Working within
the framework of 'Personalised Learning' how can I ensure there is a real learning
space for my pupils, where they feel involved in what they learn and how they
learn it?
Ros Hurford
– Educational Enquiry Masters Unit. Submitted for examination, University
of Bath, February 2008
Framing.
A personalised approach to
supporting children means:
* Tailoring learning to
the needs, interests and aspirations of each individual
*Tackling barriers to
learning and allowing each child to achieve their potential (Every Child Matters 2003)
Introduction
This educational enquiry has its roots in two
linked areas. One is an awareness of myself as a learner and how I respond more
enthusiastically when I am interested in the subject or skill. The other is linked
to my role as a senior manager within my school and the current drive for
personalising learning.
It is from these two areas that my enquiry begins,
taking the form of an action research cycle guided by Belle Wallace's TASC
wheel (2001) framework and those of Whitehead and McNiff (2006). Within this
framework I have tried to establish how and why my practise in the area of developing
personalised learning has evolved and in which direction it still continues, in
the light of my own reflections and assisted by discussions with colleagues at
work and at the Tuesday Masters group at Bath University.
The stimulus for this enquiry was a request by the head
teacher to read the current government documentation about personalised
learning in order to assist the school to audit and develop any necessary
strategies within school. Before I felt able to make a valuable contribution to
whole school policy on this, I thought it pertinent to examine my own classroom
and whole school strategies to see how personalised it really was, not just how
I hoped it to be. By using the action research cycle and involving professional
colleagues I am also endeavouring to bring to the professional body of
knowledge about professional practice my own embodied knowledge. As Whitehead (2008) states:
'We, as
professional educators, are providing values-based explanations of our
educational influences in our own learning, in the learning of others and in
the learning of the social formations in which we live and work.'
My enquiry will also be available to a wider
audience, and thus subject to further scrutiny. In doing this I am using
Habermas' (1976) criteria for validity. (p2) This is a personal narrative of
what I have found, reflected on and understood, but I trust it will resonate
with others and be completely comprehensible.
Beginning
from within
'The young child is the greatest philosopher
of all ... He or she is open minded, trusting and honest, and
greets people without any pre-conceived opinions. They see the world as it is
– something wonderful and new and full of excitement.' (p. 148)
This quote from Gervase Phinn (1999) sums up completely
what it is about working with children that continues to make me passionate
about what I do, even after twenty years. This is the particular gift of
children, in my view, that they have the ability to make the world a
wonderfully new and curious place to be. It's an excitement and passion that
seems to dull as they grow older and is sadly lacking in a lot of adults. It is this sense of
wonder about the whole vast and intricate complicatedness of being that I
willingly absorb into my life. I see my role as an educator, not in the filling
of empty vessels with a mishmash of approved knowledge, but as a co-learner and
creator in an attempt to make the world work for us and link to our
understanding of who we are and what we are capable of.
I am unable to separate teaching as a professional
role from the person that I myself am. My ways of working, my relationships
with my pupils and the knowledge and skills I put across are all linked to who
I am and what my values about life are. To some extent it involves performing
in a role each day; one that meets the expectations of the pupils, their
parents and other professionals; but within that there is space to be myself
– to personalise my teaching. Were I to totally act a part each day then
my pupils would very soon spot the gap between what I say and what I do, and I
would have little authenticity in their eyes.
The
official view
As with any responsibility in education I cannot
ignore the views and advice from government sources, so for my research into
personalisation this was my starting point. I had already attended an
afternoon's training course on personalising education and was keen to discover
how all this fitted into what we already do. I confess that at that stage I
couldn't see how it differed from what was already considered good practice
within school. My investigation into this area soon left me feeling I had
accidentally stepped into another world. I include here some extracts from some
of this documentation.
'Personalised Learning is
about tailoring education to individual need, interest and aptitude so as to
ensure that every pupil achieves and reaches the highest standards possible.'
(p11)
(Institutional Quality Standards in Gifted and
Talented Education User Guide Mouchel Parkman, 2007) )
Personalizing learning is
the deliberate and systematic process of focusing all of a school's resources
to ensure that each learner is able, with support, to decide what they learn,
how they learn, when they learn and who they learn with. (John West-Burnham) intro
Personalisation
in education should enable structures and organisations to be
developed that
result in personalised learning for all children. Personalised learning
means that all
children and young people, whatever their starting point, are able to
fulfil their
potential as learners. (DfES
Pedagogy and Personalisation June
2007 , p.11)
Personalising learning and
teaching means taking a highly
structured and responsive approach to each child's and young person's learning.
(2020 Vision 2007, p. 6)
Maybe the formal language, the standard
'government-speak', caused me to feel a conflict between the official idea of a
personalised classroom or school, and the relational values I aim to achieve in
my own practice. The learning experiences where I want children to have
'freedom to be creative in a safe environment' (Hannah, Tuesday evening group)
seemed to have no place among the use of data, structures and tracking
results.
In his National Conversation about Personalised Learning (DfES 2004, p.8). David Milliband defines
the key components of personalised learning as:
Again this is dominated by the key phrases that
read like a mantra, but require translation into the 'people' world I inhabit
at work.
I found myself questioning some of David
Hargreaves' (2007) research and conclusions in the guidance section for the
Institutional Quality Standards in Gifted and Talented Education. For the
pupils personalised education would mean having a 'safe and secure environment
in which to learn' and 'a real say about what and how they learn'. So far, it
sounds promising. But then comes the section on what personalised education
will mean to the teacher. Here we have the well worn phrases such as 'high expectations of learners', 'access
and use of data', 'development of teaching strategies including ICT' and
'access to CPD'.
At this point I wanted
desperately to tell someone with influence over official guidelines that all
these strategies are fine when we are measuring the ability and attainment of a
pupil against targets – but where is the advice to remember that each
child is a valued individual and should be treated accordingly. Is it just that
I see what I do each day in terms of human values, and feel the official descriptions
of my role are soulless and bear greater resemblance to a production line
manual?
Despite many of the promising and hope-inspiring
proposals in the 2020 Vision report there are still statements which I would
wish to see qualified rather than written as self-evident truth, such as:
'Personalisation is a
matter of moral purpose and social justice' (p7)
Nevertheless, all hope is not lost. The report also
recognises that there are 'soft skills' which need to be developed even though
they are not measured by tests or recorded adequately (p10) and that although
primary schools have not been involved in the implementation of personalised
learning to the same degree as secondary schools:
'many of its principles
are seen in the most effective practice in good primary schools'. (p14)
There were many positives to draw from the official
documentation, despite the language. Moving towards an education system that
offers a wider choice of learning experiences to children, welcomes their
feedback and involves them in the planning of their own education is, to me, a
step in the right direction, despite the organisational headache of doing all
this and ensuring that basic curriculum requirements are met.
Whole
School Personalisation
At this point my focus returned to my own school. I
wanted to see which 'boxes' we tick as whole school policy – and there
are plenty to tick. The school ethos statement, which promotes opportunities
for learning and realising potential is more than a document. It is thankfully
a living statement, evidenced by the variety of daily activities. There is a
vocal and active pupil council, consulted on lots of school issues, given the
responsibility for guiding important (inspectoral) visitors on learning walks,
having a say in organisational changes, and lately, following my literacy
group's work on interviewing new teacher candidates, has helped draw up the
qualities they would wish in the new head.
Besides this there are a wide variety of
extra-curricular clubs, activity weeks, such as multi-cultural weeks, science
weeks, to mention a few. Children have responsibility jobs around the school,
take turns to be football captains, and help deliver messages. The list is
endless. We promote the school as a family – and just like real families
we don't always agree, but we share a sense of individuals belonging to a
group. In a parental survey last October, 81% of parents agreed that the school
took account of the children's views.
Last
December's DT Christmas week will remain memorable as this was also the week we
were 'inspected'. With the economic
realities of raising funds being hammered out, rooms covered in glitter and
glue, barely a learning objective or lesson plan in sight as staff responded
daily to changes in situation or needs - was this the ideal time for Ofsted to
visit? Staff agreed very definitely yes. Chaos it might have looked, but this
was how our children work best – taking the lead in their own education,
supported and guided by adults. These weeks are often where the valuable 'soft
skills' are taught, the social skills of co-operation, planning together, the
evaluation of the role they have played, regardless of any academic ability.
They are also the times when teachers come to appreciate the less obvious talents
the children have, and work with them on a personalised level.
Personalisation
in my class.
Having assured myself that in terms of general
school provision we were able to demonstrate good examples of including pupil
voice and giving the children some choice and involvement generally with their
education, my next step was to scrutinise what goes on in my own classroom.
Checking my practice against Milliband's key
components of personalised learning the verdict is fairly positive. I do monitor
the data on pupils, use aspects of assessment for learning and plan teaching
and learning strategies that enable all children to have access to the 'broad
and balanced curriculum'. But the curriculum also require me to promote
spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development and prepare the
children for the opportunities of adult life, which is a broader remit than
teaching individual subjects.
It is at this stage that I become aware of
personalisation needing to be split into two components, in order to find a
creative way to deal with my sense of conflict. There is the 'Personalisation'
of checking each child makes the best of their talents and succeeds within the
education system – this is the aspect that seems to best fit the phrases
about potential and targets – the more measurable things promoted by
official documents. Then there is the other component which I define as the
relational aspect of engaging children in learning situations – seeing
them as individuals and knowing that unless I have some relational point of
contact with them, I might as well give up and go home. Interestingly I see the
first as something standard, belonging to the job, taken for granted, but the
second is at the very heart of my teaching.
My relationship with each pupil is of great
importance to me. Yes, I am aware of how they perform according to targets and
levels, but this for me does not adequately define the person I am teaching.
What I am to achieve is to get to know that developing individual and respond
to their needs and strengths in a way that is absolutely personal to them. It's
not setting individual work assignments for every child, which would be
physically impossible anyway, but rather being able to read their body
language, know about background influences, knowing when they need a firm push
or whether they need support. This acknowledges the conditions for profound
learning which West-Burnham (2007) describes as requiring:
'the positive interaction of a range of complex variables...... It is only
by understanding the relative significance of each factor for any one
individual that it becomes possible to be confident about their potential and
capacity to learn.' (P3)
And he identifies this
type of learning as being:
'what makes us a person, it gives us a sense of uniqueness and determines
our ability to think and act for ourselves. Profound learning is the way in which
we develop personal wisdom and meaning, which allows us to be creative, to make
moral judgements, to be an authentic human being who is able to accept responsibility
for our own destinies.' (P9)
This is the type of learning that I want to see
going on in my classroom. It doesn't exclude working within levels and targets,
it matches the overall aims of the National Curriculum and it works in harmony
with the wider aims of personalised education. But whereas the current focus on
personalised education suggests it is another extra to tag on to the overload,
this deeper, more human and loving form of treating each child as an individual
is for me the foundation of everything I do.
I believe it comes from my own understanding of how
I learn, in the widest meaning of the term. From conversations with colleagues,
and linking it also to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, I believe the need for
individual recognition, from whatever source, is fundamental not only to our
well-being, but also to the way we take control of our lives and learning. If I
do not feel valued, or recognised for the individual I am in some way, then
something essential is lost in the amount of personal investment I am prepared
to make on something.
Making an
audit
When I began to look for evidence of relational
personalisation in my class, I must confess to being disappointed at how little
seemed to go on. There was the 'good morning' at register time, some
conversations with more confident pupils - my intentions were there but only if
you could mind read. I did not make it overtly clear to the children that I
respected their views as learning partners or I was interested in them as
people. Marking comments were even sometimes extremely terse and negative
sounding, although that was not the intention.
Making
the first steps.
Having reflected on this, I decided my first move
should be to talk to the children about how they saw things. I explained that I
was concerned that I could only see things from an adult point of view and that
a lot of the time that was dominated by the demands of QCA documents, school
timetables, learning objectives and levels – all of which I had to do,
but I wanted some way of involving them with what they learned and how they
learned it. I told them how when you really want to learn something, nothing
gets in your way because it's you in control, and related how I learned to play
Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata years before I was really considered of the 'right
proficiency' – the amount of practising I willing undertook because my
heart was set on it. And I compared this to the endless lessons I'd had on Australian
sheep farming, which were of no interest to me and the only real learning had
been that daydreaming can be more interesting.
.
Their suggestions as to how I could involve them
were, as ever, very sensible. Sometimes I think adults need to regularly read
the story of the Emperor's New Clothes. We dress so many things up in
complicated terms and yet a child can get straight to the heart of the matter.
Could I write comments to them when I mark and use their name, could I ask them
to plan themselves how they could show me what they had learned? Could they
have 'Golden Time' on a Friday when they could work on things they were
interested in –and share them with the rest of the class?
Much of this was easy to implement and caused no
problem with the curriculum. I'd make a point of remembering something they
were doing, marked with a comment specifically for them, joined them at
lunchtime for a chat and gradually began to know them better as individuals.
We continued the circle time sessions whenever
possible and investigated together what sort of things they needed to know to
be adults. I was interested to see if they had the same opinions to White
(2006) who proposes that the type of curriculum we have will determine the life
of the individual as an adult:
Flourishing depends on
success – in intimate personal relationships, in worthwhile and absorbing
activities, in family life, in self-understanding, aesthetic enjoyments and in
other things ......What is important is not that they (young people) have
life-targets in mind from an early age and strive to reach them; but that somehow
they get involved, caught up, in valuable activities such as those mentioned. (P155)
Amongst the children's responses was the idea that
you need to learn how to communicate, how to get along with other people, how
to support yourself and how to find your way around. It reminded me of Robert
Fulgham's essay 'All I ever really needed to know I learned in kindergarten.'
The statutory curriculum may have been chosen for us, and we may have to follow
it for the time being , but school learning also needs to touch on skills for
life.
Having raised my own awareness of how much more
productive and informative it was to involve the children, I found that
opportunities to do so became more frequent. During film week I gave two groups
the task of making their own film using model animals. One of these groups I
videoed and reviewed with them later. Of the three boys L has literacy
difficulties and is a restless pupil, K prefers being out on the football pitch
to sitting at a desk and S would far rather spend his day playing computer
games. In routine lessons none of them shines, or looks particularly engaged.
Yet, when they had to organise themselves, produce a narrative, take photos,
construct a film and add music, they were completely different. There was
animation in their voices and movements, I had trouble getting them to leave
the project over breaktime and they paid attention to the tiniest details.
We talked about this transformation later, and
although they had no solutions for me generally, they could explain that the
project had interested them and didn't require sitting still – being
passive learners.
Another opportunity to invite the class to
participate in their own learning arose when I looked in despair at the QCA
music activities. We don't possess sufficient electronic gadgetry or software
to modify sounds and I felt it was asking rather too much of children to
compose a 'space soundscape' with just an odd assortment of percussion
instruments. I would have found
such a task a real grind. Again I put the problem to them and explained how I
felt, but suggested that we might be able to adapt the objectives to something
more creative. They weren't short on ideas and eventually we selected telling a
'space' story in pictures, making it into a film and adding their own
compositions to it; a far more creative an idea than I could have thought of
myself, and with the bonus of involving them in their own learning.
The
Futurelab site 'Enquiring Minds' suggests a move towards this when it states:
'if we are
asking students to be more and more self-aware about how they learn, then a
core component of that exercise is to enable them to engage fully with what it
is that is being taught. Our attention needs to be drawn not only to students'
learning processes but to the relationship between this and what they are
learning.'
My final example of how involving the children enables
me to create with them a learning space in which they demonstrate talents and
abilities that would otherwise go unnoticed relates to Appendix 1. The session began with a general
unpicking of the task, and, after peer discussion, they fed back their ideas
and questions about alien planets. Two hours later the room was still buzzing
with enthusiasm; they were all busy and involved (bar the child mentioned in
appendix 1). The presentations from each group at the end were delightful.
Unfortunately I have not been able to get parental permission for the photos I
took , but the radiance of pure pleasure that shines out from their faces is a
joy to see, and was wonderful to feel. This for me was creating a situation in
which the children felt secure to explore creative ideas and learn at a deeper
level.
There was just time to ask them why the afternoon
had gone so well, had been so enjoyable and productive. Every child offered a
suggestion. These included:
*we used our own ideas
* we could make it up, there were no 'wrong' ideas
*we worked in a team, it wasn't a personal success
or failure and that's not so scary
*we were allowed to use our imaginations and that's
more fun than facts
* you didn't have to work with one group –
you came round to all of us to see what we were doing.
Conclusions
and reflections
The
curriculum is too prescriptive at times and this can make it very difficult to
keep the learning of each child to the front of planning. It is however
possible to accommodate much of the official view of 'personalised learning'
within the normal structures of planning and assessment, bearing in mind that
the aim is not a form of individual tutoring.
However, there is still a long way to go, and much
to be gained by changing the relational quality of the classroom; from one
where the teacher makes all the decisions – even the ones based on the adult's
perception of the child's best interests – to the relationship of mutual
trust, respect and participation, where teacher and children are co-learners,
co-planners and understand each other on a more 'human' and relational way.
This is encouraged by Robinson & Fielding (2007) when they state:
'Where time and space is
made available in schools for pupils' voices to be heard on issues that affect
their learning, teachers can gain insights into pupils' perceptions of teaching
which helps, and teaching which hinders, pupils' learning'. (P90
What comes across as being much more effective with
the children involved is that they are very creative and when they are working
on something which interests them, they invest far more time and energy in
their learning. This might sound obvious, but when they are involved in
planning their learning, this outcome is more guaranteed than when I plan a
lesson I think they will enjoy.
There are practical difficulties to iron out, such as having time to plan
together and fitting in with a
school policy of pairs of year group teachers preparing planning in advance, or
how much freedom can we have, but I see this as a positive way forward and a
step towards a real community of enquiry as defined by Edmiston (2007)
By changing my approach I have taken the initial
steps to developing a greater awareness in the children as being independent
learners. It thrills me to find on a weekend or evening they are working on
their wiki page stories, without being told to, or when they bring an idea into
the class and have no hesitation
to share it with me. For my part I've had to make adjustments to my perceived role,
but this new one seems to be a better fit than the previous one. The
development of trust and honesty between us and the growing relationship as
learning partners has been such a wonderful surprise. It's great to get an email from a pupil telling me what she enjoyed about the day and giving
suggestions – a feeling that this 'learning stuff' is something we're all
engaged in as part of the school family.
Finally I include part of
an email sent to me by Chris Jones, the Senior Inclusion Officer for Bath and
North East Somerset. She visited my class as part of the IQM scrutiny recently
– and watched one of the music lessons that the children had helped to plan:
You have a
wonderful relationship with the children and there is a tremendous amount of
respect demonstrated between you and the children and amongst the children
themselves. The children worked so well together in their groups and listened
quietly when each group played their composition. They were all very involved
in what they were doing and it was obvious that they were enjoying the whole
learning experience.
Ensuring that I provide my children
with a real personal learning space has meant some changes, a lot of surprises
and not a few re-examinations of my ideas about what learning really is. The
benefits have been fantastic in terms of our personal growth. There is still
much that could be developed, such as learning conversations through the wiki
site or unpicking the skills and attitudes of good learners. The foundation of
the relational would appear to have been laid for this.
The official personalised learning
can exist harmoniously with the relational personalisation. Asking children to
be involved in what and how they learn does not prevent the teacher from
monitoring data or setting targets. But if we are to make children feel that
they matter in school, we must go further than this and push the
personalisation into knowing better each individual as a person.
References
Besley,S.
(2004) Personalised Learning. Just what is it? Policy Briefing.
Retrieved 18/12/07from www.edexcel.org.uk
DfES
(2003) Excellence and Enjoyment: A Strategy for Primary Schools. Retrieved
24/7/07 from http://www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/primary/publications
DfES
(2003) Every Child Matters retrieved 21/12/07 from www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk
Edmiston,
B Classroom Communities of
Enquiry retrieved 22/1/08 from www.mantleoftheexpert.com
Fulgham,
R. All I ever needed to know I
learned in Kindergarten. Retrieved
4/7/07
from http://www.elliottsamazing.com
Futurelab Enquiring Minds http://www.enquiringminds.org.uk retrieved 1/1/08
Habermas,J.
(1976) Communication and the evolution of society. London. Heinemann
Hargreaves,
D. (2007) Institutional Quality Standards
Guidance, retrieved 17/10/07 from
http://www2.teachernet.gov.uk/resources
Milliband,
D. (2004) A National Conversation about Personalised Learning. retrieved 24/7/07
from http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/personalisedlearning/downloads/
Phinn,
G. (1999) The Other Side of
the Dale. Penguin Books. London
QCA
. (2002) Designing and Timetabling the Primary Curriculum. Retrieved 6/6/07 fromwww.qca.org.uk
Robinson,C
& Fielding, M. (2007) Children and their Primary Schools: Pupil Voice.
Primary Review Research Survey 5/3
retrieved 28/1/08 from http://www.primaryreview.org.uk
Rudduck,
J, Brown, N & Hendy, L
(2006) Personalising
Learning and Pupil Voice – The East Sussex Project. DfES retrieved 17/10/07 from www.standards.dfes.gov.uk
Specialist
Schools and Academies Trust. (2007) Personalising Learning retrieved 1/1/08 from http://ssat-inet.net/resources
2020
Vision – Report of the Teaching and Learning in 2020 Review Group
retrieved 2/7/07 from www.teachernet.gov.uk/doc/10783/6856/DfESTeacchingandLeartningpdf
Wallace,
B. (Ed) (2001) Teaching Thinking Skills Across the Primary Curriculum. London NACE/David Fulton.
Whitehead,
J & McNiff, J. (2006) Action Research Living Theory. London. Sage
Publications.
West-Burnham,
J (2007) Personalized Learning. retrieved 1/1/08 from http://lgnwbwblu.livefilestore.com
West-Burnham,
J. Understanding Learning
retrieved 22/1/08 from www.edlinked.soe.waikato.ac.nz
White,
J. (2006) Intelligence, Destiny and
Education. Bodmin. Routledge
Whitehead,
J. (2008) A response to the Primary
Education Review: Aims and Values. Draft 11/2/08 retrieved 20/2/08 from edsajw@bath.ac.uk
Appendix 1
Jan
23rd
My
partner teacher is out with dental problems today. It's PPA all morning but
this afternoon, instead of having sets for Numeracy and Literacy, we will have
our own classes with a few extras as his class will be split around the school.
It's
a time to think fast on your feet – what can I find for them to do that
will be suitable for all abilities, interests and can be set up without too
much trouble?
I
find help in the form of 'Outside the Box', a book of creative thinking
activities. Apart from needing to get out the felt pens and find some paper it
doesn't require endless resources and looks feasible with a class of 32. At
least I have just enough tables although I have to find extra chairs.
I
put the children into working tables of 5 or 6 per group and give out the task.
They have to imagine that they are from an alien planet (too near the truth on
some of them) and are writing a holiday brochure for visiting Earthlings. We go
over suggestions of what could be put into this brochure, what a visiting
Earthling might find useful to know – and link it to the TASC wheel of
defining the task and 'what do I know about this'. Then they split back into
their groups and begin sorting through the ideas they want to do in their
particular group – and who is going to do what.
For
the next two hours I became mainly an observer of them being busy, engaged totally
in what they were doing; a facilitator rather than directly teaching. The room
buzzed with enthusiasm. It didn't matter what general level of ability they
were, the majority found a level to work at, or a way to produce their bit that
suited them. Children with poor literacy skills drew diagrams and made
pictures, some cut out models.
Only
one group had a problem getting going and they were the children who regularly
have problems sharing ideas – the ones who lack the social skills to work
comfortably in a group. They'd got stuck on what to call the planet –and
nothing beyond that was happening – just a blossoming argument with two
sides threatening to go elsewhere and not co-operate. They had great ideas
– and yet came unstuck with choosing the best idea. In the end it was
solved by picking the name out of a hat, a few temporary sulks and a quiet word
with the 'winner' that gloating wouldn't help the group along.
The
more able children found the lesson a creative delight – imagination
taken as far as they could. I met two of them later in Sainsbury's that
evening. One was still speaking 'alien' and the other, normally a disinterested
child, was actually enthusiastic about the lesson and said how much he'd
enjoyed it. They had been challenged by how far they could take their ideas;
the less able had found a way of showing their talents.
Only
one child sticks out in my mind over the afternoon. He's an average ability,
not particularly good at language skills or social skills, watches a lot of tv
and enjoys quite aggressive computer games – the type that need skill in
blowing your opponent to bits, rather than anything productive or needing
thought. He really found the afternoon difficult,. The group repeated several
times to him what the task was, made suggestions of what he could make but he
seemed to find real difficulty in making that leap from reality into
imagination. In the end he drew a flag for the alien country but even then he
couldn't see why aliens had a flag.