Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Teaching and Learning Implications of Linear Assessment
Similar to Teaching and Learning Implications of Linear Assessment (20)
More from SLCS-online
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Teaching and Learning Implications of Linear Assessment
- 1. Westminster Education Forum 17th July 2014 Katy Bloom k.bloom@slcs.ac.uk @bloom_growhow
- 2. Myscience Established in 2004 by the Universities of York, Leeds, Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam, Myscience is developing and supporting teachers, technicians and others working in STEM education Myscience manages: • the National Science Learning Network on behalf of the Wellcome Trust and the Department for Education; • the National STEM Centre on behalf of the Gatsby Charitable Foundation; and • a number of other STEM programmes.
- 4. Key messages • Our programmes form part of a coordinated approach to ensure teachers and lecturers are receiving the targeted support they need and are able to improve learner outcomes • Our programs impact on quality of teaching and learning and through this the outcome of young people • Teachers’ professionalism is recognised • Delivering high quality trusted CPD solutions across UK helping to ensure supply (quality and quantity) STEM graduates of the future
- 5. T&L implications of linear assessment • ‘Young’ teachers may never have experienced linear assessment themselves • Most teachers have at least 12 years of modular teaching habits Linear assessment Effective exam preparation Synoptic T&L
- 6. How can Government address concerns that making the content of the GCSEs more challenging has the potential to put pupils off taking up Science at GCSE and A-level? Increased demand of both literacy and mathematics
- 7. It’s not about the content • Teachers provide the challenge • Teachers provide the transitions The issue is the quality of the teaching rather then the content of the curriculum. Key solution is to professionally develop the teaching workforce so that they cope with the constant change
- 8. Triple Science • More advanced than Double Science? • Advantage? • All schools should offer Triple Science? • What support is in place? The issue is how teachers in post-16 offer the right transition from different pathways
- 9. Engagement with Triple Science • 25% students taking TS by Sept 2013 • 11% FSM pupils taking TS by Sept 2013 • 755 partner schools have engaged in targeted support (116%) • Positive impacts of CPD • Self-sustaining support beyond the programme: – 30 networks – Online sustainability packs made available
- 10. “..participation in the Programme was building the confidence of schools to expand or introduce triple science more quickly than would have been possible in the absence of the Programme.” Triple Science Support Programme Evaluation report to DfE
- 11. Science CPD In 2012-13: • 26,603 training days were delivered by the National Science Learning Network • 17,131 individual teachers participated in Science Learning Centre led CPD Since 2008: • 70% of all UK state-funded secondary schools have participated in National Science Learning Centre CPD • 98% of all state-funded secondary schools and colleges in England have participated in National Science Learning Network CPD
- 12. Impact on schools National Science Learning Centre
Editor's Notes
- Key messages from the Wellcome Trust
- Teaching in a ‘spiral’ curriculum: teachers have got to effectively plan progression over successive stages, and have time to revisit both skills and content.
- It is the ability of the teachers to absorb these changes and transfer them into suitable learning experiences for their students that is really the challenge. For example, there has not been a wide-scale whole-school approach to (eg) numeracy across the curriculum since 2002 (National Strategies). Has the Maths GCSE been designed to complement the Science GCSE. How much co-planning was there? Not meant in a pejorative sense, but if it has been designed so, it will be much easier, more sensible, and incentivising for maths and science departments to be able to work together to deliver a more seamless education. Equally, what can the science department gain from working with the English department? And do they have the time to do so?
- It doesn’t matter what you do, you still need CPD. Evaluation studies have shown that if you improve the CPD, there are increased numbers studying post-16. When you look at the curricula of other countries, they are remarkably similar in cognitive demand at comparable ages. We shouldn’t confuse ‘challenge of content’ with what ultimate grade boundaries will be to reduce grade inflation; they are not comparable things.
- The seminar questions state that Triple has ‘more advanced content’…not wholly precise. It is true that some concepts are more demanding, but on the whole, TS has more breadth than DS rather than more complex content. As such, it is not necessarily an advantage to those who have done it over DS; some post-16 teachers assume their students have come from the DS route, and plan and teach accordingly. However, many colleges are now only enabling triple science pupils with A* /A as it is easier for them than the work they need to put into the transition for those from grade B or below or Double science. The most disadvantaged are those DS students who attempt an A level with a C grade from the lower tier, as they have not had the breadth of content of DS higher tier. It might not be the case – it might be that they can and do succeed with the right transition – but it requires a commitment and willingness from post-16 teachers to provide this” Schools can already offer it…there are curriculum model implications for each school which is a matter for their internal timetabling. Not just timetabling – its’ more a commitment to providing a curriculum that meeting pupils needs It is fair to say that TS students who are made to take it in DS time are disadvantaged also, and this too has the potential to put students off taking it post-16. This is the key point from the Maintaining Curiosity report – it is the lack of sufficient curriculum time and quality of teaching which are the limiting factors to pupils’ success With the Triple science arguments… give a wider perspective – the issue is that for some pupils Triple is right and the depth it allows them motivates them as they like the challenge and it suits their interests and helps them move to post16 sciences. However double science level and content is right choice for other pupils , particularly for pupils who have are want to spend their curriculum time in other areas i.e. sports, music, arts, humanities before specialising in post16 science. it has been effective for over 25 years and has encouraged more girls to take science post16. However triple science also provides other possibilities. The issue is how teachers in post-16 offer the right transition from different pathways
- *25% lower than the 31% target mainly due to switch to linear assessment leading schools to pull out and change to double, ‘computer science’ as a science subject counting towards the Ebacc This number has since risen from this report.