Chris Chivers (Thinks)

  • Home
  • Blog-Thinking Aloud
  • Contact
  • Contents
  • PDFs
  • Sing and strum

Inclusion at Exemplar Primary

28/1/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
Exemplar Primary, Exemplartown.
Set within a very built up, deprived area of Exemplartown, Exemplar Primary School is an oasis of calm and purpose which has a significant impact on the lives of the children and families, from two years of age.

I can only hope to capture the essence of the school in this report, based, as it is, on one day in the school.
Exemplar Primary School can rightly see itself as a beacon of excellence in Inclusion working within a broad local group that is working collaboratively to improve opportunities across the area.

The school has a very clear vision, articulated by the head and visible throughout the school, especially within very high quality displays but also through conversation, plans and other visual evidence. The term “Team around the child (TAC)” can be used to summarise the staff approach to the individual needs of the children. The school creates informal, internal TACs to oversee the well-being and educational needs of vulnerable individuals. Parents are fully involved within this process.

The following poem is offered as a summary.
Unity
(author unknown)
I dreamed I stood in a studio and watched two sculptors there,
The clay they used was a young child’s mind and they fashioned it with care.

One was a teacher: the tools she used were books and music and art;
One was a parent with a guiding hand and gentle loving heart.

And when at last their work was done, they were proud of what they had wrought.
For the things they had worked into the child could never be sold or bought!

And each agreed she would have failed if she had worked alone.
For behind the parent stood the school and behind the teacher the home!


Care for children and their backgrounds underpins the Exemplar Primary ethos and exemplifies a fully inclusive approach:-
  • Seeks maximum academic success for all children
  • Is focussed on the pursuit of outstanding teaching and learning
  • Is focussed in the interest of relationships for learning
  • Understands and cares for each individual
  • Is a loving, fun and humane school
  • Works with parents and children to raise standards and achieve excellence

I would want to recognise the substantial volume of work undertaken by the Inclusion coordinator, supported fully by staff at all levels, in collating such a wealth of information available before the visit, that was thorough, interesting, informative and gave a rounded view of the school.  Many thanks too, to the different people, staff, Governors and parents who came to share their views during the assessment visit. I’d particularly like to thank the children for their welcome. They were a credit to the school.

The school building is bright, well lit, well equipped and well maintained with main teaching areas and separate withdrawal rooms. There are well used connecting corridors. The building is significantly enhanced by very high quality displays showcasing children’s activities. The children treat the school with respect, enjoying the facilities on offer. They move around the site sensibly.

The children, parents, Governors and staff were very welcoming, positive and ensured that openness and honesty were significant features of the visit.

The vision of the Head teacher, and the Senior Leadership Team is demonstrated throughout the school, as evidenced through the conversations with the school partners, staff at different levels, parents, Governors and children. The vision is enacted by staff who articulate and model expectations, treating adults and children with equal respect, ensuring that the ethos is enabled to grow. Children respond accordingly, evidenced through the classroom visits at different times of the day. The processes which embed the philosophy are developed, modelled and described to ensure that there is clarity across all staff groups. Aspiration is also tempered by realism; possibilities are generated, then careful choice is made. Action is monitored and evaluated. Exemplar Primary School is a reflective school.

The over-riding impression given by Exemplar Primary School is of a school that has an understanding of what it wants to provide to enhance the learning experience for children. There is an energy and enthusiasm within the school which is clearly visible in the attitudes and behaviour of the children. There is a values-based ethos, based on openness, honesty and humanity, which ensures that the Inclusion agenda is assured. It is enhanced by the Rights, Respects and Responsibilities approach, helping the children to articulate their place in the school. 

There is very clear leadership, with a number of key staff working together as the SLT, through which developments are shared, enhanced, tested in practice and reviewed to assess impact. As a result the school benefits from the drive and enthusiasm of a supportive management group, which is communicated through the children. Around these hubs is a group of fully engaged, interested and energetic staff, whose voices are being enabled to be heard, but also valued by decision-makers, who encourage thinking and engagement to ensure that all decisions are based on the most secure information. Within this organisation too, individuals are mentored, supported and developed through structured in-house and external CPD.

The school policy for teaching and learning can be described as a dynamic continuum, based within clear themes.

There is developing evidence of:-
1) Analysis of evidence leading to quality information being made available to support
2) detailed planning, including the provision of appropriate resources and staffing.
3) Children in the best practise, actively sharing in their learning journey, which is
4) tracked and reviewed at regular intervals with
5) records being collated and disseminated, allowing the process to be cyclic and developmental.

The school is one where continuous development as a result of self-assessment is an essential element of all processes, ably led by senior managers. Systems are being strengthened as a result of testing and adaptation to need. This process is evolutionary.

Children and their learning is at the heart of whole-school development, with significant work being undertaken to ensure that personalised approaches to learning are a reality for vulnerable children, with a differential approach to the aspiration for all learners. Learning is tracked throughout a child’s schooling. Systems are in place that will ensure that quality information derived from attainment data will be available to teachers to support target setting.

The children are a credit to the school. They were invariably polite, happy to engage in discussion of their own learning and their experiences through their time at the school, although a few found discussion more of a challenge. They are partners in the running of the school, some being given responsibility through a variety of means.

There is significant evidence of good practice in Inclusion, across all categories of need. Inclusion is evident in every aspect of school life, ensuring that Every Child Matters and, as an extension, that every person associated with the school is also fully valued.

The Governing body is a strong element of the development agenda, ensuring that the school is more able to articulate strong reasoning for improvements and initiatives before committing funding. There are a number of active members, with broad expertise which is made available to benefit the school.

Parents express their pleasure at having their children at the school and endorse the view that the school is open, honest and welcoming, to their children and them as parents.

Kahlil Gibran:      Teaching:

Then said a teacher, "Speak to us of Teaching." And he said:
No man can reveal to you aught but that which already lies half asleep in the dawning of our knowledge.
The teacher who walks in the shadow of the temple, among his followers, gives not of his wisdom but rather of his faith and his lovingness.
If he is indeed wise he does not bid you enter the house of wisdom, but rather leads you to the threshold of your own mind.
The astronomer may speak to you of his understanding of space, but he cannot give you his understanding.
The musician may sing to you of the rhythm which is in all space, but he cannot give you the ear which arrests the rhythm nor the voice that echoes it.
And he who is versed in the science of numbers can tell of the regions of weight and measure, but he cannot conduct you thither.
For the vision of one man lends not its wings to another man.
And even as each one of you stands alone in God's knowledge, so must each one of you be alone in his knowledge of God and in his understanding of the earth.

Significant strengths:-

  • Open, honest and humane approach to the needs of the whole school community.
  • Very self-aware, through review, quality assurance and good knowledge of school data.
  • Planning being developed at different levels.
  • Enthusiastic, supportive staff progressing the learning agenda.
  • Motivated pupils.
  • Parents, Governors and outside agencies able to provide broader support, but also appropriate challenge.
  • A community where everyone’s personal and learning needs matter.
The level of discussion throughout the visit was of a high quality, with staff prepared to engage in discussion and debate. This openness is to be applauded as it allowed trains of questioning and a depth of thinking to emerge, which might support future developments. It is clear that teaching and learning are at the heart of the school thinking.

Area for reflection.

While there was evidence of differential challenge from teachers in lessons especially in English and maths, there was less clear evidence from children that they could articulate what they were seeking to improve in their learning.  It would be worth reviewing the detail of differential challenge across the ability range, where there is potential for less clear articulation of expectation, which in turn might lead to slightly reduced performance by significant class members. See the discussion topic below.
​
Consider the impact of peer to peer learning dynamics as a model of what is possible, especially the impact within setting, where a narrower ability range might limit visualisation of what is really possible, especially for less able learners.
 
Picture
0 Comments

Inclusion and SEN

27/1/2016

3 Comments

 
Over the past couple of years, on Twitter, there have been many conversations about Inclusion and whether it is desirable or achievable.

The introduction of the new version of the National Curriculum, with a year group based scheme of work has sometimes seemed to bring the whole into one simple argument. While some argue that it demonstrates “high expectations” and suggest that “they” hold such expectations, others begin to argue that, where some children are failing to keep up with their peers that somehow they should be “elsewhere”. Any alternative argument is met with an accusation of “dumbing down”, or some other put down.

In the early days of the drafting of the NC, I was worried by the emergence of the term “mastery”, because this connotation could be equated to a proportion of more able children, whose needs might be argued as better met in a separate establishment; Grammar Schools keep hitting the headlines.

There is also the idea of a National Standard, that has been notionally set by the Government that, on a simple reading of the National Curriculum suggests that all children should “know and understand” the contents of the scheme of work. So it is arguable that where a child “knows and understands” less than 100% of the scheme of work, that there are gaps that will affect their future progress. Can we really get to a stage where 100% of children in a year group will achieve 100% in any test situation? Therefore, by definition, there will be a proportion of children who will be deemed not to have achieved. These children are likely to largely be those whose learning is less secure and may also have some kind of Specific Learning Difficulty that underlies this.

Anyone who has regularly read my blog will know that I have raised concerns about those children who will be judged to not be on track to achieve at the cohort expectation, especially when they get to transfer age, at 7 or 11, or to use and adjust a phrase used prior to 2015, “Secondary ready”, which could then be extrapolated to “Junior ready”.
Rather than worrying about the potential for creaming off the top, I am beginning to be more exercised by the potential for the argument that certain children “do not belong” in mainstream education.

This, to me, is being exacerbated by a developing narrative of Inclusion as being synonymous with integration of SEN, rather than the idea of catering for the needs of all children. It is then easier for some to start to articulate “otherness” and “not fitting”.

If there has been systematic, forensic internal analysis of individual needs, plans put in place that have had limited impact, despite best efforts from appropriate staff, advice sought from external expertise that has also been implemented, then a case study might be drawn up that seems to support alternative needs.

However, a class teacher may express the view that X “doesn’t belong” because they do not have the expertise to address the evident needs. Limited teacher expertise, understanding or tolerance, does not make a child into a special need case. So quality of teaching has to be taken onto account. Negativity towards the learner, once expressed, cannot be taken back and this rupture can become the real cause of the need to move the learner. If an internal move is possible, it is to be hoped that this will not be with a label that colours the receiving teacher view, or it becomes a negative cycle with it’s own dynamics.

It has, for many teachers, become more difficult to fully define individual learning needs within the current NC, with systems deeming children to be “emerging”, until they have completed the curriculum to be delivered. As this is likely to be in the summer term, there needs to be a greater clarity about ongoing security with the essential learning. The system could have an inbuilt delay in intervention.

Inclusion is just doing your job well, for each and every child in the class and the school. Systems should be in place that identify the vulnerable learners and those who are potentially vulnerable, as an aspect of ongoing assessment activities. The notion of TIC, TAC, TOE should guide decisions as concerns deepen (team including the child, around the child, of experts), with teachers knowing the level of concern, interventions planned and ongoing outcomes from these interventions, so that expectations are coordinated across all aspects of a child’s learning.
​
In the absence of any other methodology, here’s a crib sheet of SEN categories with some possible identifiers.
Picture
It is quite likely that a teacher will meet a child, or children, who test their ability to adapt and cater for their needs. To discuss the needs with a knowledgeable other is professional, not to do so, then to suggest that a child is wrongly placed, without a developed history, is bordering on unprofessional, in my opinion.
At an extreme, I am reminded of a radio programme that I listened to while travelling from an ITE observation, which was the story of Albert Goering, the brother of Herman, "The Good Goering". The term “unter-menchen” came up in discussion about the removal of those who didn’t fit.

Is it possible that the fate of children with Special Needs or Specific Learning Difficulties will be described as “not fitting” and to be removed to another place, thereby bringing back into reality the idea of an under-being? Of course, when one is removed, another takes their place at the “bottom of the class”, or as a higher concern. Becomes cyclic.

Unintended consequences?

​Better to build teacher expertise so that individuals, and the school can deal better with needs.
​
Inclusion ethos; everyone has value in and for themselves. Every child matters (and always has)
3 Comments

Learning to think for yourself

26/1/2016

0 Comments

 
There’s not much point in schools talking of Growth Mindset or “learned helplessness” if the systems being used do not allow learners to start to use and apply what they are learning effectively and independently.

All of the trainees with whom I work are in Primary schools, some Infant, some Junior and one in Special. One thing that strikes me each time I visit to observe and support is often the number of adults in the room, sometimes the student, the class teacher and usually one (or more) teaching assistant(s).

During the lesson, each of the adults has to be effectively deployed to support learning; after all, that is what they are paid to do. This can mean, in an extreme case that every working group in the class has an adult, who needs to show that they are doing their job, so that no child is learning to work independently, thinking for themselves, making decisions. And yet, learning to think for yourself is a fundamental aspect of learning to cope in the real world.
​
Picture
In Early Years, up to the age of five, child directed activities enable an adult to join in as a participant observer, joining in with and ascertaining some elements of the child’s thinking. There will be teacher led activities, but with an assessment eye kept on children’s articulation of ideas.

Where the National Curriculum has become ever more prescriptive, in my opinion, since 1997, the transition to year one and beyond can often mean a significant difference in approach, more teacher/adult led, with, currently, the significant focus on English and Maths seemingly diminishing the roles of other subjects. I have argued in other posts that the wider range of subjects provides the bread and butter for English teaching, as they should all be taught through spoken, reading and writing based activities. 

Where there is a significant number of adults involved in the class, there is every possibility that in each group, the dominant voice will be that of the adult, unless each of the adults has been trained to elicit open-ended discourse from the children, rather than single word, “guess what’s in my head” answers, teacher “cloze” procedures.

If children are to learn to think, to develop a “growth mindset”, they need appropriate challenge, space and time to reflect, to think and plan, to make rational decisions, before acting. They need to take some control of their actions, not have them continually moderated, adjusted and vetoed by the adult, if they are to learn from their mistakes through evaluation. The recipe approach to teaching does not, of itself, embed the ability to think. It is more a follow instructions approach; a “good outcome” is often assured, but may not be repeatable. It can also be subverted by an adult who wants their own efforts to be applauded.

Children certainly need language and language models through which to understand their world and to be able to participate fully in discussing their current awareness. Without this essential, every adult can be left guessing, so that plans are based on assumptions.

Learning to think is a process; we talk of a thought process. Life is a series of experiences through which we pass, picking up information in passing, or as a direct result of being in a formal learning situation. This happens from birth. From this point, the life experiences that a child might experience will be determined by others for a large part of their formative years. If they have parents who travel, and take them to museums to theatres, galleries, parks, forests, the seaside, a farm, who share books and watch information programmes with them, they are likely to develop a broad vocabulary, with the opposite also likely to be the case. There are often statements about children from language rich environments having significantly greater vocabularies. Not only that, but they will have a store of visuals from which to operate in an abstract manner. So an awareness of an individual’s experiences outside school will inform expectations in the formal learning environment.

It was interesting to me, in visiting several London Primary schools during the summer of 2014, just how rich was the curriculum offered, with all of them taking advantage of transport and free entry possibilities, as well as arranging for local theatre, dance and music companies to visit to enhance the internal experiences. Coupled with “forensic knowledge” of each child, as described by one head, the only surprise was that they achieved 95%+ level 4 SATs with 35+ heritage languages. They offered much that was valued and reaped the rewards of effort.
​
Picture
Making Sense of Experience; building internal images and models.

The central premise of this model was initially created some thirty years ago, when I was a science coordinator in a Junior school, evolving from an earlier incarnation, created for a Primary school where I was responsible for the topic based curriculum, in a setting that valued first-hand experience where possible. The model seeks to describe how ideas are deepened from the initial experience through to checking things out and reappraising new information.

The whole is premised upon good communication in a variety of forms. The experience, explore, explain mantra was the essential shorthand, with picture it, test it and reform ideas as an underlying methodology. Whether everyone goes through, or needs to go through all the phases will depend on the teacher awareness of the individuals who make up the class. It does not presume a step by step linearity. In practice, some children might have been scaffolded through the process to instil the essence of exploratory thought, while other might have been challenged to plan the scaffold and execute the exploration for themselves.
 
It was not context, or knowledge free, as it overlaid most aspects of the Topic curriculum, covering pretty much everything apart from Maths, as English often took advantage of the exploratory aspects to provide the stimulus for talk or writing. It gave a clue as to what might be called a learning maturity, from dependent to independent approaches, with children challenged and expected to use and apply previously learned skills and knowledge.

That children can take some charge of their learning, from an early age, is an aspect of current practice that can be overlooked, within “delivery mechanisms”.

When you teach a child to tie their laces, you might expect them to practice and repeat the exercise each time with greater proficiency, not require them to be shown each time, nor to defer to the adult for an easy life.
Let them think, let them learn, then let them use what they can do for themselves.

That way they will learn to think for themselves, because they know that they can.

0 Comments

65- grinding out assessment?

22/1/2016

0 Comments

 
Why 65? Not because I might be heading that way, but because teaching standard 6 is assessment, while 5 is adaptation, but I like to think of them, in practice, as 6-know your children and think on your feet and 5-spot and deal with issues as they become evident.
In today’s Schools Week, Michael Tidd argues that the current state of assessment, particularly the approach from the Government, is, at best unhelpful, at worst simply a “dog’s breakfast”. Michael has spent the past few years unpicking, in fine detail, every pronouncement on the subject; this time rightly considering the impact on teacher workload.

Below is a diagram that outlines the range of activities regularly undertaken by a teacher. In addition there is a need to understand all the changes being wrought on the system, sometimes multiple "tweaks".​

Picture
In several blogs over the past few years, in different fora, I have argued that assessment underpins all teacher activity; it is essentially how teachers get to know the children in their class(es). Once there was a National Curriculum (NC) with associated levels that sought to describe differences in performance between children. As a Primary deputy head at the time, the 1987 incarnation of the NC described clearly the curriculum that could largely be seen in a good Primary School, so the adjustment was to understand and incorporate the level or progress descriptors into practice. In many cases that actually led to a rise in expectation and articulation of progress over the following years, even where there were tweaks to the main curriculum framework.

The introduction of sub-levels and APP (Assessing Pupil Progress) as an extended version of progress descriptors led to practices that were almost self-defeating; it can be hard enough to determine a difference between a good level 3 and a lower achieving 4, but to differentiate between top 3c and bottom 3b? There was also a narrowing of challenge, as teachers sought to create tasks that moved children a sub-level. All this was losing sight of the bigger picture. In the attempt to create what passed as “rigour” at the time, there was a self-limiting of outcomes. The impact of this was to see the need for greater emphasis on “Literacy”, not English and “Numeracy”, not maths, to the growing detriment of other curriculum subjects, which, to my mind diminished the knowledge base available to children to enhance their vocabulary, spoken, read and written. That was a significant factor in keeping a broad, balanced and relevant, experience and language rich curriculum until I stopped being a head in 2006. As a result, children achieved well across all areas, and, from parent reports, have gone on to high level achievements later.

Apparently, teachers and parents didn’t understand levels, so that was a key reason why they disappeared. There is no doubt in my mind that they became badly used in some areas and were usually ignored at transfer to Secondary education. As they were “best fit”, there was always the potential for gaps to proceed with children, which was why, in my school, we established the “flip out target sheet” that highlighted the ongoing learning need, even if a “level” had been achieved, on the premise that all 3b children will not be the same.

The current curriculum, especially for Primary schools, where assessment has been effectively written in as “achieve everything in the year expectation to be at the “right” standard” and written out as “create your own system”. Visiting trainee teachers in a range of schools across two counties, it can appear as if the range of approaches is likely to create a new set of issues. Some schools have systems that are akin to levelness, with associated APP style tracking documents. Some are guided by the LA to see children as “emerging” as they will not have completed the year programme. There are variations in interpretation within LA schools. Others are still trying to wade their way between systems, or are focused purely on outcomes, with little in the way of judgement; completing the activity is the important aspect.

Issues that could arise: -
  • The curriculum is not “covered”, so, by definition, the children cannot be deemed to have fully “emerged”. Even if the curriculum is covered, there is no guarantee that all the information “delivered” will be firmly embedded in every child’s head.
  • “Challenge” is often offered after a basic, “expected” task is tackled, so time may not be available to tackle the challenge, which, for some might be the more realistic start point. In many ways, the style can be seen to be moving back to a traditional, whole class, three-part lesson, with minor variations.
  • The danger is of a delivery model that superficially ensures that all children will achieve. It could, in due course, result in “dumbing down” rather than creating a learning dynamic.
  • The curriculum is very literacy and numeracy heavy, with less time available to do quality work in other curriculum subjects. This limits the knowledge and experience base that can contribute to a rich language environment.
  • Being “top down” the controls on teachers’ ability to innovate can sometimes seem restrictive. Breaking away from the control might push some institutions and individual teachers into anxiety territory. Fear restricts the ability to think.
  • Some institutions interpret models into a second layer of expectation, further restricting the teacher ability to think for themselves. This, in turn, can restrict the children’s ability to think for themselves.
  • At significant points, children will be judged through external tests and given a number of “labels”, based on their numeric standardised score, or in words, such as at, or not at standard. This is supposed to be better than the previous level system. Levelness has become de facto “yearness”, with a possible “pass/fail” normative mentality overriding achievement.
  • At transition/ in year transfer, children entering a new school, with a different system will potentially face some kind of overview assessment or test to determine their ability compared with their new peers.
  • There will not be a common language between schools.
  • Judgement on a broader scale could become more difficult, especially for vulnerable learners, whose descriptor of “emerging” may not be sufficiently clear for accurate judgements to be made about personal capability. It will be, is becoming easy for some teachers to articulate that a child “can’t/shouldn’t be in their class”. Where they “should be” is another level of issue.

Teachers are paid to think about education, yet the top down system demanding compliance (or else) may actively be working against quality thinking, as teachers seek to second guess what “they” (LA, Academy chain, Ofsted, Government) actually want. Schemes are being created and bought that impose potentially further restrictions on thinking, as teachers seek to embed them in practice effectively. The curriculum is becoming more of a delivery mechanism. Why should that worry me?
  • Largely because standards 6 and 5 are the key to getting closer to individual, group and class needs. The judgemental aspects of standard 6, between and within lessons, are effected through adaptations between lessons or within a lesson. That nuance can be lost in a delivery model. It is often evident in ITE trainees, who are focused on getting through the lesson more than the actual learning and getting to know the needs of individuals.
  • Assessment, to my mind, has always meant knowing your children. It also means knowing the generic progression in each of the subjects that make up the Primary curriculum. Marrying the two together is the essence of good planning that embeds appropriate challenge for different needs.
  • Planning is, at heart, a(n) hypothesis, a general descriptor of what will happen if all your prior judgements have been accurate.
  • All plans should be subject to adjustment within the lesson, if, on the balance of evidence and the teacher judgement, individuals, groups or the whole class seem to be finding aspects harder or easier than expected. In-lesson interactions and oral and written feedback are likely to be influenced by these judgements. 6&5 effectively mean spot and deal with learning issues in a lesson.
  • Reflection after the lesson, or period of lessons allows for future plans to be adjusted to outcomes. This could be in the form of “interleaving”, or adjusting future demands to cater for known needs.

The agenda for school improvement, while laudable at one level, is also possibly deeply flawed. It is based on the premise that, “properly” delivered, the curriculum as written will result in a larger number of children achieving higher outcomes. Where there were approximately 75% of children achieving a level 4c+, there was an aspiration for 85% to achieve at what was described as 4b+, supposedly to better achieve at Secondary.

My feeling is that, in order to achieve at this level, curricular sacrifices will be made that impact negatively on the English outcomes, as children work with a reduced diet. In many ways, despite being adherents to the philosophy of E D Hirsch, the current direction of curriculum interpretations could actually be running counter to the aspiration of cultural literacy. I fully expect an HMI report in the next few years that says that Primary children are not getting a good deal in history, geography, proper Primary science, design technology and art.

If it was indeed the case that level 4b+ was the “grail”, all that was needed were a few minor tweaks, learning from those who had already achieved at this level, despite contextual difficulty, eg the London Challenge, rather than the several years of change, which have not yet ceased, as the first tests are no due until this summer, with inevitable changes for the 2016-17 academic year.

That nothing is yet secured in education is worrying. While navigating stormy seas is part and parcel of school life, never to reach land and to be able to map clear directions leaves the system as a whole adrift.

Every teacher is adrift with a boat load of children. They deserve good maps and the ability to captain their own ships with certainty. They carry a valuable cargo, who should be enjoying time to look around and take in the experiences as they pass, rather than being kept too busy to look, or only allowed to see the world through a small port hole. The teacher, as a good captain, should also be looking out for the well-being of her team.
​
It needs leadership, direction and permission to address evident need, not dictat, exhortation and whip-cracking, with potential “punishment” (academisation) for not achieving.
0 Comments

In for a penny

21/1/2016

2 Comments

 
Jennifer “can’t read”.

Try reading this line again just using only phonics knowledge.

Was it possible, as an able, adult reader, to revert back to an early reader stage? If it was, was it quick and fluent?

This week, I have been visiting School Direct trainees as they embark on their second experience. Two lessons, in particular, stood out as food for thought. One was a maths lesson, where children were challenged to use small coins to make 10p. The other was a phonics lesson, where children were asked to use knowledge of sounds to make words. As this was a second practice, the trainee reflected on the subtle difference between the schools, as one was working on Read, Write Inc, while the second school was using Letters and Sounds. There was some nervousness in her approach, as she wanted desperately to “get it right”.

The whole coalesced when I bumped into an elderly ex-colleague, who reminisced about her teaching days, including the regular teaching of phonics, as a part of reading.

In my own mind, it brought together a simple premise. In mathematics there is the concept of conservation of number, where a whole number has a known value. Where a child has conservation of number, they are able to hold the value of a number and add or take away another without recourse to counting from one. In the maths lesson, it was interesting to see who was reverting to counting, rather than maintaining the values of coins. Conservation of number and accompanying visualisation supports fluency in mathematical thinking.
​
Picture
In words, the building blocks of each word are the letters and sounds that combine to make the word. Much has been written and argued about phonics teaching and the relative merits of one approach or another, often centred on the idea of mixed methods or whole word approaches. I know that I learned through whole word, largely Ladybird and Janet and John. However, throughout my teaching career, I have taught children, of all ages the letter-sound correspondences that make up a phonics approach. In fact, it was often an area of investigation of “non-readers”, that I would check their phonics knowledge. Non–readers would present with fluency and accuracy issues, both of which meant that they were then no able to understand the text being read.

While there is a need for direct phonics teaching and, where it is done well, it does impact on learning, once words are built up, it seems eminently logical to me that they are then “conserved” as whole words for ease of carrying around, rather than having a pocketful of small change, reserving phonics as a tool for tackling unknown words when they are encountered. I remember all of my children, and now my grandchildren, asking “What’s that word?”

They wanted a holistic answer, not a “Let’s work it out” approach, as the word, as a whole, embedded some information, whereas the sounds would need a further layer of processing in order to put the sounds together to be able to make the word. In that period a young child will have switched off. However, having shared the word, it was then possible to explore the word for the component parts, depending on the context and the interest of the child on that day.

There is much interplay between the elements that coalesce into what we take for granted as a word. Children when learning to speak, tend to focus on whole words. It is when they need to use their emerging child vocabulary in the context of reading that they have to essentially relearn the elements of the language, which might result in some loss of confidence, or bring to the surface, as yet, undiagnosed issues.

Children need a rich vocabulary, orally, to fully participate in lessons that rely on speaking and listening skills. This is likely to come from a range of modelled sources, home as well as school. A good knowledge of each child is likely to result in almost intuitive engagements with language pitched to the needs of the child. It may, in some cases, require a form of interpretation, where several constructions are used to exemplify the same idea. This may not be only the province of an EAL child need. Issues orally can indicate hearing issue, so this should be checked as a priority, where a concern exists; eg undiagnosed “glue ear” can cause language delay.

Translated to the written word, where a broader range of needs come together, children may exhibit behaviours that demonstrate a need for a sight check; not necessarily uncommon. School can be the first point in a child’s life where this issue becomes apparent, through the needs of a new skill. However, a quick visit to the optician can miss some of the more subtle issues with eye problems. One child whom I taught had an exceptional general knowledge, a journalist, articulate parent, with whom, at six, he would talk philosophically, yet  J “struggled with reading”, despite every possible support and level of intervention. Eventually, after some very deep investigation, it was discovered that there was a level of “flicker” in his eyes that distorted words on a page. Once established, and remediated, this child flourished as a reader.

As a class teacher of reading, and while listening to children reading, I would regularly undertake a “miscue analysis”. Where this brought up a possible issue, this was addressed, with either a post read interrogation of the significant misconceptions, or a follow up, with a greater investigative focus, to create as full a picture as possible.

This would focus on:-
  • Talking about the book(s) being read, to ascertain the child’s understanding of what they were reading.
  • Phonics knowledge; fully identifying the sounds causing an issue.
  • Word knowledge, based on the 26 or 100 common word lists available, as read lists, but also, where there were concerns in writing, as spelling lists. Some schemes have additional words introduced within a level.
  • Fluency and accuracy checks; words per minute being read, percentage accuracy.
  • As this was always within a colour coded scheme, checking these elements with a “lower” colour, to see if there was any change in the above elements. Sometimes children progress through schemes without detailed checks.
  • Occasionally a standardised reading test was given.
Having done all these things, if there was still an issue, a discussion with the English lead or the special needs lead could be supported with insight, which was also valuable if the Educational Psychologist was then involved. It became a supported dialogue and investigation, rather than a set of imposed actions after the event.

It sometimes became apparent that the “performance” aspect of reading was a potential issue. Where this was the case, the use of recording was tried, to allow more privacy to the child and to remove that as a possible cause of concern.
​
It is better to investigate and address, rather than to need to remediate at a later stage.
​
If a word was worth a penny, a vocabulary of 5000 words would be worth £50, 10,000 would be £100; that sounds quite a reasonable equation.
2 Comments

Those early years! What are they Thinking?

15/1/2016

0 Comments

 
​A silent wish sails the seven seas
The winds of change whisper in the trees
And the walls of doubt crumble, tossed and torn
This comes to pass when a child is born.


While Twitter chunters away and argues volubly about the trad/prog dichotomy, or arguing that DI is the best way to teach, that there is the one true way to teach reading, writing, maths or any other subject.

While the Government pours more subtle, or less than subtle changes onto the system, making the whole harder to perceive or within which to make secure decisions that might last sufficient time to have  the desired impact.
​
While all this is happening, it is worth remembering that at the centre of everything a teacher does is children. Having had two new children in the family in the past year, it has been an opportunity to marvel, yet again about their development, from complete dependence to the ability to start to do things for themselves. One, at a year old, is close to taking independent steps.
Picture
From the earliest days, almost as soon as they open their eyes, they are taking in sights, their ears attune to sound, their nose smells, their taste buds developing from milk through a range of foods that are offered and their sense of touch. They are also experiencing proprioreception, a sense of movement. What they are making of all these stimuli, it is sometimes very hard to ascertain. Apart from smiles, frowns, screams, gurgles of different sorts, it can be a case of awareness and guesswork.

There are phases of movement, as they start to gain some muscle control, which allows them to sit up, to roll over, to rise on knees and hands and to begin to propel themselves as proto-crawling, often backwards to start, if arms are stronger than legs. Pulling themselves up, or being supported, strengthens their legs, until, one day, they do it for themselves. Walking takes another set of skills, muscular control and some self-confidence.

Interacting with people is done non-verbally for an extended time; lots of looking, listening and hand waving to signal, to point, to wave, to clap, to offer something to another and to seek it back. Interest in the things around them grows. When the cat enters the room and miaows, or someone new visits the house, to stop what they are doing and to show an interest in the novel is the norm. Going for a walk becomes less a bit of parent exercise than an opportunity to show the world around and to use that magical element of language, to offer the words that at some stage might become their own base for communication.

Children might enter some kind of collective experience early. There are so many opportunities available to families, through local libraries, those children’s centres that have survived, NCT and other parent-organised or more commercial groups. These are opportunities for parents to meet and talk, but also provide a vehicle for a lot of activity and talk; in other words, having a go accompanied by either a leader, parent or another child talking. Gradually and hopefully, children become socialised to others.

By the time children enter school, they have lived for at least four years; some will be almost five when they start. Their prior experiences will have a significant influence on their early progress into formal schooling; their ability to socialise, to listen and talk with others, to share and participate, to accept new ideas and opportunities.

You can’t see children learning; we haven’t yet learned how to open up their brains to see how the cogs are turning. We have to rely on their externalising how they are feeling, their focus as heads turn to see or hear, to watch their faces as they touch smell or taste something new. It can be a case of total guesswork, with many opportunities to get it wrong, as any parent will tell you. You can share, show and model things to children, encourage them to have a go and experience for themselves, as they move from gross motor activities to finer control, accepting that they may experience disappointment, but encouraging additional trying.

It is easy to see how parents are often described as their children’s first teachers, but very special teachers as there is an additional emotional bond, which manifests itself in celebrating the child’s ability to, literally and metaphorically, “take the next step”. These are also the magical classroom moments; when a child “gets it”. Play can be controlled with a focus on a particular activity determined by the parent, or free play with the adult joining in appropriately with the child.

Parenting can be a case of the romance of Rousseau, the stage noting of Piaget, the engaged other of Vygotsky, the linguistic developer of Bruner or Chomsky and the Growth Mindset encourager as Dweck, all rolled into one, but without the “baggage” of theory. Most parents respond as themselves, which is why some may need support and guidance, coaching and mentoring in order to offer the best possible opportunities to their children.

Parenting is not necessarily a natural state for every adult, which is why schemes such as Sure Start offered a great deal in the early years of development. But that's where politicians come in again...
 
Two additional posts look at learning from experience in the school setting.
Learning from experience
Experiential learning; a Teachmeet talk.
0 Comments

TA or not TA; that is the question.

11/1/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
I recently had the great pleasure of working with a large group of TAs in a London school. Leading a day for such an audience means that, within the organisation and structure of the planned day, there needs to be an adaptability to allow for a wide range of needs.
​
There was a time when the group of people making up the TA group could be characterised, as they once were, as a “mum’s army”, interested, engaged and enthusiastic, but more often seen as classroom menials, washing paint-pots and sharpening pencils. Now it is not unusual to meet a mixed sex group, with a range of ages, not necessarily, but still with a large number of parents, as young graduates use the TA route as a means of determining whether or not to become a teacher. Their prior experiences will be varied, but each brings to the classroom a wealth of expertise that the class teacher may not possess.

A significant number will live within the school catchment and may have done for some time, so they have a fundamental understanding of the community and may know a large number of families very well. They can act as the eyes and ears of the school; often act as ambassadors and may, from time to time, act as go-betweens, where relations have become strained. They can become de facto emotional literacy staff.

Some will have subject or work backgrounds that could be extremely valuable to the school, for example modern foreign languages. If you have a native speaker of the language that has been chosen as the school approach, why are they not used to support small group development activity?

I have met, over my time in schools, artists, poets, writers, scientists of all shades, engineers, actors, athletes and other sports people; in fact I employed some. As we became aware of their expertise, it was not a huge leap of thought to wonder how best to use them to support the school as a whole.

One example was an unemployed dad who volunteered to support in class, whose background was in engineering. He soon showed a considerable aptitude when leading Design Technology activities, not in a copyist way, but in developing children’s ability to think and solve their problems. This expertise was shared among the staff, and almost inevitably, we employed him in this role, extended to small group science activities too. His key skill was his ability to think with the children and encouraging high quality communicate. His knowledge base was good, supplemented by his working for an OU degree, which we supported. The success of this encouraged us to think more in terms of specialist TAs, as a supplement to classroom based arrangements, as there was still a need for in-class support. Over time, we did find linguists, musicians, artists and sports people, each of whom added significant value to day to day opportunities.

TAs were seen as key members of staff, joined in with staff training opportunities, adjusted, by agreement, their working hours to enable discussions with teachers and, where their expertise was significant were enabled to share this with teacher colleagues. An example was an artist TA leading staff training. TAs need to have a grasp of the teaching and learning approaches used within the school, so that they can work within expected norms, including the need for quality information sharing after a lesson.

Communication within the school is key to ensuring that TAs are used to best effect. This is both at institutional and classroom level. TAs need to receive in-house communications and also have time to talk and understand what they should be doing. From time to time, there is a need for TAs to receive training in aspects of practice, if they are to be more effective. In this case, training opportunities can be created by release of the relevant in-house expert, maths, English or SENCo, to deliver the necessary training within the available time; a half day off-timetable is often sufficient. CPD for TAs is as valuable and necessary as for teachers.

Where TAs are used less effectively, it is becoming clear that the question of value for money has been raised, not least after the publication of the Education Endowment Foundation Report on Making Best Use of Teaching Assistants, in 2015. This report talks of drifting into situations where TAs are poorly deployed, although everyone acts with the best of intentions. If one considers that a team of 25 TAs could cost a school £250k or more, it is reasonable to ask for evidence that this money is being used effectively.
​
There are, to me a number of simplicities within this equation.
  1. The school should have a clear rationale for employing the TA in the first instance; there should be a clear job and role description. This can be negotiated over time, to suit the needs of the school and/or the TA.
  2. TAs should be entitled to an induction process as for any other member of staff. If this is the remit of the class teacher, then the teaching staff may need some training in mentoring others.
  3. The teacher receiving the TA needs to see the role as complementary to their own role, and in developing the team ethic, needs to ensure that TA time is effectively deployed. For example, consider what the TA will do during the whole class input. They should be capable of being a “participant observer”, listening to the input while doing something else to help the class.
  4. There needs to be time built in to ensure discussion enables essential information exchange.
  5. The teacher should not give the TA the same group, so that the teacher never teaches them in a subject; the teacher is the senior member of staff and the responsible member of staff for class progress, in all subjects.
  6. High quality staff training for TAs, as individuals or collectively, should be as much of a priority as for teachers.
  7. Essentially, TAs, like teachers, need to know what they are doing, why they are doing it and what to do if it isn’t going to plan. They are often a significant part of the teaching and learning team, especially with regard to vulnerable individual or groups of children.
  8. Reviewing the need for and number of TA roles should be a regular part of school review, to ensure that the resource is fit for purpose and cost effective, as is the case for all resources, human or otherwise.
  9. And, in the absence of Government published TA standards, where a TA is in a teaching role, should they be judged against the lowest expectation of a teacher? See the diagram above for an example.
​
0 Comments

Mentoring can be excellent CPD.

7/1/2016

2 Comments

 
In the next couple of weeks, I will be working with PGCE, third year undergraduates and School Direct trainees as they start a new practice, in some case their final practice before qualification. One of the elements in their potential for success is the school context into which they are placed, with a significant factor being the quality of mentoring that they receive from in-school staff.

It has to be hoped that the teacher whose class is being used for the practice is happy that they will be having a student. I have met mentors who have complained at the outset that the student was a last minute change to plans. It is equally important that the trainee is introduced to the class in positive terms, so that their status is not undermined from the beginning.

For preference, the mentor will have received some training beforehand, so that they are prepared as fully as possible to understand the pattern of the school experience, the necessary paperwork, the need for the student to complete task for the university during the practice, the teaching demands that it is reasonable to make at different stages.

The school experience has to start with a modest apprenticeship, usually during a short familiarisation period (1 week) approach as the trainee familiarises themselves with the school layout, the policies and practices, timings and the individuals who make up the class, including any TAs who make up the team. They need to be introduced to key staff, subject leaders, SENCo, caretakers. They need time to gather their thoughts about the intended plans and their part in this. To create an overview diary, for the whole practice, that details the growing demand, while still keeping track of extraneous demands, is a good means of keeping everyone on track.

The overriding need is for the student to have the time and space to develop as a rounded teacher, able to show that they can evidence their progress against the eight teacher standards. The personal side of this is likely to be evident early (8,1,7 and 4).

8) They will show professionalism in all aspects of their approach, to relationships and to their focus on the tasks in hand. They will be self-developers, not completely reliant on others in order to function.
1) They will have some idea about the character of a well-run class, have appropriately high outline expectations about children as learners, which will be “coloured in” during the school experience.
7) They will understand the importance of good behaviour, understand the school system and work effectively within that; in doing so, showing that they can operate independently.
4) They are ordered and organised in all things, but especially in their planning and record keeping.
​
The remaining standards rely on their understanding of the needs of the class in front of them, especially with regard to their learning outcomes to date and the expectations of their progress over the time of the practice. This can be summarised as knowing the children well, planning for challenge and progress, running an effective lesson, engaging with ongoing learning and then reviewing outcomes to support decision making.
(24652)
​
Picture
Some mentors find it hard to relinquish their grip on the class, but, unless they do so, the state of deference might put the student at risk of failure, as always working within another’s thinking can create tensions which move from professional to personal.

It is important that the mentor forms a strong coaching relationship with the trainee, that recognises that (s)he has strengths developed over a number of years and that there will still be some developmental needs, not least knowledge of the children. They need to be sensitive to their context; each school and each class can be subtly different, often as a result of that teacher. They need to recognise that the student may turn out to be a stronger teacher that they are and acknowledge significant success without rancour. A jealous teacher can damage a potentially excellent colleague.

Sensitive professional support and challenge is the hallmark of high quality mentoring. The trainee will not necessarily be expecting everything to be high quality from the beginning, so they need regular feedback that supports their development, but which doesn’t rely on just hints and tips. There has to be a clear rationale behind all support. The mentor does need to know the Teaching Standards, so that they can work within these parameters, as a whole.

Observations, both informal and formal, are points where the mentor has seek to suppress personal bias and seek to see the lesson for what it is. It is possible later, during the debrief, to clarify, through questions, the trainee intentions, outcomes and their evaluation of progress made in the lesson. Alternative strategies can be offered, for consideration. As a Link Tutor, I would advise a mentor to offer in-lesson prompts as development, if it is obvious that a tweak is needed, where not to do so will jeopardise a positive outcome. In-ear coaching might be available in some situations.

Discussions should always be of a professional nature, as the mentor is the professional model that the trainee will work to in that setting. Encouraging the student to self-evaluate is key to them becoming fully self-reliant. They need clarity if they are to come up with their own solutions when operating independently. A developing relationship will alter the mentor-trainee relationship over the time of the practice.

Joining in with in-school training, staff discussions, meeting with in-school experts all contribute to the trainee understanding of the breadth of demand on a soon to be teacher. They need to recognise that it is a team game with colleagues relying on each other to do what is expected of them. At the same time, they may need advice on how to maintain a balance, avoiding burning the candle at both ends.

Where problems occur.

Planning. There is a need for the trainee to have an overview of the learning that will take place over the time of the practice. The medium term plan enables single lessons to be seen in context. It is possible, early in the experience, to structure a week so that the trainee is a part of the whole, rather than just being involved in a planning single lessons.
  • Work together on the week’s plan, eg for English, but could be any subject.
  • Teacher leads lesson 1, student observes and participates with a group, discussion after.
  • Student prepares lesson 2, teacher informally observes, participates with a group, then feeds back to student in an exchange of views.
  • Student prepares lesson 3, as in 2.
  • Teacher leads lesson 4, as in 1.
  • Student leads lesson 5, as in 2 but this time observed formally.
  • Both teacher and student review the week, including book scrutiny to ascertain progress and to make plans for the forthcoming week. Student keeps evidence of outcomes and progress discussion for portfolio.
Teaching Standards 6&5 are often the lest well documented standards, even half way into the practice, as students often believe that assessment is something that is done in discrete weeks, rather than lesson by lesson and within lessons. This needs to be addressed early, with trainees reflecting on the points in a lesson where they went “off plan” in response to evident needs. They need to get good at doing this, as it is in-lesson support, coaching and feedback to learners that makes a difference.
Where a school takes a student but they are seen as just one teacher’s student, this can become self-limiting. The trainee should be enabled to make use of the full range of expertise available within the school.

Trainees need to learn how to talk with parents, so taking opportunities to sit in on teacher-parent discussions is important.

Mentors need to loosen their grip as the practice progresses, so that the student can be seen to operate independently. In a few weeks, they may well become a colleague in the school. It is not uncommon for a student on experience to be employed by the school.
​
Mentors and their schools are helping to train the teachers of the future. Their role is an essential one, as the system needs a supply of high quality trainees developing into high quality teachers.

Some universities offer mentoring modules that offer certification, including up to Master’s level.

​
2 Comments

SEN means real People

2/1/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
The past 24 hours have seen many hours spent in “discussing” the idea of inclusion. While there may be personal grounds to take a view at either pole of the debate, the reality is that children come to school and, once there, are entitled to receive the best that can be offered. This starts with the classteacher, who may find that the specific needs of a child are outside their experience. This is not uncommon.

Special needs come in all shapes and sizes, with a disparate range of needs. The skills that were developed in dealing with the issues of one child may not be transferrable exactly to another. It is therefore incumbent on each teacher to get to know the children as well as possible, to tailor challenge to the evident needs and to monitor very carefully the outcomes, as the journey constitutes the internal case study that may be needed as evidence of a specific special need.

While engaging with the Twitter chat this morning, my mind recalled a number of children with whom I have had the significant pleasure of spending time.

There was V, who was already in the school when I became a head. V was the most delightful child, full of life, always a ready smile, a befriender, especially of younger children during playtime, a real striver, whose have a go attitude was infectious. She had innumerable friends. V’s mum had taken thalidomide during pregnancy, so V was born without legs and one arm. Despite this, she got on with things, including the putting on and taking off of her prosthetic legs, or organising her wheelchair. It was often humbling to see how much extra effort she had to make just to get though each day. This had an inevitable impact on the children in her class and across the school as a whole.

I will never forget the school sports day where V was determined to take as full a part as possible. The skipping race was the highlight, as she “skipped”, with a friend each side turning the rope, while she “ran” without her prosthetics. There were many tears of joy at her success. It was inevitable that, when it came to the end of year celebrations, that the “contribution to school life” prize would go to V, simply for her example. This was grit, resilience, character and growth mindset, 1990 style.

R came to school as a Reception child, shy, retiring and not overactive in his approach. He would avoid physical activity at all costs, which was worrying, in itself. He was one of those children, who, very early, are on your “watch” list. It was during a visit by the school OT that I took her into the school hall, which coincided with Reception doing a PE lesson. She didn’t need R to be pointed out, as she turned pale and took me outside for a chat, concerned that there were undiagnosed underlying issues. A very painful few weeks ensued as hurried reference was made to medical services, several meetings with parents keeping each other in touch with developments and the final diagnosis of muscular dystrophy. R stayed with us for a few more years, first with the aid of crutches and then with a wheelchair, but, eventually, his physical needs moved to a point where it was clear that alternative provision was the better option. Visiting him there a year later, it was evident that this was the right decision. Sadly R died a couple of years after that. With a step brother and a cousin in school we were kept in touch with the news.

M was an excellent artist, could draw anything, from life and from imagination but M couldn’t make any sense of language. He could apparently speak well enough, albeit with a slightly limited vocabulary, but it became noticeable that he could not sustain an idea over several “sentences”. Working with the advisor for language, we were able to unpick aspects of his needs, so he was able to read, at a low level. His working memory was poor, so that needed some support and his comprehension, as an ability to make sense of what he had heard or read seemed to diminish, especially when linked to memory. He was living in a strange parallel world. We were able to use his artistic skill to advantage in creating storyboards from which he was encouraged to create oral stories that would be transcribed and turned into personal reading books. In the end, however, despite deploying every available resource and source of expertise available to us, the application for a statement was successful and, with a diagnosis of language disorder, M went to a specialist provision, where there was 1:1 teacher expertise available every day.

Each of these children, chosen to represent the many who passed through the school with individual needs, offered something in return. The ability to deal with physical or learning needs within the staff was enhanced with each child identified with a possible issue. This investigative capability, building within individual teachers and the school as a whole, enabled strengthened systems to be developed that supported others with lesser needs. Underpinning all this were very good relationships and communication, with no feeling of criticism if there was a need to discuss one’s personal needs as a teacher.

It can be the case that SEN issues push the limits of the organisation, on a personal and an organisational level. If external expertise is available and can be harnessed, the expertise can be grown through experience. There is a significant need to ensure record keeping of the highest quality, especially where there are concerns, as the primary need is to establish an internal case study to underpin discussions with external experts. These records can be premised on the questions that teachers have asked, then sought to follow up; analyse, plan, do, review, record is a useful simple mantra.

It is, however, really important to remember that you are dealing with the person first and foremost, with the need being a constituent part to be addressed, not the whole. It means knowing each child well, as a rounded individual, to avoid them becoming a “problem” child. The problem may be the teacher lack of expertise or experience, which has to be addressed first. There are also very concerned parents, who may be very fearful about what the future holds for their child. All factors have to be carefully considered.

Children may be similar, but they are not necessarily the same. SEN or individual issues provide a very good learning opportunity for teachers. Becoming a good investigator is a very good first step.
0 Comments

    Chris Chivers

    Long career in education, classroom and leadership; always a learner.
    University tutor and education consultant; Teaching and Learning, Inclusion and parent partnership.
    Francophile, gardener, sometime bodhran player.

    Archives

    March 2021
    January 2021
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    September 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014

    Categories

    All
    Assessment
    Behaviour
    Differentiation
    English
    Experience
    History
    Home Learning
    Inclusive Thinking
    Maths
    Parents
    Science
    SEND
    Sing And Strum
    Teaching And Learning

    RSS Feed

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Picture
    Click to set custom HTM L
Proudly powered by Weebly