Class Room Management: The first thing you do

I realised this week, due to a number of factors and variables in the school I am in, that my classroom management ability had somewhat atrophied. That’s not to say my classrooms are chaotic (at least any more than I encourage to happen), but that my approach to keeping order had shifted to a “force of personality” approach.

I am currently heavily involved in a boarding house, and have invested quite heavily into to developing relationships with boarders, their friends and the people around them. It made some things easier, in that a significant look can solve minor issues, but when situations unravel it makes things more challenging. The professional disconnect is no longer there, which means that my own composure is compromised and things develop into shouting matches rather quickly.

Put simply; I’m not applying the same level of technique that I used to, relying on the rapport with the student to do the work.

That needs to be fixed, if I hope to not dull my classroom management ability.

So, I watched a quick YouTube video as a refresher course:

The First Thing: Border Control

The best way to avoid shenanigans is to avoid inviting shenanigans in through the door.

The means not letting students drift in through the door, bringing the baggage of the day with them. Dealing with a constant trickle of disruption coming through the door is wearing on a teacher, and essentially means you need to calm a classroom every few seconds.

As a routine, keep your class line up outside the classroom, and start managing behaviour there.

The video above suggests engaging with the students on a personal level before addressing them as a whole group. It’s good advice, and I recommend following it to the letter, particularly for new teachers.

So… how would this work for me:

My classroom

The issue with my classroom is that my corridor is quite thin, and it is also one I share with another 3 teachers. If all of us have lessons, the corridor becomes fairly crowded fairly quickly.

I don’t think there is any practical solution around this, apart from just allowing students to drift into my classroom. It may end up being one member of staff (me) dictating the ready state of the corridor. Which would be quite fun, and certainly something to aspire to.

Morning/evening roll call

A bit of context for our day pupil teaching brethren, otherwise known as the majority of teachers. Roll call in boarding schools is typically handled in house, a practical arrangement since the boarding students are there already. Trying to run a register there is a challenge for two reasons: the list is just longer, requiring a longer time where boisterous boys and giggly girls need to be quiet; and also you reach critical mass of bodies where inappropriate behaviour has a higher chance of happening.

In the past I was more mobile in roll calls, and could just position myself where knots of misbehaviour could occur. In an effort to track and prevent lateness to roll call I started using an Excel spreadsheet to log when boarders were late. This meant being tied to a certain spot with a laptop, and as a result, behaviour in roll calls has become a bit more unruly.

Going forward, I’m going to go back to guard duty on the door, keeping people out of roll call until uniform is ready, or just keeping them quiet as they walk in. I’ll just need to track the lates to roll call on a different spreadsheet.

That’s all for now.

Happy teaching!

 

Science Teaching: The Research Question

This always goes wrong.

The research question in a Science experimental report, be it Internal Assessment or one of your scheduled practicals, is always poorly done by students, and tends to require the most editing to get it right. One piece of advice given to International Baccalaureate Science teachers supervising an IA is to spend more time on the research question.

Which makes sense. If you don not have your line of inquiry sorted, how can you hope to proceed on any investigative endeavour.

The issue is that  the Research Question is a very specific format. You need to include quite a lot of information into a single sentence:

• Aim of the experiment
• What variable you will change (Independent)
• What variable you will measure as a result of that change (Dependent)
• The range of the variables you will change
• The units of those variables

As an example of a typical offering for a research question:

How does temperature affect the melting times of ice cream?

What does that include? Well the aim certainly, and it mentions two variables. Whilst you can infer that temperature is the independent variable, it does not mention the range of values in which the experiment takes place, or the units of those values.

Put it this way, if you run this experiment between -15 and 0 degrees Celsius, you would get very different results to if you did it at 3000-4000 degrees. Now imagine doing either of those ranges in Kelvin.

Aside from the impressive feat of creating negative temperature in Kelvin with school equipment, being clear about the temperature range and the units they are in is more intellectually honest.

So, let’s tidy this up a bit:

How does varying the temperature between 10 and 40 degrees Celsius affect the melting time in seconds of ice cream.

Better so far, but we can be much more clear. What exactly does temperature mean, and what are the conditions for melting?

The temperature could be surface temperaure of the container, the ambient temperature of the air, or even another external source of heat like a lamp or laser. The conditions for melting could be the surface layer of the ice cream, or it could be once the initial scoop shape is lost, or even just full liquid phase of the cream.

So, being more specific (with no finesse):

How does varying the ambient temperature of a room between 10 and 40 degrees Celsius affect the time taken, in seconds, for a 50 gram spherical scoop of ice cream to melt in its entirety?

From that you can pretty much extrapolate out the whole experiment, apart from controlling the flavour ice cream (it is a well-known fact that chocolate melts faster to facilitate staining of your favourite shirt).

So… how to encourage this in the lower years before hitting the IB stage? That is a very good question, and one for a different post. For now, the band-aid solution:

A simple formula for writing down the main points of a research question. As long as the relevant information is included you can give feedback on how well it is communicated, and the flow of language.

This slots into the experiment report frame I made earlier, replacing the hypothesis section. Feel free to steal and adapt.

Happy teaching!

Are Learning Objectives SMART goals?

One of the thousands of questions that pops out of my head. This morning in the shower I was contemplating SMART goals:

• S – specific
• M -measurable
• A – actionable
• R – that you are responsible for
• T – time bounded

There are many variations, but this is the one I like the most, referenced from CCP Gray’s video on 7 Ways to Make Yourself Miserable.

To be honest I can’t find any mention in the literature of the R value standing for “being Responsible for”. I think that is a crucial factor into making the goal motivating rather than a stick to beat down hopes and dreams.

For example; you are only responsible with the preparation for the test, not the result of the test itself. You don’t set yourself the goal of getting an A in the test, as the final result is taking out of your hands at the marking stage. The marker assigns a result, not the person taking the test.

Rather it is better to set yourself the goal of completing x number of practice questions in the week before the test, perhaps even setting a time if you are conscientious enough. Then you can succeed in preparing for a test as opposed to failing to get an A, which you could never force to happen anyway.

With this in mind, are our learning objectives actually SMART?

Learning objectives often cite “Understand a concept” as one of the middling goals. Regardless of your interpretation of the difficulty of that, neither student nor teacher is responsible for that outcome. The teacher cannot for neurological change in the student’s head, nor can the student control their own brains to force the outcome.

Would the following be better: setting actions in classroom setting to be completed. The teacher would still need to know how the activities and actions lead to Understanding, but all the student needs to do is ensure they complete the action. You can, and should, tell them how this leads to understanding, but their goal for that lesson is to follow the action script laid out by the teacher.

Tangential learning, and creativity can certainly fall out of that process, depending on the skill and confidence of the teacher.

If you want to try putting this into practice, this website provides a list of action verbs for target setting:

https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/opia/job-search-toolkit/action-verbs/?redir=1

Reproduced here in case the website goes down:

accelerated accomplished achieved acquired activated adapted adjusted administered advised allocated analyzed annotated anticipated applied appraised arranged articulated assembled assessed assigned authored balanced briefed budgeted built catalogued categorized chaired clarified cleared coded collaborated compared compiled completed composed computed conducted consolidated

constructed contacted continued contracted convened conveyed coordinated corresponded counseled created critiqued decided defined delegated delivered demonstrated derived designed detected determined developed devised directed distributed drafted edited educated effected elicited encouraged established evaluated examined executed exhibited expanded expedited experienced experimented

explained explored facilitated figured financed focused forecasted formed formulated fostered founded functioned generated governed grouped guided helped identified illustrated immunized implemented improved increased informed initiated instituted instructed interpreted interviewed introduced invented investigated judged led listened maintained managed marketed mastered

measured mediated modeled modified molded monitored motivated named negotiated observed obtained operated ordered organized originated outlined oversaw perceived performed persuaded planned planted presented presided printed produced protected provided publicized questioned raised recommended recorded recruited reduced rendered repaired reported represented

reproduced researched resolved responded restored retained retrieved reviewed revised rewrote routed scheduled searched selected served shaped shared showed simplified solicited solved specified spoke stimulated structured studied supervised supported synthesized targeted taught tested trained translated tutored updated utilized verified wrote

There is guidance all over the internet about writing SMART goals, but this is the best one I could find:

https://uncw.edu/career/documents/WritingSMARTLearningObjectives.pdf

With the following examples below:

Further reading:

Bastable, S.B., & Doody, J.A. (2011). Behavioral objectives. In S.B. Bastable, P. Gramet, K. Jacobs, & D.L. Sopczyk, D. (Eds.) Health professional as educator: Principles of teaching and learning (pp. 377-418). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Cranton, P. (2012). Planning instruction for adult learners (3rd ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Wall & Emerson, Inc.

As taken from this website:

http://www.culawschool.org/it/?p=311

With an appraisal coming up, I will make some goals for myself and post them up here.

Happy teaching!

Domains of thought

I think that we’ve stretched Bloom’s Taxonomy about as far as it will go.

When Bloom wrote his Taxonomy of Educational objectives, which I have to admit I have not read yet, the domain which came to dominate much of education was his work on the cognitive domain. This was seen as the “knowledge” domain, and since the purpose of education is to instil knowledge in the next generation, this was a neat bench mark from which to measure the success of education.

Most trainee teachers worth their chalk will study Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy, and most curricula and national level schemes will level year group learning goals on it. There are in fact two other domains to be considered: the affective domain and the psychomotor domain.

Affective is a bit of a vague word, but it deals with how learners react emotionally to new information. That is not to say it is like the popular stages of grief, but it deals with how students put value and meaning onto objective facts. It is the emotional domain.

It might seem like a very fluffy and useless sphere to study in terms of academics, but really it is one of the magic bullets you can use to gauge student engagement. You will often hear people talking about relevance of the topic to the student, and what relevance means is the subjective value the student places on that topic.

It, in fact, may be one of the most important domains to investigate in the information era. As mastery of facts becomes less important with rapid access databases and Google being so readily available, the ability to discern relevance and place a value hierarchy on information becomes more important. You can’t sift through the mud unless you know what gold looks like.

What is interesting to me (at least for right now), is the psychomotor domain.

This deals with actions taken in the world, and can be seen as how you use your body to investigate or make changes in the environment around you.

I get the feeling this has been largely sidelined due to academic disdain for the physical subjects. There is generally a feeling that Design Technology or Food Science are lesser disciplines compared to Physics and History, presumably because actually moving around is what workers do, not managers.

I argue that this is both a huge disservice to those subjects, and also a tremendous oversight on the part of academics. I readily accept the criticism that I have no evidence for this bias against the more active subjects, and I am only projecting my own observations on a straw man of stuffy academic types that don’t get outside enough, but I think they’re not uncommon observations.

Either way, an investigation of the psychomotor domain shows us some very cool ideas on how to grade skills. Speaking as a science teacher, I know that using a graph or conducting yourself in an experiment safely are skills which need to be taught. In the past it would be a simple tick box: can they use a Bunsen burner without setting their hair on fire? Yes. Good, education achieved.

But even a small amount of focus on that thinking reveals massive amounts of criticism. How do you know they can use it? You have one point of data. Did they do it right because they know what they’re doing, or were they just lucky? Are they going to do it again in the future? What does it mean that they can even use a Bunsen burner? Turning it on? Using it in an experiment? Knowing that they can use it to solve a problem?

Looking at the psychomotor domain shows us that such practical skills can be graded in terms of mastery.

And I would go as far to say as it can be used on mental or cognitive skills too.

We may have stretched Bloom’s taxonomy to its limit. I think we need to branch out and categorise the other domains of thought and education.

 

Cochrane’s Cognitive Skills Taxonomy

Here are two pictures outlaying my taxonomy of cognitive skills.

Almost every part of this needs explanation and description of how and why I have chosen the categories here. Here is the most recent (27-Feb-2019) version of what I have been working on for discussion. It should be immediately implementable in any curriculum or scheme of work, as either a simple box tick to say what level of mastery a student has, or as a foundation idea from which to build from.

 

Reading: Making Thinking Visible part 1

by Ron Ritchhart, Mark Church, Karin Morrison and foreword by David Perkins.

Reading for pleasure is something I’ve done in the context of fantasy books. I can’t say I’ve been into Sci-fi books despite my geek credentials, as I find the tone of those books stuffy and usually pompous.

So, now I’m reading some academic articles. Here I will record my thoughts as I go. They may well be unintelligible ramblings, but I need them to sort my thoughts. Even as I write this I’m interrupted and I will need a written record to keep my thread of thinking.

Anyway, let’s start.

Some irrelevant thing about a stranger being angry on the phone. What’s the point?

Ah, a mention about trying to work out the thinking inside someone else’s head. I wonder if this person has looked into different models of thinking, and I wonder if the models I’ve looked at will come up.

Good point about not knowing how we think ourselves, but I think the analogy of a coach on the sidelines is a bit weak. It’s more like a driver knowing how to operate the controls of a car, but not knowing the particulars of how the engine works and how the drive shaft is connected to the wheels.

Often that’s not even needed to go from point A-B, you just need to know what lever to pull and when to steer around the odd dog. Perhaps this helps the coach analogy? Requiring someone on the outside of the sports activity looking in to help out? Don’t think so… but you certainly need an engineer to know how to fix the car when it breaks down.

Ah, perhaps psychology as an underpinning for education is a bit of a dead end then. You only need someone who is good at driving to tell you how to drive. Is that what a teacher is? Someone who just knows the operations of learning well enough to guide others through it?

Potentially.

Read more.

So we should be externalising the process of thought? Perhaps not. No doubt there is value in learning how learning happens, but is it of functional utility to the student who needs to navigate around the road of education? Does that not simply shift the burden of teaching actual content, and discipline of subject to some other teacher?

Should then this be a separate subject in itself?

Honestly I don’t think so. I think underpinning every subject there is a core method or skill set for interpreting or interacting with the world. I don’t think there is a universal tool for understanding all truths yet, but I would suppose the scientific method comes close. That is why it appears to be mirrored in many subjects, where objective truths need to be discussed (like History and Geography etc.).

The stumbling block would be meanings of these truths, and the placing of values…. quantifying the emotional and cultural relevance of these effects, which I would put squarely in the domain of the humanities.

Can these two describe each other? Interesting notion, but I’ve forgotten the authors point.

Externalising the process of thought is a good tool for an educator. I don’t think it’s one for the educatee. Some of these skills and methods are best brought out as a result of combinations of workings and trials and errors, rather than active reprogramming by the person thinking.

Actually put bluntly, I don’t think you can teach someone how to think without breaking the thinking device. Again, thinking about driving, you don’t want to have to re-weld he axle to turn a corner… you much rather just turn the wheel and let the engineering do the rest. Simple awareness of knowing what the brain is doing is probably only going to interfere with normal operation, and the learning process itself.

The last few paragraphs seem to be justifications for Concept Based Learning (take a shot).

The idea of thinking with another set of ideas to explain a new phenomena is not useless by any means. i myself in this reading have gone to town on car analogies to explain the trickier ideas of a learning process. But that’s tremendously surface level. The mechanics of a car are different to the biology of learning, and psychology different to learning the highway code.

Is that what concept based learning (take a shot) is? Learning to think with analogy? That would be greatly comforting when encountering a new situation, and sits right in the Star Trekkian explanations of hard Science in the past. Ghostbusters Twinkie comes to mind as well.

But.

It is not the reality of the situation, and can lead to a false arrogance and assumed knowledge. Interesting.

I think about this in terms of Physics. I can explain a phenomena with analogy and metaphor, and students will understand the lower resolution concept of what I’m talking about. But when it comes down to the hard crunch, they flounder. They might not even realise the detail is there to be looked for.

Hm. I don’t think I understand Concept based teaching enough yet.

Okay, I’ll leave it there. In case you’re wondering we’ve just finished p the Foreword by David Perkins. This was a whole 2 pages.

We could be here a while.

I’m going to read through my thoughts now and see if there’s anything useful I can pop out.

I really have an aversion to Concept Based Learning (take a shot). I think I see it as the opposite pole to developing skill sets instead. I wonder if that makes me old fashioned, or just plain wrong. I enjoyed reading the book though.

I wish I could post the content of the book up here for discussion. I wonder if that might be allowed? Maybe an idea for later. Please let me know any thoughts or comments on my mad ramblings.

Happy teaching!

Experiment Report Writing Frame

I’ve been using this for a while, and I think much better use can be made of it.

It’s a basic frame, but should cover all the bases in terms of what you need for a practical report.

What I’ve been doing for lessons is filling in areas that I’m not working on, allowing students to concentrate on the focus of the lesson. Full download is here:

Prac report frame BC

Feel free to mess around with it.

Happy teaching!

Lesson Planning with Excel

One of the problems I face with my ridiculous work load (93 hours/week… on average), is that lesson planning time is virtually nil. For the last term and a half I have been recycling purely old lessons, adjusting for SEN and the class but generally keeping things the same.

It is boring.

Whilst I have lessons that work, because the lesson making process is not done I find myself missing certain points of information and anecdotes to explain away sticking points in learning. I also keep forgetting the “in the moment” adjustments I make on the day, and find it very easy to fall into the trap of chalk and talk… which is exhausting for everyone involved.

Rather than complain I would much rather fix the problem, so I have knocked up a very quick lesson planning template on Excel. Why Excel?

• You can move data around easily
• You can add timings faster
• You can copy and paste tables without screwing up the page
• Staging represenation is just much better
• Extra professional development columns can be added on an ad hock basis

This way I can save the lesson plan without having to lug around folders of paper, and when the mood takes me to update a lesson I have a clear format to follow.

It looks like this:

Simple and bare bones, but it’s a working document and you can tart it up all you like. The only function I have added is an automated timings counter based on the duration you put for each activity.

Feel free to download and mess around!

Lesson plans

The next step would be to make my PowerPoints and this Excel file link back to each other, but that’s for another day.

Happy teaching!