What students say about their learning - how can this
improve learning?
This paper reports on a project that is
exploring teaching and learning through the eyes of students and documenting
changes to teacher practice that occur based on the sharing of these student
perceptions. The inquiry is situated in
the work of the New Zealand Assess to Learn Professional Development Project
(AtoL PD) which is a national project that aims to improve student learning and
achievement and to shift teacher assessment knowledge, practice and beliefs
through implementation of assessment for learning principles. The ethnographic
nature of the inquiry has had practical value for teachers and students because
it is concerned with their issues and problems. Teachers have been able to add
to their strategies and skills through studies of themselves, their students
and teacher-student interactions (Woods, 1986).
The inquiry process provides opportunity to construct knowledge through
reflection on local theories alongside more general theories from the research
literature.
The inquiry is embedded in the professional
development though an observation and interview process. As part of the professional development,
classrooms and teachers of Year 1 to 13 students are visited. Teachers are observed on at least four
occasions over a two year period and a running commentary of teacher talk is recorded on a
specifically designed template. The
intention is to capture as much as possible the actual words the teacher
says. Aspects of the classroom
environment are also noted. Student
voice is collected through questions posed to students during lessons. These
questions act as a guide and prompts are used to gain deeper insight into the
student’s response, and thinking. This process provides an opportunity for participants
to share their ‘truth’ through what is described by Woods (1981) as ‘insider
accounts’. One advantage of this process is that students have the
opportunity to explore their learning through their talk. In each classroom at
least 12 students are interviewed over the two year period. To date, 1200 students have been interviewed and
specific themes identified in their initial voice. In a follow up unstructured interview, teachers
examine and validate the data, set
goals and plan specific actions to further improve their practice on the basis
of evidence from student voice. Further AtoL professional development in the
form of professional reading, AtoL team led dialogue and discussions focussed
on assessment for learning take place.
Consideration of student voice data seems
to be a non threatening way to show teachers what their current practice looks
like and provides opportunities for them to reflect on their practice in
relation to their espoused theories of practice. The authenticity of context is
significant in establishing rich data which is perceived to be valid and
useful. Student voice data creates dissonance challenging what teachers believe
about learning and how learners learn. The use of student voice data has proven
to be catalytic to teacher practice. It is motivational for teachers and they
display a continuing willingness to listen to the voice of their students and
to scrutinise and reflect on their practice.
Analysis of student voice indicates changes in the nature of student
responses along a continuum of indicators as teachers’ practices change.
Changes in students’ ability to talk in-depth about their learning are
apparent. This inquiry supports
research, such as that of Flutter & Rudduck, (2004), Maws (2005) which
indicates that consulting and listening to students is beneficial. Analysis of data from this inquiry has
advanced the AtoL PD project. The
inquiry into the benefits of talking with students for the purposes of improving
student and teacher learning is ongoing. It is however apparent that deliberate
and focussed attention to what students say has the power to impact on and
improve their learning.
Why this
inquiry?
Michael Fullan (1991) posed the question “What would happen if we treated the student as someone whose opinion
mattered?” This question underpins the philosophy of the
professional development this inquiry is sited within and is reflected in the
collection of student voice data and the process of reflective dialogue with
the teacher as learner. Indeed who else
should we ask about their learning but the learner themselves?
In accordance with the Convention on the
Rights of the Child, U.N. General Assembly Document (see Appendix One) articles 12 and 13 clearly indicate
that students have the right to be consulted and to share their views, in this
instance about their learning, and that due consideration should be given to
the comments that they make. However we do not believe that this is the issue.
The reality appears to be that in many classrooms students are not invited to
talk about, let alone think about, the notion of learning in a manner that has
any depth. Most of the dialogue appears
to occur more by accident than in a deliberate, conscious and planned manner.
Therefore the inquiry
we have conducted explores teachers’ learning, through the eyes of their
students, how their practice is viewed by the students and notes the consequent
changes they make to their practice based on these student perceptions. We are finding that that the adjustments made
by the teacher to their practice result in students’ improved knowledge of:
- what they are learning
- a purpose for the learning
- how
they will know they have learnt it
- what they need to do to improve or get better with this learning.
This inquiry was
conducted within the context of the Assess to Learn (AtoL) Professional
Development Project which is founded on the view that effective formative
assessment is embedded in a view
of teaching and learning of which it is an essential part. The principles and
beliefs underpinning the AtoL project include:
- sharing learning goals with students.
- helping students to know and to
recognise the standards they are aiming for
- involving students in self-assessment
- providing feedback which leads to
students recognising their next steps and how to take them
- is underpinned by confidence that
every student can improve
- involves both teacher and students
reviewing and reflecting on assessment data.
The importance of
these principles for improved student learning is discussed widely by other
researchers such as Bell
Anecdotal evidence
is emerging to suggest that Assessment for Learning practices may be becoming
ritualized and be better suited to particular groups of students (Webb &
Jones, 2006). This is one of the reasons
why we are interested in exploring student’s perceptions of their learning and
changes in these perceptions. We would endorse
the view of Alexander (2005) that working with others, where learning is viewed as a partnership, and
engaging in dialogue around their learning also supports students to develop
their learning.
Classroom
observations
Classroom
observation is one of a variety of professional development approaches used
within AtoL to facilitate teacher reflection on their practice and their
students’ learning. Data from three or
four observations with each teacher over a period of two years has been
collected, analysed and interpreted within this inquiry. In each observation a
pro forma sheet is used to record a running commentary of teacher talk
capturing as much as possible the actual words the teacher speaks (15-20
minutes). Aspects of the classroom
environment are also recorded – visibility of learning intentions, criteria,
student produced work, exemplars, learning goals, charts or displays, and
evidence of differentiated learning such as grouping of students according to
their needs, for example.
Student voice is
also collected during this observation time, through individual response to set
questions, recorded in most instances against the student’s name on the
recording sheet. Follow up prompts were
used at the discretion of the adviser in order to elicit further information
directly linked to the purpose of the question.
Teachers were invited to select students whose perceptions they might
have an interest in – this was also an intentional step to ensure teachers did
not feel threatened by the process but could see that there would be benefits
for them at the outset. This was not an ad
hoc process but carefully planned, the questions were piloted and adapted to
become more invitational to students.
Students were
asked:
(1) ‘What do you
think you are learning?’ This question is designed to establish student
perception of the learning and whether it might be the intended or unintended
learning.
(2) ‘Why do you
think you are learning this?’ The purpose of this question was to establish
whether the student can make connections or see the relevance of the learning.
(3) ‘How will
you know you have learnt it?’ This was asked to find out if students
perceived that models, examples, and shared criteria helped them.
(4) ‘How does your teacher help you with…?’ ’ This question is used to explore student
perceptions of the ways teachers work to support their learning and provide
help. It can also elicit where the
student sees the locus of control - whether they see themselves as responsible
for their own learning. More
specifically, students are asked these follow-up questions ‘How do the comments your teacher makes about
your learning help you’ and ‘What do
you need to do next and how do you know?’
What
the students said - Initial student voice
Many students, at
all year levels, said they didn’t know what they were supposed to be learning
when asked ‘What do you think you are learning?”. They responded with comments
like I don’t know even when prompted. Many had difficulty articulating what they
thought they were learning. Their responses were often short. Two typical
student responses to the question ‘what
do you think you are learning?’ were; stuff
about the sea and we are doing a
worksheet. They would often talk about the task they were involved in
rather than the learning e.g. Find the question and then find the answer in
the newspaper.
When students
could talk about what they were learning there was often a mismatch between the
students’ and teacher’s knowledge or interpretation of the intended learning
e.g. the teacher identified the intended learning outcome as “Why winds occur”. The
student response to the question ‘What
do you think you are learning?’ was, How
to predict weather using maps. Again, the student is making links to the
task rather than the learning. Even when the learning intention displayed on
the whiteboard was we are learning to use
decoding strategies and read for meaning students were often not able to
articulate the learning as outlined by the teacher to the adviser.
We are interested
to know how relevant students perceive the learning to be to their lives. When
asked about the purpose for learning, most students talked about this in terms
of future relevance, the distant future. Because
when you are older you might need to look something up. If we
want to have jobs doing that sort of thing. Students did not attribute any
relevance of the task to their own learning. One student explained, I’m just doing it. Mrs …. said. And another said, Because my teacher said to pick something to write about. This sense of
disconnection and irrelevance was evident in their answers to the question
‘how will you know when you’ve learned it?’ Students would often refer to an external
source as the final arbiter. They construed the teacher as the judge,
explaining that they had learned something when the teacher marks it and ‘when the teacher says’ or when We
can predict the weather and get it right. One student explained that, When you are good at them all then you could
pass a test that is really hard.
Students talked
about the strategies or the deliberate acts of teaching that their teachers
used to help with their learning in a generalised way. They did not appear to
have a language to talk about learning or teaching.
She tells us a little bit about how to do it and She
explains stuff were typical responses to the question ‘How does your teacher help you with this
learning?’ If there was this
on-going dialogue would the students have been able to better answer our
question?
Discussions
with teachers
Follow up discussions were held with
teacher where the student voice data and their own talk were examined. “Voice” implies
singular but it is the accumulation of student voice data (student voices) that
provides the balance of evidence for teacher scrutiny. Teachers are able to compare intentions with the perceptions of the
four or five students interviewed.
Through this reflective discussion teachers plan actions they will take
to further improve their practice based on the data collected and shared.
The recording form in Figure 1 was developed to capture and
formalise this reflective process and encourage collegial discussion,
supporting teachers with the use of evidence as the basis of strengthening
their professional learning community.
These actions
become the focus for further professional reading and reflection as well as the
next classroom observation.
Due to the
ethnographic nature of this inquiry it has had practical value for teachers
because it is concerned with their own issues, problems and in their terms,
thus teachers can add to their strategies and skills through the studies of
themselves, their students and teacher-pupil interactions (Woods, 1986 as cited
in Jones). The intervention strategies
within the process focus on enhancing teacher and student identification of
appropriate learning outcomes and the criteria for progressing towards
achievement of these outcomes, the use of models and exemplars, questioning
skills, and constructive, focused feedback about the learning. Examination of
teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge may underpin this.
This sharing,
analysis and discussion of student voice between AtoL advisers and teachers
supported the planning of teacher actions e.g. to involve students more in
talking about their learning. These actions were the focus of our next visit
where observational data and student voice was again collected.
Through analysis
of the data the AtoL team identified changes to practice made by teachers.
These have been collated under the following three themes: Making connections;
Making learning intentions explicit; Involving students in dialogue about
learning.
What
the teachers did
Making Connections
Teachers made
changes to planning by making links between long term, short term and daily
planning. In both their planning and teaching they were making explicit
connections to previous learning with the students. Teachers were making more
frequent reference to the purpose of the learning.
Teachers were
using more specific feedback to support learning e.g. What are you going to use to describe the scene, think about phrases?
Making learning intentions explicit
As a result of
observations and follow-up discussions teachers realised that for them to make
learning intentions explicit with students they needed a clear understanding of
the intended learning themselves.
Teachers need to corroborate the meaning of the achievement criteria
with each other. Teachers realised that
just giving criteria to the students was not enough and they explored ways of
using exemplars, and involving the students in the construction of achievement
criteria for the learning.
Using the New
Zealand Curriculum Exemplars with teachers to support professional
learning in curriculum content, pedagogy and assessment has also promoted team
or whole school discussion about curriculum expectations and school
achievement. This other layer exists in the intervention which was
occurring in the school through the professional development with the AtoL
Project and the teacher’s professional learning, dialogue with colleagues and
in many instances with students.
Consequently
specific learning intentions were made clearer in planning, teaching and
learning. Some of the strategies used by teachers were:
- vocalising the learning intentions
more often during the learning.
- breaking the learning down and using
more specific criteria.
- writing the criteria on overhead
transparencies daily.
- referring to the achievement criteria
throughout the lesson
- using the criteria as a teaching and
learning tool.
- using examples of quality work to
support the learning
- setting up opportunities for self and
peer assessment.
- providing scaffolds for learning in
the form of vocabulary charts to help students improve their writing.
- developing rubrics with students using
examples of work.
Through these strategies the most
significant overall change has been the increased involvement of students in
learning and assessment.
Involving students in dialogue about learning
Other strategies
that we saw teachers using during our subsequent visits indicated this shift
towards involving students as expert commentators. Teachers are supporting
students to articulate the learning in conversations with peers and with the
teacher. They were using mind-mapping
and brainstorming to co-construct the achievement criteria. Students were being assisted in the
co-construction of achievement criteria by using examples of quality work.
Teachers were spending less time in front of the class as a whole group and
were grouping students more. This notion of involving students in dialogue
about their learning is defined by Earl as co-construction “to practice self
reflection and facilitate a reflexive process in others about learning through
a collaborative dialogue” (2003).
This collaborative
dialogue is recognised by Tunstall and Gipps (1996) as a practice through which
students can construct ways forward for their own learning.. This recommendation comes from research on
the types of feedback that teachers use.
According to Askew and Lodge (2000) the use of feedback that is
constructed through loops of dialogue and information is the most
effective. The responsibility for
learning is shared with the feedback and reflection becoming intertwined. This
results in the learner reviewing their learning in the context and also in
relation to their prior experience and other knowledge.
Student
voice revisited (Third or fourth classroom observation)
Our observations
and discussions with students told us they had a deeper understanding of their
learning and from our analysis we have noted the following as indicators of
improved learning.
The students were using the learning language Students were more articulate and eager
and confident to talk. Students could understand and were keen to respond to
our questions and talk about them. They
used the language of the intended learning we
are learning to write an introduction
to our narratives and we are learning
about elements and the periodic table.
The students look for and use visual clues of the
learning and associated criteria. There was correlation between the students understanding of the
intended learning and the teachers learning intention e.g. teacher learning intention written on the whiteboard said we are learning to write to keep the reader
interested. An example student response
to the question What do you think you
are learning? was How to make a
story interesting and not just long and boring?
The students were more able to link the learning to
themselves (immediacy of
relevance). One example response to the
question why do you think you are
learning this was, Because if I don’t (edit) people will read
it and think it doesn’t make sense and
Because I can’t do it (form letters) properly now. The use of the
first person indicates the student is able to link the learning to themselves.
Students were able to identify their own learning
goals. An example response
to the question what do you need to do
next? Was to use more adjectives,
similes and metaphors and not drag out the plot.
Students could readily identify examples of their
learning, the criteria and
their response to feedback, in their work.
Adviser. How
will you know when you have learned it?
Student. By looking at my work and seeing if I have
all the stuff. (The student
pointed to the achievement criteria on the board and aspects of their own work.)
Adviser. Can you show me some feedback a teacher had
written in your book….what does that mean to you?
Student. I had to get better at
Adviser. Do
you think you have done that?
Student Yes… see here….
The students were less reliant on the teacher for
judgements about their learning. One example student response to the question How will you know you have learnt it? was, I’ll read it through and if I know how to do it, I’ll know. There was evidence that students
were taking more responsibility for their learning as shown in this
longitudinal example.
How does your teacher help you? One student on three different occasions
(April, June, and November) said
- she
says things that give us ideas
- she
gives us ideas. She reads a story out loud so everyone can hear. Her
comments make us think harder.
- She’s
given us ideas on the board. Bit by bit- we started it yesterday. We have
time to think about what we’re going to write.
While the student
is still talking about what the teacher can do for him/her they are also
talking about their own learning through the use of the word ‘think’ in the
responses.
Students were able to respond more easily to the
question about how the teacher helps them and were able to identify strategies for learning
that were directly related to the learning they had identified as opposed to
the earlier visits where students made generalized statements about how they
perceived teacher interventions that were often unrelated to the identified
learning. We believe that this may
indicate a higher level of metacognition.
Analysis of shifts over time:
The ongoing process of data collection for use with teachers for their
professional learning also provided a wealth of information that could be
collated across the entire project. This
became phase two of the inquiry. As a
team we trialed and developed two matrices which we plotted teacher and student
responses on over several occasions to determine these shifts over time. The judgments of student and teacher voice were
moderated extensively within the AtoL team.
This process of moderating was used to ensure the resulting judgments
were reasonably dependable. Typical
responses of statements made by students or teachers were also recorded as
specific examples. In many instances
teachers used the evidence to plot their position and that of their students on
the matrix. This was too was moderated by the advisers.
These collations are included as appendices to this paper. (Appendix Two
student shifts and Appendix Three teacher shifts). In examining the
student shift graphs it was puzzling to note that the progress made from visits
one to three did not seem to be sustaining in visit 4. Further inquiry into why
this might be, led to anecdotal comments that teachers were trying “something
new” in visit 4. As part of the professional development process when teachers
examined this evidence they were able to provide explanation for the student
voice responses. Partially this was
relating to the degree of “comfort” they now felt with the classroom
observation process. In some instances
teachers were working in different curriculum areas or approaching their
teaching in a different manner. This is
an area that is worthy of further examination.
What
literature is saying.
Sadler, along with
Black and Wiliam, discuss the notion of students having a clear concept of the
learning that they are engaging in. If
there is on-going dialogue between teachers and students using a shared language
of learning and teaching then a culture where students are not afraid to ask
for help will exist (Black and Wiliam, 1998a).
As discussed by Nisbet, Schuchsmith, McCallum et al this dialogue
focused on the intended learning is useful strategically for both identifying
student’s difficulties with aspects of their learning and as a way of
developing their capacity to reflect on and improve their own learning. The term ‘metacognition’ refers to the
ability to think about one’s own thinking and learning processes. This capacity
lies at the heart of effective learning. (as cited in Flutter & Rudduck,
2004).
As Paul Black and
his colleagues propose it is important that teachers consider the effectiveness
of the feedback they give to students. Feedback should make more explicit to
pupils what precisely is involved in a high quality piece of work and what
steps they need to take to improve. At
the same time it should enhance pupil’s skills and strategies for effective
learning. (Black et al, as cited in
Flutter & Rudduck, p.102, 2004). Sadler (1989) recommends that students be
viewed as expert commentators on, rather than consumers of, assessment
practices.
Conclusion
So…what students
say about their learning – how can this improve learning? In posing this
question, the title of the paper, the reader has been presented with evidence
from a New Zealand
We consider that if
the ability to articulate learning is an indicative measure of learning then
the changes made by teachers have improved learning. From the evidence we have
collected teachers did use the initial student voice to make changes to their
practice. The impacts of this were evident in student voice data gathered on
the second and third visits. These
changes were planned and deliberate as a result of teachers reflecting on and
discussing with an adviser what their students were saying in response to the
set questions. During the subsequent
discussions with the teachers there was also evidence of their thinking about
how students learn and the importance of involving students more.
The student
responses in these subsequent visits are evidence of achieving learning if we
believe that what they are saying is useful for diagnostic purposes as well as
being an indicator of learning.
This inquiry has been conducted over a short time
frame and the dynamic, complex nature of learning makes it difficult to measure
and make claims about. There is still a
need to continue with this inquiry because of the probable impacts on teacher
practice and student learning. Hattie (1998) suggests that the focus should be
upon the greatest source of variance that can make the difference-the teacher
and that there is a need to optimise this influence in order to enhance student
learning opportunities. The authenticity
of context is significant in establishing rich data which is perceived to be
useful and valuable. When Lieberman and
Miller (2000) considered the changing context of teaching they identified
several change forces including the “new social realities of teaching” which
require teachers to make transitions for example from teaching at the centre to
learning at the centre. This is ultimately
the reason for inquiry into teaching and learning and, in this case, assessment
for learning.
As we moved our focus from shifts in teacher beliefs
and practices to student response to our questions, the conversations that
resulted have led us inexorably towards the question of “How can dialogue
create opportunity for students to think and express their ideas?” However that is another paper to be presented
in the following session
This project was funded by
the Ministry of Education through an Agreement with “the Contractor”. The views
expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
represent those of either the Ministry or “the Contractor”.
Thanks to Bronwen Cowie,
Alister Jones, Jenny Mills, Colleen Sayer, Kim Millwood, Lisa Morresey, Jennifer
Charteris, Raelene Bennett and all the teachers involved in the AtoL Project
(2005-2007) for participating in the reflective practice that underpins this
inquiry.
Appendix One Extracts from Articles
Convention on the Rights of the Child,
U.N. General Assembly Document A/RES/44/25 (12
December 1989 )
Article
12,
- States Parties
shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views
freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance
with the age and maturity of the child.
Article 13
- The child
shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either
orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other
media of the child's choice.
REFERENCES
Alexander, R.
(2005). Culture, Dialogue and Learning: Notes on an emerging pedagogy. Paper
presented at International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology
Conference, University of Durham ,
UK
Askew, S. (2000).
Feedback for Learning. Part 1. Askew, S.
& Lodge, C. – Gifts, ping-pong and loops linking feedback and learning. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/waikato/Doc?id=2002543&ppg=13
Black, P. &
Wiliam D (1998). Inside the Black Box:
raising standards through classroom assessment, London
Dunn, Parry & Morgan. (Southern Cross University Australia
Earl, L (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student
learning. Corwin Press, California
Flutter,J and Rudduck, J (2004) Consulting
Pupils What’s in it for schools? London
Hammersley, M.,
& Atkinson, P (1983). Ethnography:
Principles in Practice. London New York
Hattie, J (1998). What are the attributes of excellent
teachers? Auckland University of
Auckland
Johnston, P (2004)
Choice Words How Our Language Affects
Children’s Learning. Stenhouse Publishers, Portland , Maine
Jones, A. (date
unknown) Key issues related to Classroom
Observations. University of Waikato
Lieberman, A.
& Miller.L (2000). Teaching
and Teacher Development: A New Synthesis for a New Century. In Education
for a New Era: ASCD Yearbook 2000,
Sadler, R (1998)
Formative Assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1)
Tunstall and
Gipps(1996). How does your teacher help
you to make your work better? Children’s understanding of formative assessment.
Curriculum journal Vol 7 No 2 Summer 1996
U.N. Convention on the Rights
of the Child (1989). UN General Assembly Document A/RES/44/25:
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/44/a44r025.htm (down loaded
June 2007)
Webb,
M. and Jones, J. (2006). Assessment for learning transforming classroom
practice. Paper presented at BERA, Warwick University
