Writing New Schemes of Work

The new national curriculum gives us the opportunity to review our schemes of work. I have been reviewing what we deliver and the considering the purpose of our curriculum over the past few months, but now I need to act ready for September.

I have asked myself a few questions that I need to consider and allow for in the writing of schemes of work. The appear below in no particular order.

1. What resources, techniques and lesson styles will support students with low level literacy or slow processing skills?
2. What resources do we need to incorporate into lessons to help EAL students develop their level of English and understand the science being covered while their specialist vocabulary is low.
3. At key stage 3 are we using the interests of the students to engage them and help understand the relevance of what is being taught?
4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of our students and how do our schemes of work use that?
5. How are the skills needed at GCSE being developed at Key Stage 3?
6. How does the curriculum prepare the students for the science they will need in their everyday lives?
7. Does what we do at GCSE prepare students for A-level? Does it encourage students to continue with science to A-level?
8. What methods can we use to differentiate work and what will this look like in a scheme of work?
9. What contexts will engage students (especially girls)?
10. How are G&T students identified and then stretched and challenged?
11. How do the schemes of work support intervention methods?
12. How are lessons and series of lessons structured to allow marking to support progression?
13. What does a good science lesson "look" like?
14. How will scheme of work help to promote independent learning?

In terms of things that I feel I would like to include in the scheme of work:

1. lesson activities
1. questions
2. resources
3. presentations
4. worksheets
5. support resources
6. practical requisitions and risk assessments
7. descriptions of activities
2. learning objectives
1. differentiated
2. including skills
3. knowledge
4. linked to prior and future learning
3. learning outside the classroom
1. field work
2. homework/prep
3. competitions
4. trips
5. ICT resources to support optional extra curricular work
6. revision resources
4. overview of the scheme and the progression of ideas throughout it

Other things to consider:

1. time scale of rewrite
2. review of the schemes
3. how to store, share and organise resources
4. where should assessment fit into the scheme?
5. what life skills should we be delivering?

Lastly, is it possible to collaborate with other heads of science in the GSA or Allied Schools?

Using Simulations in the Classroom

Due to the AFL strategies and observation foci I am well aware of how I should be using questioning in the classroom; aware of how I should be making learning outcomes clear and comment marking; I am also aware that I should have a variety of activities to engage the Learners. I am also in the process of considering the effectiveness of practicals in lessons as there is some degree of thought that a well designed demonstration is more helpful to learning than a practical.

However, I have never considered the effect and advantages of using simulations. Until now.

I have been involved in a project run by the science learning centres and Sheffield Hallam University, as part of which I have decide to use simulations more and see the impact.

Sheffield Hallam University kindly gave me access to sunflower learning for my students and myself. I used it with year 11 to look at split ring commutators and slip rings on the ac generators. The students accessed the software in a variety of ways. Some using the activities that you can set for the students, others just playing with the software without direction. Those that understood best were ones that I questioned and lead through the activities by my questioning. You can make your own resources for the students to use, and I expect that this would be my next step. It would help me and the students focus more closely on the learning objectives that I feel are best approached using the simulations instead of other teaching methods.

I have also used PHeT with year 12. This was to demonstrate the photoelectric effect. It took longer to log onto the computer than for the students to realise there is a threshold frequency. I wait to see if the students remember this experience more because they found out through a simulation.

Although the project has finished I want to continue to see the impact on my teaching and the learning of others of using simulations. My main issue is that at my current school we have access to laptops making it quick and easy to use a simulation as an activity in a lesson. At my new school I will have access to a computer lab, but using computers for 20 minutes of a lesson is going to be as practical.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:Rudgleigh Ave,Bristol,United Kingdom

What makes a good science faculty? (ofsted related post)

I wanted to write up my notes from the 2011 ofsted report about science education in the UK. This should help me gain an idea on how I need to lead my new faculty towards being a strong unit educating our students to the best of our ability.

According to the Ofsted subject report for science, high performing schools have:
i) clear priorities for raising standards
ii) rigorous monitoring and evaluation of performance
iii) challenging target setting for individual pupils (I read this as high expectations of pupil performance)
iv) strong focus on the improvement of the quality of teaching and learning
v) staff planning together and sharing practice

To me this list makes perfect sense. The evaluation is an important part. Do schools and departments really look at what they are doing and the impact it is making or do they hope that it is happening? What does it take for something to genuinely be embedded and how can you tell?

Good evaluation means that clear priorities can be set and monitoring means that we can work towards reaching them and not going off target.

In terms of working together and sharing practice, I have seen this happen and know what it can look like. Staff planning together formally because they team teach or are teaching the same topic and also informally as they sit in the staffroom and discuss lessons. However, not all of the schools I have worked in have had a culture of discussing teaching and learning. And I do have a question mark hanging over what makes the difference.

The ofsted report goes on to discuss the curriculum of an outstanding science department.
- The curriculum will be planned collaboratively using the best ideas from the team and there will be a forum for sharing practice.
- There is a 'plan, do, review' cycle of the curriculum plans
- There are cross curricular elements of the schemes of work, allowing students to see the uses of science in society
- Clubs are used to engage students with less focus and confidence in science
- Key stage 4 curriculum options are best suited to the students

It is interesting that the clubs can be used to engage less focused students, when often they are targeted at gifted and talented and/or students. This is something I plan to bare in mind. But it poses a challenge, how do you engage students in science during their own time when they won't engage in lessons?

The leadership and management of an outstanding science faculty has a long list of characteristics:
1. There is tracking of the progress and attainment of students
2. Intervention and planning is informed by this tracking data
3. There are clear roles and responsibilities within the faculty
4. A clear standard of the quality of teaching
5. Any evaluation takes into account the views of all the major stakeholders
6. There is a vision for the inclusion of all Learners, breaking down the barriers to engagement
7. Leadership will have good links with parents and other outside agencies
8. Departmental training is focused on areas that most teachers find problematic
9. The departmental handbook has (i) clear guidance on teaching and learning and (ii) procedures for assessment for informing planning
10. "How science works" is a significant part of the schemes of work
11. Management must challenge the performance of less effective teachers
12. There is a balanced view of the strengths and weaknesses resulting from systematic monitoring of standards
13. Tracking of students will focus on HSW as well as knowledge and understanding
14. Information on the progress of students should be passed on to the next teachers
15. Training of teachers gives subject leaders a better understanding of the issues effecting standards

From this list my main issue is with taking the views of stakeholders into account. I have managed to build relationships with parents in my current role by making myself available to them so I hope to do that in my next role.

The teaching in good science departments is described as having variety of activities such as presentations by students, investigative work, research, projects, use of models, demonstrations, use of video clips and other media resources, card sorts and group discussions. Teachers don't talk for too long, they manage time well and provide sufficient challenge in lessons. The departments also have lively and enthusiastic science teachers who are reflective and keen to improve. There is also good assessment, peer and self assessment as well as marking of work.

I will use this when I review what is happening in my science faculty. How enthusiastic are the staff and how creative are they in the types of activity they are using.

All of the comments made in the ofsted report make sense. But seeing them written in one place help to focus be mind and give me a vision for the development of my own faculty in the future.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Making and Sharing Resources

I have recently been re-inspired to make resources by the Times Educational Supplement offering £1000 to the five resource contributors that generate the most interest (OK, I am not quite sure how they are going to decide who gets the prizes, but I believe that quality and quantity are involved).

I have re-written key stage 3 resources four times in 9 years and I am on my fourth or fifth re-write of key stage 4, thanks to moving schools and changing exam boards twice on top of the specification changes in 2006 and 2011. I find it gets tedious. I would rather add to and adapt than be forced to change everything to the new subtleties of a different exam specification.

And I have found it necessary to change: "Miss, how do you answer question 3?" "Oh, that's right... Class you can either listen to me explain question 3 or leave it out as you don't need to know about isotopes in this part of the specification." I subscribe to the idea "teach some of it well, rather than all of it badly", so I am keen to teach extra content just so they can do a worksheet I made/acquired several years before.

So what does make a quality resource?

The presentation: published resources always look better than home made ones. I put this down to the graphics around the titles, the footers at the bottom of the page completing the work so the content "ends", the spacing between lines of text and blocks of text, and the quality and alignment of the images used. Published resources all seem to fit to a layout that pulls all the scheme together and makes them seem polished.
It is possible to copy the themes of published schemes to make your own work look good. Choosing a sans serif font and using 1.3 line spacing helps. So far mine still look more "high street" equivalent to the "designer", but better than most!

Ease of understanding: too many of the in-house resources I have come across are not sensitive to the literacy levels of students in the target age group. How much text will a student engage with? (Usually not much.) How many key words should be used? I find many badly phrased questions in resources, and unfortunately published revision guides with questions can be amongst the worst offenders.

Adaptability of the resource: a key feature in my opinion. Is it possible for the resource to be used in a variety of ways by teachers with different styles? Often PowerPoint Presentations found in shared drives on school servers are tailored to the class of the teacher who wrote it. This is fair enough, we should personalise our lessons to the needs of groups, but is the personalised version the right place to start and share?

Meeting the learning objectives: most importantly does the resource support the learning of the students? Does it make them think? Does the resource fill time or move on the understanding of the learner? Does the resource support the self-assessment of students? What is its purpose, and it is evident looking at the resource?

I am probably most fussy about how a resource looks. Mainly because I believe this is the most difficult to get right. Not every teacher has an eye for what is aesthetically pleasing. (Deleting the bullet point from a PowerPoint and removing the indent from the first line in the paragraph, yet leaving the indent in the other lines bugs me).

Despite finding re-writing tedious and frustrating and finding the urge to moan about OfQual and others, I know that I would rather rely on the resources I make. So I return to my PowerBook and put together GCSE lesson plans and resources to support the development of how science works skills (newly emphasised) through the context of speed, acceleration and forces. While also hoping to create activities and worksheets that will help students pass exams too.

The £1000? That would be a fantastic bonus, if and when I get round to sharing them via the TES.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:Rudgleigh Ave,,United Kingdom