DIFFERENTIATION S1 TO S4: THE WAYS FORWARD

CONFERENCE REPORT

22 MAY 1997

Faculty of Education, University of Strathclyde

ii1997

iii

DIFFERENTIATION S1 TO S4: THE WAYS FORWARD

Report on a one-day conference at

Jordanhill Campus,

University of Strathclyde

on 22 May 1997

ivACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report has been produced and edited by:

Margaret Kirkwood, University of Strathclyde, Faculty of Education

The contributors to the report are:

Dr Brian Boyd, Centre for Quality in Education, University of Strathclyde Bill Campbell, Claremont High School, East Kilbride

Morag Cunningham, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus Sandra Dunbar, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Karen Gibson, Cathkin High SchoolProfessor Wynne Harlen, Scottish Council for Research in Education

Louise Hayward, St AndrewÕs College, BearsdenSheila Hughes, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill CampusFionna Kent, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Margaret Kirkwood, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill CampusHeather Malcolm, Scottish Council for Research in Education

Eileen Mallaghan, Cardinal Newman High SchoolJoan Mowat, Woodfarm High School, East Renfrewshire

Fran Payne, Northern College, Aberdeen CampusProfessor Mary Simpson, Northern College, Aberdeen Campus

Jack Winch, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill CampusSydney Wood, Northern College, Aberdeen Campus

Myra Young, Cathkin High School

We hope that the contents of this report will prove useful to teachers and school managers in planning for differentiation at S1 to S4, and also to student teachers, educational researchers,

teacher educators and educational policy makers.

Published in 1997by

Faculty of EducationUniversity of Strathclyde

Jordanhill Campus76 Southbrae DriveGlasgow G13 1PP

Copyright © 1997 Faculty of Education, University of Strathclyde

This publication may be photocopied for use within your educational establishment.

ISBN 1 900743 65 5

vCONTENTS

AIMS AND THEMES OF THE CONFERENCE .......... v

CONFERENCE EVENTS .......... vi

EVALUATION OF THE CONFERENCE .......... vii

FOREWORD .......... viii

MAIN PRESENTATIONS

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE DIFFERENTIATION PRACTICESMary Simpson, Department Of Educational Research, Northern College Of Education .......... 1

SCHOOLS CELEBRATING SUCCESSBrian Boyd, Centre For Quality In Education, Faculty Of Education, Strathclyde University .......... 7

DISCUSSION GROUP PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARIES

WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS ON ABILITY GROUPS AND SETTINGWynne Harlen And Heather Malcolm, Scottish Council For Research In Education .......... 11

HOW CAN ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES HELP TEACHERS WITH DIFFERENTIATION?Mary Simpson, Northern College Of Education .......... 14

THE SCOTTISH NETWORK FOR ABLE PUPILS (SNAP)Louise Hayward, St AndrewÕs College .......... 18

MEETING THE NEEDS OF ABLE PUPILS: A CASE STUDY IN COMPUTINGEileen Mallaghan, Cardinal Newman High SchoolBill Campbell, Claremont High SchoolMargaret Kirkwood, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus .......... 22

DIFFERENTIATION AND LEARNING DIFFICULTIES IN HISTORYSydney Wood And Fran Payne, Northern College, Aberdeen .......... 29

MEETING INDIVIDUAL NEEDS & PROMOTING INDEPENDENT LEARNING IN MUSICJoan Mowat, Music Department, Woodfarm High School .......... 33

CREATING A CLIMATE FOR LEARNING IN ENGLISHMyra Young, Karen Gibson, Cathkin High School .......... 42

FURTHER INFORMATION ON POSTERS AND DISPLAYS .......... 44

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY .......... 45

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS ........... 47

vi

AIMS

The conference aimed to bring together educators and educational researchers

to discuss the ways forward and exchange ideas on differentiation at S1 to S4.

THEMES

¥ guiding principles on differentiation for effective learning

¥ looking at the research evidence

¥ finding practical and flexible solutions

¥ the setting/mixed-ability debate

¥ towards achievement for all

viiEVENTS

10.00 am WelcomeJim McCallProfessor: Dean of Faculty of Education, Strathclyde University

10.10-10.50 First speakerÒGuiding principles for developing effective differentiation practicesÓMary SimpsonProfessor: Head of Department of Educational Research, Northern College of Education

11.05-12.20 First discussion group

1.20-2.00 Second speakerÒSchools celebrating successÓBrian BoydAssociate Director, Centre for Quality in Education, Strathclyde University

2.00-3.15 Second discussion group

3.15-3.45 ÒPosters/displayÓ

3.45-4.10 PlenaryChairperson: Sheila Hughes, Faculty of Education, Strathclyde University

Discussion Groups

A What the research says on ability groups and settingWynne Harlen and Heather Malcolm, The Scottish Council for Research in EducationChairperson: Sheila Hughes

B How can assessment strategies help teachers with differentiation? Mary Simpson, Northern College of Education Chairperson: Sandra Dunbar

C The Scottish Network for Able Pupils (SNAP)Louise Hayward, St AndrewÕs CollegeChairperson: Jack Winch

D Meeting the needs of able pupils - a case study in computing studiesEileen Mallaghan, Cardinal Newman HS, Bill Campbell, Claremont HS,Margaret Kirkwood, Faculty of Education, Strathclyde UniversityChairperson: Margaret Kirkwood

E Differentiation & learning difficulties in historySydney Wood and Fran Payne, Northern College of EducationChairperson: Morag Cunningham

F Meeting individual needs & promoting independent learning in musicJoan Mowat, Woodfarm High SchoolChairperson: Brian Boyd

G Creating a climate for learning in EnglishMyra Young and Karen Gibson, Cathkin High SchoolChairperson: Fionna Kent

Posters and Displays

H Scottish CCC Interactive video disc on differentiation

I ÒSqueezing out the juiceÓ (On perceptions of reading in secondary schools) POSTER

Jenny Allan, Liberton High School, Edinburgh

J ÒGirls shine in computingÓ (On gender differences in Computing Studies) POSTER

Margaret Kirkwood, Faculty of Education, Strathclyde University

viiiEVALUATION OF THE CONFERENCE

The majority of the 86 delegates were from secondary schools. 41 evaluation forms were returned (48% return rate).¥ Did you enjoy the conference?

very much 23 (56%) quite enjoyed it 17 (41%) not really 1¥ Was the day worthwhile?

very worthwhile 21 (51%) quite worthwhile 19 (46%) not really 1¥ Which part or parts of the day were most worthwhile?

main presentations 32 discussion groups 25 posters 0plenary 1 informal conversations 12

¥ Did the conference succeed in pointing some of the ways forward on differentiation...?¥ ...in terms of practice in secondary schoolshighly successful 10 (24%) quite successful 28 (68%) not successful 3¥ ...in terms of future directions for researchhighly successful 6 (18%) quite successful 25 (76%) not successful 2

¥ What, in your view, would be an appropriate follow-up event to this conference?¥ a thorough research programme conducted in Scottish secondary schools into

differentiation (3 respondents)¥ appropriate teaching materials and methods to be made available to schools (1

respondent)¥ a publication with case studies of practice (1 respondent)¥ a chance to sit down with the practitioners to generate materials for my own school (1

respondent)¥ ÒoutreachÓ - discussion group presentations, on the invitation of schools or local

authorities (1 respondent)¥ arrange visits with presenters (1 respondent)¥ obtain ÒhandoutsÓ from other discussion groups by contacting presenters (1

respondent)¥ repeat the conference to allow others (wider range of participants) to attend, or to allow

those who did attend to go to different discussion groups and to hear other main presenters (4 respondents)

¥ certain ideas that I will continue to think about (3 respondents)¥ the conference/ workshops applied to a ÔsubjectÕ audience (3 respondents)¥ workshops with very clear targets on departmental organization and classroom practice

(2 respondents)¥ video material of various differentiation models in different subjects (2 respondents)¥ video the conference presentations for use on staff development sessions in schools in

order to raise awareness and to stimulate discussion and action (1 respondent)¥ feedback on how people have implemented changes and the success/failure of this (1

respondent)¥ linking of people working on a similar aspect and cross curricular approaches e.g. target

setting (2 respondents)¥ through various school-based initiatives (5 respondents)

ixFOREWORD

DIFFERENTIATION S1 TO S4: THE WAYS FORWARDWHICH ISSUES AND THEMES EMERGED, AND ARE THE WAYS FORWARD CLEAR?

Margaret KirkwoodUniversity of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

INTRODUCTION

Many important issues and themes emerged from the presentations and discussions. It is clear that differentiation is not about providing colour coded worksheets and nor is the differentiation ÒproblemÓ solved by grouping pupils by ability. Differentiation touches on fundamental issues and principles, such as equity and the need to be concerned about the development of the Òwhole childÓ (both emotional and cognitive needs) to enable the child to reach his or her full potential. How teachers can take account of individual learning needs when planning and delivering the curriculum raises many complex issues. There are however many teachers who have developed in their own practices a congruent set of principles and strategies to enable them to address the individual learning needs of their pupils effectively. This conference and the conference report may help to give such teachers a voice. Educational research can contribute by providing models for thinking about differentiation which will help teachers (and other researchers) to focus more clearly on the issues.

WHICH ISSUES AND THEMES EMERGED?

The conference was very timely, following the publication of ÒAchievement for AllÓ, a report on selection within schools by HM Inspectors of Schools. The timing also coincided with the publication of a review of research on setting and streaming commissioned by the Scottish Office Education and Industry Department (SOEID) from the Scottish Council for Research in Education and authored by Professor Wynne Harlen and Heather Malcolm.

One of the main recommendations of ÒAchievement for AllÓ is that in secondary schools much greater use should be made of attainment groups in all subjects. The report recommends that broad banded setting should be introduced in English and mathematics from S1 and, where feasible, in a number of other subjects by S2, particularly in science and modern languages. Further main recommendations focus on teaching methods. Direct teaching should be promoted in schools and in teacher training institutions as the principal role of class teachers, and whole-class teaching should be used as part of a Òjudicious blendÓ of teaching methods in every subject to ensure effective differentiation and steady and sustained progress in learning.

In the introduction to the SCRE review (SCRE, 1997) the authors indicate that most of the research into setting and streaming, and therefore most of the research that they have reviewed, has been conducted in schools in the US. The conclusions of their review do not support the increased use of attainment groups in secondary schools: ÒThere is no consistent and reliable evidence of positive effects of setting and streaming in any subjects or for students of particular ability levels.Ó (SCRE, 1997, p. 40). Effective differentiation emerges from the review as the key issue: ÒThe challenge is to find some way of catering for pupilsÕ individual needs. The research provides no support for separating pupils according to ability as a solution to this problem. Indeed it shows that for many, ability grouping reduces both their motivation and the quality of the education they receive. On the other hand, mixed-ability teaching which denies the differences between high- and low-ability pupils is not the answer. There are surely alternatives which enable the content, pace and support of classroom work to be adjusted to suit individual needs. We should find and study them urgently.Ó (SCRE Newsletter, Spring 1997). There are references within the review to the types of difficulties that primary and secondary teachers faced when attempting to meet individual learning needs, whether pupils were in mixed or ability groups (ÔgroupÕ can apply to within-class groups or whole class groups).

Several presentations - by Myra Young and Karen Gibson (on teaching and learning in English), Joan Mowat (music), and Eileen Mallaghan, Bill Campbell and Margaret Kirkwood (computing studies) - provided examples of how teachers could adjust the pace, content and support of classroom work to suit individual needs. The presenters articulated the general principles underlying their approaches to differentiation which enabled discussion group participants to assess the degree of their accordance with these principles and whether the practices could be generalized. Being fully aware of the nature and extent of pupilsÕ learning difficulties is, of course, a necessary precursor to addressing them. Sydney Wood and Fran Payne (history) identified the need for a greater focus on the key skill of evaluating sources since understanding the nature of historical evidence and developing understanding from sources is a particular cause of difficulty for some pupils. They interviewed pupils at different stages (from P7 to S4) to find out pupilsÕ perceptions of difficulty in learning history, which the researchers then related to the nature of tasks, topics, and resources, and to the

xneed for support for learning. There were other difficulties (some skills and concepts) which pupils seemed unaware of.

The findings of a research project directed by Professor Mary Simpson and funded by the Scottish Office Education Department into differentiation in Scottish secondary schools (M Simpson and J Ure, 1993) provide teachers and educational researchers with a very useful basis for further reflection and investigation. Their research sought to identify the general principles which underlay differentiation practices in mathematics, science, English and modern languages. Not only were the approaches to differentiation in English and modern languages (Òpick and mixÓ is the term used by the researchers to describe them) very different from those in mathematics (Òmeasure and matchÓ), but they were also underpinned by two very different sets of assumptions (a Òlearning centredÓ vs. Òsubject orientedÓ curriculum). The highly interactive teaching observed in S1/2 English and modern language classrooms seemed to deliver better differentiation according to pupilsÕ perceptions.

These findings should prompt teachers to reflect: does my practice fit with either of these two models, or could it be described by a different model? Is my curriculum subject-oriented or learner-centred, and where ought the balance to lie? Could individualized schemes be designed on better principles, since those schemes observed in mathematics at S1/2 did not appear to deliver good differentiation? (Since enabling pupils to learn independently is an important educational objective, it is essential to find teaching approaches which will support this objective.) Which differentiation practices are in place in other subject departments and how and why do they differ between subjects and stages? How do pupils experience the curriculum, and how do they prefer to learn?

A set of seven guiding principles for action to improve differentiation (Scottish CCC, 1996) developed by teachers in a school-based Scottish CCC development project provides a measure against which teachers can assess their existing practices and any intended innovations. In order to develop practices which sit well within these principles, Professor Simpson identified the following needs: teachers need to develop flexible learning contexts; to obtain and act upon information about prior learning; to develop ways of agreeing and sharing learning goals and strategies with learners; to develop a range of learning skills in pupils; and a school environment which promotes and supports effective learning. (Professor SimpsonÕs discussion group presentation on assessment strategies enabled an exploration of some of these aspects.) She concludes: ÒTesting and setting pupils are only two factors in a very complex equation. They are minor contributors to the solution of the differentiation problem. The key factors are the skills, knowledge and professionalism of teachers. These are the resources which are precious and which we must value and promote.Ó

Dr Brian Boyd pointed to a shift in emphasis between ÒThe Education of Able Pupils P6 - S2Ó (SOED, 1993) and ÒAchievement for All.Ó The earlier report by HM Inspectors of Schools reaches the following (balanced) conclusions on different forms of classroom organization: ÒSetting according to performance in a given subject can assist in securing a better match of work to pupilsÕ potential although care must be taken to ensure that perceptions of ability do not become fixed. Mixed ability arrangements can avoid some of the dangers of inflexibility and premature categorization but current practice, particularly in S1 and S2, frequently fails to take account of individual differences.Ó (p. 23). The report states that good planning, well-designed materials, good classroom management and regular assessment and monitoring of progress together provide the conditions in mixed ability classes to meet the needs of all pupils, including the more able. However the recommendation in ÒAchievement for AllÓ to use ability groups from the beginning of S1 in English and mathematics represents a departure from this neutral stance. Are teachers no longer considered to be capable of meeting the needs of all pupils through planning well, providing well-designed materials, good classroom management and conducting regular assessment and monitoring of progress? Dr Boyd argues, Ò...[it] shows a worryingly simplistic analysis of a complex issue, namely underachievement. To suggest that this can be solved by changing the organization of classes, supported, no doubt, by more Ônational testingÕ and by more Ôdirect teachingÕ, is to ignore not only its own previous advice in documents such as Effective Primary Schools and Effective Secondary Schools, but it fails to take account of the complexities of the learning and teaching processes.Ó

Dr Boyd describes differentiation as, Òa set of strategies designed to ensure that Ôteaching for effective learningÕ takes place. It assumes a belief that all pupils have the potential to be effective learners, and, like Bloom, that if we can provide Ôa courteous translationÕ then they will be able to learn more successfully than at present. Above all, it is a means to the end of Ôachievement for allÕ - not achievement for some at the expense of others.Ó In this statement, and elsewhere in his presentation, he draws attention to teachersÕ beliefs, value systems and assumptions, and makes his own position clear. He concludes: Ò...we need to invest our energies, not in arid discussion about classroom organization, but in unlocking the doors to the barriers which prevent pupils from being successful learners.Ó But... if we donÕt listen to pupilsÕ voices (a key theme in his address), then it becomes difficult to unlock the doors, therefore the barriers to progress remain. And so

xiestablishing relationships of trust in classrooms to allow an honest expression of views is fundamental to raising achievements.

The Scottish Network for Able Pupils (SNAP) was the topic of Louise HaywardÕs discussion group presentation. Its aims are to, Òencourage the recognition of pupilsÕ individual abilities and to enable teachers to identify, respond to and celebrate these.Ó Therefore the approaches advocated by SNAP will promote more effective learning and teaching experiences for every learner, including those with particular abilities. Among the agreed principles of SNAP is the development of an Òethos of achievementÓ. How such an Òethos of achievementÓ is developed in practice, both at whole school level and within the classroom, was a unifying theme of the conference and is reflected in the various contributions. Holding a broad definition of abilities (the SNAP principles make reference to emotional, linguistic, logical-mathematical, expressive/artistic and spatial abilities) is important, since otherwise only certain types of achievements come to be valued.

Enabling pupils to become self-directed learners was also a common theme across presentations; it is the crucially important Òlearning to learnÓ agenda which Professor John Nisbet brought to the Scottish Educational Research Association Conference in 1984: Ò...formal education must foster the most important skill of all, the skill of learningÓ (Nisbet, 1984, p. 4). Eileen Mallaghan (computing studies) and Joan Mowat (music) developed this theme through discussing and illustrating a range of approaches which included voluntary homework and individual target setting. Margaret Kirkwood (computing) presented S4 pupilsÕ reflections on their learning gleaned through group discussion activities reported in writing by the pupils themselves. From this it could be seen that pupils were very actively engaged in managing their learning on a day-to-day basis, supported by each other, the teacher and by features of the learning environment and resources which were designed with this purpose in mind. Creating a climate for learning means, among other things, establishing discipline, and this theme was developed by Joan Mowat (music) and Karen Gibson (English). They are each seeking to develop self-discipline in learners rather than for discipline to be imposed Òfrom the outsideÓ, and use differentiated approaches which target individual needs (such as by supporting pupils to identify and to achieve their own behaviour targets). It is a holistic approach which takes account of each learnerÕs emotional and cognitive needs.

ARE THE WAYS FORWARD CLEAR?

There is a strong, coherent voice articulated by the teachers and educational researchers who participated in the dayÕs events. It is a voice which is both humane and egalitarian in philosophy, but it is also routed in experience and research.

Future priorities emerged, as follows:-

¥ There is a need to sustain the discourse on how the individual learning needs of pupils can be met and why it is important to hold this as an objective. This discourse should cross subject and sector boundaries and all student teachers and practising teachers should engage in it.

¥ What are the general principles which should apply when determining how the pace, content and support for learning can be adjusted to suit the individual learner? There needs to be a continued focus on this.

¥ There is a need to re-examine within-class organizations, and in particular, resource-based and

individualized learning, to sort out the recognized deficiencies.

¥ How can all teachers be assisted to evaluate their practices more systematically and to articulate the principles on which they are based?

¥ There is a need to establish an adequate research base on differentiation which reflects the experiences in Scottish schools. Research funding must be directed towards this. Teachers can and should contribute to the research base.

¥ Which research methods are appropriate to investigate this topic? It is important to ensure that any further research contributes fully to our knowledge of this field. This issue is raised in the SCRE Review where the credibility of the results of some quantitative studies based upon comparisons between ÒtreatmentÓ and ÒcontrolÓ groups is called into question.

Funding will need to be secured to take these priorities forward effectively.

1FIRST MAIN PRESENTATION

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DEVELOPING EFFECTIVE DIFFERENTIATION PRACTICES

Mary SimpsonDepartment of Educational Research, Northern College of Education

In this presentation I want to look at the contributions from research and practice which are promoting the national aim of optimising learning for all learners in our schools.

AIM: to optimise attainment by meeting the needs of all learnersPOLICY: 5-14 Programme¥ curriculum¥ assessment¥ recordingRESEARCH: Frameworks for thinking¥ identifying needs of pupils, teachers¥ models for thinking¥ principles for actionPRACTICE: Developing strategies for¥ managing information¥ managing learning¥ creating contexts for optimising learning

The aim of optimising the attainment of pupils within the Scottish schools is being pursued through the interaction between three key elements within the educational system: ¥ the policies of the SOEID and the generation of guidelines on the central components of the

curriculum, the assessment of pupils' attainments and their recording;¥ the outcomes of research which offer teachers conceptual frameworks for thinking about the

complexity of the context within which they have to work, and which assist in the planning and evaluation of their activities;

¥ the development of practices by the teachers themselves, which are responsive to the requirements of policy, informed by research, but which are developed to be manageable and effective within the practical situations in which the teachers are required to work.The curriculum has to satisfy two seemingly contradictory requirements. On the one hand it has to reflect the broad aims of education which hold good for all children, whatever their abilities and whatever schools they attend. On the other hand it has to allow for difference in the abilities and other characteristics of children, even of the same age. (HMI, A View of the Curriculum, 1980).

Teachers have to cope with many conflicting requirements. In Scotland, through our comprehensive system, we have taken a particularly strong stance with respect to the first of these aims. Now we are challenged to respond appropriately to the second aspect identified here.When secondary school staff are asked about differentiation, the model which is most frequently held up as the ultimate in good practice is that of the individualised scheme commonly found in mathematics.

MATHEMATICS Individualised SchemesLocus of differentiation pupils, materialsPerceived difficulties no evidence of improved attainment

mechanistic model of maths learningteacher as manager of the system

Improvements sought more finely-tuned placement of pupilsmore finely-tuned materialsless finely-tuned placement of pupilsgroup activities; block matrixsetting groups or classes

As the curriculum steps followed are linked to the pace of working and level of performance of the individual pupil, it would seem to be the epitome of a differentiated approach to teaching. However, it has some perceived weaknesses. Firstly, there is disconcertingly little evidence that the mathematical attainments of pupils are rising in S1/S2 where these schemes are most frequently applied; schemes tend to present mathematics as a series of somewhat mechanistic exercises rather than the development of understanding of complex concepts which are constructed as most knowledge of this type is, in the interactions of social settings and discourse; and as the routes of the schemes are elaborated, the interaction with the teacher steadily reduces as the teacher becomes the manager of the scheme.

2The teachers who sough improvements fell into two camps, those who wished to fine-tune the schemes by adding more routes and levels in order to place pupils more 'accurately' on different materials, and those who felt accuracy in this situation was an illusion, and who wished to amalgamate blocks of work and groups of pupils in order to reduce the unmanageable and unproductive degree of individuality and detail.A contrasting model of differentiation was offered in English and modern languages. Here they frequently denied that they were indeed applying differentiation since the curriculum materials and coverage was the same for all pupils. However, further investigation revealed that the locus of differentiation was not within the curriculum, but in the activities and responses of the teacher.

I feel I should be the differentiator. I access the material to the children. I make sure that they all understand what they can. I can talk to them and give them a feel for the material. I can help them with the material and the tasks. For an experienced teacher that is what it is all about. it is in my opinion a worse stigma to be deemed incapable of trying something, than to be given the chance and the appropriate support. (English Language Teacher)

ENGLISH, MODERN Whole Class;LANGUAGES Common CourseLocus of differentiation Differentiated teachingPerceived difficulties the global nature of the subject

keeping track of individualsensuring progression

Improvements sought development of help-sheetsdifferentiated targets; learning support input etc.

The appropriate support is offered in the form of help sheets or immediate responses from the teacher, commenting on progress, adjusting the tasks, the support or the target for the pupil as their problems or needs emerge. The factors which affected the learning were understood to extend far beyond the simple ability of the individual as evidenced in a scheme test. They included who the pupils sat with, the interest value of the lesson, the personal input from parents, their individual need for attention, for encouragement or for chivvying; their ability to attend, and to work independently, their level of motivation and so on. Taking account of these required professional skills of high complexity. No simple sorting of pupils on the basis of a test could achieve homogeneity in the pupils across all these characteristics. Our research indicated that not only were these two very different approaches to differentiation, but they were underpinned by two very different sets of assumptions. We called these the Ômeasure and matchÕ and the Ôpick and mixÕ models.TWO MODELS OF DIFFERENTIATION

1. ÔMeasure and MatchÕ (as in individualised schemes).¥ assumes that a stable, underlying characteristic of pupils is the key determinant of pupils' competencies

(e.g. intelligence, or maths ability)¥ assumes that this key feature can be reliably measured at a point in time (e.g. 11+: maths test)¥ assumes that a match can then be made between the competency of the pupil and the level of difficulty

of curricular material or course¥ assumes matching can subsequently be fine-tuned by summative assessment2. ÔPick and MixÕ¥ assumes that competencies of pupils are determined by a complex range of factors (motivation,

classroom relationships, past learning experiences etc.)¥ assumes competencies will continue to be influenced by these factors and that measures at any one

point in time are useful, but not critical¥ assumes that a range of different pupil needs has to be taken account of in allocating work or

responding to learning outcomes¥ assumes that differentiated material should cater for a range of different needs and be accessed as and

when appropriate for individuals or groupsAnd these two different models are associated with two different curriculum models:TWO CURRICULUM MODELS

Subject Oriented Curriculum Learning Centred Curriculumsubject centred learner centredacquisition of given knowledge knowledge construction specific aims and objectives investment in understandingshort term long termexternal exams and standards self growth and individual potential

3clearly defined roles: teacher as authority open roles: teacher as mentor

In attempting to respond to the demands of standards and accountability and yet respond to the needs of learners, teachers find themselves commuting confusedly between these two extremes.What does the wider body of research have to contribute to all of this?Over the years, research into learning, conducted in laboratories as well as in natural settings, has identified a number of key conditions which enhance the effectiveness of learning:

New learning happens best when it is related to what individuals already know, understand and can do.Learning is enhanced when individuals are clear about its purpose and about their specific learning goals.Learning happens best when individuals are confident and motivated.Learning can be enhanced when individuals are enabled to take more responsibility.

Now while all this may sound pretty obvious, it should also be clear that these conditions are very seldom met in secondary classrooms where learning is expected to take place. There is another source of information on the identification of conditions which optimise learning, and that is the pupils themselves. In our research project on differentiation in the secondary classrooms, we asked pupils what made most difference to how well they did in school and they itemised a number of experiences from which emerged factors remarkably similar to those identified by research. WHAT DID THE PUPILS SAY THEY NEEDED?¥ Access to a friendly, approachable, knowledgeable adult.¥ Knowledge of what they are supposed to be learning.¥ Discussions and explanations focused on the activity, problem or learning task in which they are

engaged.¥ Identification of why they have problems in understanding or achieving something¥ Reassurance that their knowledge and skills are developing steadily.We also asked what teachers got the best out of them, and about the classes in which they did well. What exactly were these good teachers doing? Nine teaching strategies emerged:1. Identify and respond to a range of needs.

- these needs were not simply the need to be placed on different levels of materials, they could be for social support, additional attention or information.

2. Build on strengths and address weaknesses.- this required an effective assessment system for gathering information and making it available to both teacher and learner.

3. Promote the belief that attainment can improve.- this was done by demonstrating - particularly to the pupil with low motivation - that by applying certain agreed procedures they became good learners and achieved something.

4. Identify targets and criteria for success.- the targets set may not all be related to the curriculum - the target simply to attend for specific lessons might be appropriate for some individuals!

5. Set realistically high expectations.- ideally, the targets set for pupils are high - but are achievable, given support. The term 'ethos of achievement' is important here.

6. Give feedback on attainments and problems.ÒDon't dump all our problems on usÓ said one pupil, Òtell us what we need to do to get better. She says I must improve my spelling, but I don't know how to.Ó Giving pupils encouragement and praise is important, but pupils wanted to know where they were performing badly in some elements in the course, and how to put it right.

7. Use self-referenced vs. norm- or criterion-referenced approach.- the main incentive for many pupils was seeing how they were progressing, and seeing evidence that their skills were getting better and better.

8. Employ a range of sources of support.- increasingly teachers are using others, both inside and outside the school, to support learners. These include older pupils - who also benefited from the experiences and additional responsibilities, - parents, learning support, and library staff.

9. Share the management of learning.- pupils can be given quite a lot of responsibility for their own activities, but they must also be given the information and support to cope effectively with the responsibilities.

4Here is an account from some of our research notes on how one teacher devised a strategy for overtaking some of these features of support for learning:

Mrs H's student progress records are quite different from those in other classes in school K. They include, amongst other things, specific information about intended outcomes which have been negotiated with pupils and signed by parents; the targets aimed for, how they are to get there, and by when. They amount to contracts - with a carrot, a stick and a set of individualised directions.

(Researcher's Notes, Differentiation in Secondary Schools).For some teachers these requirements might seem like a very daunting set of demands, others may feel they meet many of them already. But implementing the requirements of 5-14 is going to require some degree of change and development for everyone. What do teachers say they need in order to go forward in good heart?WHAT DO TEACHERS SAY THEY NEED?¥ Reassurance - reassurance that in no country or school in the world have they found a quick fix for

differentiation; that we have many strengths to build on; that teachers have already been developing interesting and innovative practices.

¥ Models for thinking - I have tried to give you some frameworks in this presentation that will help you to look at the diversity and complexity of the teaching and learning contexts and see some patterns that are meaningful and helpful.

¥ Criteria for planning & evaluation - if you are going to put your precious time into developments, you want to be sure they will bring returns for your efforts. look back at what the pupils say about what they need to learn well, does your new development promote some of these conditions? If not, think again.

¥ Practical examples - at the end of the day, classroom strategies for improving differentiation will only be effective if they actually work in classroom settings. This is why teachers are always more interested in what other teachers are doing than in what the documents or the research papers say they should be doing. But there are a lot of 'tips for teachers' flying around, and many simply will not work in your setting. What teachers need in order to judge whether some idea or tip is worth developing, is a way of seeing why this tip works, the underlying principle that it is fulfilling.

¥ Principles for action - teachers themselves in a school-based Scottish CCC development project helped to distil out these principles from the wide variety of practices they had initiated to improve differentiation. Whatever practices you are developing, they should be contributing in some way to these principles.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES DEVELOPED FROM PRACTICE

PLANNING FOR CHALLENGE & ACHIEVEMENT

Challenging and achievable goals demonstrate to all learners the expectation that they will make the best progress they can

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 1 identify, prioritise and share with all learners challenging and achievable goals

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 2 find manageable ways of getting and using reliable information about your pupils and those factors which will affect their learning

LEARNING & TEACHING - MAKING IT WORK

A flexible, supportive and manageable approach to learning and teaching promotes both attainment and a commitment to lifelong learning in all pupils

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 3 share the management of learning with learners in order to encourage the development of autonomous learning skills and create quality teaching time

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 4 use dialogue and other strategies to support pupils in becoming active in their own learning and involve colleagues in promoting this process

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 5 employ assessment strategies which guide, encourage, promote and recognise progress and achievement for all learners

5

LEARNING & TEACHING ENVIRONMENTS

The school environment reflects a commitment to policies and practices which encourage, support and sustain effective learning and teaching for all

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 6 create a supportive and stimulating learning environment for all pupils in the classroom and in the school

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 7 create a supportive context which will encourage and sustain a whole school commitment to effective differentiation practices

SCOTTISH CCC (1996) Reflections on Learning and Teaching: Making Sense of Differentiation. A Framework of Guiding Principles.Here are some of the ways teachers are exemplifying these principles in their practice:1. Identify, prioritise and share with all learners challenging and achievable goals

¥ using curriculum guidelines¥ prioritising goals¥ using progress sheets

2. Find manageable ways of getting and using reliable information about your pupils and those factors which will affect their learning¥ using a variety of sources of information¥ sharing information¥ establishing easy communications

3. Share the management of learning with learners in order to encourage the development of autonomous learning skills and create quality time¥ joint target setting¥ sharing professional knowledge

4. Use dialogue and other strategies to support pupils in becoming active in their own learning and involve colleagues in promoting this process¥ encourage learners to share their ideas¥ create opportunities for talk and discussion¥ offer tasks which encourage active learning

5. Employ assessment strategies which guide, encourage, promote and recognise progress and achievement for all learners¥ profiling, records of achievement¥ file of best work¥ self-referenced indicators of progress

6. Create a supportive and stimulating learning environment for all pupils in the classroom and in the schools¥ use a variety of teaching contexts and strategies, e.g. group, whole class, individual

7. Create a supportive context which will encourage and sustain a whole school commitment to effective differentiation practices¥ ethos of achievement¥ learning and teaching policy¥ educational leadership

In order to develop practices which sit well within these principles of practice for differentiation, teachers need:¥ to organise flexible learning contexts and to use a range of appropriate teaching approaches;¥ ways of obtaining and acting on information about prior learning and developments;¥ ways of agreeing and sharing learning goals and strategies with learners;¥ practical strategies for sharing assessment and progress with learners;¥ ways of developing a range of learning skills in pupils;¥ a school environment which promotes and supports effective learning and teaching.These are rather different aims for your developments than those which are narrowly focused on subject or curriculum guidelines, but research suggests that these are the things which will bring about improvements in learnersÕ attainments. The variety of innovative classroom strategies which have been pioneered by teachers themselves suggests they can find expression and work in a variety of forms and contexts.

6Testing and setting pupils are only two factors in a very complex equation. They are minor contributors to the solution of the differentiation problem. The key factors are the skills, knowledge and professionalism of teachers. These are the resources which are precious and which we must value and promote. I hope this presentation has helped to contribute in some way to the celebration of these.Simpson, M. (1997) Developing Differentiation Practices: Meeting the Needs of Pupils and Teachers. The Curriculum Journal. 8 (1) pp. 85-104.

7SECOND MAIN PRESENTATION

SCHOOLS CELEBRATING SUCCESS

Brian BoydCentre for Quality in Education, Faculty of Education, Strathclyde University

BACKGROUND

In 1993, Her majesty's Inspectorate of Schools in Scotland published a report on the Education of Able Pupils P6 to S2. The report was a digest of the findings of Inspectors as they visited schools, and focused on the twin issues of Ôable pupilsÕ and the transition years between Primary and Secondary schooling. In essence, they found that able pupils were not being sufficiently challenged, but in looking for solutions they rejected the notion that somehow able pupils needed to be treated differently from their peers.

Instead they looked at a number of ways of organising learning:

¥ mixed-ability teaching - traditionally a feature of the Primary school and since 1965 a feature of the first two years of comprehensive Secondary schools;

¥ setting or streaming - organising classes on the basis of the attainment of the pupils, either by subject (setting) or generally across all subjects (streaming);

¥ acceleration through the curriculum - sometimes known in Scotland as Ôfast trackingÕ, rarely used but often suggested as a way of meeting the needs of able pupils;

¥ Ôhot-housingÕ - taking able pupils out of the mainstream classes and giving them a separate and more intensive education.

Against an increasingly elitist and Right Wing political background, where selection was being advocated in England and Wales, the Scottish Inspectorate retained their traditional neutrality and rejected any one of these four forms of organisation of learning as providing the answer. Instead, they argued that:

¥ effective learning and teaching for all children would meet the needs of the able pupils also;

¥ the Ôfresh startÕ approach adopted by many secondary schools, thus denigrating the value of the learning in primary schools, was Òno longer tenableÓ;

¥ all schools should have Òan ethos of achievementÓ.

AN ETHOS OF ACHIEVEMENT

Dr. Paquita McMichael, formerly of Moray House Institute, and I set out to try find out what a school with an ethos of achievement might look like. We were convinced that many schools in Scotland were striving to create just such an ethos. But would we be able to isolate those elements which contributed to it, and who would be best placed to tell us? We asked two Local Authorities to identify for us schools, primary and secondary, which they felt had an ethos of achievement. We then set out to interview headteachers, class teachers and pupils, and to review in-school documentation, with a view to seeing if there were generalisable elements of good practice across the schools.

We were able to draw on a range of previous work on the issue of ethos in Scotland, particularly that of Professor John MacBeath who had devised for schools a set of Ethos Indicators which were widely in use. Paquita had also carried out work to produce a staff development pack for teachers on Able Pupils, and I with my colleagues in the University of Strathclyde, along with Professor Peter Mortimore and his team in the Institute of Education and the University of London, had just embarked on a major piece of research involving 84 schools on Improving School Effectiveness. The final ingredient was a commission, from the National Union of Teachers (NUT) in England and Wales, to work with ten schools on the issue of School Self-Evaluation.

WHAT IS RESEARCH TELLING US?

Schools Speak for Themselves was the title of the report published by the NUT and distributed to 35,000 schools in England and Wales, and it sums up the key message emerging from the various pieces of research ongoing at present. All but the Improving School Effectiveness project is complete, and there are powerful messages emerging.

Schools Speak for Themselves (MacBeath et al, 1996)

The ten schools involved were all currently engaged in rigorous and systematic self-evaluation, and as a result, the pupils' learning was at the top of their agenda. We identified ten indicators which all of the

8ÔstakeholdersÕ in the schools were broadly in agreement about as being the characteristics of a Ôgood schoolÕ:

1. School climate2. Relationships3. Classroom climate4. Support for learning5. Support for teaching6. Time and resources7. Organisation and communication8. Equity9. Recognition of Achievement10. Home-school links.

All of these would merit some discussion, but perhaps the key indicators for the present context would be numbers 3 and 9. There was consensus that classrooms should be places where learning was fun and was stimulating and where achievements of all kinds would be celebrated.

Improving School Effectiveness (in progress)

ISEP is nearing its end point, and there are significant issues arising, for example in terms of the differences between the attitudes in primary and secondary schools towards teacher expectations of pupil achievement. Put generally, teachers in primary schools are much more likely to believe that Òall pupils in this school can be successfulÓ than their secondary counterparts. What the research has done so far is across 84 schools to take baseline measures of:

¥ attainment in aspects of language and number ¥ attitudes of pupils, teachers and a sample of parents

and in 24 of the 84 schools, being called Case Study schools, in depth qualitative data gathering has taken the form of:

¥ interviews with pupils, teachers and managers¥ Change Profile discussions using a number of key hypotheses designed to get at how people in the

school perceive its effectiveness ¥ Development Analysis interviews with key managers of change ¥ Ethos Observation Schedules.

At the end of the project we will go back to the schools and take further ÔoutputÕ measures, and we hope to be able, among other things, to isolate those processes and attitudes which appear, over time, to be associated with pupil progress.

Towards a Climate of Achievement (McMichael and Boyd, 1995)

The report of the small-scale research on schools identified as having an ethos of achievement threw up some interesting issues:

¥ a clear statement of values, agreed widely among the stakeholders was a feature of all of the schools

¥ ÔachievementÕ was defined broadly, not confined to academic issues, and, indeed, the schools had an ÔinclusiveÕ approach to learners (at least two having policies of integrating pupils with Special Educational Needs fully into all classes)

¥ high expectations and public celebration of success were seen as key aspects of school policy

¥ rigorous and shared monitoring and evaluation of progress, among teachers and pupils, was a feature of the schools

¥ teaching methods were flexible, organisation of classes was determined by need rather than dogma, and staff development was given a high priority

¥ parental involvement was seen as a fundamental element of an approach to learning which saw in-school and out-of-school experience as being complementary.

Listening to childrenÕs voices

A key message emerging from all of this research is that we must listen more to the voices of children. Traditionally, in Scotland, Òchildren should be seen and not heardÓ. In schools, they are rarely asked their opinions because, we, as teachers, Òknow bestÓ. Indeed, in a rather Calvinistic way, we have believed that what is good for children should even be a little unpleasant!

What we found was that when children - of all ages - are asked about schooling:

¥ what makes a good school?

9¥ what makes a good teacher? ¥ what helps you learn?

and so on, the responses are perceptive, constructive ... but challenging to us as teachers.

Pupils interviewed in the Schools Speak for Themselves study came up with the following items when asked what makes a good teacher:

is kind is generous listens to youencourages you has faith in you has time for youkeeps confidences likes teaching children likes teaching their subjecttakes time to explain things helps you when you're stuck tells you how you're doing allows you to have your say makes sure you understand helps people who are slow doesn't give up on you cares for your opinion makes you feel clever treats people equally stands up for you makes allowances tells the truth is forgiving

All of the wisdom of thirty years of school effectiveness research is encapsulated in this one list. Teachers will find a resonance in different items on the list - the items which stand out for me are Òhas faith in youÓ and Òmakes you feel cleverÓ. Peter Mortimore in School Matters (1988) argued that good schools make their pupils Ômore intelligentÕ, and there is no doubt that teacher/school attitudes and how they are translated into Ôan ethos of achievementÕ seem to be the key issues emerging from these studies.

Pupils can also be disturbingly insightful about teachersÕ expectations. One group of pupils got into a discussion about the concept of 'strictness' after two of them disagreed over whether a good teacher had to be a strict teacher, and came up with the following lists:

Strict for you Strict for themselvesmakes you do it and do it well makes you do ityou do it because you know they care makes you do it because they say soyou respect them but you're not frightened it is to control you not help youyou don't want to disappoint them it is to make up for their own disorganisationyou learn a lot more it makes a tense atmosphereyou make good progress you don't learn so well.

Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings!

Perhaps. the most disturbing message of all to appear from the words of pupils in Scottish schools is that coming from those in the first two years of secondary (Sl and S2). They tell as a story of lack of challenge, of not feeling valued as human beings (but being treated as babies), of not having their prior learning acknowledged, and of doing Òmore of the sameÓ:

"Sometimes you could go further, but they don't let you. You have to wait till the others catch up. You do workcards and stuff. Workcards are boring - just more of the same.Ó

ÒACHIEVEMENT FOR ALLÓ

At the end of October 1996, Her Majesty's Inspectorate published a report, commissioned by the Education Minister, which looked at mixed ability teaching, particularly in the early stages of secondary school.

Concern about underachievement had begun to focus on Sl and S2, and HMI were asked to look at whether or not ÒsettingÓ by attainment in particular subjects should be used as a strategy in S1 and S2 to improve examination success in S4 at Standard Grade.

The conclusions arrived at were that:

¥ pupils are inadequately challenged in Sl and S2

¥ evidence is growing - from the Assessment of Achievement Programme (AAP) and elsewhere - that progress in achievement is not being made by pupils in Sl and S2

¥ grouping by attainment is common practice in primary schools, for English and Maths

¥ mixed-ability teaching is difficult for secondary teachers to implement

¥ 5-14 Levels, derived from assessment and Testing, can be used to ÒsetÓ pupils

and the recommendation was that schools ÒsetÓ pupils from the beginning of Sl in English and Maths.

Clearly this represents a departure from the HMI stance of the ÒAble PupilsÓ report, and shows, in my view, a worryingly simplistic analysis of a complex issue, namely underachievement. To suggest that this can be solved by changing the organisation of classes, supported, no doubt, by more Ônational testingÕ and by more Ôdirect teachingÕ, is to ignore not only its own previous advice in documents such as ÒEffective Primary

10SchoolsÓ (SOED, 1988a) and ÒEffective Secondary SchoolsÓ (SOED, 1988b), but it fails to take account of the complexities of the learning and teaching processes.

For a more thoughtful contribution to the debate we can turn to the Scottish CCC publication, ÒTeaching for Effective LearningÓ (1996), which looks at a number of perspectives on the process:

¥ learning theory¥ research¥ thinking skills¥ theories of intelligence¥ accelerated learning, etc.

and offers no simplistic solutions. Instead, it suggests that teachers, as reflective professionals, need to engage with theory, to subject research to a critique, and to ensure that their practice has a clear educational rationale.

DIFFERENTIATION - THE FUTURE?

Differentiation is a set of strategies designed to ensure that Ôteaching for effective learningÕ takes place. It assumes a belief that all pupils have the potential to be effective learners, and, like Bloom, that if we can provide Òa courteous translationÓ then they will be able to learn more successfully than at present.

Above all, it is a means to the end of Ôachievement for allÕ - not achievement for some at the expense of others. Thus, it can be seen to be a contribution to the Ôethos of achievementÕ advocated in the HMI report on able pupils. This debate is in the mainstream of educational theory (Vygotsky), has been researched (Simpson, 1989; 1993), and has recently been the subject of an extensive literature review (Harlen and Malcolm, 1997). It leads us to consider Gardner's challenging work on Ômultiple intelligencesÕ, Goleman's book on ÔEmotional IntelligenceÕ and the whole body of Ôthinking skillsÕ literature which emphasises ÔmetacognitionÕ and the ÔaffectiveÕ domain.

If, as school effectiveness research has been telling us for two decades, ÔexpectationsÕ is at the heart of successful learning and teaching, then we need to invest our energies, not in arid discussion about class organisation, but in unlocking the doors to the barriers which prevent pupils from being successful learners.

REFERENCES

Gardner, H. (1993) Multiple Intelligences The Theory in Practice London. Harper CollinsGoleman, D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence London. BloomsburyHarlen, W., Malcolm, H. (1997) Setting and Streaming A Research Review Edinburgh. Scottish Council for Research in Education Jensen, E. (1994) The Learning Brain California. Turning Point Publishing MacBeath, J. et al. (1996) Schools Speak for Themselves NUTMcMichael, P., Boyd, B. (1995) Towards a Climate of Achievement Glasgow. QIE University of Strathclyde Mortimore, P. et al. (1988) School Matters: the Junior Years Wells, Somerset. Open BooksRutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., Ouston, J. and Smith, A. (1979) Fifteen Thousand Hours: Secondary Schools and their Effects on Children London. Open BooksScottish CCC (1996) Teaching for Effective Learning DundeeScottish Education Department (1988a) Effective Primary Schools Edinburgh. HMSOScottish Education Department (1988b) Effective Secondary Schools Edinburgh. HMSOScottish Office Education Department (1993) The Education of Able Pupils P6 to S2 Edinburgh. HMSOSimpson M. et al (1989) Differentiation in the Primary School: Investigations of Learning and Teaching. Aberdeen. Northern CollegeSimpson M., Ure J. (1993) WhatÕs the difference? A Study of Differentiation in Scottish Secondary Schools Aberdeen. Northern CollegeSOEID (1996) Achievement for All Edinburgh. HMSO

11DISCUSSION GROUP A

WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS ON ABILITY GROUPS AND SETTING

Wynne Harlen and Heather Malcolm, Scottish Council for Research in Education

The presentersÕ recent review of research on setting and streaming was the topic of this discussion. The following article by Wynne Harlen is reproduced here from the SCRE Newsletter, ÒResearch in EducationÓ, Spring 1997 edition, with the permission of the editor.

MAKING SENSE OF THE RESEARCH ON ABILITY GROUPING

Reviewing research on the effects of grouping pupils by ability could easily generate cynicism about educational research. There is something to please everyone Ð some studies lend support to grouping by ability, some point in the opposite direction and many show that there is little difference that can be ascribed only to the type of grouping.

The reasons for so much ambiguity arise because this is a very difficult area for research. Studies of setting or streaming generally involve comparison of classes containing a full range of ability with those in which pupils were more similar in ability. However the relative performance of pupils is affected by many variables other than the mix of ability; for example, class size, ability range (in some studies, classes labelled mixed-ability may have been more similar in ability than classes labelled as ability-based in other studies), teaching methods and materials, the degree of differentiation, the attitude of the teacher towards mixed-ability teaching and the curriculum content.

So how do we make sense of the outcomes of studies, many of which leave essential variables uncontrolled and have other methodological short-comings? In the case of the review which we carried out on the effects of ability grouping for the SOEID to inform an inquiry into the organisation and management of classes in primary and secondary schools, we applied the concept of 'best evidence synthesis' (Slavin, 1986). In best evidence synthesis, criteria are identified for good quality research, yielding the best evidence in a particular field. Research studies are then compared against these criteria and the reviewer places more emphasis on the findings of those studies which match, than on those which fall short in some way. This approach enabled us to sift through the research evidence and use what was most reliable.

Many of the studies, particularly those conducted some years ago, measured and compared achievements of pupils in ability-based and mixed-ability groups (usually in maths or, for young children, reading). These studies tell only part of the story however. Some more recent research based on classroom observation and/ or interview is particularly important in showing what other effects different groupings have on pupils, on teachers and on interactions in the classroom. For instance, observations in some secondary schools showed that, whilst teachers claimed to be providing differentiated experiences for pupils in mixed-ability classes, observation showed that this was no more than pupils working individually on the same worksheets at their own pace.

FINDINGS FROM PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDIES

Forming classes either for a certain subject or for all subjects on the basis of ability (setting and streaming) in primary schools is only possible in large schools and thus not widely relevant to the Scottish context. However it is worth noting that whilst the research shows no overall effect of this on pupil achievement, there are many disadvantages of the practice, particularly for the low-achieving children. In low sets or streams there was more disruptive behaviour, more off-task talk, and little peer interaction of the kind that supports learning and which was found in the high-stream classes.

Within-class ability grouping is, by contrast, widespread in primary classrooms. Almost all of the research on this has focused on performance in mathematics and great care has to be taken in generalising from this to other subjects. Mathematics is well known for the great range in achievement across an age group (equivalent to seven years at the end of the primary school) and for its hierarchical structure, each step being dependent on understanding the previous one. This means that teaching inputs have to be at different levels to suit pupils across a wide range of achievement. Thus the case for ability grouping in maths may be stronger than in, say, social subjects, where teaching can provide the same inputs for pupils of different abilities. Research studies meeting the criteria of quality consistently showed pupils of all abilities benefiting from within-class ability grouping in terms of achievement in mathematics.

However evidence gathered by observing and talking to pupils and teachers shows that there are potential disadvantages to ability grouping. Children know when they are in low or high ability groups and so may feel

12stigmatised and de-motivated. Low ability pupils lack the skills to work unsupervised and tend to interrupt each other. Teachers often have lower expectations of pupils who achieve less well and provide them with less stimulation than higher achieving pupils. Thus within-class ability grouping can introduce some of the detrimental social effects of streaming, albeit with a less strong impact. The message emerging is that it is of benefit for pupils to learn in mixed-ability groups, even if at times they are separated into ability groups.

FINDINGS FROM SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDIES

By contrast with the primary schools, within-class grouping is less common Ð or certainly has been much less researched Ð than setting or streaming. The many studies of streaming (where pupils remain in ability-based classes for all subjects) show no advantages for pupils' achievement, for any levels of ability. At the same time the research shows clearly that there were disadvantages: reinforced social-class divisions, increased likelihood of delinquent behaviour in the later school years, lowered teacher expectations of the less able, bias and inconsistency in allocating pupils to ability groups, anxiety for pupils in the top streams struggling to keep up with the pace of the class. Setting (where pupils are in ability classes for certain subjects only) might reduce the severity of these disadvantages but there was little consistent evidence of advantages in terms of achievement.

A common theme in the conclusions from the studies was that what goes on in classrooms seems likely to have more impact on achievement than how pupils are grouped. Differences in classroom materials and learning activities often explained differences in achievement. For example, in a study where pupils in the high-ability group were found to benefit over similar pupils in mixed-ability classes, the difference was ascribed to the former using classroom materials (in maths) which took them far beyond what was expected for their age or grade. It is inevitable that the grouping influences what goes on in the classroom; these are not independent variables and the research has not sorted out the effects of these two aspects.

Moreover there are both advantages and disadvantages of mixed ability grouping. Mixed-ability classes are hard to manage; there is evidence that teachers aim lessons at the middle of the ability range, sometimes, indeed, treating mixed-ability groups as though they were low-ability streams. Research showed that even teachers with substantial experience of working with mixed-ability classes frequently use whole-class teaching methods which are inappropriate to mixed-ability groupings. Also, as noted earlier, when some teachers considered themselves to be individualising work, observation of their lessons did not bear this out.

The challenge is to find some way of catering for pupils' individual needs. The research provides no support for separating pupils according to ability as a solution to this problem. Indeed, it shows that, for many, ability grouping reduces both their motivation and the quality of the education they receive. On the other hand, mixed-ability teaching which denies the differences between high- and low-ability pupils is not the answer. There are surely alternatives which enable the content, pace and support of classroom work to be adjusted to suit individual needs. We should find and study them urgently.

REFERENCES

Harlen, W. & Malcolm, H. (1997) Setting and Streaming: A Review of Research. SCRE

Slavin, R. E. (1986) Best-evidence synthesis: an alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational Researcher, November 1986, pp. 5Ð11. The Scottish Council for Research in Education, 15 St John Street, Edinburgh, EH8 8JRWebsite address: http://www.scre.ac.uk/

Tel +44 (0)131-557 2944 Fax +44 (0)131-556 9454

Webweavers webscre@scre.ac.ukLast modified 6/5/97

13DISCUSSION GROUP A: ÒWHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS ON ABILITY GROUPS AND SETTINGÓ

REPORT OF DISCUSSION Presenters: Professor Wynne Harlen and Heather Malcolm, Scottish Council for Research in Education

During this session Professor Harlen and Heather Malcolm outlined the review which has been commissioned by the SOEID of the immense amount of research concerning differentiation. Although a great deal of research had been done, this was of varying quality. The reviewers used Robert Slavin's criteria for considering worthy research, the main criteria being the ability to generalise from specific research to other areas.

The results of research into the primary situation were:

¥ There was no evidence that achievement could be raised by setting or streaming.

¥ Streaming carried with it social disadvantages.

¥ Selection has been seen to aid the more able in Mathematics if differentiated materials were also used.

¥ Teachers are observed to behave differently towards higher groups if the pupils are divided into ability groups.

Summary of the secondary sector findings.

There was no reliable evidence that any method of grouping was preferable.

Ability groups had the following problems:

¥ They reinforced social differences.

¥ There was more likelihood of delinquent behaviour in later years.

¥ The expectations of the less able were lowered.

¥ There was teacher bias and inconsistency in the allocation of pupils to groups.

¥ There was a considerable amount of anxiety for pupils struggling to keep up in the higher ability groups.

Disadvantages for mixed ability were:

¥ The management of mixed ability groups is difficult.

¥ Often teachers did not differentiate within mixed ability groups.

Overall the summary was that positive effects of any grouping are likely to be at the expense of lower ability groups. The challenge was to find a method of catering for higher achievers without this being at the expense of lower achievers.

Both groups from morning and afternoon indicated that they would like to have heard more about research into the situation in Scotland and, in particular, into setting.

Professor Harlen ended by saying that the choice of organisation of grouping doesn't seem to matter. The provision of appropriate materials and effective teaching did make a difference. The lessons to be learned from research are that, if setting is what you have to do, teachers should be aware of the lessons from research in order to avoid some of the obvious problems. Teachers need to be made aware of the danger of low achievers under achieving and should take action to avoid this.

Sheila HughesPGCE Secondary Course Director, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

14DISCUSSION GROUP B: PRESENTATION OUTLINE

HOW CAN ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES HELP TEACHERS WITH DIFFERENTIATION?

Mary Simpson, Northern College of Education

In a recent review of formative assessment, I suggested that formative assessment could make a significant contribution to improving the outcomes of teaching. However, three things were essential for its potential to be fulfilled:

¥ public and political action to establish the systems, contexts and the understandings needed for the survival of development and innovation;

¥ investment in research and development to extend and exploit the new possibilities for developing pupilsÕ learning potential that recent work has opened up;

¥ development work with teachers to change the understandings and roles of both teachers and pupils and embed formative assessment in learning programmes. (Black, 1993)

In Scotland we were first introduced to the possibility of using assessment formatively by the Dunning Report:

8.2 For example, it is insufficient to devise curricular objectives and to find out whether they have been attained by each pupil; for those who are not successful the reasons for misunderstandings require to be identified and alternative methods adopted.

(The Dunning Report, Assessment for All, 1977, SED).

Regularly since then, in many Scottish and English policy documents, there has been official support for the idea that formative assessment has a central role to play in effective teaching and learning. Here is a later English document from the Department of Education:

Promoting childrenÕs learning is a principal aim of schools. Assessment lies at the heart of this process. It can provide a framework in which educational objectives may be set, and pupilsÕ progress charted and expressed. It can yield a basis for planning the next educational steps in response to children's needs. By facilitating dialogue between teachers, it call enhance professional skills and help the school as a whole to strengthen learning across the curriculum and throughout its age range. (DES, 1987)

Doesn't this sound rather like themes from our own 5-14 Assessment Guidelines? What then are the key characteristics of formative assessment?

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

¥ purpose is the promotion of learning.¥ focus is the achievements and needs of the individual learner.¥ responsive to context and idiosyncratic conditions.¥ its validity is judged by its relevance, usefulness and success in providing a basis for successful action.¥ the pupil must be fully involved in the processes.

Although in national surveys (Malcolm et al, 1997; Simpson et al, 1997) the majority of teachers in both primary and secondary schools are now claiming to implement formative assessment, it is clear from interviews that for many, especially in the secondary subject departments, assessment means testing; the outcome is still primarily a matter of pass/fail; and little is done with the outcome of the assessments apart from the sorting of pupils and the selection of subsequent subjects at S3.

The difficulties which teachers have in finding the time and resources to develop formative assessment are often related to the competing need to find time for summative assessment:

The tendency for teachers to interpret their assessment role in terms only of summative assessment features in many accounts. Scott (1991), in a detailed case study of six secondary schools in England, found that in adapting to the new demands the teachers experienced tension between summative needs and the formative possibilities, with many so formalising course-work assessment that they isolated it from learning development.

15A similar story was told by Harlen and Qualter (1991) about primary school teachers responding to the demands of the national curriculum in England. The forty teachers surveyed all separated assessment from teaching, so that demands for teachersÕ assessment implied an extra burden of formal assessment. (Black, 1993).

But is it simply a matter of finding time? Black is of the view that it requires teachers to believe that, given the appropriate circumstances and support, all learners can achieve well. This is not a view to which all teachers necessarily subscribe, and so the need for developing formative assessment seems to them less important.

Teachers need the confidence that they can make anyone learn as long as they go about it in the right way, confidence that is needed because devotion to formative assessment is risky, taking a great deal of time and energy. In particular, since many pupils may have acquired habits of doing just enough to get by, or have ceased to believe that they can be competent at the subject, the contract between teacher and pupil has to be reformulated.

(Black, 1993)

So it is not simply time that is required, a re-thinking of the teacher/ learner relationship appears to be required:

To incorporate formative assessment into their teaching would involve teachers in far more than acquisition of the necessary skills. Their view of the aims of the teaching of their own subject might have to change if they are to be closer to their students in guiding them (Boyer and Tiberghien, 1989). The changes in their classroom practice might also involve profound changes of role, even for teachers regarded by themselves and others as already successful.

(Black, 1993)

It also requires the development of classroom strategies which are not only operable by teachers, but which are able to be understood and used by pupils themselves:

Lock and Wheatley (1990) described the design of a pupil self-assessment scheme for process skills in school science. Clear shared criteria, and giving students more responsibility for their own learning goals, were seen as essential features. It was also important to develop procedures and recording schemes which were sufficiently clear and economical that students could operate them for themselves. (Black, 1993)

It seems then that what is required for formative assessment in its fullest form are the following:

¥ a reconception of assessment as a process central to the teaching and learning interaction rather than a procedure at the end of instruction directed judgementally towards the pupil;

¥ changes in teachers' conceptions of pupil abilities and potential, leading to the adoption of the view that all pupils can learn more effectively given the appropriate context, knowledge and support;

¥ a change from pupils being reactive to what is being done to them, to being proactive in the pursuance of successful learning strategies;

¥ a redefining of the roles of, and the relationships between, teachers and pupils.

¥ the development of workable classroom practices which allow teachers to exploit the potential of formative assessment.

Examples were then discussed of the ways in which teachers had already developed formative assessment strategies in the context of the following:

CIRCLE TIME............................................... PRIMARY

IDENTIFY SPECIAL NEEDS.......................... PRIMARY/SECONDARY LIAISON

PROFILING.................................................. Sl - S4

PARTNERSHIP MODEL................................ PRIMARY

PRE-TESTS................................................. PRIMARY

16

PROGRESS SHEETS...................................... Sl/S2

SEB TEST ITEMS.......................................... S3/S4

TROUBLE SHOOTING TIME............................ Sl/S2

The following set of questions was offered as a starting point for the discussion of the forms, purposes and uses of assessment in different settings and the information which the answer gives to the pupil, parent, or teacher who receives the response:

POSSIBLE RESPONSES TO THE PUPIL'S QUESTION: ÒHOW AM I GETTING ON?Ó

A. ÒYou are doing better than average for this class.Ó(norm referencing, or simple rating scale)

B. ÒYour progress is satisfactoryÓ(5 point rating scale)

C. ÒYou have met most of the criteria for this piece of work.Ó(criterion referencing)

D. ÒYou are getting on really well. 1Õm pleased with your work.Ó(Òwarm fuzziesÓ scale)

E. ÒHow do you think you are getting on?Ó ÒAre you pleased with your work?Ó(self- assessment?)

F. ÒYou can see from your folder how you've made progress since your last piece of work.Ó(self-referenced).

REFERENCES

Black P. J. (1993) Formative and Summative Assessment by Teachers. Studies in Science Education 21, pp 49-97.

Malcolm H. and Schlapp U. (1997) 5-14 in the Primary School: a continuing challenge. SCRE, Edinburgh.

Simpson M. and Goulder J. (1997) Implementing the 5-14 Programme in Secondary Schools: continuity and progression. Northern College, Aberdeen.

17DISCUSSION GROUP B: ÒFORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS AND DIFFERENTIATIONÓ

REPORT OF DISCUSSION

Presenter: Professor Mary Simpson, Northern College, Aberdeen

Effective assessment forms the basis for planning and is thus central to the process of differentiation. Despite some current pressure towards summative forms and the necessity to prepare pupils for external examination, there are specific features of formative models which are essential if assessment is to fulfil its potential in informing the process of effective teaching and learning:

¥ its focus is on the achievement and needs of individual learners¥ it is responsive to context¥ its purpose is the promotion of learning¥ it places the learner at the heart of the teaching and learning process.

The implications of the development of formative models at the S1 to S4 stage were considered by participants. The issues raised may be grouped under three headings:

Teachers/schools

There are variations in the ease with which certain subjects at S1 to S4 stage employ different forms of assessment. For example, while English departments find formative assessment comparatively straightforward, agreement on summative criteria and grading can be problematic. The experience within Mathematics is often quite different. Such variations across subjects may mean that whole-school policies on forms and systems of assessment are more problematic than has been appreciated hitherto.

Schools would find it useful to have exemplars of systems and structures, such as profiling or subject progress sheets which would assist the record-keeping of formative assessment.

There is an argument for cross-curricular formative assessment of core skills. This could have radical implications for the structure and timetabling of S1/S2 courses.

Parents

Although currently there may be some who Ôsimply want a markÕ, as parental experience of newer models of assessment and reporting builds throughout their childrenÕs primary years, it is likely that the demand for similar systems at the secondary stage will increase.

Pupils

There is a need to find appropriate language for sharing assessment criteria with pupils. However, in laying open the criteria, teachers will also be releasing and sharing subject information and encouraging students towards less teacher-dependent models of learning. It should be possible to develop procedures and recording systems which students could operate.

Sandra DunbarDepartment of Special Educational Needs, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

18DISCUSSION GROUP C: FIRST PAPER

THE SCOTTISH NETWORK FOR ABLE PUPILS (SNAP)

Louise Hayward, St AndrewÕs College

INTRODUCTION TO SNAP

SNAP (Scottish Network for Able Pupils) was set up in 1995 as a partnership between St AndrewÕs College and the Scottish Office Education and Industry Department (SOEID) in response to the SOED report of 1993, The Education of Able Pupils P6 - S2. There had been concern about under achievement in Scottish schools particularly at this stage of the education system. The Scottish Network was initiated as a way of identifying and disseminating good practice around the country, in the initial stages through allowing people to contact one another and more recently through publications and teacher education courses.

The recognition of the importance of raising achievement in our schools is clearly demonstrated by schools and the wider community. The more recent reports from Her Majesty's Inspectors of schools: Achievement for All (SOEID 1996) and Standards and Quality in Scottish Schools 1992 - 95 (SOEID 1996) highlight that this is an area which still needs to be comprehensively addressed by the majority of schools.

WHAT IS SNAP?

The role of SNAP within the Scottish Education system has become increasingly important. A key and central place exists for a co-ordinating body which will encourage and expand the knowledge schools have in order to ensure that all pupils are appropriately challenged and that educational standards are raised.

The Scottish network is situated in St AndrewÕs College and is steered by a committee which involves key personnel and organisations from within the Scottish education system.

Membership, at present, includes all Directors of Education in Scotland; many named personnel at local authority level; and around 650 schools, teachers and parents. Joint projects are being pursued or have been undertaken with: the Scottish CCC; local authorities; the Scottish Council of Independent Schools (SCIS); and the National Association of Gifted Children (NAGCS).

In order to make clear the philosophy which underpins the work of this national body the committee drew up a set of principles on which all of its work with schools and authorities would be based. These principles were presented to the membership for comment through the first SNAP newsletter which was issued in the Autumn of 1996.

SNAP PRINCIPLES

¥ Each person has a unique profile of abilities and has the right to appropriately challenging educational experiences.

¥ A wide range of abilities should be recognised and enhanced, including: emotional, linguistic, logical-mathematical, expressive/ artistic and spatial abilities.

¥ All abilities should be valued equally.¥ Different learners are inspired to learn effectively in different ways. This should be recognised through

flexible approaches to learning, teaching and organizational arrangements both in and beyond the classroom. These approaches should recognize the crucial impact of motivation on each personÕs ability to learn.

¥ Educational establishments and organizations should strive to promote an ethos of achievement where the abilities of each person are recognized and celebrated.

¥ Developing an ethos of achievement will involve collaborative working amongst parents, pupils, teachers, schools, education authorities and national organisations.

AIMS

Therefore SNAP advocates approaches which will promote more effective learning and teaching experiences for every learner, including those with particular abilities. The network exists to encourage the recognition of pupils' individual abilities and to enable teachers to identify, respond to and celebrate these. To take forward these aims SNAP will work collaboratively with a range of partners in ways which recognise the above principles.

WHAT SNAP HAS ACHIEVED SO FAR

The network has developed along one major arterial route to date and that is through teacher education. Within this route a wide variety of methods have been utilised to put teachers in touch with one another in order to share good practice.

19Staff developmentIt is important that teachers feel supported, through staff development, to support learners in schools more effectively. It is equally important that they be given the opportunity to contribute to the research base in this area within the Scottish system and share good practice with one another. A range of staff development programmes has been devised to offer these opportunities.

A post graduate module is available within the diploma in support for learning framework specifically dealing with more able learners for those wishing to further their expertise through an accredited course.

A catalogue of one day courses has been made available to teachers, schools and local authorities and is being delivered by the college. These courses are also linked into the accreditation system if desired by participants.

The network databaseA network has been established of interested parties which includes all local authority education offices, a variety of schools (including from the independent sector), individual teachers and parents. Schools and individuals can be put in touch with one another for mutual support and for the dissemination of good practice.

PublicationsA series of publications has been produced including: a tri-yearly newsletter; a paper on children with particular abilities in IT; and a paper on children with particular abilities in music.

More are planned for publication within this academic year - a review of the literature; a pack of inset materials for use by schools on Ôan ethos of achievementÕ; a survey of the coverage the topic receives in courses available to initial teachers and serving teachers by colleges and local authorities; and a book Ôcelebrating achievementÕ around the country.

Research and developmentNegotiation has taken place with many local authorities and research proposals submitted which would involve collaborative working between SNAP and local authorities.

FUTURE PRIORITIES

From the returns both to the network and the first newsletter SNAP has identified a number of needs within the system.

Continuation of the work already started

It is envisaged that in 1997/98 SNAP will continue with three major themes.

Publications¥ newsletters - three per year¥ specific subject advice¥ papers which accompany the one day courses

ProjectsCreating an Ethos of Achievement - a continuation of the projects already started.

Course/ Staff developmentIt is proposed to continue the work with teachers and to extend and expand the courses available across the country. In addition a series of publications are planned for the academic session 1997/8 which will link into particular subject disciplines including modern languages and maths. Research and development opportunities also exist to work directly with individual schools. Thus four main areas should be developed in the next session:¥ a variety of one day courses to be written¥ training trainers in other institutions and EA's to deliver the one day courses¥ developing courses for initial teacher education¥ developing support for probationers in this area

In addition it is planned that the network should be developed along two other major arterial routes:1. Work with children2. Work with the wider community.

20DISCUSSION GROUP C: SECOND PAPER

WHAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR FROM SNAP

This brief paper begins with a summary of issues raised by members of the SNAP network. It concludes by identifying possible areas for consideration by the steering committee.

SUMMARY OF ISSUES

Resourcespracticalities - suggestions for personal investigations linked into 5- 14; homework schemes / materials for use with / by parents; extension materials for maths and language; a suggested list of suitable resources; a central bank of resources to borrow for one-off children; thinking skills teaching materials; self supported materials; materials appropriate to the age/maturity but also intellectually challenging; computer software; exemplars of materials already developed; extension material packs; examples of cross curricular projects and open-ended research; ideas for activities in language and maths.

Staff developmentidentification; classroom support strategies; strategies for differentiation; developing open-ended investigations; study skills; cross age and peer tutoring; mentoring programmes; thinking skills; learning styles; assessment; case studies; developing whole school policies; staff support - advice to schools, e.g., staff development officer;teaching methodologies for problem solving; demonstration of assessment; getting staff together to talk - more than just annual conferences, e.g., cluster support groups; timetabling advice so that secondary schools can be more flexible and primaries can think about cross age groupings; use of technology; ideas for coping with SEBD and able pupils; easing primary/secondary transfer; classroom organisation and management issues; grouping more able children; IT for the more able; what do we mean by gifted children?; profiling; ideas; teacher attitudes - change them to get reflective practitioners and have higher expectations; publicity for schools as a pat on the back; management of whole school issues; problem solving; confidence building for class teachers; self esteem; strategies for behaviour management.

Guidelinesregional policies; clear guidelines for identification (MAP and underachievers) and teaching to make it clear how it all ties into 5-14; explicit advice on how schools can be more flexible in their timetabling arrangements; whole school issues and guidance on whole school policies; practical ways of getting started; whole school mechanisms; how to involve parents; flexible learning strategies; timetabling flexibility; reports from professional bodies.

Research/backgroundregional and Scottish CCC materials; research evidence; practical exemplars of good practice; put in touch with others doing work; case studies; textbooks for teachers; opportunities to become involved in research and trial approaches.

Supportaddresses of key workers and organisations in the field; newsletter; links with outside agencies, e.g., for visits / speakers to children etc.; links with other schools; what has been done already and what has been successful elsewhere; access to e-mail and Internet; inset materials to be available.

Focused Activitiessummer schools; workshops for able pupils; whole day activities centralised, e.g., science olympiad at Jordanhill.

POSSIBLE AREAS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Six areas are identity although they overlap in places. On which of these areas should SNAP focus? Possible approaches within two areas are:

¥ ResourcesThis issue might be approached by developing, e.g. a catalogue of materials; courses in task design; writing materials / tasks; banks of existing school tasks and activities.

¥ Staff DevelopmentIssues might be clustered (somewhat artificially!) into - whole school issues, e.g. policy; structure and organisation; attitudes; communication.- classroom issues, e.g. methodologies; assessment; curricular areas; management and organisation; self-esteem.- issues of principle - identification

21What, if any, action should we take to support the areas identified under each of these headings by SNAP members?

22

DISCUSSION GROUP C: THE SCOTTISH NETWORK FOR ABLE PUPILS (SNAP)REPORT OF DISCUSSION

Presenter: Louise Hayward, Assistant Principal, St Andrew's College, Bearsden

Ideas for the kind of involvements which the group thought would be appropriate for SNAP were as follows:Primary / Secondary Liaison - case studies of good practiceSupport for Learning - forming a network, building a database of those who can provide support in certain areas, emphasising the need for an across-the-board view of learning supportAwareness Raising - a programme of courses for schools on addressing the needs of the more ableCreating an Ethos of Achievement - a resource pack for running an inservice, with follow-up material in addition to a day's programmeUniversities as a Focus of Activity for More Able Children - encouraging and arranging appropriate eventsMaterials for Classroom Use - exemplars of good practice in particular subject areasPromoting the Acceptability of Being More Able - case studies of changing the ethos, amongst pupils and amongst staff.

Jack WinchHead of Department of Business and Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

23DISCUSSION GROUP D: FIRST PAPER

Note: There were three linked presentations in this session. Questions were taken from participants throughout each presentation and therefore there is no separate report of the discussion.

MEETING THE NEEDS OF ABLE PUPILS: A CASE STUDY IN COMPUTING

Margaret Kirkwood, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

TOPIC OF PRESENTATION

¥ On the background, methods, findings, and implications of a two-year (from October 1993), SOED sponsored research study on differentiation.

¥ The study focused on the learning needs of able pupils at S3 and S4 within computing studies.¥ Seven Standard Grade classes from different Lanark Division schools participated (132 pupils).

FORMAT OF PRESENTATION

¥ Background, impetus, methods of the study, and broad findings (Margaret). ¥ TeachersÕ experiences with one G/C class (Eileen) and one mixed-ability class (Bill).¥ Discussion of implications.

BACKGROUND TO THE SUBJECT AREA

What are children learning in computing studies?

¥ to solve problems using computers, and to evaluate solutions¥ to use software of various types - programming language, word processor, spreadsheet, etc.¥ about how computers are used in the real world and their effects on society¥ about how computers work

The first two of these aspects are the most relevant to this presentation. Pupils were learning a programming language (COMAL) and they were learning to use it to solve problems.

BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH The teachers were participants in a four-year curriculum development project on the teaching of programming funded by Lanark Division.

Features of the learning environment¥ resource-based (comprising four study units with four or five topics in each) and self-paced¥ designed to be manageable (avoiding the pitfalls of over-elaborate ÒschemesÓ)¥ pupils learning Òhow to learnÓ and taking responsibility for their learning were key objectives¥ problem solving and thinking skills developed¥ pupils were encouraged, but not forced, to collaborate

One of our objectives was to enable pupils to Òlearn how to learnÓ. John NisbetÕs and Janet ShucksmithÕs research conducted in Aberdeen primary schools provided guidance on this process (Nisbet & Shucksmith, 1986). We encouraged responsibility for learning by building in many features to the learning environment to enable pupils to manage their learning effectively. For example, an answer book made it easy for pupils to record their work, a daily Òprogress recordÓ was maintained by pupils, Òhelp hintsÓ provided a diagnostic aid, summary notes and revision questions were used for consolidation and revision, and homework in some classes was voluntary.

IMPETUS: WHY THE CONCERN ABOUT ABLE PUPILS?

¥ too much content - able pupils getting Òbogged downÓ and failing to cover enough to gain a credit grade

¥ Higher Grade programming therefore a struggle to get through¥ pupils missing out on opportunities - to solve more complex problems, to engage in open-ended

exploration¥ some pupils commented (in questionnaire responses) that certain tasks were repetitive or laborious

This issue began to dominate at project meetings. Teachers were not concerned about the quality of work produced or with pupilsÕ understanding, but with how to get pupils through the course. We drew up a proposal and sent it to the RIU (Research and Intelligence Unit) of the SOED for small-scale funding. In the proposal, we set out our intention to investigate a range of approaches to differentiation but with a particular focus upon accelerating able pupils. The intention was not to obtain Ôhard measuresÕ of progress or

24attainment gains by using a comparative study but to identify principles of operation, teachersÕ and pupilsÕ views on the effectiveness of the measures investigated, and any practical constraints and implications.

The publication of two reports provided further impetus for our work. ÒThe Education of Able Pupils P6 - S2Ó emphasized the importance of, Òproviding activities which encourage pupils to take responsibility for their learning; which help them to develop independent learning skills; and which provide a wide variety of new contexts in which understanding and skills can be developed.Ó (para. 3.16). These desirable goals were proving difficult to achieve with able learners because of the pressure for coverage. ÒWhatÕs the Difference?Ó, a report on differentiation in Scottish secondary schools by Professor Mary Simpson and Jenny Ure of Aberdeen Campus, Northern College (Simpson M. and Ure J., 1993) highlighted a serious mismatch of provision for potential credit grade pupils in mathematics (where individualized learning schemes were in operation) and in science (where resource-based learning was in use) in S1/2. Therefore we knew this was not an isolated problem.

EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PHASE

We came up with the idea of Fastracks, which would direct pupils to bypass certain practice tasks. Pupils would work at their own pace through topics, guided and supported by the teacher. The amount of practice should be sufficient to secure understanding and provide a sound basis for later learning but not more than any pupil needed.

A Fastrack is issued by the teacher when the pupil is about to embark on a new topic and has come to have the work on the previous topic checked. It is then stapled to the pupil's answer book. It does not affect the teaching order, and it does not allow the pupil to bypass any of the learning outcomes for a topic.

FASTRACK - Topic 3Well done!

You have made such good progress in Topics 1 and 2 that you get to follow the FASTRACK for Topic 3.

Task 1 You only need to READ through this task.Task 8 Miss this one out!Task 9 DonÕt do this task but make sure that you read the section on page 22

about Getting a printed listingTask 10 Do part 2 only.

RESEARCH FOCUS

Main focus: Ò...to investigate the use of accelerated routes through individual topics...Ó

Detailed aspects:¥ design principles - which types of tasks to omit, how much acceleration to build in?¥ why do/donÕt teachers choose to use accelerated routes with particular classes or pupils?¥ how easily can their use be integrated into classroom management?¥ what are teachersÕ and pupilsÕ views on the effectiveness of accelerated routes?...¥ and are there constraints which limit the effectiveness of accelerated routes?¥ which alternative or additional approaches are used by teachers to meet the learning needs of able

pupils?...¥ and how well does the learning environment differentiate overall?

This focus would allow teachers to investigate a range of approaches to addressing the needs of able pupils, without being locked into one approach.

RESEARCH DECISIONS

¥ How much acceleration to build in?¥ Comparative study, or in the natural setting?¥ Teacher and pupil participants?¥ Timescale?¥ Which instruments for gathering information?

We were cautious about the amount of acceleration to build in, to safeguard pupilsÕ understanding. Therefore Fastracks were devised for only four of the eighteen topics, two from each of Units 1 and 2. Pupils could be accelerated to varying degrees, some in one topic only, others in three or four. Individual teachers could create Fastracks for Unit 3 or 4 topics if they felt it was appropriate for their pupils.

We decided to use the natural setting. There are too many variables to permit valid comparisons between classes. Also teachersÕ judgements were central - teachers should decide how best to meet their pupilsÕ learning needs. Seven project teachers opted into the research, each with one S3 class. The timescale was about eighteen months, from October of S3 to April of S4, to follow the progress of each class.

25We were already using pupil questionnaires, class records and exchange visits by project teachers to observe classes, and project meetings. To this we added two teacher surveys (one at the end of S3, the other in May of S4) and group interviews with one class of pupils (their parentsÕ permission was gained).

PARTICIPANTS: PROJECT SCHOOLS AND CLASSES

The schools included a range of sizes (from approximately 600 to 1200 pupils on the roll), locations (urban industrial, rural town, new town), denominational and non-denominational, and with different levels of success in national examinations at S4 (ranging in one school from 28% of S4 pupils gaining 3+ Credit awards at Standard Grade in the 1995 examination, to 50% in another).

SCHOOL CLASS ABILITY GENDERSIZE COMPOSITION COMPOSITION

M FA 18 G/C 15 3B 19 MIXED 14 5C 20 G/C 8 12D 20 MIXED 11 9E 17 MIXED 15 2F 18 G/C 14 4G 20 MIXED 10 10

TOTALS 132 87 45

They were all practical-sized classes (17 to 20 pupils). Two-thirds of the 132 pupils were boys (a typical proportion in the subject).

FINDINGS

Fastracks - pattern of use during S3

SCHOOL ABILITY COMPOSITION FASTRACKS USED IN S3?

FREQUENCY & TIMING

A G/C NOB MIXED YES MOST PUPILSC G/C YES SOME PUPILS IN LATER TOPICSD MIXED YES SOME PUPILS E MIXED NOF G/C YES MOST PUPILSG MIXED NO

Four teachers used Fastracks with their S3 class while three teachers preferred to try other approaches. This pattern altered in S4, with all but one teacher introducing Fastracks for later topics. All teachers used Fastracks with some classes from the new S3 intake.

Fastracks - use for individual topics

USING FASTRACK FOR TOPIC: 3 5 7 10NO. OF PUPILS 23 16 26 24AS % OF PUPILS COMPLETING TOPIC 17% 12% 23% 30%AVE. TIME (50 MINUTE PERS) 2.9 4.1 3.3 3.2

NOT USING FASTRACK FOR TOPIC: 3 5 7 10NO. OF PUPILS 109 112 88 55AVE. TIME (PERS) 6.1 6.3 5.2 4.5

Fastracks did lead to faster progress, according to teachersÕ survey returns. Although the above statistics do not provide any exact measures of time gains (since the pupils who were accelerated might have made faster progress on average without acceleration than the others) they give some indication that using Fastracks makes a difference (Topic 3 had the most acceleration built in). Some teachers saw scope for extending their use.

However there were strong reservations expressed by some teachers about whether the credit level programming content could ever be covered within the recommended 40 hours (and indeed the average time spent on programming was in excess of 52 hours), which points to the need for an urgent revision of the syllabus.

I am still concerned about the amount of time taken by even the more able pupils to complete the course. (Teacher B)

26The classÕs progress has been faster than in previous years but it is still slow as the programming content cannot be covered in the time allocated. (Teacher C)

Fastracks - use in Teacher B's (mixed-ability) and Teacher F's (G/C) class

NO. OF FASTRACKS USED... 0 1 2 3 4 TOTAL

NO. PUPILS IN TEACHER B's CLASS 3 4 3 5 4 19NO. PUPILS IN TEACHER F'S CLASS 2 3 1 7 5 18TOTAL 5 7 4 12 9 37

In Teacher B's class about half of pupils were accelerated in three or more topics, and in Teacher F's class exactly two-thirds. Few pupils in either class were not accelerated at all. Both teachers thought that using Fastracks had enabled pupils to make better progress and had helped to raise pupil motivation.

There is a noticeable improvement in progress compared to the previous S3... Very few problems - only one or two pupils needed to be directed back into a Fastrack topic for more practice. (Teacher B)

...pupils were able to work more quickly without any disadvantage in the learning process. (Teacher F)

Pupils were generally pleased to use Fastracks, it acted as an encouragement and fostered a feeling of making good progress. (Teacher B)

The pupils placed on Fastracks responded in a very positive manner. (Teacher F)

Pupils responded positivelyThe findings from questionnaires which pupils from all classes completed indicate that pupils who used Fastracks displayed high levels of interest, confidence, and satisfaction with their progress. They liked working at their own pace (as did 98% of all pupils). Compared with other pupils they were less likely to complain that some of the tasks were laborious or time-consuming.

The pupils who were interviewed (from teacher CÕs class only) also responded positively. Even those who had not used Fastracks thought that they were a good idea; the most important thing was being allowed to work at a pace that suited them individually.

Involving pupils in decisions, monitoring progress and assessing understandingAll the teachers who used Fastracks felt it was important to involve pupils in the decision about whether a Fastrack should be used for a topic. This prompted pupils to assess their own progress and current levels of understanding, competence and confidence. One teacher stressed the importance of individual chats with pupils to assess their understanding:

...basically trying to get round as many pupils as possible to keep in touch with what they are doing and to check that they are really understanding what they are doing (i.e. not just copying someone else's work). (Teacher G)

Fastracks also enabled pupils to monitor their own progress more effectively. Interviews with pupils revealed that they did not wish to be accelerated where they felt their understanding was not secure.

Target settingOne teacher (teacher C) also negotiated targets with each pupil as the course progressed. She found that pupils need more information about the teaching plan if they are to make sensible decisions about when and where to focus their efforts (e.g. when will the class move on to a different topic?). Her pupils volunteered to do extra work at lunch times, after school (through a supported study programme) and at home in order to reach their agreed targets Ð which the majority succeeded in doing.

The difficulty for teachers and pupils in making judgementsThere were some teething problems and instances where other approaches may be called for. Three teachers were reluctant, initially, to use Fastracks. They were uncertain about their judgements of pupils' abilities and afraid pupils might get out of their depth. Some pupils seemed to share this reluctance.

Some pupils were not confident to skip anything Ð very meticulous children. Worried about missing something, or losing understanding? Ð despite being told otherwise. (Teacher D)

However since a Fastrack applies to only one topic at a time there is no real danger of pupils getting out of their depth, so long as progress is being monitored. The decision to accelerate can always be reversed.

Acceleration is not appropriate for every pupilSome pupils felt that they needed more practice, not less:

27I'd rather do more programs, get more practice at it. There's one task on one thing, then straight onto a different thing. (Marie)

or they rushed to keep up with others in the class:

I would have liked to dae one of them, but with the time we done three of them, to understand it better, so that you do it more carefully Because I don't feel I know what I'm doing. Do you know what I mean? If I had time to read it all through slowly Ð and take it in. (Annette)

and compared their progress unfavourably with that of other pupils:

like compared to a lot of the people in the class Ð everyone is away on Topic Y I don't know Ð I'm just a bit behind, I think. (Marie)

You're more (further on) than me! (Annette)

An obvious consequence of accelerating some pupils is that it makes it harder for others in the class to keep up. PupilsÕ feelings of anxiety and their positive aspirations towards making good progress should not be ignored.

CONCLUSIONS

Once teachers and pupils have had the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the ÒFastrackÓ approach, it can provide an effective differentiation strategy. It is particularly effective when used in conjunction with individual target setting to promote pupil responsibility. It is flexible, manageable and avoids the need to ÒlabelÓ pupils as potential credit, general or foundation level, which can lead to premature categorization and Òthe self fulfilling prophesyÓ. It is desirable to seek out practical alternatives to enable those pupils for whom acceleration is not appropriate to reach their full potential.

IMPLICATIONS

The main implications of this study relate to the general principles which we identified as underpinning effective differentiation practices in computing studies. We believe these principles could be applied to other subjects.

¥ enabling pupils to work at their own pace (because pupils lose understanding if they cannot keep up and lose interest if the pace is too slow, and also because it enables pupils to be self-directed)

¥ providing achievable targets (which, clearly, at credit level, the programming syllabus does not, and therefore the teacherÕs hands are tied)

¥ creating an ethos of achievement which extends to every pupil in the class ¥ building in flexibility and recognizing that learning needs can vary over time (labelling of pupils is

unnecessary, divisive and leads to the Òself fulfilling prophesyÓ)¥ building in effective monitoring and formative assessment strategies¥ involving pupils in decisions (and providing them with information to inform decision making) and

listening to their views¥ promoting pupil responsibility for learning as a key objective¥ manageability - the process of piloting revealed ways of making Fastracks easier to integrate into

classroom practices¥ being responsive to pupilsÕ emotional as well as learning needs¥ the use of Fastracks may contribute to broader educational objectives. For example, their use can free

time to develop pupilsÕ problem solving and thinking abilities more fully.

Collaboration between teachers from different schools in one local authority and a Higher Education institution provided an effective way to bring resources to a complex problem. Perhaps this research project will suggest a way forward for other groups of teachers who face a common difficulty.

REFERENCESKirkwood, M (1996a) Investigating Acceleration within an Individualized Learning Programme Ð A Study on

Differentiation within Standard Grade Computing Studies Glasgow. University of Strathclyde.Kirkwood, M (1996b) Accelerating Progress in Learning (Summary report). Glasgow. University of

Strathclyde.Nisbet, J., Schucksmith, J. (1986) Learning Strategies London. Routledge and Kegan Paul. Scottish Office Education Department (1993) The Education Of Able Pupils P6 To S2 Edinburgh. HMSOSimpson M., Ure, J. (1993) WhatÕs The Difference? A Study Of Differentiation In Scottish Secondary Schools Aberdeen. Northern College

28DISCUSSION GROUP D: SECOND PAPER

FINDING FLEXIBLE SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS A RANGE OF LEARNING NEEDS IN COMPUTING STUDIES

Eileen Mallaghan, Cardinal Newman High SchoolMargaret Kirkwood, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

My class was a general/credit class. I delayed the introduction of Fastracks until Topic 10 (the last topic in Unit 2) because I felt that pupils needed time to Òfind their feetÓ when faced with learning a new and unfamiliar subject. Most pupils have had little experience of programming before they begin the Standard Grade course and the programming language (COMAL) is also unfamiliar. I also know from experience that programming is a difficult topic for the majority of learners.

Perhaps because of trying to introduce Fastracks in the middle of the programming course things did not go smoothly at first. It didnÕt work out for the first three pupils whom I intended to accelerate. I mis-timed it for one pupil (she had been taking her work home and had already done most of the topic), another decided that she would prefer to do the tasks at home rather than Òmiss anythingÓ, and a third forgot to follow the Fastrack instructions.

However I was determined to make it work more successfully for the next study unit. In any case, by this stage pupils were beginning to feel that they would welcome the chance to miss out some tasks (the problems were more substantial and so the tasks were taking pupils longer to do). Therefore I used Fastracks to reduce the time spent on long topics and to motivate pupils as they could see themselves catching up with others. My other reasons for using Fastracks were to involve pupils in making decisions about their learning as this makes them more responsible and aware of their progress, and also to improve their self-confidence.

About the same time I introduced individual target setting in which I negotiated with each pupil a timetable for completing later topics to enable pupils to monitor their own progress better. I only did this for a few topics at a time to ensure that targets and actual progress did not get too far out of step and to enable adjustments to be made. I also introduced a range of other measures to increase the time that pupils could spend on programming and the support that they could get:

In addition to using Fastracks and individual target setting:¥ increasing the time allocation for programming by reducing the time spent on other topics;¥ supported study after school (pupils could work in the labs with a computing teacher to help them); ¥ supervised access to the lab at lunchtimes;¥ voluntary homework (I made up individual topic books from the study units and encouraged pupils to

take them home and to continue with the work that they had been doing in class);¥ collaboration - as pupils gained in confidence and competence they were better able to help each other;¥ Òchoice timeÓ - for thirty minutes every week during S4, each pupil could decide on the work that he

or she wanted to do in class - this could be programming, some other computing topic, or revision. The combination of these measures enabled nearly every pupil in the class to meet the final target that he or she had negotiated with me. It meant that, for those pupils who could not cope with acceleration at a particular stage, there were alternatives to enable them to make better progress. Unfortunately this class was hit constantly by term-time holidays (on Mondays, Tuesdays and Fridays) which created interruptions and I think this affected their attainment (ten pupils got credit grades and ten got general grades in programming coursework).

Margaret conducted group interviews with pupils to gauge their reactions to Fastracks and also to some of the other measures. Margaret reported that pupils reacted positively and maturely, and it is clear that they welcomed being asked their opinions (there is a chapter in the final research report on the interview findings). For example, one group saw no benefit in allowing pupils to choose whether to follow a Fastrack since certain pupils would want to get ahead whether or not they understood the work, so that it would turn into a race. Partnership between pupil and teacher was, in their view, the way ahead. Another group discussed how early target setting should begin - too early would make it difficult to gauge the appropriate pace for the individual, and too late would leave too little time for catching up. Pupils expressed different preferences during interviews, which validates the use of a range of strategies.

Most pupils worked hard and were keen to do well, particularly in S3. In future years I will make more use of Fastracks for Unit 2 topics onwards (I still maintain that pupils need an easier pace at the beginning) and continue to use the other approaches. The main problem lies with a syllabus that makes very unrealistic demands, and, until this is resolved, the tension between attempting to Òcover groundÓ and to develop understanding and problem solving capacities in pupils will remain.

29DISCUSSION GROUP D: THIRD PAPER

TAKING THE FASTRACKS CONCEPT FORWARD

Bill Campbell, Claremont High School

How did it go? It went very well. The pupils seemed to like it and made faster progress. It soon became apparent that the use of Fastracks was very successful. I had the impression that progress was being made, and made quickly. There were two aspects of using Fastracks that seemed to appeal to pupils. Firstly, they liked the recognition that their work had been done well. This appeared to improve motivation to continue working to a high standard. Secondly, the idea of being allowed to Òmiss outÓ work was attractive. When this became the established way of working for a class, pupils looked forward to receiving the Fastrack insert.

Some problems emerged:· I sometimes forgot to issue the Fastrack insert although often this was quickly remedied by a reminder from the

pupil. Sometimes pupils forgot that they had been given the Fastrack insert and did all the tasks in a topic regardless. This was because the Fastrack insert was attached to the pupil's answer book and not to the task book which contained the instructions for the pupil to follow.

· Pupils who were not permitted to follow a Fastrack for a topic needed reassurance. Some were very disappointed if they did not receive the Fastrack insert like their classmates. These pupils were usually those who had encountered difficulties in the preceding topic or their answers for the topic revealed some lack of understanding. Taking time to review the pupil's problems with the work and explaining the need for all of the next topic to be completed to provide enough opportunities for practice helped to reassure them. The pupil was also reassured that a decision not to allow the use of the Fastrack was for that topic only and if subsequent progress was good then he or she would get to follow later Fastracks.

How did it develop? In my school it was so successful that the concept has been embedded in the materials.There were relatively few pupils in Claremont who were not able to follow accelerated routes through the programming course. In the case of pupils with learning difficulties a different version of the materials with a combined task and answer book has been used. Such pupils have required considerable support and would not normally be considered for Fastracks.

When new copies of the materials were due to be duplicated, I decided to embed the Fastrack concept into the task book containing the instructions for the pupil. Instead of a loose sheet of paper being attached to the pupil's answer book at the beginning of a topic, new instructions were pasted in to the task book. These additional instructions identified tasks which are to be bypassed by the pupil unless otherwise instructed by the teacher.

Identifying tasks to be bypassed

Topic 5 Using procedures

Task 8DO NOT DO THIS TASK JUST NOW

Your teacher will tell you if you need to do it.

In this task you will ...

In the answer book any tasks which pupils had to bypass would be indicated by drawing an oval around the task number. When it comes to checking each pupilÕs work this makes it clear which tasks the pupil ought to have done. I no longer need to forecast each pupilÕs likely success in the next topic. As before I identify pupils who are experiencing difficulty with a topic and direct them at the appropriate time to complete the tasks that otherwise would have been bypassed.

All pupils now get the same materials which I think is an advantage, both from an organizational point of view, and from the pupilsÕ, since there is less likelihood that any pupil will feel Òleft outÓ.

30DISCUSSION GROUP E: PAPER

DIFFERENTIATION AND LEARNING DIFFICULTIES IN HISTORY

Sydney Wood and Fran PayneNorthern College, Aberdeen

ABSTRACT

This paper explores dimensions of the above issue firstly through a review of official pronouncements, the evidence of a range of available published research and two research projects involving collaboration between specialists in English Language and History. Secondly, consideration is given to an investigation of and comparison between the perceptions of learning difficulties and ways of addressing them provided by S1, S2 and S4 pupils and their teachers in a large comprehensive school as well as P7 pupils and their teacher in an associated primary school.

INTRODUCTORY SURVEY

The importance of differentiation in History teaching is emphasised in official documentation provided in the various countries of the United Kingdom. In Scotland, the History Inspectorate refer approvingly in principle to the strategy of core and extension, yet indicate its serious flaws in current practice (HMI 1992). In Wales a range of ways of approaching differentiation have been outlined by the Welsh Curriculum Council (CCW 1993).

None of these publications analyse the diverse sources of difficulty that face the teacher of History. Variations in difficulty are often seen in the primary sector as being matters of language: in the secondary sector the tendency has been to focus on the skills needed to pursue the subject, especially the skill of evaluating evidence. Yet, as Martin Booth has pointed out (Booth 1993) differentiation really needs to begin by considering the nature of historical content itself. The most explicit attempt to grapple with this question has been produced by Kieran Egan (Egan 1979) who set out a series of stages of complexity and stressed especially that pupils' interest is stirred by the imaginative stimulus of a past very different from the present day whilst their understanding is aided by focusing studies around major personalities.

For several years the London University based CHATA project has been exploring the abilities of 7 to 14 year olds to handle evidence and explanation in History by offering pupils a problem from the past and observing how they cope with identifying, connecting and prioritising a range of possible causes (Dickinson & Lee 1994). Like Egan, these researchers have drawn up a list of stages of achievement.

Understanding the nature of historical evidence and developing understanding from sources of evidence seem to be a particular cause of difficulty for pupils. Wineburg has shown that even 16 year olds do not properly consider source provenance when faced with a range of sources and asked to rank them in order of trustworthiness (Wineburg 1991). Northern College researchers working with 13-14 year olds found that typical modern History textbooks may give many pupils real problems in deriving the responses expected from them from the actual material provided rather than from general understanding already in their minds.

Language is central to History, both in terms of materials used and expectations that pupils themselves will create text. Northern College researchers have explored the importance of the nature of tasks by setting two tasks requiring different degrees of genre transformation from the materials provided but both on the same aspect of the past and using the same resources (Wood 1995 & 1996). Thus, the nature of tasks set, the nature of the means used and the nature of the content studied would all seem to be critical to suiting work in History to pupils of varying ability. Since current evidence is so fragmented, it was decided to investigate how pupils themselves viewed the subject and the difficulties involved in studying it and to compare these with teachers' views.

The study involved a large suburban secondary school selected as having pupils with a wide range of ability and its largest associated primary school. The teachers were asked to select 12 pupils, drawn from the lower, middle and upper ability levels from each of the years P7, S1, S2 and S4 (48 in total). A semi structured interview schedule was developed and used for both pupil and teacher interviews. The pupils were interviewed individually, as was the primary 7 teacher. The three S1/S2 and S4 teachers were interviewed as a group.

31THE FINDINGS

We felt that before we could focus on differentiation and the pupils' experience of its implementation, we needed to see whether the pupils were aware of what doing History involved, what motivated them, what caused difficulty and what helped them. Our findings indicate that the majority of pupils in P7 and S1 view History primarily in terms of the language skills of reading, writing, and listening but that by S2 a minority of able pupils have begun to appreciate the centrality of source handling. By S4 nearly half of the pupils mentioned studying source material, the remainder were still unsure of the skills they should be using and mentioned language skills. Equal numbers of S4 pupils found Standard Grade Evaluating, and Knowledge and Understanding skills difficult and were not sure of which strategies to use, particularly for Evaluating.

We explored what pupils considered motivated them to work hard. Pupils' perceptions changed as they progressed through secondary school. S1 pupils liked drawing activities and working in groups. S2 pupils were motivated by rewarding results and easily achievable tasks. S4 pupils especially stressed the importance of clear explanations. An overwhelming factor in the motivation of all pupils was the enjoyment of History which naturally led to our investigating whether certain topics were more motivating than others. The curriculum involved the following topics:

P7 The VictoriansS1 Skara Brae, The Romans, The Black Death, The NormansS2 World War Two/The Home Front, The Jews, Industrial Revolution,

Culloden, Exploration and DiscoveryS4 Changing Life in Britain, 1800-1920, World War One, Russia

P7 pupils enjoyed the topic on the Victorians, due perhaps to the concrete experiences they had, such as object handling. Secondary school pupils enjoyed topics when they could identify with the people living at that time. In S1 three quarters of pupils of all abilities enjoyed studying the Black Death, a powerful topic with resources that helped to personalise it. Half of the S2 pupils enjoyed World War Two, finding it easier than the other topics and with a variety of tasks. In S4, World War One was enjoyed by half of the pupils of all abilities because they could empathise with people living at that time. Changing Life in Britain was enjoyed by one third of pupils, because they found it easier to remember as the topic was broken down into subtopics.

The pupils' perceptions of difficulty changed from P7-S4. The primary pupils focused on task difficulty, making no mention of the historical knowledge being difficult. Secondary pupils gave more detailed responses and mentioned other factors:

¥ Tasks - secondary pupils mentioned the level of task difficulty, inadequacy of information or lack of explanation.

¥ Topics - a lack of interest in the subject meant that pupils were less motivated to work. The difficulties were often the consequence of the strong presence of abstract, complex concepts.

¥ Resources - the poor quality of photocopied material, and the language used in the source material, the density of text and layout on a page caused problems for pupils; they also appreciated the stimulus of a variety of resources.

¥ Lack of support - often what pupils needed from the teacher was a re-explanation. Pupils also indicated the need for a variety of ways of working, both on their own and in a group.

Difficulties pupils were unaware of

¥ Skills - it became apparent from pupil responses to further questioning, that they were unaware of some of the difficulties hindering their understanding. The majority of the pupils in primary and lower secondary, and half of the pupils in S4 were unaware of what strategies to use to evaluate source material. S4 pupils thought that Evaluating was easier than Knowledge and Understanding, simply because they had sources in front of them.

¥ Concepts - pupils lacked an understanding of the concept of time in History. P7-S1 pupils tended to use vague periods of time. For example, the responses pupils gave when asked how long ago was the Black Death, ranged from one hundred years ago to three thousand years ago. S2 pupils used the term 'century' and by S4, pupils were attempting to date events, though not always correctly.

¥ Misconceptions - sometimes pupils professed to understand a topic but further questioning revealed confusion.

32

As this evidence indicates, pupil understanding needs clearly explained tasks focused on topics shaped to suit pupil aptitude using varied and intelligible resources and with positive and effective support supplied both by the teacher and, where appropriate, fellow pupils. Pupils had no sense of being offered tasks or resources that differentiated between them. P7 pupils tackled worksheets and, once finished, pursued personal research into what interested them; they were not required to attempt more challenging work. S1-2 pupils undertook the same tasks until the latter part of their course when an investigative activity provided a more open and flexible structure. Some able S2 pupils observed that some of their work was too easy. S3-4 pupils worked through booklets which had a common core and extension tasks that were not noticeably more challenging. They rounded off their work with revision guides pitched at a level that lower ability pupils struggled to understand.

Secondary teachers made clear that they appreciated the need for varied resources and ways of working as well as clearly structured and well-presented topics using intelligible material. They recognised pupils' problems in mastering the concept of time and saw the value in topics that allowed pupils to develop a sense of empathy with the past. The primary teacher's comments indicated a primary focus on language skills rather than the key features of History. Differentiated worksheets used with P7 were created with language issues chiefly in mind.

Teachers' views did not wholly match pupil perceptions, nor did actual topics and teaching strategies necessarily epitomise the issues of concern that teachers themselves identified. Secondary teachers recognised they focused their work on middle ability pupils yet were not strongly motivated to create tasks and the means of implementing them for other abilities. They did not fully appreciate the experiences of pupils in upper primary either in terms of topics covered or ways of working. Across primary and secondary sectors the key skill of evaluating sources was not a sufficient focus of attention.

CONCLUSION

Differentiation in History has to begin with a clear understanding of the dimensions of the problem; the development of a handbook on these would be a real benefit to teachers. Practical strategies that have been properly piloted are needed to exemplify all that is required. Work on differentiation by task, not least the evidence of Standard Grade Investigations suggests that this strategy may be especially helpful and can take a number of forms. Certainly the coming of Higher Still further emphasises the need for further research as well as training in this crucial area.

REFERENCES

BOOTH, M. (1993) Students' historical thinking and the History of the National curriculum in England, Theory and Research in Social Education No.21.

CURRICULUM COUNCIL FOR WALES (1993) Progression and Differentiation in History at Key Stage 3, Cardiff. Curriculum Council for Wales.

DICKINSON, A K, LEE, P J (1994) Investigating Progression in Children's Ideas about History: the CHATA Project, in JOHN P and LUCAS P Partnership and Progress, Sheffield. Standing conference of History Teacher Educators.

EGAN, K. (1979) Educational Development, New York. Oxford University Press.

H M INSPECTORS OF SCHOOLS (1992) Effective Learning and Teaching in Scottish Secondary Schools : History, Edinburgh, SOED.

WINEBURG, S. (1991) Historical problem solving: a study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Education Psychology 83.

WOOD, S. (1995) Understanding the Past. Language and Learning. September/October and December issues.

WOOD, S. (1996) Implementing Writing Tasks in History. Teaching History 85.

33DISCUSSION GROUP E: ÒDIFFERENTIATION AND LEARNING DIFFICULTIES IN HISTORYÓ

REPORT OF DISCUSSION

Presenters: Sydney Wood and Fran Payne, Northern College, Aberdeen

The research findings presented in this discussion group stimulated an animated and interesting discussion which unfortunately was curtailed by time constraints.

From the discussion it became clear that History is a subject which encompasses skills from all areas of the curriculum and this makes more demands upon teachers of History. Not only must they ensure that their subject material meets the needs of their pupils but that the way in which it is presented is appropriate to the stages met in other subject areas e.g. displaying graphical material as a pie chart would be inappropriate if in Maths the pupils had only encountered bar charts. The point was made that the role of the learning support teachers can be very important but that at present Mathematics and English often benefit from the main thrust of learning support; it was suggested that perhaps this is because some senior management teams are unaware of how complex a subject History is. Learning support teachers were seen as having an invaluable part to play in helping to modify written source materials which can be a very time consuming task.

An important point made was that source materials do not have to be written and that for some pupils text can restrict their access to History. It was suggested that more use could be made of local resources e.g. heritage centres; this raised the issue of the practicalities of such activities due to the restraints of time, money etc.

It was agreed that there had to be differentiation of written sources for pupils, with particular reference to their reading ability, but it was emphasised that there had also to be differentiation of tasks. By differentiating the tasks, pupils of different abilities can work successfully on the same topic, within the same overall context. It is not the subject matter alone that determines the difficulty level but also the way in which it is presented to the pupils.

Throughout the discussion it became clear that History is a very complex subject and the teaching of History is much more than content based. It is necessary to develop strategies to teach understanding and evaluation skills. It was the consensus of both discussion groups that evaluation of sources poses real problems for the majority of pupils.

The diversity of topics within the subject makes it more difficult for teachers to develop and share resources and the point was made that a narrowing of topics would make this easier.

While there was much discussion of how to teach History the point was made that we should not lose sight of the pupil and that appropriate approaches, sources and tasks can do much to stimulate interest in the subject and to motivate.

Morag CunninghamDepartment of Business and Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

34DISCUSSION GROUP F: PRESENTATION OUTLINE

MEETING INDIVIDUAL NEEDS & PROMOTING INDEPENDENT LEARNING IN MUSIC

Joan Mowat, Music Department, Woodfarm High School

I chose to develop the theme of developing responsibility for learning as it is fundamental to the approach which we adopt within the Music Department at Woodfarm High School and which permeates all aspects of our work. Curriculum development has a very high priority and almost all course work is devised within the department. An ongoing process of evaluation and a desire to constantly build upon and improve practice characterise the work of the department.

PRESENTATION OUTLINE¥ The rationale underlying our approach¥ Learning climate¥ Targeting pupil work effectively¥ Realising differentiation through developing responsibility for learning¥ What makes it work for us?

The concept of differentiation is a very wide one and incorporates elements such as developing self-esteem, self-awareness and self-responsibility. Caring for pupils as individuals, providing choice, challenge, support and encouragement and involving pupils in the learning process are fundamental as are listening to pupils and responding to their needs, consulting and collaborating with them.

Differentiation is a means of providing opportunity for pupils and the ability to motivate both staff and pupils is crucial if pupils are to achieve their full potential.

WHAT IS THE RATIONALE UNDERLYING OUR APPROACH?

¥ Meeting individual needs through adopting a variety of approaches in a flexible manner¥ Having high, yet realistic, expectations and creating the right conditions for effective teaching and

learning¥ Having a range of support mechanisms to support learners¥ Encouraging pupils to take responsibility for their own learning and to become involved in decision

making relating to it¥ Viewing differentiation holistically, taking account of all the factors which impinge upon the learning

process

Appendix A provides an overview of differentiation principles and practices within the music department. This presentation seeks to demonstrate through practical means how the rationale is realised in practise within the department. In particular, the importance of high, yet realistic teacher and pupil expectations is highlighted as a major factor in pupil success and in creating a culture of achievement.

LEARNING CLIMATE

¥ Encouraging pupils to be proud of their success at any level and to be comfortable working at the level which is appropriate for them

¥ Handling differences in ability sensitively and with discretion¥ Drawing attention to/rewarding favourable outcomes¥ Creating a climate in which pupils work in collaboration with each other and with the class teacher to

achieve the highest possible standards for all

Creating a learning climate which fosters effective learning and teaching is fundamental. In this part of the presentation, the relationship between the formal (the intended curriculum) and the informal (or hidden curriculum) is explored. Whilst teachers seek to recognise and praise attainment of pupils of all abilities, what is the reality within the classroom? Are teachers sensitive and discreet in their handling of pupils? Is encouragement and time given equally to pupils of all abilities and backgrounds?

The use of extrinsic means (such as awards and certificates) of encouraging pupils and the use of Senior Management to reinforce achievement are also explored.

A behaviour scheme (Appendix B) which has been introduced to S1 classes within the Music Department, and in which 61% of pupils participating within the scheme considered that it had led to improved learning, is

35explored within the presentation. Aspects of the scheme such as target-setting, pupil support cards and support from senior pupils are discussed.

TARGETING PUPIL WORK EFFECTIVELY

¥ Drawing upon information relating to previous learning to guide decisions about appropriate work for each pupil

¥ Maintaining accurate pupil profiles and developing ways of charting pupil progress on an ongoing basis¥ Creating support mechanisms for pupils with learning and/or behavioural difficulties and being flexible

in approach¥ Ensuring that pathways are open to enable pupils to proceed further and in greater depth if they are able

In this part of the presentation, the need to target pupil work effectively through knowledge of the pupil and the need to devise effective means of charting pupil progress on an on-going basis are discussed and illustrated. An analysis of pupil test results and of S2 predictions highlight the importance of not categorising pupils at too early a stage and adopting a flexible approach which keeps pathways open for pupils. Means of providing support to help keep pupils with learning and/or behavioural difficulties on board are also discussed.

DEVELOPING RESPONSIBILITY FOR LEARNING

¥ Providing appropriate materials which can be readily accessed by staff and pupils¥ Informing pupils about their learning so that they can make meaningful choices¥ Developing in pupils a depth of understanding of what is required of them to produce work of the

highest standards¥ Developing learning skills in pupils in order that they can exercise control over their own learning¥ Involving pupils in decisions about the nature, difficulty and pacing of their work and guiding pupils

towards assessments set at the correct level for them¥ Providing high quality timeous feedback on progress in which criticism is constructive and praise is

given when appropriate¥ Target-setting on a group or individual basis in negotiation between teacher and pupil(s)

A presentation based upon a differentiated voluntary homework scheme (Appendix C) which was introduced within the department for Standard Grade pupils and which has met with a high degree of success exemplifies the principles above.

WHAT MAKES IT WORK FOR US?

¥ MOTIVATION¥ COMMUNICATION¥ TEAMWORK

collaborative problem-solving approachsharing of expertise

¥ HIGH PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS¥ FLEXIBILITY

not categorising pupils at too early a stage¥ CONSULTATIVE APPROACH¥ ENCOURAGEMENT OF SELF-EVALUATION¥ LEADERSHIP

Whilst each school and each department has its own unique circumstances, the above are the criteria which make differentiation work for us. The importance of working as a team, consulting with and learning from each other, setting high standards, constantly evaluating our practice in a non-threatening way and, hopefully, leading by example create an ethos of achievement which results in happy, well-motivated pupils who achieve their potential.

I will be happy to provide further details of any of the work described in this presentation. Please do not hesitate to contact me.

Joan G MowatWoodfarm High SchoolEast Renfrewshire(0141-638-6541)

36DISCUSSION GROUP F: APPENDIX A

DIFFERENTIATION - PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES

Joan Mowat, Music Department, Woodfarm High School

WHICH APPROACHES DO WE USE TO ACHIEVE DIFFERENTIATION?

¥ Individualised/resource-based learning.

¥ Setting within the class taking account of aptitude, experience and instruments professed.

¥ Whole-class teaching based upon one stimulus but in which differentiated materials to guide the response are provided.

¥ Whole-class teaching based upon one stimulus in which the individual responses of the learners in themselves give a differentiated outcome.

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT WE ARE BEING SUCCESSFUL?

¥ We have an on-going programme of evaluation which encompasses all aspects of the departmentÕs work, which takes account of staff views through discussion at departmental meetings and pupil views through questionnaires followed up by discussion.

¥ As a department, we formally monitor each otherÕs teaching by devising and using a checklist of good practice and we then use the information obtained to help shape future developments.

¥ We issue very detailed reports to all certificate pupils and these reports form the basis of an informal discussion with each pupil at which concerns (on both sides) can be aired and resolved.

¥ We monitor performance in external examinations and subject uptake from S2 - 3 and S4 - 5/6.

PupilsÕ opinions of the Music department

ÒIt is probably the best working atmosphere in the schoolÓ.

ÒIt is a relaxed atmosphere. Everyone works at their own paceÓ.

ÒI liked music because you get to go in groups with your friends. There is a good selection of instruments plus you get a choice of what music you want to play. The teachers are very friendly and helpful - they really try and do their best to boost your confidence to perform in front of other peopleÓ.

WHAT IS THE RATIONALE BEHIND OUR APPROACHES?

¥ Differentiation is about meeting the individual needs of learners through adopting a variety of approaches in a flexible manner.

¥ It is about having high, yet realistic, expectations of what individual learners are able to achieve and creating the right conditions for that learning to take place.

¥ It is about having a range of support mechanisms which can be brought into place when required to support learners.

¥ It is about encouraging learners to take responsibility for their own learning and to become involved in decision making relating to it.

¥ It is about recognising that differentiation is only one aspect of effective teaching and learning and that it should not be considered in isolation from other aspects. The learning environment needs to be viewed holistically, taking account of all of the factors which impinge upon the learning process.

37WHAT IS IMPORTANT IN OUR APPROACH?

Learning climate

¥ Creating a climate in which pupils can be proud of achieving success at any level, in which pupils can feel comfortable working at the level which is appropriate to them and in which differences in ability and achievement are handled sensitively by the class teacher.

¥ Drawing attention to/ rewarding favourable outcomes and creating a climate in which pupils collaborate with each other and work co-operatively with the class teacher to achieve the highest possible standards for all. The department recently instigated a behaviour scheme for S1 pupils which encourages pupils to work together with the class teacher to create an effective and supportive climate for learning.

Targeting pupil work effectively

¥ Drawing upon information relating to previous learning to guide decisions about appropriate work for each pupil.

¥ Maintaining accurate pupil profiles and developing ways of charting pupil progress on an on-going basis.

¥ Creating support mechanisms for pupils with learning and/or behavioural difficulties which could include:- specially adapted materials; assistance from senior pupils, voluntary helpers or co-operative teachers; paired-activities within the class; individual target-setting; and the use of pupil support cards.

¥ Ensuring that path-ways are open to enable the more-able pupil to proceed further and in greater depth.

Developing responsibility for learning

¥ Ensuring that appropriate materials and resources to meet individual needs are in place and can be readily accessed by staff and pupils.

¥ Ensuring that pupils are sufficiently informed about their learning to make meaningful choices and to develop a depth of understanding about what is required of them in order to produce work of the highest standards.

¥ Developing learning skills in pupils in order that they can exercise control over their own learning (e.g. the ability to plan and evaluate).

¥ Involving pupils in choices about the nature, difficulty and pacing of their work and guiding pupils towards assessments set at the correct level for them as individuals.

¥ Providing high-quality, timeous feedback on progress in which criticism is constructive and praise is given when appropriate.

¥ Target-setting on an individual or group basis as a negotiated process between teacher and learners.

¥ Introducing a voluntary, differentiated homework scheme which enables pupils to exercise choice and develop learning skills.

38DISCUSSION GROUP F: APPENDIX B

PROMOTING POSITIVE BEHAVIOUR

Joan Mowat, Music Department, Woodfarm High School

BACKGROUND

The behaviour scheme was piloted initially with three S1 classes who attend Music for two periods a week. Although the scheme is specific to the Music Department, it could be applied to a wider context. The scheme has been formally evaluated and written up in a research report.

WHY WAS THE SCHEME INTRODUCED?

The scheme was introduced for two reasons, the first philosophical (derived from a belief that the principles inherent within the scheme were those most likely to promote effective teaching and learning) and the second pragmatic (aiming to improve standards of behaviour by taking positive measures at a stage when pupils were most likely to respond - at the beginning of S1).

WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPLES BEHIND THE SCHEME?

¥ That developing pupilsÕ understanding of behaviour is best undertaken within a positive climate in which ÔgoodÕ behaviour (that which enables effective learning to occur) is positively reinforced.

¥ That developing understanding of behaviour could be undertaken within the context of normal subject teaching.

¥ That pupils have a capacity to change negative models of behaviour if given sufficient encouragement and support to do so.

¥ That pupils should develop responsibility for their own behaviour.¥ That a collaborative approach encouraging pupils to help each other to behave well is most likely to

succeed.¥ That approaches towards discipline need not, and, ideally, should not be confrontational as this

undermines relationships making future negotiations difficult and less likely to succeed.

HOW DID THE SCHEME OPERATE?

Monthly targets (e.g. being considerate) were set (through consultation with staff and pupils) and ways of meeting the targets were suggested (e.g. please put up your hand to speak; be helpful towards each other). At the end of each lesson, pupils who had demonstrated the target were given a point. At the end of the term, pupils who had consistently met the targets were awarded a certificate. A fun approach was adopted for one month:- Òbeat the clockÓ - the hands on the cardboard clock only moved round if the target was not being met by the class as a whole and double points were awarded if the clock hands had not moved.

WHAT EXTRA SUPPORT WAS PROVIDED FOR PUPILS WITH BEHAVIOURAL DIFFICULTIES?

¥ Pupils Ôat riskÕ were given a support card which was completed at the end of each lesson by the class teacher. This card enabled the class teacher to comment on the pupilÕs behaviour - perhaps highlighting things on which the pupil needed to work (e.g. not interrupting the lesson) or providing encouragement when the pupil succeeded. Guidance staff, AHT and parents were informed both on the issue and withdrawal of cards and a letter was sent to parents when the pupil achieved success.

¥ Pupils who had been placed on support cards were discussed weekly at Departmental Meetings and a collaborative approach was adopted to trying to find solutions to problems.

¥ Senior pupils were drafted in to work with pupils Ôat riskÕ either individually or in small groups within or outwith the classroom.

¥ Pupils were paired - pupils within the class volunteering to help others within the class on a rota basis.¥ Some pupils were set individual targets and were provided with a target card to remind them (e.g.

please do not talk).

WHAT OTHER MEASURES WERE TAKEN?

¥ Departmental Policy on the area of Promoting Positive Behaviour was reviewed and agreed and staff monitored each other through observation based upon an agreed set of criteria.

HAS THE SCHEME BEEN SUCCESSFUL?

39The scheme was evaluated formally by means of a pupil questionnaire, a parental questionnaire which informed parents of the nature of the scheme, an interview with senior pupil assistants and discussion at departmental meetings.

The consensus of opinion was that it had been highly successful. 70% of pupils had given more consideration to their behaviour; 63% of pupils considered that it had led to an improvement in their own behaviour and 66% to an improvement in the behaviour of their class. Parents endorsed the approach and 95% of parents who responded considered that it had motivated their children to behave better. Senior pupils were very enthusiastic. One said: ÒThe way in which pupils responded to the scheme seems to show their opinion of it. I just think this type of scheme is long overdue in first year.Ó Another said: ÒIt would be ideal if it (good behaviour) could come from within and I think it could (even with that age). But if it doesnÕt, you have to find some other way of doing it, and although punishment has a place, on its own itÕs going to do nothingÓ.

40DISCUSSION GROUP F: APPENDIX C

VOLUNTARY HOMEWORK SCHEME

Joan Mowat, Music Department, Woodfarm High School

¥ A series of differentiated listening assignments which can be undertaken by Standard Grade pupils on a voluntary basis

¥ Each assignment has a set of instructions for pupils and parents¥ Each assignment commences with a glossary of terms which are illustrated on tape ¥ Each assignment is based upon the format of examination papers with a series of questions based upon

taped excerpts¥ Each assignment has a revision section to reinforce learning¥ Each assignment has answers and clear marking instructions¥ Pupils record their own progress on specially designed cards¥ Pupils are awarded certificates when they meet set targets

ÒListening Assignments were very helpful and were a successful task. However, problems were caused as many of the assignments were out of the library due to popular demand so it would be helpful to future users if there was more than one copy of each.Ó (an S4 pupil)

BACKGROUND

The voluntary homework initiative was introduced last session to the Standard Grade Music Course at Woodfarm High School. Although the description which ensues relates specifically to the context of a Music department, the scheme (or one similar to it) could be applied to any other subject.

WHY WAS THE SCHEME INTRODUCED?

A common pattern was emerging of pupils performing well in the Listening element of the course throughout the two year span of the course and achieving well in end of unit assessments. However, this performance was not being reflected in the formal prelim or final examination. After discussion, it was considered that pupils were not retaining knowledge and skills from one unit into the next and their final performance was not reflecting the quality of work undertaken throughout the course. A homework scheme whereby pupils could revise or even anticipate course work, consolidating learning and skills, was considered to be a means of tackling this problem.

WHY A VOLUNTARY SCHEME?

Teachers in all schools are plagued with the problems of pupils failing to complete homework tasks. The negative means of reinforcing homework is often self-defeating, leading to no improvement in outcome and resulting in switched-off pupils with a poor work attitude towards the subject. Tackling this problem by simply adding on more compulsory homework seemed pointless.

More importantly, the department places a heavy emphasis upon encouraging pupils to accept responsibility for their own learning and to develop the skills to work well independently. This seemed an ideal opportunity to promote this ideology further by giving pupils control over the scheme. It should be stressed however, that pupils still undertake compulsory homework related to other aspects of the course such as instrumental practice.

HOW DID WE ENCOURAGE PUPIL INVOLVEMENT?

Introducing a voluntary homework scheme will not work unless pupils are convinced of its value and gain a sense of achievement from undertaking the tasks. We therefore placed a heavy emphasis upon the quality and presentation of the materials, introduced them to pupils within the class, giving a clear explanation of their purpose and the benefits to be accrued from participation. The school supported us in this by providing development time to develop the pack of materials. We held a very successful parent/pupil workshop at which we introduced the assignments. In addition we set termly targets for the class and award certificates to pupils meeting the targets.

WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SCHEME?

¥ It is based upon individual assignments based upon topics from the course.

41¥ It is differentiated - the assignments are graded at levels F, F/G, G and C.¥ All assignments are based upon the format of past-papers and therefore give pupils not only the

opportunity to revise and consolidate skills but to gain practise in examination technique.¥ All assignments come with a clear set of instructions for pupils and parents.¥ Parents are encouraged to become involved if their children wish them to.¥ Each assignment commences with a glossary of concepts required to undertake the work within the

assignment, each of which is illustrated on tape.¥ In addition to the basic assignment questions, additional questions are provided to reinforce learning.

Each unit is self-correcting. Beyond the initial preparation of the answer sheets, all correction is carried out by pupils and is only checked by the teacher. In correcting their own work, pupils are coming into regular contact with Exam Board criteria for assessment and model answers both of which develop their concept of what is required for the examination. Although work is not undertaken under examination conditions, the assignments would provide suitable evidence of pupil work in the event of an appeal being necessary.

HOW DOES THE SCHEME OPERATE?

Assignments are placed in the classroom and in the library and pupils simply sign them out and return them when required. Pupils record their progress on individual progress cards. Parental signatures are sought to declare that the work has been carried out as per instructions. The progress card also provides the opportunity for pupils to record particular concepts with which they had difficulty and require further practise. On a weekly basis, the class teacher will ask to see evidence of work and will complete a class chart recording the scores of the pupils for each assignment undertaken. The teacher will take the opportunity to encourage the pupil and direct him/her to the next assignment.

HAS THE SCHEME BEEN SUCCESSFUL?

It is early days yet, but the first signs are that is has been successful. All pupils in the current S3 class have chosen to participate and all achieved their first target of 5 assignments (5 hrs work). S4 has been a little more variable but it will be interesting to see the uptake as the examination approaches.

42DISCUSSION GROUP F:

ÒMEETING INDIVIDUAL NEEDS & PROMOTING INDEPENDENT LEARNING IN MUSICÓREPORT OF DISCUSSION

There were four things that were striking about this presentation.

Firstly, and most importantly, inherent in every approach used in the music department is the expectation that all children can be successful. It is clear that children responded to this, from the outstanding quality of their work which we heard on tape during the session. Building self-esteem is of critical importance to enable all children to be successful.

Secondly, it is a highly organized approach to learning - very detailed and structured. Again children have responded to this. Children like to learn in an orderly climate - this is borne out by the research evidence.

Thirdly, pupils are given a great deal of choice, but they didnÕt take the easy route. They opted instead for work that would stretch them (again this is borne out by the quality of their work).

The presentation itself was given with humour. We had to guess the composer (was it Bach or Mozart? - neither, a sixth year pupil). Within a highly structured and well-thought out approach where it can be expected that some pupils will feel under a little pressure, humour is very important.

Others should have the opportunity to hear this presentation.

Dr Brian BoydAssociate DirectorCentre for Quality in EducationStrathclyde University

43DISCUSSION GROUP G: PRESENTATION OUTLINE

CREATING A CLIMATE FOR LEARNING IN ENGLISH

Myra Young, Karen Gibson, Cathkin High School

MAIN THEMES

¥ recognising the difference¥ addressing the difference¥ making the difference

This presentation dealt with the importance of utilising the wealth of information which can be provided on pupils by previous teachers. It outlined how the information is passed on so that teachers of S1 and S3 English classes in Cathkin High School can make use of it to acknowledge learning needs, to set targets and to plan strategies which help individual pupils to build on their progress to date.

METHODS OF DIFFERENTIATING

¥ by response¥ by support¥ by task¥ by text

These differentiation strategies are seen as an integral part of the process of teaching and learning. Very practical and manageable structures for classroom organisation establish a framework where objectives are accessible to all pupils and the criteria for success made known. At every stage, pupils are encouraged to take personal responsibility for their own success and tasks provide choice and challenge. The planned use of a range of resources appropriate to particular tasks provides support so that pupils can achieve success at a variety of levels.

KEY FACETS OF THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

¥ establishing the climate¥ promoting good behaviour¥ building self-esteem¥ encouraging mutual respect¥ recognising achievement

Differentiation can be a mechanistic process unless all pupils feel valued and are involved in their own learning. The department operates a system where the emphasis is on promoting good behaviour (rather than punishing bad), building self-esteem and establishing an atmosphere of mutual respect and co-operation. Target setting, peer group support and encouragement, and awards for effort and achievement in a range of areas all contribute to creating a climate for learning in the department.

44DISCUSSION GROUP G: ÒCREATING A CLIMATE FOR LEARNING IN ENGLISHÓ

REPORT OF DISCUSSION

Presenters: Myra Young and Karen Gibson, Cathkin High School

The key issues to emerge from the discussion following this presentation (albeit a short discussion), were the need for practical guidance for teachers and the fact that pupils were meeting personal targets rather than competing with each other.

The teachers concerned had done a tremendous amount of work to generate differentiated materials for their pupils many of which were designed to stretch pupils rather than to make the work easier for them.

A question was asked about the other departments in the school and it was noted that not all departments chose to work in mixed ability groupings.

When it came to chosen texts such as Shakespeare the presenters said that they approached these texts in a similar manner with differentiated materials available such as audio and video tapes.

There was also discussion on the amount of learning support available and the use made of co-operative teaching. The presenters were keen to point out that they were human beings and not miracle workers and had to make best use of the limited help that was available to them.

The conclusion reached was that there had to be a balance between positive and negative feedback to pupils and that the materials created for pupils had to reflect the response, the support, the text and the task in hand.

Fionna KentDepartment of Business and Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

45FURTHER INFORMATION ON POSTERS & DISPLAYS

Scottish CCC Interactive video disc on differentiation.

There is an accompanying guide written by Mary Simpson (published by Northern College, Aberdeen Campus, Department of Educational Research, 1997).

ÒSqueezing out the juiceÓ

Jenny Allan, Liberton High School, Edinburgh. A poster on perceptions of reading in secondary schools. This is based on JennyÕs and Annette BrutonÕs research which has been published recently as a SCRE Spotlight (1997). The Spotlight can be viewed and printed out from the SCRE Website. It can also be obtained, free of charge, from SCRE at the address shown below.

The Scottish Council for Research in Education, 15 St John Street, Edinburgh, EH8 8JRWebsite address: http://www.scre.ac.uk/

Tel +44 (0)131-557 2944 Fax +44 (0)131-556 9454

Webweavers webscre@scre.ac.ukLast modified 6/5/97

ÒGirls shine in computingÓ

Margaret Kirkwood, Faculty of Education, Strathclyde University. A poster on the gender differences revealed through a study on differentiation in Computing Studies at Standard Grade (see Discussion Group D).

The data was obtained through class records on progress and attainment and pupil questionnaires. Some of the gender differences are:

¥ Nationally boys outnumber girls in computing studies by 2:1 at Standard Grade and 3:1 at Higher Grade.

Within this study:

¥ Girls did much better than boys at programming. 49% of girls achieved credit grades for programming coursework vs. 18% of boys.

¥ A higher proportion of girls preferred to work on their own when asked to express a preference between working on their own or with a partner (61% of girls vs. 51% of boys).

¥ Boys were more likely to have done programming before the start of the course than girls, mostly on home computers (29% of boys vs. 22% of girls).

¥ By mid-way through the course, 79% of girls were pleased with their progress in comparison to only 60% of boys.

¥ Doing revision questions at home was a much more highly rated activity amongst girls than boys (75% of girls vs. 46% of boys). Also prepared summaries of topics were rated as useful by a much higher proportion of girls (80% of girls vs. 45% of boys).

¥ Girls made many more references to understanding, revising, getting practice, learning new things, etc. than boys, in extended written responses.

46SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

DIFFERENTIATION & ABILITY GROUPING

Wynne Harlen and Heather Malcolm, 1997 Setting And Streaming A Research Review Edinburgh. Scottish Council For Research In Education.

Mary Simpson et.al., 1989 Differentiation In The Primary School: Investigations Of Learning And Teaching. Aberdeen. Northern College

Mary Simpson and Jenny Ure, 1993 WhatÕs The Difference? A Study Of Differentiation In Scottish Secondary Schools Aberdeen. Northern College

Mary Simpson, 1997 Developing Differentiation Practices: Meeting the Needs of Pupils and Teachers The Curriculum Journal Vol. 8 No. 1 Spring

Scottish CCC, 1997 Learning and Teaching: Making Sense of Differentiation: CDI Dundee. SCCC

LEARNING AND TEACHING

Howard Gardner, 1993 Multiple Intelligences The Theory In Practice London. Harper Collins.

Daniel Goleman, 1996 Emotional Intelligence London. Bloomsbury.

Eric Jensen, 1994 The Learning Brain California. Turning Point Publishing.

Heather Malcolm and Schlapp U., 1997 5-14 In The Primary School: A Continuing Challenge Edinburgh. Scottish Council For Research In Education.

Pacquita McMichael and Brian Boyd, 1995 Towards A Climate Of Achievement Glasgow. QIE University Of Strathclyde.

John Nisbet, 1984 The Seventh Sense. Edinburgh. The Scottish Council for Research in Education.

John Nisbet and Janet Schucksmith, 1986 Learning Strategies London. Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Scottish CCC, 1996 Teaching For Effective Learning Dundee.

Scottish Office Education Department, 1992 Effective Learning And Teaching In Scottish Secondary Schools: History, Edinburgh. SOED

Scottish Office Education Department, 1993 The Education Of Able Pupils P6 To S2 Edinburgh. HMSO

SOEID, 1996 Achievement For All Edinburgh. HMSO

Mary Simpson and J. Goulder, 1997 Implementing The 5-14 Programme In Secondary Schools: Continuity and Progression. Aberdeen. Northern College

Mary Simpson, 1997 Developing Differentiation Practices: Meeting the Needs of Pupils and Teachers. The Curriculum Journal. 8 (1) pp. 85-104.

47EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS

John MacBeath et. al , 1996 Schools Speak For Themselves NUT

Peter Mortimore et. al , 1988 School Matters: The Junior Years Wells Somerset. Open Books.

Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., Ouston, J., Smith, A., 1979 Fifteen Thousand Hours: Secondary Schools And Their Effects

On Children London. Open Books.

Scottish Education Department, 1988 Effective Primary Schools Edinburgh. HMSO

Scottish Education Department, 1988 Effective Secondary Schools Edinburgh. HMSO

ASSESSMENT

P. J. Black, 1993 Formative And Summative Assessment By Teachers. Studies In Science Education Vol. 21, p. 49-97.

RESEARCH METHODS

Slavin, R. E., 1986 Best-Evidence Synthesis: An Alternative To Meta-Analytic And Traditional Reviews. Educational Researcher, Nov 1986, p. 5Ð11.

48

CONTRIBUTORS

CONFERENCE DIRECTOR

Margaret Kirkwood Senior Lecturer in Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

MAIN SPEAKERS, DISCUSSION GROUP AND POSTER PRESENTERS

Jenny Allan Principal Teacher of English, Liberton High School, Edinburgh

Dr Brian Boyd Associate Director, Centre for Quality in Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Bill Campbell Principal Teacher of Computing, Claremont High School, East Kilbride

Karen Gibson Senior Teacher, Cathkin High School

Professor Wynne Harlen Director, The Scottish Council for Research in Education

Louise Hayward Assistant Principal, St AndrewÕs College, Bearsden

Margaret Kirkwood Senior Lecturer in Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Heather Malcolm The Scottish Council for Research in Education

Eileen Mallaghan Principal Teacher of Computing, Cardinal Newman High School, Bellshill

Joan Mowat Principal Teacher of Music, Woodfarm High School, Thornliebank

Professor Jim McCall Department of Educational Studies, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Fran Payne Department of Educational Research,

Professor Mary Simpson Head of Department of Educational Research, Aberdeen Campus, Northern College

Sydney Wood Department of Social Studies, Northern College, Aberdeen Campus

Myra Young Principal Teacher of English, Cathkin High School

CHAIRPERSONS

Morag Cunningham Lecturer, Department of Business and Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Sandra Dunbar Lecturer, Department of Special Educational Needs, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Sheila Hughes Course Director, PGCE Secondary Course, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Fionna Kent Lecturer, Department of Business and Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Professor Jim McCall Department of Educational Studies, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

Jack Winch Head of Department of Business and Computer Education, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus

49

ADMINISTRATION

Michelle Watson Professional Development Unit, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus