We can’t learn from simply
watching experts, if we could we’d all be elite sports performers. We need this
performance broken down into chunks that can be carefully examined. Modelling is a strategy
that is frequently employed, by teachers, to allow pupils to know ‘what a good
one looks like’. Modelling is an effective cognitive support but it is much
more than just showing pupils a good piece of work.
I have experienced lessons where teachers have provided
an explanation of a concept and modelled what they expected from the pupils
before swiftly setting a number of tasks for them to complete independently. It
quickly became apparent that the pupils lacked the understanding to complete the
work and, as a result, the teacher spent the majority of the lesson racing around
the room trying to explain, with little effect, what to do. Similarly, Barak
Roshenshine recognises this in his paper on Principles of Effective
Instruction. He identifies that the least successful teachers provide
very short explanations before passing out worksheets and asking pupils to
complete a range of problems. Under these conditions the pupils made too many
errors and had to be retaught the lesson. Whereas, in contrast, the most
effective teachers guide pupils’ practice by providing more detailed explanations
and instructions, giving a wider range of examples and more regularly posing
questions and checking understanding
Pupils obviously need time to engage in independent
practice if they are to become fluent in a skill or in order to embed essential
knowledge. During this time a teacher should only need to interact with a pupil
for up to 30 seconds. If teachers need to take any longer, like in the scenario
explained above, then they are too dependent on the teacher, indicating that they
are not secure enough in their understanding to engage in independent practice.
The diagram below, from Make Every Lesson Count,
indicates the process that teachers need to take their pupils through to
achieve greater independence.
The least successful teachers tend to provide less feedback, pose
fewer questions and they often neglect the 'joint practice and construction'
phase altogether. Although they may appear to be progressing at a
quicker rate their pupils' knowledge is less secure. A successful teacher’s
lesson will have pace, but it will be pace in depth rather than breadth. They
will provide sufficient instruction, pose questions to probe and clarify, they
will connect new information to previously learnt content and provide a range
of examples during explanations. Whilst modelling, successful, teachers will deconstruct and simplify work and they will discuss the
comparisons between exemplar and non-exemplar work. Their pupils’ will be
guided through practice by breaking a task down into simple steps, through
interactive modelling and they will probe for understanding with process
questions. Throughout the whole process an effective teacher will be continually
monitoring their pupils and only when they are confident that they have
achieved a high success rate will they progress on to independent practice.
I believe that the processes employed by successful teachers
reflect mastery teaching; a pedagogical approach that involves breaking content
down into a series of sequential steps. Teaching, in this way, enables teachers
to deal with the limitations of working memory more effectively and also ensure
that pupils spend more time thinking about content, which in turn makes it more
likely that learning will occur.
The two principles discussed within
Rosenshine’s paper that resonates most with mastery teaching are ‘spending more
time guiding practice of new material’ and ‘obtaining a high success rate’.
Pupils
need to spend lots of time rephrasing, elaborating and summarising new material
in order to store it within their long-term memory. If this rehearsal
time is too short, pupils are less able to store, remember or use the new material.
Another finding is that the more time spent guiding students, the better
prepared for independent work they are and the fewer mistakes they make. Whereas,
if the rate of progression to independence is too quick pupils may end up
encoding misconceptions.
Pupils must demonstrate a high level of success on
tests, typically at about 80% level, before progressing. This ratio of success to mistake
shows that pupils are learning material, yet also challenged by it. If a
child is not secure in a topic and they are moved on too quickly, then they
will carry gaps in knowledge and misconceptions to the next topic. Previously
teachers have moved on too quickly because they feel a need to show progression
despite the fact that knowledge is insecure and it is likely that it will need
to be retaught again.
We cannot provide limited explanations,
model a good piece of work and expect our pupils to make progress in their
learning. If our pupils are to acquire important knowledge and skills and have
them readily available to apply to a range of problems, we not only need to be
aware of the science of learning but we need to be able to carefully craft a process
that moves pupils from dependence to independence.
