Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Primary' started by minnieminx, Mar 9, 2012.
LOLOL Wot nick909 said!
I use Learning Objectives & Success Critieria occasionally when they're appropriate.
I also use Pritt Sticks occasionally when they're appropriate.
I couldn't tell you which I thought I did more often, but importantly I know that when I use them it's because I think they'll serve a purpose, and when they won't.. I don't!
I've found that this is generally a good rule of thumb for... well... anything.
Like the answer tafkam. Cardinal rule for mental and oral starter - children should learn to chant the LO if used and automatically turn their heads to the generic SC pinned on the wall in response to your question
"What must we do if the head/ visitor comes in and asks us what we are learning."
Award extra points for children who can automatically state what a good one looks like.
SC rarely make any difference. The children can tell you what they are and how they are supposed to work but they read them, write them then promptly ignore them. Even if you ask them to check their work against the SC before handing it in most still pay no attention to them. The only children they might work with are the enthusiastic, able ones who would produce good work anyway.
I think for the teacher (especially new graduates) it is useful to be explicity aware of the learning outcome and success criteria so you know what you are supposed to be teaching and what it will look like when the children have achieved it. It is very easy to get carried away with planning and not really know what you are assessing or looking for. It helps with 'constructive alignment'.
For the children, then I don't beieve that they are useful for all students. If you put it into the context of a physical skill like high jump. I can be aware that I am supposed to be able to jump over a certain height bar, I can be made aware of the correct technique and what excellent jumping looks like, but it doesn't really make any difference to my ability to jump or my willingness to participate.
The learning outcomes need to be differentiated to suit where each learner is and to have to document and share that for every student is an administrative nightmare.
I think the SC also box in students and in many cases sharing exemplars just gets you "more of the same" with students not taking risks in their learning. They just chase the grades. Some others will be content to perfom well enough to gert a passing grade. (The refrain from many of my classmates at uni was "Ps get degrees") No intrinsic motivation to learn for a purpose.
I read something this week that made me thing of why it is not helpful to have all chn on the same outcome. The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.” Aristotle quotes (Ancient Greek Philosopher, Scientist and Physician, 384 BC-322 BC) ...
Oh No. Don't get me started again!
I'm currently being urged to show (on all planning) differentiated LO and SC for each group. Takes flipping hours.
I really try to differentiate in class in a subtle way and avoid telegraphing to the whizz kids how far ahead of the rest they are. They can be superior enough already. I want to be free to use a single set of SC that all can aim for... i know some will fall short - but at least they can aim higher. And like cassie511 said... hardly any actually take notice of them. They will merrily tick all points the SC checklists I give them whether or not they have met them.
Please don't tell me that is because I don't share them with the children. I share them, I emphasise them, I print them out to stick in books, I get them to repeat them back to me... only 5% take any notice of them.
Hi bex900, when I was a PGCE student a few years ago I also researched success criteria and I found that teachers vary in what they mean by success criteria. Some schools use them as "steps to success", which is what I called process success criteria in my research. For example, to be successful in this literacy lesson about instructions you need to 1. Use bossy verbs, 2. put numbers for each instruction, 3. Give your instructions a title. In those lessons pupils often use the success criteria as a checklist so they know how to make their work good. If used properly and referred to during the lesson they can be great for AfL as the pupils can use them for self assessment. My class like them because they know the rules of the game. Other teachers use the term success criteria to mean expected learning outcomes , and they often look like "must/should/could". Again if used well they can be a good tool for AfL . I find that many teachers are told that they have to have success criteria and they mechanically put it on their planning - because they have to - but don't use it in lessons because they can't make it work meaningfully. I think it is a good tool for AfL but not the only one and it should be left up to teacher's professional judgement how or if they use it.
Then tell your SLT to attend the latest Shirley Clarke course and to read her latest books.
The LO and the SC should be THE SAME for all of your class. Only the task should be differentiated. She hates 'must' 'should' 'could' and so do I.