Slow feedback ©


Last night I tweeted about ‘slow feedback’ (I made up the name as I typed. I now claim it as mine ©) I thought I’d write a quick blog to explain what I meant and the rationale behind it.

Marking exams takes precious time

Our year 11s did some exams in the final days of year 10. There was no way I was going to mark them before the end of the academic year and to be honest I wasn’t going to spend my holiday doing it either.

The new specifications are huge. Ours has two separate papers. Each paper has 16 questions, ranging from multiple choice to extended writing. They take a long time to mark. I will be honest. I didn’t set full papers for them as I knew it would take a long time to mark. My class has 27 students in it. That would be 864 questions. However I wrote a paper that was a complete mix of content and covered each question type at least 4 times.

We need to consider if the time spent on marking work is outweighed by the benefit to the students? I don’t ‘fully’ mark their work. A few hints, question marks and a simple tick sheet.

No marks. No grades

I don’t give students marks or grades until the last moment I have to; usually their year 11 mock. There is no way I was going to spend hours and hours marking and then they just look at the marks/grade. Because that is what they’d do. They say they won’t, but they would. I know it.  I’ve blogged before on this. Giving feedback alongside a grade is essentially a waste of time. I just go for the feedback.

Whole class feedback

When there are 28 questions to feedback on there’s no way that one lesson will suffice. If you try to do this, students will be overloaded (cognitive load) with feedback. It will blur into one. Some people type up the feedback and give it to the students. I don’t. I type key points onto a Powerpoint as I am reading their work.

I have then spent some time each lesson for the past two weeks giving feedback. I show the exam question and ask them what we already know, point out common errors, in some cases show a model answer and then crucially students are given time to improve their own answer ( we call it ‘green pen’ work. The only reason it’s green is so that it stands out. Nothing else). If I’d fed back on several complex questions they wouldn’t be able to focus on specific improvements. They would be overwhelmed and wouldn’t know where to start. I divided the feedback into manageable chunks each lesson. The added benefit of this is that this is repeating the same skills over and over, not just in one lesson but over two weeks. It supports retrieval practice; revision.

The second benefit is I can stagger my marking. I didn’t give up my whole weekend to do it. I did some each day, in between feeding back.

Delayed feedback?

They sat the papers nearly 8 weeks ago. Aren’t I a bad teacher not giving it back earlier? Well, the first lesson was a test anyway to interrupt the forgetting curve (see here for my blog on why the holiday may not matter for this) and I’m not bothered by the gap. I’ve seen research supporting immediate feedback and delayed feedback. Probably not this gap but it was an exceptional circumstance that is unlikely to happen again. I can actually see a positive in it. Once I’d fed back, they had to reread their own answer to see if they’d make the errors I’d highlighted. In some ways they had to diagnose where they needed to add some of the content I’d recapped and improved their answers with it.

Feedback as revision

As all the questions were from their year 9 and year 10 content, everything was based on retrieval from up to 2 years ago. In my eyes this attempt to retrieve content is part of revision; firstly in the exam and then in the improvement lessons. Some people leave revision to the last few lessons or weeks of year 11. We were revising many topics over these lessons. As long as I include these in our starter quizzes for the next few lessons, they should retain the previously missing content.

There were some questions for which there were clear gaps in knowledge or understanding. This is where I retaught the gaps. They added to the notes they already have on the topic (easy when they work on paper in folders) or created a new page of notes to then file in the correct topic. It wasn’t separate from the original learning notes. This shows students that notes are part of the revision process of checking what you might have gaps of knowledge in.We had to retrieve what we already knew and then added to this. This is revision.

Next lesson they will complete a review of the feedback and reflect on what they’ve improved on in the past two weeks; content and exam question skills. They should have a better view of this from the repetitions over the lessons in two weeks, rather than all in one lesson. It’s slow feedback ©.

Whilst this was an exceptional gap, I can’t see that it would’ve been better if I’d have worked all evenings in the last week of term to give feedback. This process has acted as revision and in my opinion, it’s the best time for it, in lessons.

Last week I told my year 11 this week that I will not be running any after school or lunch revision for them. Feedback is revision. Today, as I repeated this, one student said ‘Miss you should write that on the walls’. I think I might.

design (1).png

*In case you don’t realise, the © is a joke.No-one ‘owns’ any idea on social media…..


A focus on knowledge: Vocabulary rich teaching


This is the first in a series of blogs on how I think my teaching has become more ‘knowledge rich’. The summary of what this means is in the first post here. This post will focus on how I have developed my teaching of subject vocabulary to the stage where I think it can be classed as ‘vocabulary rich’.


My view of the importance of subject vocabulary has evolved. When I first taught I didn’t put much emphasis on words as I felt that the subject content was more important and that subject vocabulary came after the learning of concepts. In the first specification of GCSE that I taught, the first question on the paper was always a keyword, 2 mark question. They needed to write the correct definition. I saw this as something they needed to learn and it was almost separate to further learning. I created subject vocabulary sheets, gave them to the students and just expected them to learn them. No strategies, just the words and the definitions. I was leaving it to chance if they learnt them.

Now, this has changed. My understanding of the importance of subject vocabulary has evolved and over the years I have moved to this model. Some I’ve been doing for a long time (how I introduce words in my explanation) and others are relatively new in my practice. I’ve shifted to believe that vocabulary is the start of a deeper understanding of concepts within and beyond my subject.

Planning subject vocabulary

I’ve now realised that consistency is important. As a result we have written lists of the key terms that we will both use in our teaching for each topic. This means that all classes, regardless of ‘set’ or teacher accesses the exact same words. We plan to use them in our teaching so that students will be able to use them confidently in their own work.


Introduction of a word

When I first introduce a new word, I casually slip it into a sentence. But not just any sentence. A sentence where the students already know the meaning of all the rest of the vocabulary being used. The new keyword is the only word that the majority of them won’t understand. It will either be full of tier 1 words or already ‘known’ tier 3 words. For example, ‘”Sikhs offer free food to anyone in the langar”. They already know what a Sikh is and the remaining words are tier 1 words so the word ‘langar’ stands out.


I only recently learnt this hierarchy of vocabulary 

The definition

The next sentence is then the definition in as much tier 1 language as possible (I would class this as differentiation).

“The Langar is a kitchen that serves food to everyone and anyone, even if they’re not a Sikh”

Explain on board

I then will write the word on the board and annotate it where appropriate. I will use synonyms where possible. I will use examples. I sometimes use pictures if appropriate (although my art work is rubbish it adds to the excitement!). I will explain the word in the context of what they already know, making links and connections where possible. I will usually get students to write down the word and its meaning.


This is usually when the hands go up. The students are starting to process what you’re telling them and have questions about it. They’re beginning to understand the word as a  concept and their minds start applying it to situations which they then want to know about.

A classic in the example above is “Do you really mean anyone? What about a homeless person? They could get free meals all the time”or “Can I get a free meal? Where’s the nearest langar?”

These show that the student is moving from just a word to a deeper understanding of an important concept in the religion or view we are learning about. The key word becomes important ‘knowledge’ in the full understanding of the idea or concept it’s linked to.


In many cases it is possible to share with the students the root or origins of a word. In the past I haven’t really considered this as part of the learning. Now I can see that this is important for several reasons.

  1. Learning the origin gives an extra foundation for them to remember the word. The more they remember about the word itself the more likely they are to remember it. The visual ‘hook’ of a prefix or set of letters helps with the learning. I reference it when getting them to remember; ‘remember what I said about ‘mono’.
  2. It contributes to their wider literacy. They can see links to other vocabulary, out of the subject. It helps them create a vocabulary schema in their heads that can be used in my class, other classes and beyond. I don’t need to make up some nonsense for my contribution to whole school literacy. It’s already there.
  3. They love it! Whenever I explain some of the common prefixes or patterns in letters they seem to enjoy it. Especially when things ‘make sense’. You can almost see it processing in their heads as they realise that a ‘monotheist’ is ‘mono’ and a ‘theist’.
  4. I keep on learning more and more. From a selfish point of view I’ve learnt more from this, and as I love language, it’s very satisfying seeing students enjoying it too.


My knowledge of language has also increased through this focus on terminology. In the new GCSE students needs to know a few Arabic terms. I’ve gone well beyond what they need and have taught them as much Arabic as I can, for example all the prophets in Arabic.  I know more Latin now than ever. (I now wish I’d been made to study Latin at school).

I’ve also taught them how Arabic ‘works’ so they can see the similarities and differences between it and English. For example the root word ‘s_l_m‘ meaning submission or peace. They can see it appear in Islam, Muslims, Salaam etc.  I was particularly pleased when a year 7 exclaimed ‘Jerusalem Miss!’ and realised the s_l_m root was in it.

Our Languages colleagues may or may not agree, but most of my students love to ‘feel clever’ knowing words that aren’t English. I say the prophet in English and they say out loud the prophets in Arabic. Year 7 love it!

It provides ‘cultural capital’ they understand things that are ‘beyond’ their own experience. It stops the ‘them’ and ‘us’ mentality, particularly in the context where I teach.

Over time

From this point onward, I will repeatedly use the term in my explanations and questioning. I will gradually decrease the use of the definition after I say the word, until I don’t add the definition at all. At this stage students begin to use the word themselves when asking a question.

If they use just the definition, I will usually say ‘What is that called?’ or suchlike to get them using the specific word in their own sentences.


This is where things have changed the most in recent years. If we want students to learn, remember and retain these words to be able to apply them independently, they need to be tested on them to help remember them.

At key stage 3, every lesson begins with a ‘quiz’ from previous lessons. This will cover this vocabulary and I may also ask questions about the etymology etc This means they all have to retrieve the key word, not just one of them, which is a limitation of whole class questioning. Depending on the difficulty of the word I will either put the word on the board and ask for the meaning or will give the definition and ask them what the word is. The former being easier.

At key stage 4 GCSE we do much more in-depth, specific testing on keywords which I’ve explained here.


Made for a GCSE student that said they hadn’t learnt their keywords as I was testing them on a day other than Tuesday.


At GCSE the keywords are one-third of student homework. See here for an explanation. This reinforces the importance of the vocabulary as a foundation for other learning.  However, this involves learning words that haven’t been introduced in teaching yet.

When presenting this model people have questioned whether students should learn vocabulary before they’ve learnt the word and the linked concepts in class first. I briefly looked at some research and it seems there is research supporting both approaches. However, I want them to almost learn these by rote so that when we apply them in class they have the foundation knowledge. An anecdotal example of why I’m not overly concerned about doing it this way was giving students an exam question linked to the words they had been given for homework and some students using these in their work even though we hadn’t covered them in class. They clearly knew them enough to apply them independently. Not all can, but some can.

What’s changed?

How do I know these added focus on subject vocabulary is ‘working’? I see it. I hear it. Students use the words in their verbal responses. They use it in their writing.  They start linking concepts due to the vocabulary.

As as subject we have agreed on the words and all students will learn them regardless of ‘ability’ or class. No differentiation by content taught. Everyone gets the same.

I spend more time on vocabulary than I’ve ever done before. I’ve shifted in my belief that keywords are there just to be learnt to answer a definition question. It gives students the confidence in their explanations. I can see in exam answers them using and applying these words well beyond just the definitions that they did in the old specification.

I think that student understanding is much deeper than just a definition used in RE. They can apply this knowledge and can use it outside of RE. It’s a new part of their huge schema of vocabulary. It’s knowledge beyond what they might learn at home or use between each other. Making teaching ‘vocabulary rich’ is much more than knowing keywords. They are the foundation for learning.



A focus on knowledge – how my teaching has changed (short series)


I often see people on Twitter talking about a ‘knowledge rich’ curriculum or a ‘knowledge based’ curriculum and think, if I wasn’t teaching knowledge before, what was I doing? Of course, I’ve always taught knowledge however I have changed my view of it, particularly in how I teach my subject.

This small series of blogs will help to clarify in my own mind what I believe these terms to mean in my own teaching and how I have developed and changed what I do in practical terms. I aim to take it beyond the soundbites of politicians and tweets, to real life exemplification in my classroom. The posts will focus specifically on what I do in the classroom and my justifications.

I don’t know why I changed but almost certainly listening to others on Twitter, reading blogs, books and reading research have had a significant impact. The structures of how I teach has not changed very much; I’ve always believed in teacher exposition, students practising and getting feedback to improve, as a learning cycle. However, the emphasis on what I teach has changed. This small series of blogs* explains what I now teach is more knowledge or content focused.

The things that I feel make my teaching more knowledge based are:

  1. Planning schemes using knowledge
  2. Direct instruction with focus on context and linking of contexts
  3. Direct instruction & note taking
  4. Testing
  5. Foundation knowledge & depth of knowledge
  6. Use of etymology & focus on keywords

The term ‘knowledge rich’ has been accused by some as being the new fad in education. In my case if a new fad means how my teaching has developed in recent years then I seem to have fallen for the fad and it seems to be working.

*I will add the links to the blogs on the list as I write them

Further reading

Why the holidays may not matter when it comes to learning and why my first lessons back will be tests


“Forgetting focuses remembering and fosters learning; remembering generates learning and causes forgetting; learning causes forgetting, begets remembering, and supports new learning.”  Bjork 2011

I’ve seen some online articles that raise concerns with the length of the school holidays. Whilst there may be other concerns, I don’t think they’re overly problematical in terms of learning.  This is because this time can be classed as ‘forgetting time’, which research suggests may help with learning.

Why forgetting is important

I’m not going to do a literature review on why. I will just recommend this brilliant chapter from Bjork (2011) to do that. He says that “forgetting [is] a facilitator of learning”. It is actually part of the learning process.

He goes on to say “any forgetting will therefore increase the acquisition of storage strength”; forgetting during the holidays, might just be a useful thing. However, most research focuses on comparatively short delays between learning and retrieval e.g. hours, days, 1 week.  There is little that suggests what the length of the forgetting should be for a two or three-year GCSE course, for example.

Twitter colleague Damian Benney has written a great blog on what he thinks the optimal time should be. He references Cepeda et al (2008) that are clear on this, “To put it simply, if you want to know the optimal distribution of your study time, you need to decide how long you wish to remember something.”. We know this for GCSE. It’s not 100% guaranteed but if we start to consider our forgetting gaps, as Damian is, could we begin to work on finding some suggested optimal timings for retrieval?

Conversely, they also conclude “If a person wishes to retain information for several years, a delayed review of at least several months seems likely to produce a highly favorable return on the time investment”. Is this evidence that the holidays might not hinder but actually support learning? It seems a possibility.

There is however, a caveat to regarding holidays as ‘good’ forgetting time. I believe that this doesn’t work if the first retrieval is after the 6 week break. A teacher cannot just give a test on the first day back and expect students to do well without the previous retrieval opportunities. The classic Ebbinghaus model of forgetting suggests that without retrieval we will quickly forget what we learn over a matter of minutes/hours.  Taking the research into consideration, it suggests that it only works when there have been previous recall opportunities with increasing gaps.

This has implications for the learning 1-2 months before the holidays. Spacing of topics needs to begin from the moment something is ‘learnt’ with increasing gaps. All the holiday provides is the larger gap between retrievals. If a student hasn’t ever retrieved something before the holiday then the forgetting curve kicks in and it becomes much more difficult to retrieve.  Unscientifically, I suggest that the first retrieval after the holiday should be the 4th or 5th time it has been retrieved, not the 1st.

If we followed this argument through, I might even suggest that the last week/s of the summer term should be dedicated to retrieval practice. You might call these end of year tests (that are truly at the very end of the academic year in the last days i.e without time to mark and write reports as sometimes they’re used for). Or you could have a ‘quiz week’. It really doesn’t matter what it’s called, but two things could be important: 1) There is no new content being learnt at the end of term, as there won’t be the time for the initial retrievals in school and 2) They are part of a planned, spaced, retrieval programme.

A test the first lesson back

So, whilst some may think I’m an evil teacher giving students a test on the first lesson back, that’s what all my GCSE classes will get. Not because I’m evil but because I want them to learn from day 1. It will get them to retrieve learning from the previous year/s of the course to try to breach the 40 day gap of forgetting.  Instead of just reminding them of what we’ve learnt before, Kornell et al 2011 suggest that “Retrieving information from memory produces more learning than does being presented with the same information”. Their test might just be best for learning itself.

I don’t care about their result. I don’t use marks/scores. It’s the importance of this event in the forgetting/long term memory plan that matters. Bjork 2011 says that “retrieving information from memory is a learning event”. My students are used to this. We do it all the time in class. I believe that students do want to get back into their school routine in September, in my classroom. Some will be relieved to start answering the questions. I’ve not heard a complaint from any of them to date. They know it’s about learning not performance.

Considering these points, might teachers begin to plan their curriculum around the gaps that holidays create to be the ‘forgetting’ part of learning? Could we consider holidays to be one of the key aspects of learning instead of worrying about students forgetting and not remembering? With some considered planning, I think we can use holidays to our advantage.

Referenced reading/research

Why we need to structure learning for students


I’m really lazy. I have an online exam to complete. I’ve done very little work for it. Even though I sit blogging about the importance of spaced practice, I’ve completely ignored the research and gone for cramming. Why? Because humans are generally rubbish at organising themselves and are that awful word, ‘lazy’.

So if we as adults can’t structure our own learning, why do we expect students to be able to do it? At worst we expect them to do it with no guidance on how they could do it but similarly expect them to self organise by saying ‘study at home’ or ‘revise’. Depending on your school, maybe 5% will do this. The rest will either not do it or do the minimum at the last minute.

It’s our job, not just to teach our subject but to teach how to learn effectively and model it in our teaching. Sadly, this has got a bad reputation in some areas. Earlier in my career I was involved in ‘Learning to Learn’ lessons which, I know now, had some dubious content and ironically didn’t cover some of the main research on learning itself.

Giving students lessons or tips or booklets on how best to learn in their own time will probably have limited effect. Just like me, they will know what is best but just won’t do it. Teachers need to base everything they do on learning; from curriculum structure and content, to lesson planning and homework. We need to ensure that all of these have the foundations of learning built in them to make learning as hassle free but structured as possible.

I’ve already blogged on how we do this for:

However there was a gap in what we do that will be a new structure for 2018-2019 for my students.

One of their homeworks is to learn new keywords from given lists. To support them they can create revision cards (last year we made them make the first set as an example) and we have the words as Quizlet quizzes (non-account based so I don’t see who has done what). However, we are trusting students to do this between the keyword tests.

As students have to improve their score each time, there is a small incentive to do the work, but I’ve found that with 3 groups this year, some just haven’t bothered. They make excuses like ‘I can’t learn them’ or ‘I’ve never been able to do this’. I just don’t believe them. The huge majority can improve by 1 mark each week if they test themselves over and over; they just don’t bother. They probably cannot self regulate over the two weeks the repeated testing. So I’ve decided that, as soon as a student doesn’t improve in the subsequent test, I won’t be using their break to help them I’ll be giving them structure ready for the next time. It’s not that they can’t learn the keywords it’s that they can’t strcuture the process themselves that’s the usual problem.

We use google forms a lot as they can help with retrieval practice and self mark; a double win. Up until now these have mainly been on content and the keywords have been down to the student. Now I’m making a quiz for each set of keywords.

I did ask Twitter for any research on how best to structure these:


However as yet I don’t have any research, either way. The easiest for me to organise is to give the definition, and this is how it will be in their exam. However the test that this links to, they have to write the definition themselves so it may be better the other way round. If I have time I’ll do both and mix it up.


The students that haven’t improved since last time will be given the link to this quiz and will be told to complete the quiz, probably 4 times, in a spaced way over the two weeks. How will I know if they have done this? This is the beauty of a google form:

It tells me who has completed, it, their score and crucially for this purpose, when they’ve done it. I can check that they complete them at spaced intervals. If they then can’t do this themselves, I will provide the spaced intervals for them (at break/lunch). The aim is to get them into the habit. This should then provide one week of success which can then be used to show them it ‘works’ and then the excuses can only be ‘I haven’t done it’ as opposed to blaming their learning capacity. I think this should help give students the structure that they need for this part of their 3 homeworks.

I will also put another copy of the quiz for students that just want to use it as part of their own spacing. I won’t check that one; it’s just for themselves.

This is what I’d call ‘closing the gap’; finding the holes in what we do and filling them with something that structures learning for students. It’s like using stabilisers. Some will need this at the start and then will hopefully go on to see that these processes work and can do them themselves. I really wish my teachers had done this for me.

Constructing a coherent key stage 3 assessment system


I’m embarrassed to admit that I hadn’t really considered how assessment might be a coherent system in key stage 3 until recent years. This process began when we were asked to consider how we would assess in our subjects when levels were no longer necessary. We’ve been lucky enough to be given the time to continue to develop our ideas over the past couple of years rather than having to have a  system that we were stuck with. Sadly, some schools hastily implemented new systems that were essentially levels rehashed. I blogged on the ‘Emperor’s new clothes’ of levels here and how some have replaced levels with levels.

At the start of this process, I initially thought about what it is that we wanted to assess. I ended up with a lot of potential ideas. This is where RE colleagues are divided; what can/should we assess in RE. I took ideas from the new A Levels and GCSE. I don’t believe that it is our job to attempt to assess things like empathy or students’ own opinions. I think that students should be taught argument writing skills and key ideas of critical thinking in order to create coherent, well evidenced arguments. Alongside this we should be clear what knowledge we want them to learn and be able to apply throughout the keys stage.

assessment chart

Our original ideas started with far too many things for the curriculum time we have. We have reduced what we assess down to very few things. We see year 7 once a week; it would be impossible to assess everything all the time. Reading Daisy Christodoulou’s book ‘Making good progress’ confirmed my instinct that we don’t need to assess everything all the time. I’ve come to the belief that less is more; they shouldn’t be doing everything needed for GCSE at key stage 3 and key stage 3 shouldn’t be full of GCSE exam questions. However, key stage 3 should be a foundation for those who take GCSE but also a foundation in logical argument skills if they choose not to continue their study of religions.

We’ve treated the skills as we have treated knowledge. In order for students to develop and improve their skills we have repeated them and spaced them over time. However knowledge itself is really important. It is included in two ways. Students are tested using multiple choice quizzes at the start/middle/end of each topic and then these quizzes are spaced/interleaved throughout the year. We’ve yet to do this across year 7 and year 8. I’ve not heard of anyone doing this and I’m not sure that it’s necessary with so little curriculum time. I’m prepared to be challenged on this.

The second way we look at knowledge is through these written assessments. We look for depth of knowledge and use of specific keywords to show their understanding of the content they’ve been taught.

The tracker above shows the frequency of coverage and at the moment they are used as a RAG system. We have 6 ‘assessments’ over the year, one each half term indicated by 1a, 1b etc. These are linked to clear, ‘objective’ criteria for each element. For example, using quotations includes using quotation marks, referencing and explain what the quotation means.

I’m currently pondering if this is sufficient as there can be many ways that a student partly meet the criteria yet the system isn’t detailed enough to show this. I want to keep it simple but it needs more clarity of development. Any thoughts/ideas on developing this, welcomed.

Is it a levels system?

The key to ensuring that this isn’t levels rehashed is that we don’t have to amalgamate these individual aspects of their learning to create one letter/number/level/grade. We use this tracker and other sources to use out professional judgement on whether students are making progress. It’s not a science but we’re moving towards making it as clear and objective as possible.

This system has the same issues as many assessment systems. One written assessment is not necessarily a true snapshot of what a student can do. Using it to consider progress is full of flaws. However, as we continue to refine it I feel it is better than using generalised summary statements or grades that conflate everything into one. We’re still working on it. Suggestions welcomed.

5 simple ways to encourage meta-cognition


It is important that supporting pupils’ metacognition and self-regulation skills isn’t seen as something ‘extra’ for teachers to do, but an effective pedagogy that can be used to support their normal classroom practice.

EEF 2018

1. Why this is wrong

If in class questioning/discussion, you can ask the student themselves why their answer is wrong or ask another student to explain why. If in written work use WTIW (Why This Is Wrong -I just made that up) and get students to write a brief explanation to show they’ve understood the error.

At GCSE our students write their own multiple choice questions. This is always a good time to identify misconceptions if they credit an incorrect answer. WTIW is a quick way for them to correct their work and learn from their error. They won’t learn from a  ’X’ on their work.

2. Use a visualiser* 

There are lots of ways it can be used but using it alongside your own live commentary whilst ‘being a student (guided practice)’ is very useful.

I put a GCSE question on it, and unpick and annotate ready for answering the question. What does this word mean? What quotation could I use? What core knowledge/teaching can I reference?

They don’t even need to answer the question. Practising the thought process and annotation is powerful by itself.

* other methods are just as effective: interactive whiteboard, annotation on whiteboard, overhead projector…

3. Why did we do this?

A simple strategy to get students thinking about the value of an activity; ask them why you got them to do it. If there isn’t an answer that links to learning then you may want to rethink the activity.

4. This is a good one (or WAGOLL if you want another acronym)

Modelling a good version of the outcome you want from students gives them something to visualise. A worked example or a sample answer does the job. Discuss why it’s good. Annotate and highlight the important parts.

One way I do this is to write a ‘perfect’ answer on a slide and for the following slides copy the same answer then take one element away from it each slide . I get students to identify which part is missing each time. A kind of spot the difference that allows them to identify all the aspects that make it a great paragraph.

5.  What do you need to focus on?

None of the nonsense of walking into a classroom asking students what their target is or what they need to do to get to the next level. If teachers are explicit in what students need to be able to do in the specific skill or topic they’re studying they should also know what they need to improve on which cannot be answered in a simple sentence to the stranger coming in the lesson.

Students won’t know what they need to do better by osmosis; give them the criteria of what makes a good one and then use their own work to identify what needs improving. Teacher feedback should use the same language. Ambiguous phrases like ‘add more detail’ and ‘revise more’ are not acceptable.

A simple way I do this is to feedback on a piece of work with one or two things they need to do to improve. In their next piece of work they write these on a sticker (could easily be written at the top of the work) and then they must ensure that they complete these things in the new piece of work. They can colour code them and then highlight in their work where they’ve addressed  them. Repeat with the same targets in the next few pieces of work. Just because they’ve done it once does not mean they’ve nailed it.


EEF Metacognition and self regulated learning (2018)

Summary poster

Progress is being able to do it again…and again


I sometimes think about sport when thinking about learning. In this case, basketball and shooting a hoop. It’s one part of the game but an essential one. Practising shooting is important as when you get the ball it’s a chance to score. Leaving it to chance would seem foolish. Being able to do it once in a while isn’t good enough otherwise we might all be in our national basketball team! It needs to have a high rate of success, through regular practice. A player needs to do the same thing, over and over. That’s what makes a great player.

This however isn’t what some people have thought or do think learning is about. Doing the same thing over and over in class has been frowned upon. I am saddened to say that in the past I have been a victim of ‘your lesson didn’t show progress because they didn’t learn something new’ but also, was made to tell others the same when I observed them. Something instinctively told me it was nonsense at the time but I didn’t have the evidence to the contrary nor was I likely to change things as it was what ‘Ofsted wanted’.

But now, not only do I think that it is essential to progress, it is part of what makes learning itself. There are many ways to make progress but in my opinion, one important way is that you can do something again and again and maintain a high standard, over a period of time

This is where some teaching goes wrong. The classic example is that in maths during a lesson, students are taught how to solve equations. They can all do it and do lots of practice during the lesson, the teacher then thinks ‘we’ve done equations’ and that’s it. They then wonder why in the future they can’t do it. Students need to practise the same type of equations, over and over, over a long period of staggered time (see research on spacing).

It seems sensible to think that if a student can repeat something then progress has been made. But how many times until you can confidently say that it is ‘learned’? Rawson and Dunlosky (2011) in ‘Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: how much is enough?’ suggest…

On the basis of the overall patterns of durability and efficiency, our prescriptive conclusion for students is to practice recalling concepts to an initial criterion of 3 correct recalls and then to relearn them 3 times at widely spaced intervals.

This has huge implications for those that teach a topic and move on, never for it to appear again until revision. The problem is teachers will say they don’t have time to do these repetitions. Rawson and Dunlosky (2012) explore durability and efficiency; we need to be able to do this using a minimal amount of time yet be as effective as possible. They call this process ‘distributed test–restudy’. The restudy is important. You cannot just teach/practise it once and hope it sticks. It will only work for a few students. Their research suggests certain amounts of practice testing and relearning improves overall learning.

Ideally we need to explain this to our students, and then use a similar model in our curriculum. If we struggle for time, homework can be used. In fact, I believe this is the best way homework can be used at secondary. Also, when doing pieces of work in written subjects, we shouldn’t be afraid to do the same thing, again and again. Without complicating it or adding anything to it, just repeating to get it right. One way I’ve been doing this is explained in this blog.

So, if you still have observations and someone wants to see something ‘new’ to prove students have made progress, send them to these links below and maybe mention basketball hoops.


Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2011). Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: How much is enough? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140(3), 283-302.

Rawson, K.A. & Dunlosky, J. (2012) When Is Practice Testing Most Effective for Improving the Durability and Efficiency of Student Learning Educ Psychol Rev (2012) 24: 41

Rethinking planning – what if we plan not to finish?


Whenever I think of lesson planning, it is usually in the form of filling the lesson time with a series of ‘activities’/actions that will happen during the lesson. The activities fit neatly into the time available. A trainee may ‘overplan’ or ‘underplan’ but most teachers get used to how long things take and adjust their timings. It will be one topic of part of a topic, neatly arranged into the lesson, so that it covers ‘everything needed’.

In this model each lesson is a stand-alone lesson of content. I see many lessons shared with other teacher where these are literally named ‘lesson 1’, ‘lesson 2’ etc so each lesson is a stand-alone, in a series.


However, I generally don’t do this. Luckily I don’t have to write lesson plans in my school so planning is ‘in my head’. The difference to what I do from above is that I don’t plan activities that fill the length of the lesson. I plan for us to do things and I judge how long they will take at the time. I roughly know how long they’ll last but many times a side discussion on a linked topic will take more time or students will ask more questions.

(I have previously read a blog that links to this idea that a lesson isn’t a unit of learning by Bodil Isaksen ,A lesson is the wrong unit of time ,however sadly it no longer exists)

What if we deliberately plan not to finish something?

Instead of making a lesson the unit of learning*, make the ‘learning’ the unit of time; the learning dictates the timing not the other way round.

*learning being the set of things done that enable long term knowledge and understanding.



Without planning for this I’ve come to realise it means that it helps with long-term memory. It means they have to retrieve what we were doing last lesson and we have to recap. It makes them think about last lesson. They have to re-engage with the content.

It’s useful for those that are absent for a lesson. It means they haven’t fully missed out on something because we were partly through it. There’s more logic to trying to quickly copy notes and engage as it’s still a ‘live’ topic.

It also means an activity can carry on for as long as is needed; it’s not restricted by time. In my subject, we can discuss some topics more than others, students have examples they can share and we can expand or contract the timing as needed.

I also don’t have PowerPoints of lessons. (My use of PowerPoint isn’t ‘normal’ compared to others anyway). I have one PowerPoint of the entire topic all in one. It’s not neatly divided into lessons because I don’t know how long a lesson will be. Sometimes I add slides, sometimes I jump them. They’re not my lessons; they just hold useful stuff I don’t want to keep rewriting or re-searching for.


If time is an issue for your subject/class it may feel disorganised or not moving at the pace needed to cover the content needed. Planning each lesson has a certain neatness and certainty of covering all the syllabus needed.

I teach some classes every fortnight. I don’t use this with them. It is probably too much to ask them to do this and if someone was absent it would take them too long to catch up. It would be a constant catch up. I do use quick 1-10 quizzes at the start of lessons but I wouldn’t fully use the model above.

This model would be problematical for colleagues that have to hand in lesson plans in advance (which of course is nonsense in most cases) as you wouldn’t know how far you’d got along the way to write the next plan. You could however deliberately plan to split the end of lesson activity to go into the next.

If you have a trainee or you plan lessons in these neat blocks, consider if this might be a useful way to rethink lessons.

“Sorry Sir/Miss, I’ll stop doing it now”; Why we need to model responses for children


This week I have been thinking a lot about how children speak whilst in school, especially how they respond in certain situations. I’m particularly interested when what they say isn’t polite or tries to justify poor behaviour.

I’ve heard people say ‘it’s because they do it at home’. Of course, in some cases, this is true. This is the only school I’ve worked in where some students say ‘thank you’ after a detention! But some children lack the structure of polite social interaction as their parents don’t model it or allow them to argue or be rude, often in desperation of not knowing how to deal with them; it’s easier to let them say what they want than to battle with them. However, school doesn’t need to be like this. We are a separate part of their lives and we need to behave within our own environment’s boundaries.

There are things that can/can’t be acceptably said in each environment but for some students they don’t experience what is needed for the ‘outside world’. We need to decide what we want our school environment to look like and how we will model it; we can create a different language within our environment.

Having thought about it, saying ‘we model good behaviour every day’ to our students isn’t enough. If a child isn’t used to a way of behaving or speaking, they’re not just going to naturally identify that one adult at school is speaking differently than another at home and then imitate. We need to give them a model, link it to when it needs to be used and explicitly discuss it. Which is what I’ve been doing this week.

When a student is on the phone (against our school rules), I will tell them to put it away however it is often responded to with, who they’re on the phone to or why they ‘have’ to be on the phone or ‘they’re just going to be a minute’. None of these are appropriate responses, they are attempting to argue their point instead of acknowledging they’ve broken the school rule. As we haven’t modelled to them what is a good response, they revert to speaking to me as though I am a parent or a friend, not a member or staff telling them to stop breaking a rule. We need to give them the best response in a situation when they break a rule.

So, I’ve tried it with my form. I modelled a sample, appropriate response for them and reminded them of it every day. “Sorry Sir/Miss, I’ll stop doing it now”. Of course some of them probably think I’m mad as I’m telling them something they would already naturally do (or they wouldn’t break the rule in the first place) but others need it. If I’m in a situation with them where this applies I’m now saying ‘you’re breaking the rule….what is the correct response?’ And (sometimes begrudgingly) they say the modelled response; they have to think about the model before their natural response.

Criticisms of  modelling responses

They’re just saying it, they don’t mean it

Does that matter? They are learning and practising the polite and best way to deal with a situation. The point is that this might impact them in daily life, even when they leave school and it might just be the best way to stop the police officer giving them a fine!

We shouldn’t have to do this; we’re not their parents

No we’re not. But we have two options. Ignore it and use constant (often ineffective) sanctions or build up a school language that prevents further escalation in a situation from a simple breaking of rules to an encounter where a student argues and is rude to a member of staff. In my eyes, breaking a rule is one thing but a student trying to argue makes it ten times worse.

Part of our wider social support for students is that we provide a model of the ‘best’ way to behave in the wider society. In some schools this might be needed, in others it isn’t. Ignoring it is doing a disservice to our students.

It also reinforces the idea of context and that specific contexts require specific behaviours. If they behaved the same way in a place of work than in their lounge with their mates, they may find themselves in trouble. We can easily make school a different context from home but we need to do this explicitly for some.

It’s just dealing with the negative

I’ve given examples of the negative. We also need to model the positive. So after a week of the above, I modelled a positive; saying ‘thank you’ to someone. I stole the idea from Twitter (Michaela school) and got them to write a ‘thank you’ note to anyone in school for absolutely anything. Again, some thought it was weird, but others may not have said the words ‘thank you’ for a while. It hopefully made them think of what others do for them, not always ‘just’ teaching them, as part of a different environment than home. Their responses brought a tear to my eye and when I delivered them to the staff, it was so lovely to see their response to this unexpected ‘thank you’. I will tell the form about the response from staff and how important it is. I will challenge them to do this face to face with someone next week. I will model as much as I can with them as well.

These models of how to speak have the potential to make schools such nicer places to be, even if rules are broken; it makes it manageable. Now I’m thinking further about how what I say can be tweaked to explicitly model the ‘best’ response.