Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time in Teaching
Assignment 3 – Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time
Introduction
Formative Assessment, was originally proposed as a method of classifying and evaluating the existing curriculum (Scriven 1967) and has grown in stature and prominence within the classroom (commonly known as Assessment for Learning), to the point that it is considered by many teachers, schools and academics as a vital component of the modern educational landscape. Since Scriven’s initial outline of summative and formative evaluation there has been a great deal of academic output and classroom-based research into the field, combined with a substantial effort to apply these theories practically in schools. Black and William’s exhaustive review (1998) and later work – above all Inside the Black Box (1999) – are clearly the most prominentworks on formative assessment and still perhaps the most wide ranging investigations into formative assessment.
What is clear and notable following their publication is the force and immediacy with which formative assessment, as a model of educational assessment, became an integral feature of modern education. It encounters relatively little resistance or criticism from either the classroom or academic realms, with William noting that Inside the Black Box’s success is ‘as much due to its rhetorical force as to its basis in evidence’ (2004). Their influence in schools is substantial and increasing, largely due to the fact that these more abstract pedagogical theories have been synthesised into effective, classroom practices with eminently observable results, from explaining learning outcomes to students to techniques to ensure all-student engagement and assessment.
Rationale
One such example, and the primary focus of this work, is the use of ‘Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time’, commonly referred to as DIRT and popularised by Jackie Beere particularly in the book ‘The Perfect Ofsted Lesson’, which is intended as a practical guide to teaching. Dedicating time within lesson for students to engage with their own work is certainly not a wholly modern concept, but by integrating such methods with the principles of formative assessment allows for a far greater level of dialogue between teacher, learner and peer. In ‘The Perfect Ofsted Lesson’ Beere outlines the goals of Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time:
The process of learning is a journey. It is essential to raise awareness of this by frequently reminding students to check their learning processes and progress. … There should be regular checkpoints in the lesson that become part of the assessment as learning process. A very important part of this is the teacher’s awareness of how different groups of students have performed and what their next steps should be (another good reason to do collaborative learning and not simply to lead from the front). Pay particular attention to the most able, special educational needs students, girls, boys, ethnic minorities and children in care, as appropriate. You need to know who these students are and how they have progressed. They need to know too!(Beere 2012).
The colloquial tone of this passage belies the elegant distillation of much of the aims of formative assessment, particularly in regarding learning and assessment as a ‘process’ and in pointing out the importance of all students understanding and being responsible for their own learning. I would contend that a simple task such as DIRT enables a teacher to ensure all five “key strategies” of formative assessment are met (Leahy, Lyon, Thompson & William, 2005. see fig. 1). I therefore consider the investigation of DIRT as an achievable and observable method of evaluating and exploring formative assessment as a whole. It is particularly important to ensure a focused and measurable means of evaluation in this case, given the limited period in which to conduct classroom-based research during a main teaching placement.
The subject of my research is also timely, as it coincides with a recent school-wide focus at my placement school in order to provide students with time to reflect upon and improve their own work. Finally, it has been noted that whilst formative assessment is particularly prevalent in the subject of English, how this formative assessment is employed tends to deviate hugely in practice between teachers and schools (Topping 2009). The countless viable modes of its application in teaching is a strength of formative assessment, but is problematic from an empirical standpoint – especially when attempting to use classroom evidence to gauge the relative effectiveness of formative assessment. A widely recognised technique like DIRT is therefore a means of providing a structure and focus for an investigation that might become untenable due to the relative complexity and variation intrinsic to such a broad pedagogical theory.
Outline of the Investigation
The classroom-based research into formative assessment and DIRT will consist of measuring the progress achievedfollowing the implementation of DIRT within a scheme of work. The aim is both to measure the effect of DIRT on improvement in addition to optimising the delivery of DIRT in my teaching. The research is focused principally on two KS3 Year 7 classes at my main placement. Both classes have just over 30 students and are of mixed ability, ranging in end of Year 7 target levels from 4b to 6a. (see fig 2.) Both classes have students with special educational needs as well as those considered gifted and talented (although the placement school in question has not yet developed a recognized list of gifted and talented students for Year 7). A key advantage with regards to the classroom research is that both classes have been taught variations on the same lesson, on the same topicand with the same learning outcomes and objectives (see fig. 3).
My aim for the research is to focus on measuring the increase in progress made by students with the use of DIRT in the teaching of English. In order to achieve this I will explore a wide range of self and peer-assessments, taking into account my own concepts, the practices of colleagues and further ideas from research. Bloom’s taxonomy will act as a primary reference point and framework to ensure there is a somewhat stable reference when offering formative written and verbal feedback individually catering to the needs and progress of each student. In order to achieve this, one principal concern will be offering clear marking with ‘calls to action’ linked directly to learning outcomes and assessment criteria (particularly in KS4 & KS5). I will therefore thoroughly investigate this method through a 3 lesson sequence for both Year 7 classes tailored to allow for clear reflection time, during which pupils will engage with the formative marking in addition to receiving verbal formative feedback.
Additionally, in order to get a broader sense of DIRT/reflection time across each Key Stage I have elected to summarise my findings after using this technique with a KS4 Year 9 class and a KS5 Yr12 class in order to attempt comparison and contrast.
With these classes outside the main route of enquiry I will also aim to experiment with DIRT in order to ensure that the time is used effectively. In particular I aim to more directly incorporate peer assessment, in order to ensure that all 5 key strategies (as outlined by Leahy et al.) are utilized within the classroom.
My reason for doing so is in order to more closely integrate peer assessment with Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time, as from research thus far alongside classroom experience I retain that the merit and benefits of peer assessment in particular is undermined by a lack of real reflection on peer feedback –the general role of any teacher should be to facilitate the sharing of ideas and opinions, so I would hypothesise that encouraging this as much as possible during DIRT time will yield tangible benefits on pupil progress. Peer and self-assessment are cited in several studies and reports (e.g. Black and William 1998a, Assessment Reform Group 1999) as improving the progress and achievement of students.
The Assessment Reform Group offer some caveats: of the two peer-assessment is judged to be easier to introduce to the classroom and provides several more immediate advantages over self-assessment. These include facilitating higher-order thinking skills through dialogue and scaffolding; as pupils may explain concepts to one another with familiar language and less perceived risk of humiliation (Assessment Reform Group 2005). Self-assessment is accordingly more difficult to implement as “the distinction between formative and summative assessment is often blurred”. The implication is that since the feedback is almost instantaneous it could be received by the student and interpreted as summative: without proper planning the feedback may not provoke the intended action in order to develop progress. Furthermore, research suggests that at least initially students are reluctant to critically engage with their own work and require significant stimuli (Sadler 1998) and structured training until they are comfortable self-assessing effectively.
Combining peer assessment with Dedicated Improvement and Reflection Time accomplishes the five key strategies of formative assessment definitely, since the
Peer-assessment benefits of course from the intrinsic advantages of small group work, such as engaging with different perspectives and assisting students in clarifying their own ideas.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂