Saturday School - What about the Gap? - Part 2
This post follows on from Saturday School - What about the Gap? - Part 1
The second session I chose was led by Mary Myatt and entitled 'Curriculum: Controversies, Concepts and Conversations. She began by talking about some of the thorny issues that crop up when curriculum development is being discussed: the notion that skills are transferable across subjects; the ever-present false dichotomy of knowledge versus skills when they are intrinsically linked; the privileging of activity and task completion over thinking and learning (should we ask 'Have you learned?' instead of 'Have you finished?'?), leading to what she called a 'cardboard curriculum'; the superficial links that can be made in the attempt to plan cross-curricular themes or topics; the loss of entitlement to a broad and balanced curriculum and access to powerful knowledge for pupils who are too often taken out of class for interventions (this one really hit home).
Mary spoke about the need for demanding work and said that the strength and ambition of provision is reflected in what learners say in answer to 'When do you work hard?' She challenged us to consider whether we ration demanding, challenging work based on what we think learners will be able to do, resulting in a 'diminished diet'. This has implications for the way in which many teachers still approach differentiation. High expectations, within a low threat environment can have extraordinary results, particularly for less advantaged learners: Mary made reference to a study* which showed that reading challenging texts aloud to Y8 students over a 12 week period, helped those with a reading age of 12 months or more behind their chronological age to make 16 months’ progress in their reading comprehension. All pupils made an average of 9 months' progress.
Mary spoke about the need for demanding work and said that the strength and ambition of provision is reflected in what learners say in answer to 'When do you work hard?' She challenged us to consider whether we ration demanding, challenging work based on what we think learners will be able to do, resulting in a 'diminished diet'. This has implications for the way in which many teachers still approach differentiation. High expectations, within a low threat environment can have extraordinary results, particularly for less advantaged learners: Mary made reference to a study* which showed that reading challenging texts aloud to Y8 students over a 12 week period, helped those with a reading age of 12 months or more behind their chronological age to make 16 months’ progress in their reading comprehension. All pupils made an average of 9 months' progress.
David Didau and David Williams continued the theme of meeting the needs of disadvantaged learners with their session, How to Make the Curriculum for Wales Work. They put forward the argument that in order achieve the Four Purposes of CfW, learners will need access to a 'knowledge-rich' curriculum. David D drew on material also included in his book 'Making Kids Cleverer - A Manifesto for Closing the Disadvantage Gap' in which he suggests that to avoid the systematic privileging of the most privileged, all learners should have access to a broad, culturally-rich and coherent curriculum. The importance of reading and of challenging texts was again underlined by David W, including the need to balance depth and breadth.
Rajvi-Glasbrook-Griffiths' session focused on the challenge of deciding what should and, as importantly, should not be included in a curriculum. Making the right choices is far more complex than drawing up a list of 'things' to be covered and in the case of the new Curriculum for Wales, responsibility for those choices lies with teachers. The starting point needs to be 'teacher development', referring to work on curriculum by Lawrence Stenhouse. Teachers need to understand different curriculum planning models - spiral, T-shaped - for example; they need to have a clear understanding of progression within disciplines in order to achieve coherence; they need to reconcile the need for a nationally equitable offer with local issues and the interests of their learners. Rajvi referred to E D Hirsch's, comments on France's fall from being one of the most educationally equitable countries to one of the least: he cites the change to its national curriculum in 1989 which removed prescribed content, organised in a systematic way to build knowledge over time, as the root cause and claims that all students, but particularly those who are disadvantaged, lose out. It is important that teachers do not underestimate the complexity of creating a curriculum for all.
I cannot do justice here to Oliver Caviglioli's session on Dual Coding for Effective Explanations as a large part of it was an extremely powerful practical demonstration of the effectiveness of using images and diagrams both to learn and recall new information.
My key 'take-aways' were:
1.Using dual coding reduces cognitive load, meaning that more challenging new material can be understood and retained, benefiting all learners.
2. Spatial thinking is the foundation of abstract thought.
I highly recommend that you visit his website, read his book and follow him on social media.
https://www.olicav.com/
Clare Sealy's final session of the day, Disciplinary Knowledge for Beginners, dealt with the role of different kinds of knowledge in the curriculum. Beginning by referring to Michael Young's work on 'powerful knowledge' (knowledge beyond the everyday kind; knowledge requiring a systematic, specialised way of thinking), Clare then posed the question of 'whose knowledge' that should be. Young's belief is that inclusion of such knowledge in the curriculum is a matter of social justice. Teachers need a clear appreciation that disciplines from which subjects in the curriculum are derived include substantive (established as fact) and disciplinary (knowing how that knowledge came to be established) knowledge. She also stressed the need to maintain the integrity of subjects when making cross-curricular links and there was a further reminder that skills are not transferable. The example was given of 'observing' and how this would not be the same in science and in art. The aim of building 'cultural capital' in order to narrow the disadvantage gap is well-known; Clare added to this the need to build social, moral and spiritual capital through our curricula.
So much food for thought from an inspiring day. A huge thank you to all involved.
Rajvi-Glasbrook-Griffiths' session focused on the challenge of deciding what should and, as importantly, should not be included in a curriculum. Making the right choices is far more complex than drawing up a list of 'things' to be covered and in the case of the new Curriculum for Wales, responsibility for those choices lies with teachers. The starting point needs to be 'teacher development', referring to work on curriculum by Lawrence Stenhouse. Teachers need to understand different curriculum planning models - spiral, T-shaped - for example; they need to have a clear understanding of progression within disciplines in order to achieve coherence; they need to reconcile the need for a nationally equitable offer with local issues and the interests of their learners. Rajvi referred to E D Hirsch's, comments on France's fall from being one of the most educationally equitable countries to one of the least: he cites the change to its national curriculum in 1989 which removed prescribed content, organised in a systematic way to build knowledge over time, as the root cause and claims that all students, but particularly those who are disadvantaged, lose out. It is important that teachers do not underestimate the complexity of creating a curriculum for all.
I cannot do justice here to Oliver Caviglioli's session on Dual Coding for Effective Explanations as a large part of it was an extremely powerful practical demonstration of the effectiveness of using images and diagrams both to learn and recall new information.
My key 'take-aways' were:
1.Using dual coding reduces cognitive load, meaning that more challenging new material can be understood and retained, benefiting all learners.
2. Spatial thinking is the foundation of abstract thought.
I highly recommend that you visit his website, read his book and follow him on social media.
https://www.olicav.com/
Clare Sealy's final session of the day, Disciplinary Knowledge for Beginners, dealt with the role of different kinds of knowledge in the curriculum. Beginning by referring to Michael Young's work on 'powerful knowledge' (knowledge beyond the everyday kind; knowledge requiring a systematic, specialised way of thinking), Clare then posed the question of 'whose knowledge' that should be. Young's belief is that inclusion of such knowledge in the curriculum is a matter of social justice. Teachers need a clear appreciation that disciplines from which subjects in the curriculum are derived include substantive (established as fact) and disciplinary (knowing how that knowledge came to be established) knowledge. She also stressed the need to maintain the integrity of subjects when making cross-curricular links and there was a further reminder that skills are not transferable. The example was given of 'observing' and how this would not be the same in science and in art. The aim of building 'cultural capital' in order to narrow the disadvantage gap is well-known; Clare added to this the need to build social, moral and spiritual capital through our curricula.
So much food for thought from an inspiring day. A huge thank you to all involved.
Comments
Post a Comment