TLIF

An investigation into student-centred reporting in the online environment

St Mary’s Catholic School, Tauranga (TLIF 1-151)

The quote below is from a learning conversation in which Carter and his teacher discussed a new piece of writing in relation to his personal learning goal. Together, they then went on to set a new learning goal. The conversation was recorded and shared on Seesaw, along with a scan of Carter’s work.

Teacher: Do you like writing, Carter?

Carter: Yes, it’s my favourite activity to do.

Teacher: Why do you think it’s important to learn how to write, Carter?

Carter: Because lots of times you have to write; like, say, if you’re writing a letter or you have to answer a question by writing. And it helps you to learn and your brain grows bigger.

Overview

Teachers at St Mary’s Catholic School were concerned that despite efforts to create a learner-centred environment, their students were not as agentic as they would have liked. Most students were unable to articulate the learning task or its context. They could not talk about their learning in relation to the success criteria or identify their next learning steps. They relied on their teachers to direct the learning. When asked, students could not describe how the use of digital devices might support their learning. The school’s data also showed that parents and whānau were interested in greater collaboration, but most did not know how to do this in the online environment and were not offered such opportunities. Teachers were unsure about how to grow student agency and how to make formative assessment and critical conversations an integral part of teaching and learning. It was apparent that everybody needed support to play their part in growing students as twenty-first-century learners.

The school had a tradition of collaborative learning and a willingness to innovate, supported by the stance that mistakes are to be expected, inspected, and respected. This project built on those strengths to facilitate learning for everybody in the school community, particularly regarding clarity. Implementing an approach to formative assessment that sees it as being both ‘as’ and ‘for’ learning empowered students with a greater sense of their agency and led to academic success. As we learn from Carter, writing became fun and felt purposeful. The use of online tools enabled connections to be created between the learning conversations students participated in at home and school.

The inquiry story

This three-year inquiry project involved approximately ten teachers of students in years 2–6. The makeup of the project lead team changed in this time, partly due to staff turnover, but also because of a decision to expand the team to include the leaders of the school’s four teaching teams. This was done to achieve greater consistency in practice across the school. The inquiry process was guided by the Spirals of Inquiry framework. Each teacher selected a focus group of five students who they identified as achieving below expectation for writing at the start of the project.

What was the focus?

The focus of this project was on enhancing student agency and raising achievement by taking a student-centred approach and engaging students, teachers, and whānau in a reciprocal learning partnership. The intention was that students would be able to talk about and share their progress in an online environment using progressions of learning and that they would be able to provide feedback about their learning to their teachers and whānau.

While the project intended that all students would benefit, there was a focus on priority learners: Māori and Pasifika students, those from low socio-economic backgrounds or who were underachieving, and those with additional learning needs. Likewise, while the team hoped to see improvement in all core curriculum areas, it focused its attention on writing.

The project’s central inquiry question was, “How do teachers, as they inquire into their own teaching practice, make an impact on student learning and assessment capability in an online environment?”

The team established two connected learning outcomes:

·       Students are able to talk about their learning and find evidence of meeting the success criteria.

·       Students are able to share this with teacher or peer, using the progressions to support their assessment.

What did the teachers try?

The project team theorised that if students are clear about their learning (that is, they know what they are learning and why, what they need to do next and how to get there), their attitude, achievement, and sense of agency will improve. Achieving clarity requires pedagogical practices that combine ‘assessment for learning’ with ‘assessment as learning’. While most New Zealand teachers are familiar with the former concept, the latter term may be less familiar. The Education Review Office describes assessment as learning as “the process of students monitoring their own learning and progress. It occurs when students understand how they are learning and what[KD1]  they need to do to improve. They can interpret their assessment information from different sources and use it to make decisions about their own learning” (Education Review Office, March 2007). The team also theorised that the use of online tools would enable learning conversations to connect between home and school.

The innovations included the following:

·       The team constructed learning progressions that made the school’s expectations for progress in writing visible to everybody in the St Mary’s School community. The progressions are now displayed throughout the school and supported by other resources, such as exemplars and rubrics. The latter are co-constructed with students in relationship to particular learning tasks.

·       Writing progressions, student voice data, recorded learning conversations, and Assessment for Learning matrices are uploaded to Seesaw and shared with parents and whānau. The latter is used to monitor students’ progress in terms of their clarity of learning. The progressions have been progressively modified to make them more child-centred.

·       A new report format was developed that includes spaces for student and parent reflection.

·       Time for reflection is now timetabled into the day and week and underpinned by routines and processes to ensure this activity is worthwhile. Reflection involves students in making their learning goals explicit and demonstrating evidence of their progress towards achieving them. Every student has a learning buddy with whom to write their self-reflection and senior students record their reflections independently on Seesaw.

·       Teacher professional learning and a ‘writing toolkit’ provide clarity about the school’s expectations for teaching writing. Shared expectations for teachers include ensuring that students always understand the purpose and audience for their writing, establishing a global learning intention when planning for writing and a specific learning intention for each lesson, and recording the learning intentions and success criteria in their modelling books.

·       Across the school, teachers are expected to use the same language for talking about assessment and writing. The use of consistent terms deepens everybody’s understanding of what they mean.

·       The language of assessment being ‘as’ and ‘for’ learning is being incorporated into teacher professional learning and appraisal conversations. That is, teachers are supported to gain clarity about where they are, the improvements they need to make, and how to make those improvements.

What happened as a result of this innovation?

Students

Student agency has increased significantly. The majority of students:

·       see themselves as writers and enjoy writing;

·       can talk about their learning with their peers and teachers;

·       can describe what they can do, where they are at, and how they know this;

·       understand and can describe their next steps for learning;

·       use progressions, rubrics, and success criteria to support their self-assessment;

·       treat mistakes as learning opportunities;

·       use Seesaw to share their progress.

Whānau support was motivating for students, leading to more discussion at home and, in some case, students wanting to write more at home.

Achievement data shows accelerated improvement, for example:

·       In 2016, 55 students were below the expectations then set by the National Standards in writing, and 15 were at the expected level; in 2018, this changed to[KD2]  33 below and 82 at the expected level.

·       In 2016, 18 Māori and Pasifika students were below the expectations set by the National Standard in writing; in 2018, this dropped to 4.

Teachers

Teachers at St Mary’s take collective responsibility for student learning. They have developed capabilities in ‘assessment for and as learning’ practices that include:

·       using a common language about learning;

·       working with students to develop rubrics for tasks that link to the progressions;

·       using progressions to help students to identify their learning needs;

·       conducting workshops with students on how to use the progressions and how to be clear about the learning;

·       shifting the locus of control to students and fostering a growth mindset;

·       fostering parent contributions to their children’s learning journey, including through Seesaw and the new report format;

·       using the online environment to foster partnerships with students, parents, and whānau.

The content uploaded to Seesaw is moving towards evidence of ongoing learning – learning as it happens. The recording of Carter’s learning conversation with his teacher provides an example of this. Seesaw is also used to celebrate when a child has achieved a learning goal.

Review of the writing progressions and improved teacher knowledge and understandings have led to teachers making more accurate overall teacher judgements.

Parents and whānau

More whānau understand the learning that is taking place at school and are sharing collective responsibility for that learning through Seesaw. Whānau recognise the value of collaborating in their child’s learning in real time. The recorded conversations help whānau understand what they can do to support their children’s learning at home. Parents are making more visits to the school and offering more feedback online.

What did they learn?

The team found that the innovation with the single greatest impact on student achievement occurred through students sharing learning conversations through Seesaw. Seesaw enabled whānau to celebrate their children’s progress and be part of the learning conversations with the teacher. The provision of audio recordings, progressions, images of student work, reflections, and other visuals provided parents with tools they could use to have learning conversations with their children that align with the progressions.

They also found that the students whose achievement improved the most were those:

·       who were most advanced in their assessment as learning journey and had greatest clarity about their learning;

·       whose whānau were most excited and engaged with their child’s learning;

·       whose teachers most effectively modelled assessment for and as learning practices.

The team concluded that the opportunity and ability to talk about learning to a teacher, peer, or whānau member supports student progress in writing.

Overall, the project reinforces the importance of ensuring that that all those with a part to play in children’s learning are clear what they are learning, how, and the path they are following. This fosters learner agency and academic success. It requires an approach that combines assessment for and as learning. It also requires consistency in language, processes, and systems. The project also shows that, used thoughtfully, digital tools can help students, teachers, and whānau take collective responsibility for learning.

Inquiry team

Initially, the project was led by Janet McCarroll and Jana Benson, supported by deputy principal, Anna MacKinnon. During the project, Janet and Jana left, and Megan Akkerman took up the leadership role. The initial inquiry team was made up of Lisa Broadmoor, Gerardine Robbie, Gavin Hesqua, Janine Goldsmith, and Joanne Meehan. Membership of this group also changed in the course of the project.

The inquiry team was supported by people with expertise in a range of fields, including:

·       Ruth Pepper, Te Toi Tupu, University of Waikato

·       Mark Treadwell, Mark Treadwell Consultancy

·       Mark Osborne, Core Education

·       Dee Reid, Director, K.I.S Education Ltd

·       Professor Roberta Hunter, Institute of Education, Massey University

·       Professor Tony Rickards, Curtin University?

·       Mary Jamieson, Te Whai Toi Tangata, Institute of Professional Learning at the University of Waikato.

For further information

If you would like to learn more about this project, please contact the project leader, Megan Akkerman at makkerman@stmarystga.school.nz

Reference list

[We’ve included the references cited in your proposal, as well as those in the final report. Please delete any that seem irrelevant.]

Absolum, M. (2006). Clarity in the classroom: Using formative assessment: Building learner focused relationships. Auckland: Hachette Livre NZ Ltd.

Absolum, M., Flockton, L., J., Hipkins, R., & Reid, I. (2009). Directions for Assessment in New Zealand. Developing students’ assessment capabilities. Retrieved from Te Kete Ipurangi: http://www.tki.org.nz/assessmrnt/research/mainpage/directions

Benson, J. (2012). An investigation into the effective use of an IT-based learning management system to support learning in a New Zealand primary school. Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University, Perth, WA

Bolstad, R. & Gilbert, J. with McDowall, S., Bull, A., Boyd, S., & Hipkins, R. (2012). Supporting future-orientated learning and teaching: A New Zealand perspective. Report prepared for the Ministry of Education. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications

Bull, A. & Gilbert J. (2012). Swimming out of our depth: Leading learning in 21^st century schools. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.

Clarke, S. (2001). Unlocking formative assessment: Practical strategies for enhancing pupils’ learning in the primary classroom. London: Hodder Education.

Clarke, S. (2008). Active learning through formative assessment. London: Hodder Education.

Education Review Office. (2007). The collection and use of assessment information in schools. Wellington: Education Review Office. [Our addition – only if you want it.]

Gadd, M. (2014). What is critical in the effective teaching of writing? A study of the classroom practice of some year 5 to 8 teachers in the New Zealand context. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Auckland.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of 800+ meta-analyses on achievement. Abingdon: Routledge.

McCarroll, J. (2014). An investigation into a student-centered approach to assessment and self-reporting using e-Portfolios. Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University, Perth, WA.

McCarroll, J., Benson, J. & Vincent, S. (2010). Implementing a parent portal (SMS-LMSv2) lessons learnt at St Mary’s Catholic School, Tauranga. San Francisco: Creative Commons.

Ministry of Education. (2006). Enabling the 21^st century learner: An e-Learning action plan for schools 2006–2010. Wellington: Learning Media Limited.

Ministry of Education (2011). Position Paper: Assessment (Schooling Sector) Ko te Whārangi Takotoranga Ārunga, Ā te Tāhuhu o te Mātauranga, te Matekitenga, 24 September 2010.

Timperley, H., Kaser, L., & Halbert, J. (2014). A framework for transforming learning in schools: Innovation and the spiral of inquiry. Centre for Strategic Education, Seminar Series Paper No. 234.

Formative assessment in the classroom and school. UNESCO IIEP Learning Portal. https://learningportal.iiep.unesco.org/en/issue-briefs/improve-learning/schools-and-classrooms/formative-assessment-in-the-classroom-and

What is assessment for learning? http://assessment.tki.org.nz/Assessment-for-learning/Underlying-principles-of-assessment-for-learning/What-is-assessment-for-learning

---

 [KD1]https://www.ero.govt.nz/publications/the-collection-and-use-of-assessment-information-in-schools/introduction/

How would you feel about our incorporating this definition? Could stick with the UNESCO one, but I couldn’t actually find it on the page.

 [KD2]Please check that we have these figures correct. The graph and text don’t seem to quite align, but that could just be us. 😊