.

Having spoken to my students and analysed a summary of current and historical data, my hunch was that my target group struggled to read and interpret written questions. This meant many learning situations, and all testing situations were seen as highly stressful and overwhelming experiences.

After the Term 1 assessments my target group shared the fact that for most questions, they simply clicked on any answer. This honesty meant I did not have a true picture of their achievement as I was not actually assessing their ability to interpret, recall and use their knowledge; instead I was in reality, assessing their skills of random selection.

Deeper analysis of student data and my own observations showed none of my target group were able to respond accurately to questions that were asking them to infer. So rather than focusing on reading comprehension as a whole, I narrowed my focus to only the comprehension strategy of inference, as often it is the inferential component in written questions that cause the disconnects.

What happened for the learners:

• Engagement and agency increased through the co-construction of scaffolds and shared ownership of the learning.
• Overall confidence levels increased. Meaning these students are now asking and answering questions, and trying hard to apply new learning when working independently. Something that was not happening at the start of the year. So this is a huge change.
• The increases in student self efficacy has had a positive impact on the amount of work completed and posted on blogs. 

What evidence do I have for this:

The detailed data analysis on my blog shows most of my target group made the expected achievement shifts across the board and in some cases, accelerated shifts. These students are not at the national norms yet but now, unlike the start of the year, none of our Y7/8s are on the colour wheel, below level 2b in writing or below stage 4 in maths.

To make this happen I...

• Actively sought and embraced help from colleagues
• Personalised the language of instruction to make it explicit
• Used think alouds, learner talk and written exemplars to unpack new learning and vocabulary.
• Used the same lesson structure in all curriculum areas to help my learners to see that what we learn in one curriculum area can be transferred to another.
• Identified opportunities to practise using and reinforce connections to inference in all subjects.
• Adapted support programmes with ongoing help from Donna Ryan in literacy and maths, that include an inferential component and align with our Y7/8 content. Running these in-class has meant the students are not missing learning time in one curriculum area whilst trying to fill gaps in another.
• Made my learners and myself accountable for unfinished work.

The most important learning I made from my inquiry is that changes in teacher practice are paramount to success. If strong connections to learning are to be made, the learning must be accessible to all students. We need to be mindful of the external factors affecting our tamariki that we can not control, as we gently nudge these same students out of their comfort zones using factors we can control.

WFRC#13 Summarise Key Changes in Student Learning...

'The average scale score progress for each year group is described by a benchmark scale score for each year level from the Term 1 trials. They can be used as a guide to compare individual student /class progress between two assessment time points.' - source NZCER

To build a rich picture of my students’ learning I used their historical data, their current data (PAT Reading and Maths, STAR, e-asTTle writing, Probe running record analysis, IKAN and GLoSS), student voice (T1, T2, T3) and my own in-class observations.

Student self-efficacy and self belief about their own ability to understand, interpret and answer questions when in a test, determines the level of confidence or anxiety they bring to that testing situation. The insight my previous inquiry has given me in regards to student self-efficacy and self belief has strongly influenced the way I introduce new learning, guide and feed back to my learners. By this I mean, I have reflected a lot on the changes I made to my teaching practice last year. The excerpt below is taken from a blog post I wrote at the end of 2018.

'I lived by the idea of 'Repetition without boring' which when unpacked, means repurposing, revisiting and tapping into the known to help access the unknown. In other words repeat, repeat, repeat, but do it in a creative way! I used the same lesson format, regardless of text type. Began each lesson by co-constructing the success criteria and revisiting the available scaffolds and exemplars created by our group. Talk was actively planned for to front-load the vocabulary needed to unpack the topic in context, and the language of instruction personalised and explicit. Moving forward I will continue to actively plan time for front-loading, time for planning and time for talk in my lessons, but most importantly, I will try really hard to make sure my learners not only think that they’re good at writing but also think I think they’re good at writing.'

Whilst my previous focus was solely on writing, I found myself applying the same thinking across the curriculum areas. As this year has progressed I have noticed student engagement, work completion rates and confidence levels have increased so I was keen to see if this increased level of efficacy and self belief would be make a difference to my learners when we compared how they felt during data collection time point one with data collection time point two. 

After the Term 1 assessments, my target group shared the fact that for most questions, they simply clicked on any answer. This honesty meant I did not have a true picture of their achievement as I was not actually assessing their ability to interpret, recall and use their knowledge; instead I was in reality, assessing their skills of random selection.
It seems quite a lot has changed since our time point 1 testing. I asked these three questions at the end of each time point 2 assessment session to ensure their responses were authentic. The responses below reflect only the students in my target group who were at school during assessment week.

Link to Google Draw

'A rising tide lifts all ships' and I hope that the levels of confidence and self belief are strong enough to keep these students believing they have the knowledge and skills to swim with the current as they begin next year's learning journey.

WFRC #14 Evaluating changes in teaching practice ...

The catalytic aspect of student learning my inquiry focused on this year was whether ‘increased emphasis on reading comprehension instruction could lead to better subject achievement in reading, writing and maths’. After talking to Fiona Grant at the start of Term 3, I realised that I had already narrowed this from 'increased emphasis on reading comprehension instruction' to 'increased emphasis on the reading comprehension strategy of inference'. We all need an overarching umbrella question to guide our inquiries whilst giving us room to veer off and explore, but I now realise I had an overarching marquee! My question was too broad and without refining would have meant valuable stones were left unturned.

I identified this as my focus when I noticed how real the ongoing struggle is for our learners who do not have the language acquisition and literacy skills needed to make sense of learning at our level.

To build a rich picture of my students’ learning I used their historical data, their current data (PAT Reading and Maths, STAR, e-asTTle writing, Probe running record analysis, IKAN and GLoSS), student voice (T1, T2, T3) and my own in-class observations.

                                                  

The main patterns of student learning I identified in the profiling phase were that they struggled to read and interpret instructions and tasks, which meant that all testing situations were seen as being highly stressful experiences. My target students could not see that we could use the language and strategies we learn in reading, in maths. I needed them to understand that what we learn in one subject can be used to help us in another. The example I chose to explore further was the strategy of inference because the data that identified the gaps in comprehension across my focus group, reflected none of them were able to respond accurately to questions that were asking them to infer. In addition to this, my reading and conversations with colleagues identified that often it is the inferential component in a written maths question that causes the disconnects.

I have always sought and embraced feedback and suggestions from expert colleagues. so the profiling of my own teaching was done collaboratively with my critical friend, Donna Ryan who observed my practice across several different learning areas. Her observations showed that I had strengths in weaving learning from previous sessions into current lessons, co-constructing learning intentions and scaffold supports, teacher modelling of vocabulary and strategies, and questioning.

However I realised quite quickly that my students would likely make more progress if I asked them to remind me why we were doing the task we were doing. Putting the onus on the students to recap the purpose of the learning gave them an increased sense of ownership. Recording responses as they were offered allowed them to see immediate success and gave us a valuable resource to take further steps along our learning paradigm. I have always taken time to listen to and implement student feedback but this time I identified the person/people responsible for the ideas. Doing this again personalised the changes made and showed that I valued their thinking.

The changes I made in my teaching were that I consciously used think alouds to model explicit use of content language and/or the strategy I was teaching in all subject areas. For example, when introducing new words we unpacked the meaning then I used a variety of synonyms to show these words meant the same as known words. An example of this is the way the word multiply is broken down as times tables or groups of. Doing this each time I use the word allows a wider number of students to make the connections they need, to make sense of the learning.

                                                 

I purposely planned activities that encouraged my learners to use the vocabulary in partner, group and class discussions, and set follow up tasks that gave my learners opportunities to use and apply the vocabulary and strategies in context. To support this I provide co-constructed written models at the start of each lesson so my learners are able to continue to make the visual connections to the learning they need in order to find success. By generating these ourselves and not using pre-made versions, I found that my students saw recalling strategy steps and written structures as a natural part of the lesson. 

I took time to notice the types of questions my learners responded to and tried hard to adapt the type of question I asked to suit the purpose and the learner. What I mean by that was sometimes I had to scaffold the questions by really unpacking the language I used, and asking literal questions that I knew my learners could respond to. Other times my questioning was much more open ended for those who were able to respond to a challenge without feeling insecure. Ensuring my learners could find success was the catalyst behind this thinking. My target students preferred to respond to literal questions as they felt safe sharing information they could see. In comparison my more able students tended not to respond to these questions, preferring instead to offer their informed opinions. Over time I have been able to merge this gap by using question stems to support those who struggle with knowing how to word their responses. 

To grow my own knowledge I sought advice from colleagues who have expertise in teaching Maths. Donna Yates (Te Hiku Cluster outreach facilitator) shared an article with me and some great ideas to help learners access a wider variety of Maths language. Sheree Hodge (Ranui School In-school Maths CoL teacher) helped me strengthen my own connections to inference. The professional readings I used are listed in these blog posts - Link 1. Link 2.

Overall I would rate the changes in student learning as a success. The evidence for my rating is that despite the results achieved in the online testing, the results achieved in the GLoSS, IKAN and Probe assessments showed my learners have made progress. This aligns with what I have seen in the classroom. My target students, like their peers have become more confident when faced with new learning, are actively involved in discussions and try hard to apply strategies at their level when working independently on follow up tasks. The latter being something that was not happening at the start of the year, with my target students relying on the learned behaviour of waiting for help from their peers or from me. This is a huge change. They are no longer the students who sit quietly watching the learning happening around them as they adopt every known strategy to avoid having to answer a question or give an opinion. A lot of positive reinforcement and gentle nudging has helped them start trying to swim through the sea of learning by using and applying the strokes of their own knowledge.

The most important learning I made about whether an increased emphasis on the strategy of inference could lead to better subject achievement in reading, writing and maths, was that whilst standardised testing data is an important measure of achievement, it is most definitely not the only measure that should be observed. The external factors that our students come to school with are real. Our tamariki can not be expected to automatically disassociate from a highly stressful situation outside of school because I am asking them to in many cases, undertake the highly stressful situation of sitting a test. I am proud of the effort they put into their learning this year, even though some results do not align with the work that happened daily in our classroom.

The most important learning I made about inquiry was that change is paramount to success. If strong connections to learning are to be made as teachers we need to make the learning accessible for all students. We need to be empathetic and supportive as we push our learners out of their comfort zones. Our learners in return, need to take risks and embrace change; and where possible commit to continuous patterns of attendance to avoid the disconnects in learning that erratic absences cause. 

Some learnings that would be relevant to other teachers are that it is important to remember the external factors out of our control, should not affect the factors we can control.

Icons made by Freepik from www.flaticon.com