Using Blooms to improve the standard of the writing of senior students

During that interesting lesson I had with my Year 11 IT students, I was challenged to put down in writing some of the ideas I expressed in the class. Made me think about what the different levels actually mean and how they can be used to guide students to deeper thinking.
Anyway I came up with a grid that students might use to improve their responses to issues.
Here is it:

Example One: Writing about Issues

Bloom’s Taxonomy Level (including dictionary definition)	Explanation	Questions to answer when exploring issues	Example: all students should be banned from the school’s car park
Remember – “to recall or bring to mind again”	Involves simply remembering, listing, retelling, stating in your own words what the issue is.	What are the words, ideas and thoughts that immediately come to mind when you think about the issue.	P plates, speeding, reckless, showing off, noisy.
Understand – “to grasp the meaning of”	Involves trying to understand and summarise what the issue means.	Why this is an issue?	People could get hurt, cars and property might get damaged
Apply – “to put to use especially for some practical purpose”	Involves showing examples and illustrating the main points about the issue.	Give examples of the issue as you or others you know have experienced it	Two days ago, I saw a Year 12 student speed out of the car park and just missed a car coming up Surrey Farm Drive (more examples would be good).
Analyse – “separating or distinguishing the component parts of something (as a substance, a process, a situation) so as to discover its true nature”	Involves thinking more deeply about the issue by separating it into the different arguments about it, working out their importance and how they are different from each other.	Is this an important issue? Is it widespread? Are many people affected? What are the reasons why the issue occurs? What will happen if it is not dealt with?	18-25 year old drivers have the most accidents. Often drive powerful cars. Peer pressure to show off to others.
Evaluate – “to determine the significance, worth, or condition”	Using certain criteria or standards, make judgements about the significance of the issue. Make conclusions about the issue and how to resolve it.	After reviewing the above ideas, what do you think about the issue? Do you think it is important? Explain why.	I am concerned that somebody will get seriously hurt or even killed either in the car park or out on the road. Most young people are good drivers, but some are reckless and selfish.
Create – “to produce through imaginative skill”	Involves looking at the issue from a different angle. Is there some way that the causes and consequences could be used positively?	If you have identified that the issue is significant, can we solve it creatively? If it isn’t significant, can the concerns of others be used positively?	Organise a “show off your car” day at a racetrack. Use driving simulators to have races between student drivers.

I will give it to colleagues first to get their feedback but it was good to do to help clarify in my mind what exactly is involved in the analysis, evaluate and create steps -very challenging.

A new term...a new beginning

The new term has started and I find myself trying more of the Teaching strategies learnt at the AGQTP sessions.
For example, I met with my Year 11 IT class for the first time and got them thinking about how they might respond to an assignment on Computer Game addiction. This meant a brief introduction to Blooms taxonomy and then selecting part of the assignment and asking how they could respond to show: recall, understanding, application, analysis, evaluation, creativity in their response. This will help them understand why a simple recall response, though factually correct, may not be enough to get the higher scores.
My Year 11 Biology class used a see-saw activity to do some revision. In pairs, the first person was asked to recall as much as possible about the respiratory system for one minute. Then the second person was asked to recall as much as possible about the breathing cycle. Many commented that they felt they could not recall much. This was an opportunity for me to talk about the importance of regularly sustained revision - using whatever format suited them.
I am starting to explore wikis with my Psychology class. At this stage we cannot get on but at least they are interested in trying.

AGQTP Day 6 2007

Today was a very satisfying day in many respects.
We further trialled the Final Word protocol (see previous post) and it worked much better and seemed to engage people more in what the article was trying to say. The process allows you to cover the essentials of the article but gives you different perspectives. It enriches the conversation on the topic and enables quieter members to have a say.

I would suggest that it may also be useful to sit for 2 minutes in silence to write a reflection on the main points of the discussion after going through the protocol. The other thing to consider is: Groupthink. How do you prevent like-minded individuals from agreeing with each other just so you don't rock the boat. Need an outside party to review the discussion. Also, you could have one person act as an outsider who reviews the process.

We discussed an article on the new Professionalism of teachers where the focus is now on measurable student outcomes. Part of the way that this can be achieved is through professional development that is self-directed, continuous and systematic. Excellent stuff!

Success analysis protocol
Another way to listen more professionally to what people have to say is this protocol. It goes like this:

1. Everybody think about and note down some key points about a recent professional success (5 minutes).
2. One person outlines what was successful in as much detail as possible. (5 minutes)
3. The others in the group ask clarifying questions (defined as questions that help the questioner understand the situation) as opposed to probing questions (defined as questions that help the respondent think a little more deeply about their situation). (3 minutes).
4. The rest of the group then discuss the success story. The story teller says nothing but writes notes as the rest of the group speak. (8 minutes).
5. The story teller then gives their reflections on what was said in step 4. (2 minutes)
   
6. The group then discusses the process and try to sum up together what elements of the story led to it being a success. (2minutes)

This was also interesting although it was hard to stick to the protocol properly. Once again, it allowed one person to speak at length about a topic that was important to them. The others had to listen and only ask clarifying questions. Then the storyteller was forced to listen.
This would be good with students or to debrief after a key event. We could use it in our PL teams to talk about our successes in teaching.

We then tried a Tuning protocol. Similar to the above but used when evaluating policy and fine-tuning it's contents. We did it once as a big group but I will wait until the next session in August before reporting back in detail.

We did have a long discussion about a Teaching Australia document on what it is to be a teacher. It was good that such a document is being developed and would be useful for me in my quest to develop the Professional Learning Policy for the school.

The next session: we must bring samples of student work, a policy document of some sort and should try some of the protocols before the August meeting.

AGQTP Day 5 2007

We met all day today down at the Yacht Club, no less, and went through a range of strategies.

Some that might be worth following up:

• Using the Extended T-Chart [KW(H)L(D)] to help plan a unit of work.
• Use the SACSA outcomes to set the standards of assessment. That is SACSA outcomes along the side of the page, and levels of achievement (ie introductory, satisfactory, mastery) across the top.
• Help students remember to use the assessment rubrics by making bigger versions and place them around the classroom.
• Getting students to use summative assessment rubrics for formative tasks as a test run -either by assessing their own work or by using it to review other students work.

Some of the good ideas expressed on the day were:

Students learn best when:

• they understand what the expectations are for the task. This includes understanding of the language used.
• the get feedback about the quality of their work
• they are advised how to improve their work (this needs time)
• the are involved in deciding what needs to be done

Authentic Questions are those that have addressed:

• Content - what is required and is it useful
• Context - what situation are we talking about
• Quantity - limits placed on time, length and general boundaries of the response
• Depth - is higher order thinking required?

For example: You are about to plan a trip to the Flinders Ranges National Park. You will be there for three days. You will need to be self-sufficient.

• What areas will you go to?
• What resources will you bring?
• What will you do when you are there?
• What impact might you have on the environment and how can you minimise that impact?

or
If your hair straightener stopped working, how would you find out why?

What makes a fertile question? It should be

• open - not one correct answer
• unsettling - challenges assumptions
• rich - has depth
• connected - relevant to learners and the community to which they belong
• charged - involves ethical, social and political decision making
• practical - a question that can be researched by students

Finally, a very interesting way of a group of people analysing key ideas in a text called The Last Word. It uses the following process:

1. All read the text to be analysed. As each person reads, they highlight important points (5 minutes)
2. One person reads one of their highlighted points and say why it is important (2 minutes). No one else is to speak during this time.
3. The next person responds to the first speaker on their own for one minute.
4. Repeat step 3. for others in the group.
5. Person one has the final word by responding to what has been said for one minute.

Repeat for all other members of the group.
When we did it, it forced you to be quiet (and not interrupt) the speaker. I had to noted down points I wanted to make and then choose the most important. Everybody had a say and everybody had to listen.
Could be interesting with a senior class.
More ideas tomorrow.