I came across SOLO taxonomy via a colleague. This colleague is extremely well read and understands a great deal about aspects of pedagogy. I was discussing how I wanted my A-level students to progress so they would ultimately be able to
link their ideas and apply them in new situations.
He photocopied me the page, I read it and decided that I agreed with it.
Greg Seal sent me a copy of Pam Hooke's book about SOLO taxonomy and since then I have used SOLO taxonomy to help me write learning objectives for GCSE classes.
Lucie Golton presented to us at tweet up York about how she shares the SOLO objectives on a continuum. This is something that I now do too with GCSE students.
I also hold it in my mind when developing schemes and lessons for A-level physics. I want to make sure that my students get the first stage before moving on as it will just cause confusion to use V=IR to answer a question about a lightning conductor they don't know what it means.
I often create presentations with the SOLO symbols on them to show what SOLO level the students should be working at.
I have used the SOLO hexagons. But not to great effect. The students either made tenuous links or were unhappy to make links. I wasn't able to get around the groups and ask questions about all the links and thus it didn't help me learn about what they understood or give them feedback on misconceptions.
The next step for me is to use SOLO taxonomy to help write the new key stage 3 schemes of work. I think it explains well the type of progression I would like students to make within science and I can use it to set differentiate learning objectives that I can grade the students against.
SOLO taxonomy is rather like Blooms Taxonomy, it is part of what I do but not all of what I do.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad