When the Art of Teaching Meets the Science of Learning

Mr Derek Wise

Cramlington Community High School
United Kingdom

PROBABLY everyone would agree that teachers need a range of teaching and learning strategies to call upon. Many teachers will assume that they have this range. But how broad is this repertoire? Does it range from teacher-centred to student-centred? Are our teachers able to switch effortlessly between methods, choosing according to the needs of a particular group, on a particular day, or to a particular topic? The evidence isn’t very encouraging:
‘In many instances, perhaps even the majority, the grounds on which teachers adopt particular teaching methods are manifold, but rarely do they include knowledge based on informed practice. Rather, teaching methods are based on teachers’ past teaching and learning experiences, as well as on personal traits and preferences. Some of these reflect the way they were taught at school. Others reflect their own learning style preferences. Over the passage of time, however, it appears that teachers come to rely on a narrower, rather than broader, range of methods and especially on those from which they derive confidence and comfort and which offer them economy and efficiency of effort in coping with the daily pressures of lesson delivery.’ ¹

Now most of this isn’t our teachers’ fault. When many of them were trained, we didn’t know much about the way the brain worked. Subsequently, at least in the UK, staff development and training has tended to focus on the delivery of a large body of content, embedded within a national curriculum.

Although the emphasis on product, rather than process, has not deterred everyone the rationale underpinning many of our classroom activities has been missing. The reasons for a ‘variety of teaching strategies’, for example, has often been based on experience and logic, rather than research into learning. Like many of my colleagues, I used to think it didn’t matter if there wasn’t any credible research underpinning a particular strategy. If it appeared to work in practice, then that was good enough for me! I was wrong. Fortunately, some of my colleagues rejected such a notion out-of-hand - they wanted to know the theory and how practice related to it. Indeed, if theory and practice is related in your mind, you have a touchstone against which to evaluate. With no theory it becomes ‘Well, it worked out though I don’t know why’. It might not work with another group. Also, there is nothing to encourage further application of the principle!

Breakthrough in Knowledge About Learning

Fortunately over the last 30 years there has been a breakthrough in knowledge about how we learn. Advances in technology mean that we are now able to look inside the human brain whilst it is working, and insights from psychologists, such as Howard Gardner, have raised questions about the nature of intelligence. The most important thing about all of the different fields of study is that they converge in support of certain instructional practices. For example, co-operative learning physiologically engages more of the brain’s neural networks’ through the stimulation of sensory information from kinesthetic, visual and auditory input. Co-operative learning taps into the natural capacity to be engaged socially and emotionally and is particularly favoured by students who have strong interpersonal intelligence traits. It is the convergence of these different fields of study that is enabling us to talk of the Science of Learning.

Teaching and Learning Frameworks

The solution that we have explored is using teaching and learning frameworks. These frameworks blend new understanding from neuroscience cognitive psychology and motivational theory into a coherent whole, and can be used as planning vehicles that put good practice into the right order. Without a coherent structure or framework giving support to teachers, there is a danger of new ideas being adopted in an ad hoc fashion. In the USA, for example, it is commonplace to meet teachers who place themselves in ‘camps’, e.g., ‘I’m co-operative learning’; ‘I’m a brain-based learning teacher’ or ‘I’m into multiple intelligences’.

It is possible to develop understanding of a number of frameworks that cover a repertoire of teaching strategies, from teacher-centred to student-centred. A framework that we have particularly worked with is the Accelerated Learning Cycle, invented and developed in the UK by Alistair Smith. Within the context of a supportive learning environment, this has seven steps:

Remind the students of previous learning that is related to this lesson. An Activity can connect the learning.

2. The Big Picture (within 3-4 minutes)

Explain how this lesson fits into the whole topic of work. This is particularly important at the beginning of a topic.

Within five minutes of the start of the lesson, tell the children what they will have learned by the end.

4. Input/Introduction (10 minutes)

Present new information through as many of the senses as possible VAK (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic)

This is the main chunk of the lesson and provides an activity or variety of activities based on the multiple intelligences, e.g., Activity (10 minutes), Review (2 minutes), New Activity (10-15 minutes), Stop and Review.

Pupils demonstrate in some way what they have learned, perhaps by sharing with a partner or by producing a picture, rhyme, writing, presentation, etc.

7. Review and Preview (5 minutes)

Refer to the learning outcomes. Use memory hooks to help pupils remember.

This framework has provided us with a planning vehicle to put good practice, underpinned with up-to-date knowledge of how children learn, into the right order. Once you have adopted a framework, or a number of frameworks, the advantages of such an approach become evident:

a. A common vocabulary and understanding about the learning process is developed. This then allows peer observation and INSET focused on, say, one specific part of the framework. Colleagues can self-evaluate their development over phases of the framework and the school can develop a matrix of the characteristics of good practice in using the framework. This, for example, might range over a continuum of novice to expert on each part of the framework.

b. Developments in ICT and thinking skills can be related to specific parts of the framework. In other words, the framework becomes a peg on which to hang other hats. Too often, it has been assumed that ICT will transform learning. It won’t if it is being incorporated into a traditional teaching structure but its effects are maximised if it goes hand-in-hand with changes in teaching and learning.

c. Particular areas for skill development, e.g., Independent Learning, can be examined in relation to individual stages of the chosen framework. In relation to this accelerated learning cycle, for example, you may wish to use the activities stage of the cycle to develop more independent learning, through giving students a choice of activities - perhaps giving them the opportunity one week to work on the topic in their favoured learning style. The next week you could develop an area in which the students are weak - or pass the responsibility for learning on to them, by forming them into collaborative problem-solving groups that have to draw their own conclusions, and demonstrate their understanding by making presentations to their peers.

d. Because a large number of colleagues are using a common framework, you can develop protocols and structures that go across the curriculum and are mutually reinforcing. For example, a common protocol for group work/collaborative problem-solving.

e. The students are also able to see all this in practice and their feedback becomes more specific and therefore helpful to colleagues.

f. Finally, it can be seen that an imaginative use of a framework that is based on the principles of effective learning develops independent learning, teamwork, student responsibility and ownership for their own learning, opportunities to demonstrate understanding, etc. If we were trying to develop these characteristics throughout the school, without a common framework or frameworks, how much reinvention of wheels would there be in individual departments? How much coherence would there be? How would we easily be able to identify progress?

It may be argued that this restriction on professional autonomy. My answer to this is that we are talking here about frameworks, not straightjackets. All of our experience indicates that staff become creative and properly critical in their application of the framework. Although, for example our accelerated learning framework suggests using multiple intelligence theory in the activities section, a number of colleagues have preferred to use Gregorcs work.

This is fine, the same underpinning principles are at work - we learn in different ways. Other colleagues have suggested that informing the students of the learning outcomes at the beginning of the lesson may be, in certain instances, prescriptive and foreclosing on original thinking. They have modified the framework by leaving out the sharing of the learning outcomes at the beginning and going almost immediately to the activities section. The review section becomes a debriefing and reflection on the activity and the lessons learnt are then brought together at the end of the session. In this modification, the learning emerges out of the lesson. Now this is just excellent! Isn’t this exactly what we want from our teachers: reflective practitioners, capable of designing and evaluating lessons fit for the purpose intended?

And fitness for purpose is an important concept to grasp. Over the years we would wish to develop an ‘in depth’ knowledge of a number of different frameworks, all with different emphasis, covering the full spectrum of teaching and learning approaches. We would want our staff to be able to choose an appropriate framework, fit for the purpose intended and within the framework the specific teaching strategies used, e.g., role play, simulations, modelling, independent research, collaborative problem-solving, etc., would be as individual as the individual personalities of our teachers.

However, this is just the start of the process because management, training, structures and organisation also have to change in order to support the change to teaching and learning.

Staff Support

At Cramlington Community High School we have supported staff through a range of far reaching initiatives:

• adopting a top-down and bottom-up approach to change, with key members of the leadership team and members of the Research and Development team (open to all members of staff) being involved in discussion, debate, dialogue, and sharing. This involved change to the management structure in the school;

• providing planning time within the school week for teachers to plan and review together. We changed the structure of the school week to achieve an ‘early finish’ on Wednesday afternoons. Students leave campus at 2.00p.m. and staff meet collectively from 2.15 - 4.15 every week for professional development and INSET, not meetings;

• aligning new initiatives with our focus on teaching and learning. In order to avoid ‘overload’ and the ‘one damn thing after another’ syndrome, we have aligned other national initiatives with our priority. For example, we have developed our expertise in ICT to underpin the Accelerated Learning cycle. ICT developments are focused on the individual stages in the cycle, so all staff can see how ICT enhances our model of teaching and learning. In addition, we have incorporated ‘thinking skills’ into the accelerated learning framework and the focus of our performance management objectives is on the learning process;

• we encourage staff to ‘take risks’ in the classroom. One ‘safe’ area for staff to experiment is our Intensive Study Weeks, where the normal segmented timetable is replaced for six weeks of the year by blocks of time for each subject area. For example, we have a succession of whole mornings for Maths, whole days for Science, and so on;

• colleagues are supported in the classroom by a ‘learning coach’. Our teaching and learning co-ordinator - a new post to facilitate enhanced teaching and learning throughout the school - is available to work alongside colleagues in their classrooms and provide support, feedback and examples of different approaches. One technique that has proved to be particularly valuable is the ‘You plan the lesson and I’ll teach it’ and then in the next lesson reversing the process;

• publishing our own training materials, handbooks and planners gives teaching and learning the highest possible profile. All staff receive a teacher planner for recording marks, attendance, etc. However, the first 20 pages of the teacher planner have been customised to the school and 12 pages are devoted to teaching and learning with tips, techniques, etc. All staff are given a handbook on Accelerated Learning written by the Headteacher and the Teaching and Learning Co-ordinator, incorporating ideas submitted by the staff;

• at interview all candidates receive one hour’s introduction to Accelerated Learning and complete a short planning exercise using the cycle as a guide. All new appointees receive a full day’s training on Accelerated Learning. Through the careful, thorough recruitment and induction of new staff, we ensure there is a ‘match’ between the school ethos and new staff and there is a smooth induction into our culture; and,

• keeping true to some important principles of Accelerated Learning, we encourage colleagues to demonstrate their understanding of Accelerated Learning by inviting visitors into their classrooms. We recognise Radio WIIFM (What’s In It For Me?) by awarding every member of staff willing to demonstrate Accelerated Learning in practice with a £50 training credit!

Teachers as Designers of the Learning Experience

What we have advocated in this paper is the use of teaching and learning frameworks to support our teachers in applying the new science of learning. As a profession, we have been bedeviled by an over-emphasis on teaching, as compared to learning.

Recently the President of the General Teaching Council in the UK, Lord Puttnam, advocated, as his solution to our teacher shortage, the recruiting of out-of-work actors. Teaching was all about performance wasn’t it? Well, performance is important but by over-emphasising it, attention is switched away from the learners.

Our teachers need to be designers or architects of the learning experience, as well as performers. Responsibility for learning needs to be shared with the learners! Perhaps we should think of the teacher as a choreographer, creating and designing the steps for the dancers, and occasionally taking personal part in the performance. Certainly the use of teaching and learning frameworks promotes this approach and puts the learner back into the centre of the picture.

Does Our New Approach Work?

Finally, does it work? Our exam results have rocketed and are the best ever. The National Schools Inspectorate (OFSTED) described us (2001) as a ‘strikingly successful school’ and ‘an exciting place in which to learn’. Gordon Dryden, author of The Learning Revolution, which has sold 10 million copies worldwide, recently visited the school (July 2002) and declared that we were the best state school he had seen worldwide for combining the imaginative and effective use of ICT with new ways of teaching and learning.

All of this has been achieved not simply by imposing teaching and learning frameworks on a traditional school structure. If you are serious about learning you need to redesign the school around it:
‘What we need is a metamorphosis of education - from the cocoon a butterfly should emerge, improvement only gives us a faster caterpillar’ 2

References

1. The Learning Focused School: Clive Dimmock, Falmer Press, 2000.

2. B.H. Bathany, n Systemic Change - Touchstones for the Future (Ed.) Patrick Jenlink (1996).

3. Additional Information on Accelerated Learning can be found in:

• Accelerated Learning in Practice, Alistair Smith, Network Press (1998).
• Accelerated Learning in the Classroom, Alistair Smith, Network Press (1996).
• Creating an Accelerated Learning School, Derek Wise and Mark Lovatt, Network Educational Press (2000).

Alistair Smith’s website is at: http://www.alite.co.uk/

Read  the Focus Paper Online Discussion on this paper.

Join the Theme 2 Online Discussion to comment on this paper.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Mr Derek Wise was appointed as Head of Cramlington Community High School, Northumberland, in the United Kingdom, in 1990. After graduating from the University of Hull, he completed an MA in American History at the University of Keele. His interest in American History was later to lead to the publication of The American West (Heinemann, 1984). He started his teaching career in Suffolk and subsequently taught in Doncaster, Wolverhampton and Wiltshire. He was a Deputy Head in two inner city schools before taking up his headship at Cramlington Community High School, which is a 13-18 Comprehensive School of some 1,600 students. It received specialist college status (Science) in September 2002.

In 1999-2000 Derek Wise was seconded for a year to the Newcastle Education Action Zone as Project Director. He serves on the BBC Secondary Education Committee.

He is a passionate advocate of comprehensive education and chairs the NE branch of the Centre for the Study of Comprehensive Schools (CSCS). An innovative thinker, he is in demand as a speaker on all issues relating to leadership, creative thinking, and the delivery of effective learning. OFSTED describes his school as ‘strikingly successful’ and its innovative teaching and curriculum has led to excellent exam results with ‘a success for all’ culture. In 1999 the under-16 soccer team were the national ESFA champions and, in 2000, the school received awards for Internationalism and the Basic Skills Agency Quality Mark.

Derek Wise has recently published, with Mark Lovatt, Creating an Accelerated Learning School (Network Press), and is currently engaged on two projects: An Introduction to Accelerated Learning and The Learning Focused School, both for Network Press.

Mr Derek Wise can be contacted by email at: dmwise@rmplc.co.uk.