Collaborative and group learn<strong>in</strong>g has been studied for some time, but collaboration requirespurpose and good content. Small-group work has been related to higher achievement(Veenam et al., 2005) but it has to be carefully managed. <strong>Effective</strong> teachers often allow childrento work <strong>in</strong> groups to th<strong>in</strong>k through their ideas and to present and make explicit their th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g.This <strong>in</strong>cludes to each other and peer tutor<strong>in</strong>g (Whitebread et al., 2007). They assign roles with<strong>in</strong>group work and see <strong>in</strong>teraction as an <strong>in</strong>tegral part of learn<strong>in</strong>g (Gipps et al., 2000; Fosnot, 1996;Barron, 2003; Tolmie et al., 2010).Personalis<strong>in</strong>g and differentiat<strong>in</strong>g learn<strong>in</strong>g is equally important for groups and <strong>in</strong>dividuals.Classrooms with considered, purposeful differentiation ensure that learn<strong>in</strong>g can be scaffolded(Rojas-Drummond & Mercer, 2003) and has the variety and richness required to reta<strong>in</strong>children’s <strong>in</strong>terests and the right level of challenge. This requires teachers to have priorknowledge of their children’s learn<strong>in</strong>g levels, to plan for the next steps <strong>in</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g and tomake l<strong>in</strong>ks explicit with<strong>in</strong> and across concepts (Bruner, 2006). This supports the case forshift<strong>in</strong>g towards a more <strong>in</strong>tegrated approach to the curriculum (such as topic work) ratherthan a purely subject-specific approach (West & Muijs, 2009).Although direct teach<strong>in</strong>g has an important place <strong>in</strong> the classroom, other strategies can promotebetter provocations to children’s th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g and these often depend on the quality of the<strong>in</strong>teraction between the teacher and the learner. Referred to as dialogic teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g(Wells, 1999), it is a key feature of effective classrooms and is characterised by the use ofopen-ended questions to develop deeper level learn<strong>in</strong>g. It has been seen to be important <strong>in</strong>the early years, where susta<strong>in</strong>ed, shared th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g has been found <strong>in</strong> effective practice(Siraj-Blatchford, 2002), and for older children (Muijs & Reynolds, 2011). These approachesencourage more analytical thought as children reflect, expla<strong>in</strong> and argue through their th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>gand learn<strong>in</strong>g and problem solv<strong>in</strong>g, it also enhances children’s meta-cognitive skills (De Jager et al.,2005). This requires good content knowledge, <strong>in</strong>structional conversations (Andrews, 2011) andthe will<strong>in</strong>gness by teachers to share the locus of control and authority (Alexander, 2006).In the last decade, Assessment for Learn<strong>in</strong>g has achieved great popularity (Black et al., 2003). Ithas an emphasis on feedback strategies that are formative and strong on delv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to children’sunderstand<strong>in</strong>gs and extend<strong>in</strong>g their learn<strong>in</strong>g (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Arter & Stigg<strong>in</strong>s, 2005).Evaluative feedback of this k<strong>in</strong>d, examples of which are given <strong>in</strong> this report, helps childrento reflect on their learn<strong>in</strong>g through review<strong>in</strong>g their work (Rittle-Johnson, 2006). It offersencouragement and promotes effort, especially when coupled with suggestions and strategiesto assist the learner to move forward <strong>in</strong> their learn<strong>in</strong>g (Dweck, 2000).The research on homework is mixed <strong>in</strong> the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs. However, there is a great deal of evidencethat suggests that if homework is mean<strong>in</strong>gful (Trautwe<strong>in</strong>, 2007), flexible to what arises <strong>in</strong> lessons(Cooper, 2006) and extends and deepens understand<strong>in</strong>g of concepts and l<strong>in</strong>ks with children’slearn<strong>in</strong>g experiences, it will enhance learn<strong>in</strong>g (Durden, 2008).40 | <strong>Explor<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Effective</strong> <strong>Pedagogy</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Primary</strong> <strong>Schools</strong>
All of the above could be researched further but this report testifies that a great deal isalready known about what promotes good outcomes for children. The challenge is to put thisknowledge <strong>in</strong>to practice and embed it <strong>in</strong> policies and classrooms. The report has identified anumber of strategies which, if given a higher profile <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial teacher tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and the cont<strong>in</strong>uousprofessional development of teachers, would improve practice and therefore provide bettereducational experiences that enhance children’s learn<strong>in</strong>g and improve academic and socialbehaviouraloutcomes. These f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs are of particular relevance to policy makers at bothnational and local level who have responsibility for <strong>in</strong>vest<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>, and design<strong>in</strong>g programmesfor, the development of educational leaders and teachers. Good programmes that genu<strong>in</strong>elyimprove practice and pedagogy ultimately <strong>in</strong>crease children’s life chances. As Michael Fullan(1991:17) stated:Educational change depends on what teachers do and th<strong>in</strong>k. It’s as simple and complex as that.Evidence from Research | 41
- Page 1 and 2:
Exploring Effective Pedagogy inPrim
- Page 3 and 4: About the AuthorsProfessor Iram Sir
- Page 5 and 6: ContentsForeword - by Dylan WiliamE
- Page 7 and 8: That is why the Effective Pre-Schoo
- Page 9 and 10: Executive SummaryBackgroundThis pub
- Page 11 and 12: some there was incomplete data; onl
- Page 13 and 14: Personalised teaching and learningT
- Page 15 and 16: 1Pedagogy: TheInternational Perspec
- Page 17 and 18: The work of SER scholars provided p
- Page 19 and 20: The TIMSS study is very clear about
- Page 21 and 22: Given that pedagogy is fundamentall
- Page 23 and 24: The methodsThe EPPSE study is uniqu
- Page 25 and 26: The case studies of practice were c
- Page 27 and 28: The full findings of this associate
- Page 29 and 30: Group C: Poor Schools: Low academic
- Page 31 and 32: The initial analyses of the observe
- Page 33 and 34: • Routines are very efficient - h
- Page 35 and 36: 3. HomeworkThe EPPSE 3-14 study sho
- Page 37 and 38: • Supportive approach with high e
- Page 39 and 40: • Only one very minor disagreemen
- Page 41 and 42: Children in highly effective school
- Page 43 and 44: • Teacher is very aware of childr
- Page 45 and 46: Another example demonstrates clear
- Page 47 and 48: 10. Assessment for Learning (AfL)As
- Page 49 and 50: She was able to offer a little feed
- Page 51 and 52: It is highly likely that good organ
- Page 53: Also, although the large amounts of
- Page 57 and 58: Claxton, G. & Carr, M. (2004). A Fr
- Page 59 and 60: Gorard, S. (2010b). Serious doubts
- Page 61 and 62: OECD Organisation for Economic Co-o
- Page 63 and 64: Sammons, P., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E
- Page 65 and 66: Veenam, S., Denessen, E., van den A
- Page 67 and 68: Child social behaviour - Social int
- Page 69 and 70: Appendix 2: Complete List of School
- Page 71 and 72: Appendix 2: Complete List of School