Peer Review – Aiming for the Bull’s Eye

April 26, 2013 in Assessment, English, Pedagoo by Jamie Warner-Lynn

Sir Michael Wilshaw commented recently in the Telegraph that inspectors “don’t see enough extended reading and extended writing” in English lessons. This has prompted a good deal of debate in our department staffroom: it’s all very well saying that inspectors want to see extended writing, but how would this work in practice? How would it be possible to evidence impact and progress in a lesson focused on extended writing?

After much head scratching in my department, we decided that the answer lay in peer assessment and careful redrafting. Not only would this help to embed the culture of craftsmanship written about so eloquently by @huntingenglish, but it would also enable us to nurture our pupils’ intellectual resilience through structured peer scrutiny (see Zoe Elder’s inspirational Full on Learning for further details).

Anyway, the upshot of all my musing is that I thought I’d share the best tool that I have come across for self and peer review – The Evaluation Target Board. The Target Board was created by Thinkwell and I was introduced to it through the Connections for Learning programme at my school. However, I’ve added my own ‘twist’– the magic is in the plenary! This is how I have made use of it to help Y8 pupils improve their persuasive writing.

This sequence of activities is based on the TV programme Room 101. Celebrity guests are asked to make an argument for ‘things’ (in the loosest sense of that word) to be consigned for all eternity to Room 101 (see Orwell’s 1984 for literary context). If you are unfamiliar with the format of the show, here is a clip.

I begin by asking pupils what they consider the most essential elements of powerful persuasive writing. Pupils work in pairs to ‘brainstorm’ their ideas. They feedback and I collect their ideas on the board. Depending on the group and the ability level, we might end up with something like this: emotive language; rhetorical questions; facts & opinions, etc…

Next, I ask them to rank the following examples ‘what I wrote’. Apologies to cat lovers.

Example 1: I really don’t like cats. They are very upsetting. Basically, they act like they own the place. They’ve got horrible rough tongues and they are always licking their sticky bits. As if that wasn’t bad enough, they’ve got really smelly poo. I think that they should go into Room 101.

Example 2: I can’t stand cats. We call them pets, but basically they couldn’t care less about us. They just parade around the house, acting like they own the place. What’s the point in having a pet that thinks it’s superior to you?

As if that wasn’t bad enough, they spend half of the day sleeping and the other half licking their sticky bits with their horrible, rough tongues. What have they got to be superior about?

And just when you thought they couldn’t get any more disgusting, they leave a dead thing in your shoe as a ‘present.’

Not only that but they have the stinkiest poo in the whole world.

Go on – stick the moggy in Room 101. You know you want to.

Example 3: If I could have one wish – just one – it would be that every cat in the whole world would spontaneously combust at my command. Kitty apocalypse! And, boy, have those furry little blighters got it coming!

It’s not just the way that they parade around the house acting as if they own the place; it’s not the way they spend half the day snoring on some sun-lit cushion and the other half licking their sticky bits, while you’re trying to eat your dinner – it’s not even the way they wake you up in the morning by clawing your chest and trying to curl up on your face. No, it’s the fact that they think that they are better than you.

And just when you thought that they couldn’t be any more revolting they leave a surprise in your shoe. Some twitching, half dead/ half alive rodent or bird – its still warm guts squelching in your sock.

Trust me – I won’t rest until the last of the feline species is crammed, spitting and yowling into Room 101!

Following the rank order exercise, pupils share the features of the text which they have identified as most effective. Following feedback, I ask them if they want to change their list of criteria. It is at this point that I give out the target boards and ask the pupils to record their effective writing criteria (in no particular order) against the bullet points. The target board that I used on this ocassion had five bullet points and therefore required five criteria, but you can vary the number of bullet points for purposes of differentiation.

By this stage, the class have engaged in paired and grouped work and they should all have demonstrated progress . You can make this progress ‘visible’ by asking pupils to work on mini-white boards and to display their criteria before and after the ranking exercise.

The next phase involves the pupils working individually, planning and writing their Room 101 speech. If they are stuck, I suggest ‘Facebook’, ‘Karaoke’ and ‘Justin Bieber’ as deserving candidates.

It is at this point that the target boards come into their own. All of the pupils swap their work and use their target boards to peer review the work that they have been given. If criterion number 1 is ‘a strong opening’ and the piece they are marking has the strongest opening they can imagine, they write number 1 in the bull’s eye. If the opening is weak, number 1 is written in one of the outer concentric circles or off the board altogether. They then repeat this procedure with each of the criteria. A perfect piece of work would have all of the numbers in the bull’s eye.

First draft
First draft target board evaluation

Pupils then have to redraft at least the first three paragraphs of their peers’ work, using the criteria and trying to ‘improve’ the writing in accordance with the criteria, so that they can justify moving all of the numbers into the centre of the target. In the plenary, pupils read out before and after versions and explain how they improved it, using the criteria. I have found that there is immense power in asking the pupils to articulate how they have improved the work. It delivers quality metacognition.

Second Draft
Second Draft Evaluation Target

Finally, because pupils have worked in pairs/ groups and selected only a limited number of criteria, there will be variation in the criteria that pupils have used to assess and improve their peers’ work. I ‘blow up’ the work to A3 size and create a gallery in the classroom, displaying the ‘improved’ writing alongside the target board and criteria. Pupils wander around the room, reading the work and I ask them to stop at the piece of work which they feel is most effective. I take note of where most of the pupils have gathered and ask them to explain why they have chosen that piece of work. This opens up a space for a discussion about the most essential criteria for persuasive writing.

The target boards are incredibly versatile. You can suppy your own criteria or the pupils can generate them from exemplar matrerial (as above) or from A Level or GCSE mark schemes. I have used them to great effect across all key stages.

Have fun!

@deadshelley

SOLO Stations, Havisham and the Talking Cure

April 25, 2013 in Creativity, English, Literacy, Pedagoo by Jamie Warner-Lynn

Havisham

Beloved sweetheart bastard. Not a day since then
I haven’t wished him dead. Prayed for it
so hard I’ve dark green pebbles for eyes,
ropes on the back of my hands I could strangle with.

Spinster. I stink and remember. Whole days
in bed cawing Nooooo at the wall; the dress
yellowing, trembling if I open the wardrobe;
the slewed mirror, full-length, her, myself, who did this

to me? Puce curses that are sounds not words.
Some nights better, the lost body over me,
my fluent tongue in its mouth in its ear
then down till suddenly bite awake. Love’s

hate behind a white veil; a red balloon bursting
in my face. Bang. I stabbed at a wedding cake.
Give me a male corpse for a long slow honeymoon.
Don’t think it’s only the heart that b-b-b-breaks.

Carol Ann Duffy

Before I begin, I need to make it absolutely clear that I am not holding this sequence of lessons up as an example of ‘outstanding’ practice. Having said that, it certainly represents progress in terms of my own engagement with SOLO and I feel confident that not only did the pupils enjoy the lessons, they also learnt a good deal about the poem and, in some cases at least, overcame their fear of tackiling ‘difficult’ poetry independently.

I have been experimenting with SOLO taxonomy since September and my pupils have responded well. I have seen the positive impact of the approach reflected in the development of a shared pedagogical language; greater engagement and, above all, deeper learning. The following lesson was my third or fourth attempt at SOLO stations, an approach I picked up from Oops! Helping Children to Learn Accidentally’, I remain very much under the influence of the book’s author, Hywel Roberts. In Oops, Hywel talks about the importance of building anticipation and creating imaginary contexts for learning and I decided that this approach would help me engage my disaffected Y10s.

Lesson 1

In the first lesson I introduced the ‘Big Question’ which we would keep returning to during our preparation for the CA, namely ‘Is love a mental illness?’ This generated a good deal of very interesting discussion. Next, we talked about the role of psychoanalysts in treating mental illness by interpreting the dreams, behaviour and language of their patients. I called one of the pupils out to the front of the class. I had prepared him earlier and he related a dream in which he was in his home town and speaking in his mother tongue, but no one could understand a word he said – not even his family. We then discussed possible interpretations of his ‘dream’. Finally, I explained that in the following lesson they would be working with footage and a transcript of a patient and attempting to reach a diagnosis. The result was a satisfying sense of anticipation amongst the members of the class.

Lesson 2

At the beginning of the next lesson, I reminded the class of the ‘Big Question’ before screening a clip from David Lean’s adaptation of Great Expectations and, having asked the pupils to underline vocabulary that they were unsure of, I read the poem. Pupils fed back and I clarified terms like ‘spinster’ and ‘slewed.’ Next, I explained that they were to take on the role of psychoanalysts. They would work through a series of station/ tasks designed to help them focus with gradually increasing depth on the language and behaviour of ‘the patient’ as presented in the transcript/ poem. Once they had identified, listed, analysed and explained aspects of Mrs Havisham’s behaviour and language, the final outcome would be a ‘report’ on the patient. I briefly reminded them of our agreed protocols for SOLO stations and told them that, while they could begin at any station, the point was not to ‘progress’ as fast as they could through the levels, but to develop as deep an understanding of the patient’s plight as possible – this might necessitate returning to the unistructural and multistructural stations to gather more ‘knowledge’.

Pupils carried a psychoanalyst’s ‘notebook’ with them in order to record their ideas and assess their progress against SOLO self assessment rubrics which were tailored to each station. They then decided where they wanted to start based on their assessment of their current understanding. All of the stations were clearly identified, so that pupils could navigate the room with ease and as had been the case in previous attempts, those pupils who had been a little ambitious in their self assessment adjusted their starting points quickly.

There were two prestructural tables, which were strewn with confetti and images of Mrs Havisham from various adaptations and illustrations. There were also copies of the extract from Great Expectations and paper tissue boxes complete with strips of paper containing additional information regarding Mrs. Havisham (an idea I nicked from David Didau’s excellent blog) .There were also multistructural and relational tables. At one multistructural station, pupils worked with the text highlighting examples of oxymorons, similes, metaphors and onomatopoeia and exploring what they told us about Mrs Havisham’s state of mind. At one of the relational stations pupils worked with the blacked-out shape of the poem, exploring how that might connect with Mrs Havisham’s behaviour and use of language in the poem as a whole. Most importantly of all, each ‘station’ had an objective and an outcome and its own SOLO self assessment rubric. This meant that even if the task was geared towards gathering multistructural information, pupils could potentially achieve at an extended abstract level of thinking. For instance, in the case of a task that required pupils to ‘identify’ (unistructural) and ‘list’ (multistructural) the things that Mrs Havisham ‘did’, they could still develop an understanding of how her relative lack of activity – she sits and ‘stinks’; ‘caws’ at the walls and opens a wardrobe – could be connected with the powerlessness of women in a patriarchal, Victorian society (extended abstract). Unfortunately, not one of the little critters came up with that! Pupils understood that they were to take time out between stations to self assess, reflect and develop their ideas. You will perhaps have noticed that I have not referred to any extended abstract stations. That’s because there weren’t any. In attempt to slow things down, I had decided to save this final level for the third lesson in the sequence.

Lesson 3

In the third and final lesson, pupils worked in small groups with their notebooks, discussing and developing their ideas. I then supplied differentiated writing frames for the report and relational connectives for the main body of the text and extended abstract connectives for the diagnostic conclusion. Pupils had to refer to their notes in order to write about the background to Mrs Havisham’s breakdown, her behaviour and her language. In the conclusion, pupils drew on all of the information to develop a hypothesis or a diagnosis, using extended abstract connectives.

The Verdict

This was an improvement on my previous experiments with SOLO stations lessons. There was time for reflection and each station was differntiated using the SOLO self assessment rubric. As a result pupils were engaged and produced good work. However, the psychoanalytical ‘frame’ for the lesson meant that the final product did not read like literary criticism and could be seen as an unnecessary distraction. This may have been a flaw in my planning: after all, this was preparation towards Controlled Assessment. However, they enjoyed adopting the role of psychotherapists: the pace of work was productive and there was understanding; there was analysis and pupils were mostly able to pull it all together into something approaching a hypothesis or diagnosis, which explained the elements of the poem and the connectives seemed to work well.

If I’m honest, I think that the sequence was a little ‘busy’ – it certainly took a lot of preparation – and in future I will adopt a more pared down approach. I would also avoid using the psychoanalytical frame as an over-arching approach to analysis of thge poem. Although the pupils enjoyed it and the idea of reaching a diagnosis leant purpose to their reading, it was in the final analysis a distraction.

@deadshelley

Writing with them & iPads as a tool for feedback – late to the party?

April 24, 2013 in Assessment, Curricular Areas, English, ICT, Ideas, Involving Pupils, Pedagoo by Sam Bainbridge

Do you ever get that horrid sinking feeling? That ‘late to the party’ feeling when it seems that everybody around you doing something that you’re not? Well, that’s pretty much how I felt about the good old iPad. Yes, I have an iPhone and yes, I was using it to take pictures of positive learner behaviours, projecting photos that I had taken on to the IWB, using the odd app etc. but with such a small screen and such terrible eyes…I really wasn’t doing it justice. We’ve all heard the expression ‘using tech for tech’s sake’ and I’m a firm believer in only using something if it enhances the learning experience for the pupils in the classroom so, when I recently gave in and got an iPad, I was understandably cautious. I had got it to use for work yes, but in spite of the mountain of amazing recommendations from others far more experienced than i (see @ICTEvangelist), I am still following the line of ‘cautious’ in my approach.

By introducing it into the classroom slowly however, I am finding that the simplest things are made far easier. Take revision with Year 11 for example. Having made it my mission to change their mindset when it came to drafting extended answers for the English writing exam (see my previous post Meat is Murder), we are getting through a good deal of past papers at the moment. In the spirit of channelling my inner year 11 pupil (scary at times!) and working to develop a Growth Mindset with the group; I have started to write with them, a fantastic tip from David Didau @LearningSpy , and it has developed both their learning and my relationship with the class in a very positive way.

In the vein of ‘exam papers are hard but they are worth giving your all to’ as opposed to ‘give up at the first 10 mark question’; I explained to the group that each time they were to write an exam answer, reading or writing paper, I was going to write with them. I too was going to ‘sit’ the exam. This was a novelty for them. Rather than me going round, peering over shoulders offering little or no input until the marking stage; I too was feeling the pressure of the silence, having to analyse the question, find the information and structure the answer. It’s completely different from writing model answers in the staffroom during your PPA’s let me tell you! It really was a great learning experience.

Rather than sitting at home or at my desk, creating model answers; for 30 minutes I was able to understand their experience and they loved it! With the occasional well placed utterance of ‘it’s a bit tricky that second one’ or ‘must remember to use the key words from the question here’ from me, it really enthused the pupils to know that we were ‘in it together’. Quite apart from that, the notion of me completing the exam with them removed the desire for those ‘can you just look at this and check it’s right?’ until the appropriate time, as I was doing the exam too and they ‘couldn’t’ disturb me. The subtle promotion of independence within this situation was something so simple yet so important. It is doing them a disservice to step in at every possible opportunity; after all, they won’t get that assistance in the exam. Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t refusing assistance, we have been working on structuring responses for the better part of six months now, but in this situation, it can be too much of a temptation to ask teacher.

Having completed our allotted questions it was time to mark and feed back. During the initial attempt I used only the answers that I had written, photographing them with the iPad and projecting on to the whiteboard after which we marked them using the mark scheme, annotated key points and compared with pupils’ own work.

This technique of projecting your own work is beneficial for a number of reasons. On a human level, if you make mistakes (on purpose or not!) pupils are quick to correct them, suggesting improvements and learning from the errors – what not to do next time. We all make mistakes, that’s where the learning happens!

From a ‘time’ point of view; you are able to create model answers which can be used again with other groups, thus saving valuable planning time (we all need that!). From an expectations point of view, the answers, yours and theirs, can be used to raise pupil aspirations by explaining that only the best answers will be shown and analysed, therefor enthusing pupils to produce their very best work, ‘I’m going to get this just right so that mine will be shown’ or in contrast to remove the fear of feedback and move towards a focus on progress by using answers that aren’t quite there and building upon them as a group, visually, making improvements. I’m definitely a fan of the iPad, albeit a cautious one, yet its use to give instant visual feedback is a simple yet effective technique and I have found it to be great for exam preparation.

Although writing with your classes is not appropriate all of the time, I would really recommend doing it when you can as it promotes independence. If you are writing too it encourages pupils to independently work through any issues they might come across, using their own skills and knowledge to resolve them. You can always clarify misconceptions / misunderstandings at the feedback stage and most valuably, use these ‘moments’ to reflect upon and improve exam technique. It develops your understanding of the tasks you set – you see things that you may miss if you are ‘just’ planning it rather than ‘doing’ it. Finally, it develops your relationship with your class; they see that you are prepared to do the task rather than just dishing it out, struggle at times and then show them your work as well as theirs to critique. A useful technique for developing writing all round.

The Poetry Bracket: Head-to-Head Elimination with Past Paper Questions

April 22, 2013 in Assessment, Curricular Areas, English, Ideas, Involving Pupils, Pedagoo by James McEnaney

So it’s that time of year – revision is upon us! The problem at hand is no longer how to teach new material; instead, we’re looking for ways to ensure that the spectrum of texts, techniques and skills covered since last June are securely understood and readily accessible for all of our pupils.

One question that seems to come up a lot with my Intermediate 2 English class is how sure I am that they will find suitable questions in the critical essay section of their exam (an entirely valid concern). On Tuesday this issue arose once again, and once again I told my class that the chances of them not finding an appropriate question for Norman MacCaig’s Visiting Hour are as close to nil as makes no difference (we have, of course, studied other poems as well). The real issue, I reminded them, isn’t whether or not they can find one suitable question, but rather whether they can recognise and select the best available question (as over the past six years the vast majority of poetry questions have been eminently suitable for this particular text).

An hour or so later, during a free period, I started to really think this through, and I realised that if I could find a way to show them the importance of choosing the right question, then I would surely also be able to assess and develop their detailed knowledge of the text and its techniques (a non-negotiable pre-requisite of effective decision making in this context). A few different ideas came and went before the following occurred to me:

The Poetry Bracket

‘The Poetry Bracket’ at the end of the lesson, with 2008 Question 8 the eventual winner

 

This, then, is The Poetry Bracket, an idea adapted from American competitive sports. Here’s how it works:

Each of the poetry questions from the last 6 years is represented by the appropriate code (for example, question 9 from the 2010 paper is 10-9 in the top right corner) and each year is grouped together. This means that when you begin only the spaces on the far left and far right are completed, with the rest being filled as you work your way through a series of competitions between the various questions. Once you have made your ‘Bracket’ on the board, and handed out copies of the Intermediate 2 poetry questions from the last six years, you’re ready to go.

The first step is to select the most appropriate question for each particular year, with the winner going on to the next round of the competition. There would be a number of ways to complete this stage but I decided to use a whole-class discussion followed by a vote.

Once the best question from each year has been selected, the top three on each side of The Bracket must compete – once again I led a class discussion for this section, although this time I pushed the pupils much more to really argue their case, often pitting two pupils who disagreed directly against one another. By this stage in the process I found that most pupils – even those who had been reluctant to express their opinion openly and vocally in the initial rounds – were getting involved and gaining in confidence. At the end of this stage you will are left with two remaining contenders, and at this point the whole process becomes even more entertaining.

In order to debate the contest between the final two questions the room was split in three, with those strongly in favour of one option on either side of the room and undecided pupils in the middle; then the gloves came off. The ‘team’ on either side had to argue for their chosen question as persuasively as possible, with my only role being to facilitate this discussion by bringing different pupils into the debate to support team-mates or challenge opponents. In the end, the victors succeeded not only because they argued well for their own side, but because they demonstrated that the answer that could be written for their question would also – if done well – incorporate the question of their opponents. What matters, they realised, is not choosing the easiest question to understand or the most obvious choice for the text, but rather finding the question that would allow them to write the most sophisticated response.

At the end of the process it was clear that the intentions of the lesson – to improve pupils’ ability to select an appropriate question for their text whilst also enhancing their knowledge and understanding of the texts – had been successfully achieved, as the quality of discussion around appropriate essay questions had markedly improved from between the first and last stages of The Bracket process. Furthermore, in the end, the pupils did select what I would consider to be the best available question from a selection of the 18 available. I’ll certainly be using this approach again to enhance my revision process for poetry, prose and drama.

 

(This post has also been published on my own blog: I’ve Been Thinking)

Playing with Poetry in the Primary Classroom

March 19, 2013 in Creativity, Curricular Areas, English, Ideas by Raymond Soltysek

A beautiful image from Gerry Cambridge's "Nothing But Heather"

This post can also be read at Raymond Soltysek’s blog,   http://raymondsoltysek.wordpress.com/, and at his website, soltysek.com

Last Friday, I spent the day working with groups of PGDE Primary students on poetry in the classroom;  I had a lot of fun, and discussing creative writing pedagogy with Primary teachers was really enlightening for me.

I start from the premise that we kind of get poetry wrong in schools.  Pupils’ experiences of it tends to be either for construction (“let’s all write an acrostic poem together”) or deconstruction (“let’s all highlight all the similes in the poem”), or a combination of both that, for example, uses deconstruction to elicit construction (“let’s all analyse the genre markers of the haiku, and then write one ourselves”).   And while all of these types of activity are valuable and indeed essential to understanding poetry, it is, for me, quite a limited and sterile experience: poetry is something we do something with, something that generates work. Students – even English graduates looking to be English teachers – come with a great deal of anxiety about poetry, and that is, they say, down to their experiences of poetry at school.

And yet, why do we read poetry?  Well, for enjoyment, of course.  And I don’t think there’s enough of that, so we started each session with the students browsing through some poetry anthologies and magazines to find something they liked to read to the rest of their group.  Then put it aside, because the worst thing we could do is to analyse it to death for the next three hours.

Having warmed up our poetry reading, we then warmed up our poetry writing with a quick poetry word wheel  exercise, a simple resource of three concentric discs containing an adjective,  a noun and a verb that provides a three word stimulus for a short poem.  With “scientist”, “kind” and “eats”, I came up with

“Working late, the scientist
Fills his lab with sparks,
eats Chinese food from a takeaway carton.
Kind of tangy.”

For some unaccountable reason, I’m quite proud of that.  However, some of the students’ responses were lovely:  Heather, using “big”, “girl and “swims”, wrote

“The girl swims slowly
Big arcing movements of her arms
Pulling her towards a warmer kind of peace.”

Catriona, using “empty”, “animal” and “hopes” thought of:

“The dawn stretches empty over rooftops
Below an animal limps across the road
A dog? A cat? A fox?
The sullen hopes of a city life are waking”

Poetry is stripped out of the curriculum, studied almost as a separate entity.  I’m a great believer that the poetic sensibility should be embedded and integrated much more into the day to day work of the classroom, and that a poem is as much a way of recording knowledge as a report or a close reading test or a storyboard.  To illustrate this, we spent some time looking at poems from Gerry Cambridge’s gorgeous poetry / photography / natural history collection “Nothing But Heather”.  Cambridge’s poetry is gorgeous, but what is so striking about “Nothing But Heather” is the informative quality of the text.  I remember looking at one of my favourites, “Chrysomelid Beetle Pollinating a Wild Orchid”, with a Fifth Year pupil, and she said she learned more about plant fertilisation from that poem than she learned in 5 weeks in Higher Biology.   All the students particularly liked “Shore Crab”, which they could easily see themselves using with their classes:  you can hear a musical version of it here, with Cambridge proving his Rennaisance Man credentials by playing a mean moothie.

So poetry, much more than simply being a form, also informs.  We looked at typical Primary school topics, and brainstormed a wordbank.  For example, with Vikings, we came up with:

Long ships       Sails             Shields                 Mead               Sagas

Hats with horns            Horned helmets              Swords             battle-axes      Pigtails

Ginger beards             Storm              Fjords              Fiery funerals

Gruel               Seas                             France – Normandy

A technique I’ve used often with older poetry writers is close redrafting:  you can read more about it in “Wind Them Up and Let Them Go: The Primacy of Stimulus in the Classroom”, an article I did for Writing in Education magazine a few years back.  You can download a copy from the University of Strathclyde by clicking the link.

Basically, when we assess prose, we tend to mark it holistically, taking in an extended piece of writing and assessing it with broad brushstrokes such as “vary your sentence structure” or “avoid repetition”.  It’s my feeling that this kind of assessment is inappropriate for poetry, since here the aim is to condense, distil.  As a result, we need to do away with prepositions, conjunctions, articles, all the chaff that makes a piece of prose flow, because those are not the words that signify meaning to the poet.

So, we get the pupils to write three simple sentences from their word bank – something like

Viking long ships sailed through stormy seas from their homes in the fjords to invade Scotland.  They arrived on beaches in the north and battled the locals with their swords and axes.  They told stories they called sagas about these events.

Now, looking at this as prose, we’d probably never comment on the fact that the phrase “in their” is repeated, or that the word “they” is used three times, because we feel they are somehow  ”essential”.  The poetic way, though,  is to get rid of all those little words in red  to strip us to the words that really mean something, the words that communicate the core idea.  With a little beating and shaping, we can begin to mould something that looks like poetry:

“Viking long ships
Through stormy seas
From fjord homes
Invading Scotland
Swords and axes
For locals
On beaches
Sagas to be told.”

I’ve worked with teenage boys who love this way of building poetry, bit by bit, three sentence prose chunks developed into verses.  Working with groups in a Primary classroom, you could have your very own Viking saga in less than  half an hour.

So the poem becomes not a poem on its own, something seemingly independent of the rest of the curriculum, but becomes a quick, relatively easy way of providing another source of evidence of pupils’ understanding of a topic.  In addition, unlike the passivity of a close reading, it demonstrates individuals’ ability to make choices about the language  which means most to them from a  topic, and their ability to manipulate that language to express something that is genuinely an individual response.  Light bulbs seemed to be going on in the groups, thankfully.  Now, the poetic way of handling language simply became another literacy skill in the arsenal.

And what poetry also does is combine the objective with the subjective.  We looked at simple items that might be found on a  nature walk – a dead autumn leaf, a pebble, a scrap of wool caught on a barbed wire fence – and brainstormed it with a simple “Objective  / Subjective” column.  After sharing and developing, the task was to write a short poem that contained at least  two informative details and two emotional details.  With a picture of a bird’s skull, I came up with:

“A fragile piece
Of weather bleached calcium
It’s tiny brain cavity
Empty sockets
And beak
All that is left
Of what it once was
A feathered, flighted beauty,
Built for tearing flesh.”

Again, many of the students outdid me.  Matthew wrote about a broken egg-shell:

“On the ground
broken, discarded
A small cracked egg
lies on its own
once a house
to a new walk of life.
Or is it now dead?
A defenceless lunch for creatures passing by.”

What Matthew was very clear about was that he had no idea when he came in that he would have been able to produce that in five minutes – and that is, I think, an extremely powerful message to keep giving children: five minutes ago, you had nothing.  This poem didn’t exist.  Now look at what you’ve done.  That message has been hugely motivating for my pupils over the years.  And it also encourages an increased quantity of writing: every student went out the door having done a lot, they had been busy, busy, busy.  In classrooms, pupils will drag their feet for weeks over a big set piece essay; with five or ten minute poetry exercises slotted in here and there into their everyday activities, they actually produce a great deal

A final stimulus exercise using Farrow and Ball’s ludicrous paint colour range – Dead Salmon?  Elephant’s Breath? – and some discussion about the possibilities of using the poetic form much more regularly in classrooms as a means of allowing children to respond to the topics they study wound up the sessions.  I think they all got the message; that rather than “doing poems” as a box tick for the curriculum, divorced from the reality of the rest of their learning, poetry can be an everyday way to respond to experience.  And in doing so, I reckon, that can only help develop a love of poetry that can last a long, long time.

#Pedagoolondon: How Twitter Taught My Students to Write

March 4, 2013 in English, Ideas, Literacy, Pedagoo, PedagooLondon by Gordon Baillie

March. A dark, cold Saturday morning. The careful customer service of British Rail. My first teachmeet. Pedagoo London.

The prospect of having been asked to present in amongst the heavyweights of the job was both flattering and exciting. Helene O’Shea is a master enabler, in her sharing of blogs, recommendation of colleagues to read and speak to and in her fabulous organisation of a networking and CPD event that had none of the passive aggressive teacher behaviours of other inset I have provided. What a pleasure it was to put real, three dimensional faces to the people who have supported me and shared with me and allowed me to build my progress and to say stupid things to them like, “everyone feels taller than I thought they would be”.

Kev Bartle talked us through the “Trojan Mouse” (Google it! Really!) and I attended sessions from Tait Coles, David Fawcett and the peerless David Didau and would have loved to have seen others, particularly Rachael Stevens and Lisa Jane Ashes. I left, and write this on a train home, missing the evening session which I trust will continue in the same veign as the day but perhaps slightly more, “fuelled”?

A fab day and something I’d do again and may even do closer to home with some of the Twitterers from the North West. A day of great ideas and practice. Building on the spirit of sharing I wanted to share a short summary of my session with links to the materials for people to use.

@AfLPie: How Twitter Taught My Students To Write

Pedagoo London 2nd March 2013 (pdf)

Link to Prezi

I’m fascinated by the idea of engagement and have written before about the idea of “Flow” as a useful facsimile for engagement so tend to start sessions like this with a pointless activity to engage and get brains and juices flowing. In this session it was to tear a hole in a piece of paper big enough to fit a person through. Some success was had but effectively we got to know each other a bit. I will be nicking David Didau’s idea of having the “flow” graph up in my teaching room to track with students how they’re feeling about their work at given points in the lesson.

The task of writing a letter to me to tell me you could beat me in a fight is just as silly an engagement task but it starts to delve a little further into the core of the session. Despite the flimsy or shallow nature of the task, participants have to include technical details and then share with the group. This question is in contrast to the typical exam question which treats kids like forty something accountants, perhaps despite the unfortunate assumed back slapping at the AQA when they came up with the classic, “describe the room you’re sitting in”. The video that follows is frivolous but helps to explain my motivation in trying to provide more engaging tasks for writing. I started to feel like the unfortunately unhinged individual in it.

The two tasks that follow are unashamedly nicked from TED talks I’ve watched over the years and are concerned with combatting “self editing”, that moment when, before you start something, you convince yourself of your inability to do it. Simply, thirty seconds to turn the “squiggle” into a recognisable picture of something and the thirty circle test requires you to turn as many of the circles into as many different things as you can in the time given. As mentioned before, you’re aiming for “flow”.

My work on writing begins with meeting a Lead Practitioner who had been working on writing journals. Places where students had the opportunity to write about whatever they wanted for a set amount of time every day. The quality, to an extent, doesn’t matter – it is the act of writing that matters. With mobile communication and social networks as prevalent as they are, our kids write more than ever but less than they ever did. What I mean by this is the actual kinaesthetic act of writing. Partly inspired by a programme that Phil Beadle took part in a few years ago around adult literacy I hit upon the idea of providing students with the chance to write every day. In the programme, Beadle asked a couple of the more “hard to reach” participants to simply draw waves across the page then zig zags and so on – building up this concept of the kinaesthetic act of writing. But getting kids to write every day is a bit of a hill to climb and could be dangerously Sisyphusian.

I had been working with “Thunks” and “Thinkers Keys” for a while and love the way that they inspire higher level, interpretative thought so I resolved to basically, and sometimes childishly, ask a silly question. (I’ve written about this before here)

There are as many examples as I have come up with so far here (Writing Warmups), amongst my favourites being “Write a letter to the Head to advise him/her why the punishment for stopping suddenly in a busy corridor should be a lunch in the face” and “Write an article for a local newspaper to argue that we pick ugly friends to make ourselves look better” (this one always causes some raised eyebrows and spirited discussion). The trick is to keep it small, maybe starting with A5 cards that can be collected together but also to keep the scale achievable (I now use the slim vocabulary books). Be careful to work out a way to mark or check over what is done. This should be somewhere for the kids to write and feel challenged and creative but realism and direction dictates that they need to be “marked” in some way.

I played around with using success criteria to stimulate more peer assessment and reflection but it almost took away from the intended “quickness” of the idea. Also, two students’ interpretations of what good looks like can be fairly diverse. So I started working with a broader scaffold for a reflective journal that worked well but hasn’t been revisited. Perhaps watch this space for that one!

The most recent and most significant breakthrough has been in joining Twitter. The advice and resources I have tapped into have been invaluable, particularly with respect to David Didau’s “slow” writing process. In combination with Alex Quigley’s ideas around DIRT and Zoe Elder’s series around marginal learning gains this made a significant difference to my students writing.

David describes the slow writing process perfectly on his blog. I began by simply taking David’s process directly and was amazed by the outcomes. I set about trying to use it in a variety of ways, but the most powerful aspect of the process, to me, is the double spacing. This communicates that the writing isn’t complete, that there will be a redraft or reflection or DIRT (Dedicated Improvement & Reflection Time). It reinforces that writing is as much a process as it is a product. Genius.

I began to combine this with the adage that I had developed with one class in particular: Quantity, Quality, Progress. Every time we write, we write as much as we can (Quantity), we make it as good as it can possibly be (Quality) and whatever we write has to be better than the last thing we wrote (Progress). It started to work. Before the January English Language exam, students were taking mobile phone pictures of the projection of the “slow” writing sentence progression.

I’m trying a few new ideas with it: adapting it for responding to an unseen poem, including the “A, B, C story” (each sentence must start with a word that starts with the next letter of the alphabetPoems prompts etc) and cut up into “slow” writing cards. The arguments against a formulaic approach to the unseen poem are good ones but it has stopped kids from staring at a blank page, terrified by making a mistake, unaware of how to move forward. I combined this with Rachael Steven’s take on Ron Berger’s critique system to support kids in offering “FSH” feedback – friendly – specific – helpful to support peer assessment and improvement.

The cards, available here (SLOW Writing Card) are loaded with more “high value” items like inclusion of semi colons so that, with random selection, kids are more likely to include those things. But also, moving forward, I want kids to make more conscious decisions about crafting based on which card is selected, either accepting it or rejecting it based on what they want their writing to “do”.

Health Warning:

The tendency for lots of teachers to read what they find above and say, “yeah but…” is hereby acknowledged. The stuff I describe here worked for me, I enjoyed it and so have the kids and, luckily, it’s shown some real improvement in their writing. It’s a beginning though. It’s like any writing “frame”, you start with a sturdy scaffold and gradually remove it part by part until the habits it has hopefully sown the seeds of, begin to grow. Sorry to end on a mixed metaphor but it seemed appropriate.

Dedicated to Helene.

Cross-posted from Creative Teacher Support

The “cursed” chest

February 19, 2013 in Creativity, English, Ideas, Literacy, Pedagoo by Rachel Preece-Dawson

My Y2/3 class are half way through our term-long topic on Ancient Egypt and I wanted to stimulate some great independent writing for assessment week as well as continue to engage children with the topic.

I found an old, brass-covered chest and arranged it in the classroom with signs saying, “Do not touch” and “Beware of the curse” so that the children would see it as they came in for morning registration. Some children regarded the chest with idle curiosity; some completely ignored it and a handful of children were absolutely fascinated by it.

I carried on with our usual morning routine, carefully avoiding touching or going too close to the “cursed” chest. Once everyone was settled, I began our first lesson, still carefully and ostentatiously avoiding coming into contact with the chest. I warned a couple of children to move away from it when they went too close but otherwise continued as if it were not there. Suddenly, I remembered that I needed to photocopy something for the lesson. Leaving my teaching assistant in charge, I dashed out of the room.

Whilst I was at the photocopier, the TA investigated the chest closely. She read the signs aloud and carefully inspected the chest, wondering aloud whether or not she should open it. Some children urged her to open it quickly, whilst others told her that it was cursed and that she should leave it alone.

Without too much persuasion, the TA opened the chest to find an old, stained note inside. She read it aloud to the children: it was a warning that the contents of the chest were cursed and that they should not open the fabric bag inside. Ignoring the warning, the TA opened the bag to find some old jewellery, some ancient-looking coins and some chocolate. She ate some of the chocolate herself and gave some to a child to eat.


I came back into the room and was horrified that they had opened the chest. I expressed great concern for the TA and the child who had eaten the chocolate, and hurried to put the contents of the chest back. In the meantime, I asked the TA to do a quick job for me outside the classroom, still concerned for her wellbeing. She returned a few moments later with a face full of red spots and feeling quite unwell.

By this time, the children were completely engaged in the role play. Even the child who had noticed that the handwritten notes looked suspiciously like my handwriting was entranced! The TA went to remove her spots, and we talked about why people might want to pretend that chests, or tombs, or other special things, were cursed.

This led on to finding out about Howard Carter and Lord Carnarvon’s discovery of Tutankhamen’s tomb and the supposed curse on the contents. We watched archive footage of the two men from 1922 and read about the events surrounding the discovery. The children then paired off for some drama work, with one child in each pair pretending to be Howard Carter greeting Lord Carnarvon at the discovery site and explaining what he had found.

The activities took most of the morning. After lunch, the children quickly and eagerly settled down to their writing task: writing a letter in role as Howard Carter to a friend, explaining the discovery. Some really high-quality writing was produced, with not one child saying, “I don’t know what to write!”

A tiny canon: Scottish literature in the classroom

February 11, 2013 in Assessment, Curriculum, English, Qualification by Raymond Soltysek

This post can also be read at Raymond Soltysek’s blog,  http://raymondsoltysek.wordpress.com/

The other day, one of my PGDE students came up to me and pulled a couple of sheets of paper from her bag. “Raymond,” she said, “I wanted to show you this. We studied this story at Higher when I was at school.”

It was a copy of a story of mine, “Teuchter Dancing when the Lights Go Out”. I know that some teachers use “The Practicality of Magnolia”, but I was surprised by her teacher’s choice because the story contains more than a few swear words and a brief but explicit sex scene. How brave of him, I thought, and how original.

Education Scotland have published their Scottish set texts list for Higher and National 5 qualifications, and she got me thinking. There has been a vociferous campaign to make the study of Scottish literature compulsory in schools; there is a powerful lobby that says that Scottish schoolchildren should know about Scottish writers. And, in essence, I agree. However, sections of that lobby have also successfully pushed an agenda that prescribes who those Scottish writers schoolchildren study should be, presumably on the grounds that if there is no prescription, there will be no compliance. At that point, we part company.

The list itself is, I feel, a disappointment. It is not that I object to any particular text or writer; it is just that it is a tired rehash of the same old same old that seems to take more account of what texts English departments might have in their store cupboards than what actually might be relevant to pupils today who are studying in the context of the breadth of Curriculum for Excellence. I am particularly depressed by the drama list. Bold Girls may be written by a Scottish writer, but it is set in Northern Ireland during the Troubles; hugely contemporary, n’est pas? Always a fairly insubstantial text, it gained currency by being the only option accessible to pupils who might struggle at Higher. Sailmaker by Alan Spence is set in the Glasgow fifty years ago and centres on a boy’s relationship with a father who works in the long gone shipyards; I used it with Standard Grade General classes in the 1980s. Tally’s Blood – a play I admit I don’t know – was written in the 1990s; The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil was written in the 1970s; Men Should Weep in the 1940s; and The Slab Boys, set in a 1950s carpet factory in a town that hasn’t seen carpet manufacturing for decades, was written in the late 1970s, and is another that has miles of groaning shelves dedicated to it.

Now I am not criticising these plays – they all have merit – but in a golden age of Scottish Theatre, why is there not one play that has been written in the 21st century? Why have those who have constructed this list ignored David Greig, David Harrower or Gregory Burke? Why are school students studying the Irish troubles when Black Watch might actually connect with what they see on television every day? Where are the really big issues about Scottish history, nationalism and identity that could have been explored through the utterly magnificent Duninsane? It is as if the National Theatre of Scotland never happened, as if it has no relevance to “Scottish literature”.

However, the other genres are little better, I feel. Of all the prose texts, only two were written in the 21st century. And while Anne Donovan, Iain Crichton Smith and Norman MacCaig are fine short story writers, there are many, many others who are ignored. Where is Suhayl Saadi or Linda Cracknell? Where are Scottish adoptees like Bernard MacLaverty or Leila Abouela, both Scottish enough to have won a host of Scotland’s major literary awards? Where is the opportunity to pick up occasional brilliances like Beatrice Colin’s “Tangerines” or Michel Faber’s “Fish” – or, dare I say it, “The Practicality of Magnolia”. By prescribing these authors, the range and cultural diversity of Scottish writing is sidelined: there will be no other brave, original choices made, because “the list” will dominate. I cannot understand why Education Scotland didn’t simply trawl through the exam papers of students who write on a wide range of Scottish stories every year and publish a list of a hundred or so that seem to work. It’s tempting to think, looking at the list, that one of the major driving factors was saving money – what do schools already have on the shelf so we don’t have to listen to them asking for funding for new books – but that is hardly relevant for short stories, many of which are freely available online or cheaply available through the photocopier.

As for the novels, I love The Trick is to Keep Breathing, although it is again 23 years old, and James Robertson is a brilliant writer. Sunset Song is for some a classic, for others (like me) a wearisome trudge; again, where is the opportunity to look at the history of rural Scotland through a range of fantastic alternatives, such as Gunn’s The Silver Darlings or Alex Benzies’ The Year’s Midnight? I have yet to hear any teacher I know say a good word about the choice of Kidnapped for the list, including fans of R.L. Stevenson. The Cone Gatherers is a safe choice yet again: I can’t say much against it given that I helped create resources for it ten years ago that are still regularly used in schools, so I may get some in-service work out of it – but would I have been too unhappy to see a novel set 70 years ago ditched for the very best of A.L. Kennedy? I really don’t think so. Scottish literature we want our schoolchildren to read – and A.L. Kennedy isn’t on the list.

As for the poets, thankfully 5 out of the 8 are still alive. Once more, though, where is the imagination? I use a W.N. Herbert poem, Temporal Ode, with Higher pupils because I don’t think any other teacher in Scotland uses it, and because it’s brilliant. So once more, where is the encouragement to introduce Scottish kids to a smorgasbord of Graham Fulton, Jim Carruth, Liz Niven, Gerrie Loose, Gerry Cambridge, Roddy Gorman, Robert Jamieson, Alan Riach, Donny O’Rourke, David Kinloch, Kathleen Jamie, Stuart A. Paterson, Roddy Lumsden, Gerrie Fellows, Bill Herbert, Dilys Rose, Brian McCabe or John Burnside. Come on, John Burnside, for heaven’s sake!

It’s not really a question of who is on and who is not on the list, though; it’s a question of how having a list at all will direct the focus of teachers onto a narrower and narrower range of what pupils will come to see as “Scottish”. We saw it last time texts were prescribed for the Revised Higher, which left us chained to Bold Girls and the poetry of Norman MacCaig. In those days, pupils had to study a set author. For MacCaig, the list consisted of about 13 poems. Assessment consisted of either a context question – a whole poem or extract on which about 16 marks’ worth of questions were based, with the remaining 9 marks assigned to a general question asking about the author’s work as a whole – or an essay, which had to take account of at least two and usually more poems from the list.

When set texts were dropped, though, most schools found themselves with copies of the poems and units of study (many published by my old colleagues at Jordanhill), and so they continued studying MacCaig’s poetry. However, they no longer spent time studying 13 poems; instead, they trimmed that to three, or two, or even only one, and in the mid-2000s, the majority of schoolchildren sitting Higher answered a question using only “Assisi”, “Brooklyn Cop” or “Visiting Hour”. It got so bad, the Examiners had to change the nature of the paper to make it difficult to answer using the poems.

But teachers missed the whole point. In the set text days, studying one poem was never enough to get more than 15 or 16 marks out of 25, since in both forms, the examination paper demanded knowledge of more than one poem. But because it had been prescribed, because it had been given the exam board’s blessing, “Assisi” in particular became the default poem of choice for many teachers in the mistaken knowledge that such blessing meant it was adequately rigorous to get the full range of marks; I spoke to an examiner once who said that many of his colleagues called it “That fucking dwarf poem”. It was that seal of approval that damned a generation of Scottish teenagers to studying what is a short, lightweight poem – and I knew of some schools which studied only that poem – when they could and should have been swimming in a sea of the work of many varied, demanding, fulfilling Scottish poets. And history will repeat itself.

The thing is that the Scottish curriculum has always demanded the study of Scottish literature; it is in every guideline and arrangements document you can find. The issue, then, is oversight in schools, and that is quite easily remedied. Yes, pupils at National 5 and Higher should answer a question on a Scottish text; but why not any Scottish text, or, at least, one from a very, very long list of suggested Scottish texts. Then, teachers can talk about Scottish literature and can read widely around it: they can have professional discussions about the appropriateness of Scottish texts for the curriculum in their schools. And then, a department head can oversee the study of those Scottish texts in the classrooms of their teachers. The knock on effect that would have on interest in Scottish literature – and by implication, on publishing – could be enormous.

Ah, but would they do it? Well, if students have to fill out a box on the front of their exam paper that says “The Scottish text I have used in my examination paper is ……………… “ you can damned well be sure that teachers will train them to fill it out right. They already make sure candidates don’t answer on two texts from the same genre, and train them to within an inch of their lives on all sorts of aspects of the exam, some of them quite bizarre (“My teacher says I’ll fail my essay if I don’t have a conclusion”, many pupils tell me); so why on earth couldn’t they make it crystal clear to pupils that they must make sure they answer a question on text A, B or C because those are the Scottish texts they studied this year?

I’m afraid. I’m afraid that in a sincere attempt to ensure that teachers do study Scottish literature, Scottish literature has in fact been done a great disservice. No teacher will ever do “Teuchter Dancing when the Lights Go Out” again, and although that sounds as if I’m bemoaning my own fate, what disturbs me more is that it will be the fate of the majority of Scottish writers, many of them much more accomplished than me, because they have not made that arbitrary list of the chosen few.

The Full List

National 5 Higher
Drama:Bold Girls by Rona Munro 

Sailmaker by Alan Spence

Tally’s Blood by Ann Marie di Mambro

Drama:The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil by John McGrath 

Men Should Weep by Ena Lamont Steward

The Slab Boys by John Byrne

Prose:Short stories (a selection of) by Iain Crichton Smith 

Hieroglyphics and Other Stories by Anne Donovan

The Testament of Gideon Mack by James Robertson

Kidnapped by Robert Louis Stevenson

Prose:Short stories (a selection of) by Iain Crichton Smith 

Short stories (a selection of) by George Mackay Brown

Sunset Song by Lewis Grassic Gibbon

The Cone Gatherers by Robin Jenkins

The Trick is to Keep Breathing by Janice Galloway

Poetry:Carol Ann Duffy, Edwin Morgan, Norman MacCaig, Jackie Kay Poetry:Carol Ann Duffy, Robert Burns, Don Paterson, Liz Lochhead, Sorley MacLean (in English)

.

Inside Out Poetry

January 27, 2013 in English, Pedagoo by Jamie Warner-Lynn

‘Inside Out’ Poetry

I may be speaking for myself here, and if so I apologise, but isn’t it the case that we teachers of English sometimes assume that our pupils ‘know’ how to ‘read’ poetry,  when in fact they haven’t a clue?  The truth is that pupils are terrified when they are confronted with a new poem to analyse. They do not feel equal to the  challenge of  cracking the code of the inscrutable and obscure text in front of them and their response is to shut down.

As a result, I have got into the habit of approaching the poem from the inside out, starting with the  words or lexical items – the linguistic soil out of which the poem grows and only then working towards a reading of the poem as a whole. I have come to think of this approach as ‘inside out’ poetry.  At its most simple, this might involve working with a word cloud as a pre-reading exercise.e one below. The pupils work in groups with the language of the poem – grouping words and anticipating themes; exploring connotations and speculating about style.  This is brilliant because it means that they have rolled up their sleeves and got the linguistic muck beneath their fingernails. It also means that they have formulated theories about the poem and they are keen to test their theories out against the poem itself. As a result,  they have a sense of ownership of the poem; they are no longer intimidated and they have already begun to engage in close analysis before they have even read the text.

If you haven’t tried this approach to and would like to you need to take a look at Wordle and ABCya. Of the two, Wordle is by far the sexiest, but it comes with a health warning: firstly, network firewalls mean that Wordle may not work in school and, secondly, you can’t save the word clouds that you make on Wordle. Instead you have to take a screen shot and paste it into Word. If you want to save it as a Jpeg, you can, but you would need to paste it into ppt and save it in the appropriate format. ABCya is a good alternative. While the word clouds that it generates are less striking than those that you can make on Wordle, it does work in school and you can save the images. Here’s one that I made earlier:

Poetry Word Cloud Made Using ABCya

 

Using Poetry to Develop Our Psychic Abilities

This is essentially a development of the ‘Inside Out’ approach to poetry and  another example of the benefits of approaching reading through the mindset of a writer (see previous posts). I would also like to think that it is in the spirit of @HYWEL_ROBERTS’ book Oops! – a book which I have found incredibly inspiring and regenerative.  In Oops,  Hwyel stresses the importance of ‘hooking’ your pupils into learning. He argues that the best way to do this is to create an imaginative context for learning and then to introduce a ‘lure’, which pupils can’t resist and which leads them into learning whether they like it or not. He also writes about the impact of ‘altering the status quo’ on pupils learning: a change in venue or routine, or anything out the ordinary tends to engage pupils’ interest and prime them for learning.  I have tried to draw on these excellent  ideas in developing the  lesson, which goes something like this:

When the pupils enter the class room they find a sealed envelope on each chair. As this is unusual, they are intrigued. They are told to place the envelope on the desk in front of them and to leave it alone for the time being. Next, in order to create an appropriately imaginative and engaging context for learning, I introduce my ‘pretend’ learning intentions. The pupils are told that the objective of the lesson is to develop their psychic abilities; the outcome is that they will be able to ‘read’  a poem in a sealed envelope. By this point, they are ‘buzzing’ – another of Hwyel’s favourite concepts.

I then explain that before exercising their psychic powers and using muscles in the mind that we rarely exercise (cross curricular connections with science?),  it is important to limber up our minds, just as they would in PE (another cross curricular link?). I then display the following words on the board:

carrot, cabbage, onion, broccoli, plum.

This is a starter activity that I have pinched from Helen Dunmore and you can find it here. Pupils have to identify the odd one out in the list. The obvious candidate is ‘plum’, because it is the only fruit, but the trick is to get them to think about any other possible odd ones out. For instance, ‘onion’ is the only one that begins with a vowel. The key is that there is no ‘right’ answer. I then display the next list and the pupils go through the same process:

happiness, wedding cake, bride, bouquet, coffin.

Odd ones out could include ‘happiness’, because it is an abstract noun, or ‘wedding cake’, because it is the only one that they can eat. There is usually some bright spark who identifies ‘funeral’ as the odd one out, because all the rest are connected with happiness. At which point, I ask them if any of them have ever been married?

Anyway, the activity works well, because of the element of competition and because it gets the pupils’ brains working  thinking about words and the way they can be categorised. It also, as Dunmore points out, nails the Literacy objectives for that lesson.

Next, I ask the pupils to take the sealed envelope, to close their eyes and to press the envelope to their foreheads, while concentrating and trying to visualise the poem. They ALL do this and I am filled with joy at the power I exert over these impressionable young minds ; ) But, seriously – is there anything better than being a teacher?

While they’ve been doing this, my helpers have been giving out envelopes filled with words. They do not know this (though some of them will suspect) , but they are the lexical or ‘content’  words from the poem in the envelope.  There are two ways of doing this. You can laboriously type the words of the poem into a table, leaving out ‘grammar’ words, like conjunctions and prepositions, into a table or you can feed the poem into a text ‘cruncher’ like this one at Teachit. However, you need Teachit works membership to access this. Failing that, I am sure that there are free text crunchers if you google for them.

 

all alone already away bed believe black blight book
both bottles call clear crime dad dead death disbelief
disconnected distance drop end ends gas get give gone
grief hear hot hour just kept key knew leather
life lock long look love mother name new number
off out pass phone popped raw renew risk rusted
same scrape she’d shopping side slippers soon still such
sure tea there’s time transport warming years

 

The next stage is for the pupils to gather the words into groups. They do this in pairs. The only rule is that they give their group of words a title. Working with the words in the table, they might identify groups of words with titles like ‘death’, ‘domesticity’ ‘loss’  or ‘time’. However, it also pays to advise them not to look for groups based on spelling or word types (abstract nouns), which they might be inclined to do, depending on how the starter activity panned out. You can differentiate by asking specific pairs to aim for a specific number of groups.

I generally allow ten to fifteen minutes for the completion of this task, after which they go pairs into fours to compare, agree and rank order the groupings that they are most pleased with. Next they feedback and, as a whole class,  we talk about the groupings: are there any surprising groups? Do they all ‘fit’ together?  Finally, we ask what a poem with these groups of words might be about.  Without realising it they are exploring the semantic field of the poem (the real learning intention).

The next step is for the pupils to use the words and their groupings to write at least five lines of ‘the’ poem. They are allowed to add additional words;  they do not have to use all of the words and they can change the tense. However, they must not attempt to rhyme. I allow them ten minutes to write without stopping. This tends to take the pressure off. After all, you can’t be expected to produce a masterpiece in ten minutes (see previous posts). Of course, if the energy is there, I allow it to run on.

Because the pupils are working with a poem ‘concentrate’ – a bit like undiluted orange squash, they write with more confidence and the results are usually very impressive. They get to experience a feeling of success. It is at this point that I ask them to open their envelopes and one pupil reads out:

Long Distance II by Tony Harrison

This poem works well because it is not too long, so the pupils will not be overwhelmed with words and there are a number of clear semantic fields.

I ask the class if any of their poems share similar ideas with the ‘real poem’ and there is always at least one poem that is close to the original. We talk about similarities and differences and then I ask why this should be the case. Is it down to psychic ability? By this time all of the pupils have caught on and it is easy to draw out the ‘real’ learning outcome – the concept of semantic field and the connection between semantic field and theme.

I have used this lesson with all key stages and have found that it delivers engagement, creativity and learning. You can, of course, discard the envelopes and the psychic window dressing and it works just as well.

Cross-posted from Let’s go to work…

Is this a cheap plastic shuttlecock I see before me?

January 26, 2013 in Creativity, English, Pedagoo, SOLO by JamesTheo

So this all started when I read this genius tweet from genius @nicnacraph:
Yr12s prepare for Tabletop Shakespeare: using everyday objects to explore 'Twelfth Night' #PedagooFriday http://t.co/tx4CTeTC
@nicnacraph
Nic Raphael

This piqued my interest (curiosity may have killed the cat, but in between all of the gory felinicide it finds plenty of time to prod me into a bit of lesson planning), and a quick Google search took me to Be Stone No More, a project by the RSC involving actors performing ‘Table Top Shakespeare’. I won’t explain what this is, just have a look at these examples for yourself:

Romeo and Juliet performed by Sam Taylor


Download | YouTube to MP3

Hamlet performed by Nina Lampic


Download | YouTube to MP3

What a great way to get pupils to cement their understanding of a narrative’s plot, don’t you think? A lot more interesting than a fusty old card sort.

Director Tim Etchells, who created the idea, makes reference to using “a collection of banal materials and objects”, which suggests a disconnection between the objects and the characters. However, for those who like a bit of praxis and extended abstract thinking, ‘banal materials’ are an opportunity to make interesting connections with seemingly unconnected objects.

Having just looked at the story of Romeo and Juliet with my Year 11 class, I felt this was a perfect task to consolidate their understanding of the plot before moving onto textual analysis. With this in mind, I made a quick trip to the 99p shop with no other criteria than to find items that came in packets of 8 or more. Just under £15 lighter, I came back with this haul of ‘banal’ objects:

The ingredients of Heston's celebrated pound shop tat bouillabaisse

 

I then sorted this potpourri of cheap curios into 8 Table Top Shakespeare starter sets:

The global recession had really taken its toll on the traditional Academy Awards gift baskets

 

The lessons that resulted were quite simple. After arranging the pupils into groups of 3-4, I gave each group a sheet of sugar paper and a pen. As a nice recall starter, I asked each group to write down the names of as many characters from the play that they could remember. Inspired by the spirit of competition, cue groups huddled over sheets trying to protect the classified name of “that bloke who married them” and taking out super injunctions so that nobody in their group may utter the names of the Montague servants out loud for fear of other groups hearing this classified information.

Once we’d recapped and I’d broken the Official Secrets Act by asking them to share their lists with each other, I presented each group with their TTS starter kit. This group understand the SOLO levels, so were comfortable when I asked them to use extended abstract thinking to apply an object to each name. I asked them to think about how they can make links between the object and the character and to justify their choices. As these objects weren’t bought without conscious connections in mind – price was the only influencing factor – this is a nice use of praxis, or post rationalisation (the pupils are doing the work to justify the connections: I had no preconceived ideas about connections when I handed them out). I also urged them to root around in their pockets and bags for any other items that they wanted to use to bolster the kits.

The extended abstract connections were excellent and showed real understanding of character. I heard discussions where people had assigned a toothbrush to Lady Capulet as it symbolises health and care, only for others in the same group to argue that Nurse would fit that reasoning better and that a scourer should be Lady Capulet as she is only interested in the appearance of perfection. In other groups, Nurse was a plant pot because she nurtured Juliet and watched her grow, unlike her mum. A peg represented Friar Lawrence because he binds the lovers together through marriage. A plastic banana was Mercutio because he has a skewed look on love compared to Romeo. Romeo was seen as a packet of tissues “because he’s soppy” and a pineapple because “he’s soft inside”. Tybalt was a toy dinosaur or a soldier because of his aggression, and even a shuttlecock because… “well, he’s a cock, isn’t he sir?”

Table Top Shakespeare

We then looked at some clips from the videos above and I set them the task of creating their own 5-10 minute Table Top Shakespeare films. They planned this out ready to make their films during the next lesson. At the beginning of this next lesson, we did some work on speaking and listening success criteria. They were then given a video camera, a table, their boxes of objects and the lesson to produce their films. The pupils really threw themselves into the task and showed clear understanding of the plot of the play and how the narrative fits together as a whole. This will inform their textual analysis and help them support their ideas (particularly helpful with a discussion of foreshadowing) by reference to the wider text.

But why stop at Shakespeare? I’ll be using Table Top ‘Of Mice and Men’ and Table Top ‘An Inspector Calls’ to revise with GCSE classes in the future.