Expertise Exchange #9 Spring 2024

Expertise ExThe Expertise Exchange Issue 9 Spring 2 May 2024

CONTENTS ISSUE #9 May 2024 Senior Leadership Learning from the Trust Conference Hannah Griffiths is Deputy Headteacher at Shire Oak Academy. Here, she reflects on the sessions she attendended as part of the Mercian Trust Staff Conference Self-efficacy- The next big lever for learning Stacey Smith is a Teacher of English at Queen Mary's High School. Here, she reflects on Dr Chris Baker's session at the Trust Conference, and considers the implications of her learning in the classroom. How to implement messy marking in your classroom Harouna Savadogo is Head of Modern Foreign Languages at Q3 Academy Great Barr. Here, Harouna reflects on a session he attended at the Trust Conference 'Creating Feedback Classrooms' by Jon Gilbert Revolutionising Creative Arts education: Celebrating a year of innovation and collaboration Michelle Martin, Trust Lead Professional for Creative Arts, reflects on the work undertaken by the Creative Arts Professional Learning Community this academic year. Educational Debate: Does group work ever work? Matthew Moore, Queen Mary’s High School, debates the benefits and drawbacks of collaborative learning. Philosophies in Education:False Contexts and Contextual Learning Ben Adams, Trust Lead Professional and Head of Maths at Queen Mary's High School reflects on the relevance and importance of context in the learning process. 10 ideas for teaching mixed ability MfL classes Trust Lead Professional for Naomi Beer and Head of Department at Queen Mary's High School shares 10 strategies to ensure high levels of challenge in the Key Stage Four MfL classroom. 4 5 7 9 11 14 12 2

How useful is cognitive science in the everyday classroom? Abbie Hornsby is a teacher of MfL at Q3 Academy Langley. Here, she debates the usefulness of cognitive science in the classroom. Teachers vs. Tech: To what extent does educational technology help or hinder teaching and learning? Imran Khan is Assistant Headteacher responsible for teaching and learning at Shire Oak Academy. In this debate, he presents the debate surrounding educational technologies and their place in the classroom. How useful is cognitive science for the History classroom? Jodie Waters is Head of History at Shire Oak Academy. Here, Jodie debates the merits of cognitive practice in the teaching of History. What are the arguments for and against collaborative learning approaches in the MfL classroom? Soma Daly is a teacher of MfL at Aldridge School. Here, she discusses the benefits and drawbacks of collaborative learning approaches in the MfL classroom. 16 18 20 23 26 Don't make school improvement complicated: Using Alastair Campbell's Hourglass of Change Keziah Featherstone is Executive Headteacher at The Mercian Trust. Here, she reflects on some of the challenges of school improvement and how simplicity is key. 3

It was the combination of workshops that was so powerful in getting me to really think about the practice in our academy. Each workshop alone would have been an opportunity to reflect but all three together created a flow which kept me thinking long after the conference, ‘United by our common purpose’ finished. Sam Twiselton’s session balanced the theory and practice so perfectly. She outlined her and others’ research, how this influenced policy and how this can be implemented in schools. A succinct model that could be replicated in our own CPD to explain the journey from research to implementation. She explained a leader’s role in retention of teachers by developing teachers from task managers to curriculum deliverers through to concept/skill builders. With 20% of teachers leaving in the first two years and 33% leaving in the first five years, it has never been more pertinent to get recruitment and retention right. Having strong teacher mentors in school to help often ‘stuck’ teachers move from task managers to concept skill builders gives everyone a chance to regularly reflect, think and rejuvenate their practice and ultimately enjoy teaching more as they value the learning that is taking students forward. We as leaders need to give teachers the time and space to reconnect with the bigger picture of teaching and value staff by developing them to become experts. Where is our Academy strategy to retain our own teachers, provide great mentoring and structured support to offer ‘wrap around’ care to develop all our teachers into concept/skill builders? Better get writing that... Sam’s thought-provoking first session was followed by a second excellent Sam. This time Sam Crome led us through ‘leading high performing teams’. Within minutes Sam had the virtual room gripped with his quick-fire stats such as ‘90% of organisations agree teamwork is critical but only 25% consider their team to be effective’ and ‘teamwork remains the ultimate edge’. As leaders these are things we’ve all heard before so why did this session resonate more than before? It was the belonging. Research says it really matters: a sense of psychological safety; an environment where you feel safe, trusted, and supported. An environment where you can engage openly and are free to fail. Building the foundations to set ambitious goals and to challenge each other. If you did not attend this session, it's a must as a reminder for how to lead an effective team but also how to be a valuable team member. The session ended with some key takeaways that once we’ve built belonging to activate purpose there are four strategies Reflection Piece: Senior Leadership Learning from the Trust Conference we can use to create the most effective teams: 1. Team mental models and knowledge – more cohesive when there’s secure knowledge 2. Team communication - what are the main methods and logistics? 3. Meetings – with strong psychological safety, lively and full of discussions. And don’t forget the team debrief 4. Team learning and development – coaching and reading together. It certainly made me consider the way I structure delivery, in particular for the teams I lead and how I contribute as a leader in other teams. The final chosen workshop was Jonny Uttley who I’ve had the pleasure of hearing a few times before. He just talks sense. Starting with the probing question of ‘why do you drag yourself into school on a dark, wet February morning when there’s much easier ways to earn money?’. A good reminder and reflection that we are here to make great schools and happy, stronger communities so that people have better lives. My key takeaway from Jonny’s session linked closely back to the previous two. A strong professional culture incorporating high quality CPD and high psychological safety will improve schools and a healthy leadership culture will retain staff too. Repeated messages are so powerful. There are ways to keep your standards high with staff but to lose the stuff that doesn’t work and to do it intelligently. Data collection, one off lesson observation and performance pay are all examples of tackling workload and growing professional trust. Jonny ended his session with ‘think how much more you can do’ and as I said, he just talks sense. So what now? It is going to be important to help staff share their learning from the Trust conference and we’ve built in CPD time to do this. If you’re leading any team in school and you missed this trio share their wise words, then it would be a valuable few hours catch up. It would also be great CPD for those wanting to move into leadership roles in the future. Reflection done, for now. Time for action! Hannah Griffiths is Deputy Headteacher at Shire Oak Academy. Here, she reflects on the sessions she attendended as part of the Mercian Trust Staff Conference on 19th April and the impact that this learning is having on her leadership practice. 4

include not only a student’s prior experiences within a subject, but also task difficulty, the level of guidance they receive during the task, the feedback that they receive from their teacher, and the influence of those around them. Not only is it important that we understand the impact of each of these factors on students’ self-belief, but also that we recognise that there are many ways in which they can be exploited to boost self-efficacy within our classrooms. Practical Application: Promoting Self-Efficacy within the Classroom After having established the impact of self-efficacy on students’ self-perception and therefore their overall attainment, the presentation then delved into the many ways in which teachers can promote self-efficacy within their lessons. The first is related to ‘mastery experiences’, referring to a student’s ability to recall a past experience of success within a particular subject. From setting realistic targets, to breaking large tasks down to create more opportunities for success, there are a number of different techniques that can be used to create a learning environment conducive to student achievement. One of the most important methods is through setting performance-based rather than outcome goals. As Dr Baker explained, it is essential for teachers to recognise unquantifiable aspects of student performance, such as the resilience they display in lessons, as opposed to their attainment of a specific mark or grade within the subject. By encouraging student reflection on the seemingly more marginal successes within lessons, teachers create a culture of self-efficacy where students’ sense of self-belief is not determined by their assessment grade and they are therefore less likely to become demotivated and disengaged within lessons. Outlining further ways to help students gain ‘mastery experiences’ within the classroom, Dr Baker illustrated the importance of allowing students to see first-hand that success is possible, rather than simply showing them what success looks like within your subject. This means actively involving students in modelling processes, allowing students to observe successful practice from their Stacey Smith is a Teacher of English at Queen Mary's High School. Here, she reflects on Dr Chris Baker's session at the Trust Conference, and considers the implications of her learning in the classroom. As part of the Mercian Trust conference, Dr Chris Baker from Cabot Learning Federation delivered a thoughtful examination of the role of self-efficacy within the classroom. Offering a number of insights into the complexity of student self-belief, this presentation explored both the importance of self-efficacy for the success of our students, as well as the number of ways that we as teachers can promote student self-belief within our lessons. Defining the Term Unlike self-esteem and self-confidence, both of which relate to our overall sense of our own capabilities, self-efficacy is described by Dr Baker as ‘task-specific confidence’. Relating to an individual’s ability to succeed in specific situations, the self-efficacy of a student can vary greatly depending on their prior experiences within a particular subject. As the presentation illuminated, students must be able to draw on prior successes in order to feel confident completing a specific task. It is therefore essential that we purposefully create opportunities for students to succeed in lessons if we intend to maximise their motivation and self-belief within our subjects. Whilst self-efficacy is imperative for our students to thrive within our lessons, the significance of self-efficacy extends far beyond the individual classroom. As Dr Baker outlined, students with high levels of self-efficacy have been shown to have higher aspirations, greater resilience and less stress than those with low levels of self-efficacy. This can result in what Dr Baker terms ‘self-efficacy spirals’, whereby students who experience success in one subject approach their next lesson with not only greater motivation but also a greater sense of belief in their own abilities. As a concept that is far more complicated than simply someone’s self-confidence, educational self-efficacy is dependent upon a number of factors. These Reflection Piece: Self-efficacy- The next big lever for learning 5

Want to learn more about self-efficacy in the classroom? All sessions from the Conference are still available to Mercian Trust staff 'on demand'. To watch this session and to learn more about self-efficacy in the classroom, click here: Dr Chris Baker- Self-efficacy For other sessions, please see the full on demand conference brochure, here: Conference Catch-up peers, and using questioning to unlock students’ existing knowledge. As the presentation emphasised, seeing a subject expert craft a successful response or complete a difficult task is far less motivating than seeing someone of your own experience level achieve the same result. As such, we should all be making a conscious effort to include our students as we construct our worked examples within lessons, showing them not only that success is possible, but that they themselves are capable of achieving it. One thought that has remained with me from this presentation is the idea that when we approach a task which we have never completed before, each of us asks ourselves the question, ‘can I see myself being successful in this?’. Putting ourselves in the shoes of our students, who perhaps have never experienced success in our subjects, is thus vital to our understanding of the barriers that learners can face as a result of their low self-efficacy. Embedding the techniques offered in this presentation into our everyday practice will not only improve our own lessons, but also perhaps promote the establishment of wider ‘self-efficacy spirals’, raising students’ self-belief in all aspects of their educational experience and therefore having a transformational impact on not only their academic attainment, but also their individual aspirations, personal wellbeing and overall sense of self-worth. 6

“Feedback is information given to the learner about the learner’s performance relative to learning goals or outcomes. It should aim to (and be capable of producing) improvement in students’ learning.” (EEF 2024) I was busy marking my Y10 books when I realised there was no way for me to capture the insights I was getting in lessons - this was making reporting progress data less meaningful. As part of the Mercian Trust Staff Conference in April, I was exposed the 'Creating Feedback Classrooms' session by Jon Gilbert, Head of Professional Development at The Two Counties Trust, and it showed me a potential solution I have been excited to test out! A 'Markbook Page' is a fantastic initiative to streamline feedback and make it more effective for both teachers and students in the Modern Foreign Languages (MFL) Department. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how you could design a markbook page for messy marking that aligns with Gilbert's shared strategies: Step 1: Define the Layout Create a two-section layout for the markbook: 1. In-Class Monitoring: This section should have space for date, lesson focus, and brief notes. Columns could include student names, key observations (successes, errors), and any immediate feedback or interventions. 2. Post-Practice Review: This section could focus on independent learning, deliberate practice or other independent work. Include columns for common successes, areas for improvement, and next steps. Step 2: Include Key Elements Learning Goals: At the top of each page, specify the learning goals or outcomes for that lesson or series of lessons. Success Criteria: Clearly define what excellence looks like for the tasks at hand. Common Errors/Misconceptions: Reserve a space to note down frequently occurring mistakes or misunderstandings. Step 3: Design for Efficiency Quick Notes Area: Ensure there is a designated area where teachers can jot down observations quickly. This could be a grid or a lined section with checkboxes for common issues or achievements. Follow-Up Actions: Include a section where teachers can plan their responsive teaching strategies based on the data collected, such as specific questions to ask or topics to revisit. Step 4: Guidance on Usage Instructions: At the bottom or on the back of the page, provide brief instructions on how to use the markbook effectively. This might include tips on how to observe and note information quickly and how to interpret the data for responsive teaching. Examples: Offer a few filled-out examples to demonstrate how entries might look during actual lessons. This can help in standardising the approach across the department. Step 5: Training and Implementation Training Session: Organise a training session for the department to introduce the new markbook design. Use this session to explain the rationale, demonstrate how to use the page effectively, and discuss how it aligns with the department's objectives. Feedback Loop: After initial implementation, gather feedback from the teachers on the usability and effectiveness of the design. Use this feedback to make necessary adjustments. Step 6: Digital Integration How to implement messy marking in your classroom Harouna Savadogo is Head of Modern Foreign Languages at Q3 Academy Great Barr. Here, Harouna reflects on a session he attended at the Trust Conference 'Creating Feedback Classrooms' by Jon Gilbert and has encouraged his department to implement greater opportunities for feedback during lessons. 7

Digital Version: If possible, create a digital version of the markbook that can be integrated into the Academy’s existing systems. This could allow for easier data collection and analysis. Designing the markbook page thoughtfully will help your department implement messy marking efficiently, reducing workload while enhancing the feedback process. This approach not only aligns with the strategies discussed by Jon Gilbert but also supports a more data-driven and responsive teaching environment. I have started using this in some of my lessons and will go through the process of utilising this across the whole MfL department. Stacey Smith is a Teacher of English at Queen Mary's High School. Here, she reflects on Dr Chris Baker's session at the Trust Conference, and considers the implications of her learning in the classroom. Collaborative learning has attracted much debate within the educational landscape. The Educational Endowment Foundation define it as an approach that ‘involves pupils working together’, and when effective, it generates at least five months of progress (Primary) and six months (Secondary) respectively (EEF, 2021). While collaborative rehearsed References: Eduucation Endowment Foundation, (2024). Feedback | EEF (educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk) Gilbert, J.,(2024) Creating Feedback Classroom, 130_ Creating Feedback Classrooms-20240419_130118-Meeting Recording.mp4 (sharepoint.com) curriculum and tourist activities. Did you miss Jon Gilbert's session on Creating Feedback Classrooms? You can still watch on demand! All sessions from the Conference are still available to Mercian Trust staff 'on demand'. To watch this session and to learn more about creating the right conditions for feedback classrooms, click here: Jon Gilbert- Creating Feedback Classrooms. For other sessions, please see the full on demand conference brochure, here: Conference Catch-up 8

Revolutionising Creative Arts education: Celebrating a year of innovation and collaboration Michelle Martin, Trust Lead Professional for Creative Arts, reflects on the work undertaken by the Creative Arts Professional Learning Community this academic year. In the ever-evolving landscape of education, the Creative Arts Professional Learning Community (PLC) has once again demonstrated its commitment to excellence and innovation. Building on a solid foundation of collaborative success, this academic year has seen our PLC embrace cuttingedge educational technology, delve into the intricacies of assessment, and explore the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in the arts education. Our journey through deliberate practice and educational research has not only enhanced our pedagogical strategies but also enriched the creative experiences we offer our students. Embracing Innovation: The Role of EdTech and AI This year, our PLC took a significant leap forward by integrating advanced educational technologies and AI into our curriculum. The introduction of AI tools has revolutionised the way we approach creative processes, allowing for more personalised learning experiences and opening new avenues for student creativity. These technologies have not only facilitated more efficient assessment methods but have also provided us with invaluable insights into student learning patterns, enabling tailored support and intervention. Deepening Expertise Through Deliberate Practice Central to our achievements this year has been the focus on deliberate practice. By systematically refining and reflecting on our teaching methods, our community has seen substantial growth in both teaching expertise and student outcomes. This approach has ensured that our educational practices are not only evidence-based but also continuouslyevolving to meet the diverse needs of our students. Enhancing Skills with Hands-On Learning A highlight of the year was the two studio photography sessions hosted by Shire Oak Academy, which epitomised our commitment to hands-on learning. These sessions provided staff with practical experience in new photography techniques, significantly enhancing their skills and confidence. The impact was immediately evident, as educators integrated these new techniques into their teaching, thereby enriching the learning experience for students and sparking their interest in new aspects of creative arts. Research and Assessment: Informing Practice Our engagement with the latest educational research and our focus on refining assessment strategies have been pivotal in shaping our teaching practices this year. By aligning our assessment methods more closely with our creative objectives, we have been able to provide more accurate and constructive feedback to students, thereby driving their progress and engagement The strength of our PLC lies in its community. This year, more than ever, we have seen the power of collaborative practice and shared expertise. From sharing resources and ideas across the Trust to celebrating our collective successes, we have fostered a supportive and inspiring environment that benefits both educators and students alike. As we reflect on a year marked by significant achievements and breakthroughs, we are filled with anticipation for what the future holds. With a foundation of strong collaborative ties and a forward-looking approach, the Creative Arts PLC is well-positioned to continue leading the way in educational innovation. Our ongoing commitment to professional development and our passion for our subjects promise yet another exciting year ahead, where we will continue to inspire, engage, and facilitate the creative journeys of our students. Let us carry forward the momentum of this year and continue to push the boundaries of what is possible in creative arts education. Together, we can shape a future where every student has the tools, knowledge, and inspiration to explore their creative potential to the fullest. 9

Collaborative learning has attracted much debate within the educational landscape. The Educational Endowment Foundation define it as an approach that ‘involves pupils working together’, and when effective, it generates at least five months of progress (Primary) and six months (Secondary) respectively (EEF, 2021). While collaborative learning has the potential to ‘reduce cognitive load, as students are able to share information’, it simultaneously poses ‘a negative impact on learning’ when having to ‘communicate and coordinate [which] causes higher levels of extraneous load’ (Pearce, 2022, p. 54). Numerous strategies have been employed to promote successful collaborative learning and thus improve engagement, such as, De Bano’s ‘Thinking Hats’, Jig-Saw groupings, and ThinkPair-Share. The digital classroom has also accelerated peer collaboration through online breakout rooms and with having the greater opportunities to collaborate on digital platforms, yet the EEF (2021) suggest this has less of an impact than class-based group-work. Despite the positive views towards collaborative learning, it is often substituted for Direct Instruction as the ‘teacher governs most aspects of [the] lessons’, and in some contexts, it is indeed ‘favoured over collaborative group work’ because of ‘its presumed efficiency and effectiveness’ (Sun and Anderson et al., 2022). However, Mansworth challenges this and argues that ‘direct instruction can enable good exam results [but it] should be balanced with other approaches if [teachers] are going to provide […] students with the best preparation’ (2021, p. 87). In my context, students often prefer direct instruction; whilst it does not generate passive learning itself, pupils are often more reluctant to collaboratively lead and regulate their learning, thus indicating that Mansworth’s view is accurate. Indeed, without exposure to collaborative learning, students do not experience different ways of working, and McCallum (2015) aligns with Mansworth as collaborative learning is ‘a crucial part of a balanced teaching diet,’ and therefore, opportunities for it are an important part of a student’s classroom experience. Given the conflicting views surrounding collaborative learning, it is important to assess whether it does enhance student learning or hinders progress. The two polarising views towards collaborative learning are evident within two differing educational contexts: a comprehensive and selective school. In my current setting, collaborative strategies have been employed departmentally to reduce the passive nature of students and to encourage greater participation in English. Literature lessons require students to explore set texts in groups – each with a specific focus – and they construct a lesson to empower their own voice. This model has been implemented throughout Key Three to Five to discourage teacherled analysis of texts. When launching this idea, it was typically viewed as too idealistic – sentiments that resonate with the wider perception of collaborative learning, as it is seen as a ‘burden for hard working teachers’ and is ‘incredibly time consuming’ with little reward as it encourages ‘havoc [with] behaviour in the classroom’ (Quigley, 2016). Whilst valid concerns – and ones that I personally feared at the beginning of my teaching career – I do, however, now align more so with Quigley’s view that it can be transformational once ‘students bring the necessary focus to group work, and when teachers use it appropriately’ (Quigley, 2016). Here, Quigley’s emphasis on both pupil focus and teachers utilising it effectively are important factors that lead to its overall success in deepening student learning. Tom Bennett also aligns with Quigley’s thinking as ‘group work can go a long way in reinforcing knowledge’, yet ‘it should not take the place of fully guided instruction (2015, p. 33). Not only is it necessary for students to value group work then, but an effective framework for it is key. This has led to the implementation of Zoe Elder’s twelve principles of collaborative learning within my context. Disappointingly, although this framework was discussed as a team and CPD was continually included to support its implementation, lesson visits were mixed. Whilst some displayed successful pupil collaboration, others exemplified Bennett’s concern of pupils failing to ‘stay on task’ (2015, p.33). Numerous variables can contribute to the success or failure of collaborative learning, but it was less effective when the teacher did not clarify and model the expectations of group work. In contrast, those that continually reviewed the collaborative process, did cultivate Elder’s notion of ‘a safe learning community’ where ‘everyone [can] make huge gains in their thinking and their progress’ (2011, p. 34), evidenced through students working towards a shared goal. This finding aligns Matthew Moore is Head of English at Queen Mary's High School. Matthew successfully gained his Certificate in Evidence Informed Practice recently, awarded by the Chartered College of Teaching. Here, Matthew debates the benefits and drawbacks of collaborative learning. Educational Debate: Does group work ever work? 10

with Campbell and Bokhove (2021), as they argue that generating ‘a high specific learning goal or any goal that implies an element of exploration is more appropriate than a performance goal.’ Within the classroom, both forms can motivate, and on balance, I argue that it is class and context dependent, but goals are fundamental for collaborative learning to be successful, and as Collins et al (2021) also outlines, once students ‘use knowledge actively’ they can build ‘communities of practice where students find an intrinsic motivation for their learning which goes beyond pleasing teachers or gaining examination grades’ (2021, p. 12). Considering these perspectives, embedding collaborative learning so that it becomes normalised is crucial. Undoubtedly, collaboration can enrich student learning, but these two varied experiences highlight that explicit modelling and metacognition are vital. Goos et al (2002) supports this view in that collaborative metacognition is characterised by ‘mutuality’ whereby ‘each student explores their own and others’ ideas […] to construct a shared understanding.’ Departmentally, when the teacher and group had embraced collaborative learning, they displayed greater confidence orally and in their written responses. It is, therefore, possible to conclude that collaborative learning does play a fundamental role in the development of analytical thinking, writing and discussion within English classrooms, and as McCallum (2015) argues, it ‘can provide a range of alternative ideas to use in writing activities’, that ‘might not come into being if dependent solely on individual thought.’ When exploring the factors that impact upon successful group work, Nokes-Malach et al (2015) research highlights elements that should be factored into teacher planning and suggests consideration is needed with ‘how and when collaboration improves outcomes.’ Thus, the practitioner must be adept at establishing whether a particular task lends itself towards individual or collaborative learning. Campbell and Bokhove (2021) note that collaboration leads to students ‘losing [their] train of thought because of paying attention to other group members’, and they suggest that it causes ‘retrieval strategy disruption’, alongside ‘production blocking [taking] place with missed retrieval opportunities, as group members must wait their turns while another person is talking.’ They also observe that social loafing – defined as ‘group members [who] do not contribute optimally because they think other group members will do the work’ - as the key factor that dilutes collaboration. Although this cannot be refuted, Quigley (2016) suggests that the social loafing effect can be avoided through carefully ‘ensuring that each and every student understands their role’ and that ‘each student has a distinct task’. Indeed, my own practice and that across the department correlates with Quigley’s view, highlighting the importance of establishing the clearly defined roles. That is not to say, however, that teachers should avoid giving students the autonomy to select their groups and roles, but I argue that this cannot be expected until collaborative habits are embedded and normalised. In the case of English lessons, when analysing characters in Macbeth, teachers that assigned responsibility for alternative ideas, comparisons, and generating thesis statements within their group seemed to perform better and displayed greater engagement, and the impact of collaboration was also illuminated in their written responses, thus aligning with the EEF (2021) as ‘structured approaches with well-designed tasks lead to the greatest learning gains.’ Overall, it is fitting to conclude with Didau’s view that teachers should ‘make the implicit, explicit’ (2014, p.21), and whilst this sentiment is not directly applied to collaborative learning, the principle behind it does resonate with group work in that it can only be successful if such habits are continually rehearsed and modelled. References Bennett, Tom (2015) Group Work for the Good: Unpacking the Research behind one Popular Classroom Strategy. American Educator. (pp. 32-43). Campbell., Ryan and Bokhov., Christian. (2021), Building learning culture through effective uses of group work. Impact. 5. Spring 2019. Available at: https://my.chartered.college/impact_article/building-learning-culture-through-effective-uses-ofgroup-work/. Collins et al’s (2021) Cognitive Apprenticeship in Action. Edited by Tomsett, John. Woodbridge: John Catt Educational. Didau, David., (2014), The Secret of Literacy. United Kingdom: Crown House Publisher. Education Endowment Foundation (2021) Teaching and learning toolkit – collaborative learning. Available at: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/ evidence-summaries/teaching-learning-toolkit/collaborative-learning (accessed 10th January 2024). Elder, Zoe., (2011), Full on Learning: Involve Me and I’ll Understand. United Kingdom: Crown House Publisher. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 193–223. doi: 10.1023/A:1016209010120. Mansworth, Meghan., (2021) Teach to the Top: Aiming High for Every Learner. Woodbridge: John Catt Educational. McCallum, Andew (2015)., English and Media Centre: In Praise of Group Work [online]. [14th November 2023]. Available at: https://www.englishandmedia. co.uk/blog/in-praise-of-group-work/ . Nokes-Malach TJ, Richey JE and Gadgil S (2015) When is it better to learn together? Insights from research on collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review 27(4): 645–656. Pearce, Jade (2022)., What Every Teacher Needs to Know: How to embed evidence-informed teaching and learning in your school. Great Britain: Bloomsbury Publishing. Quigley, Alex (2016). Group Work: An Essential Guide [online]. [14th November 2023]. Available at: https://www.theconfidentteacher.com/2016/05/group-workessential-guide/. Sun., J and Anderson, Richardson., C et al., (2022) Children’s engagement during collaborative learning and direct instruction through the lens of participant structure. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 69. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/ S0361476X22000200#preview-section-cited-by. Smith., Julie M. and Mancy, Rebecca., (2018) Exploring the relationship between metacognitive and collaborative talk during group mathematical problem-solving – what do we mean by collaborative metacognition?, Research in Mathematics Education, 20:1, 14-36, DOI: 10.1080/14794802.2017.1410215. 11

In our teaching vocation, above all, we look to emphasise the instrumental value of education. In the daily grind we do everything we can to create ‘buy in’. We need ‘buy in’. We need engaged learners. Teaching can be hard. In our desperation for engagement, do we sometimes push boundaries? Do we sometimes do harm rather than good? During the Mercian Trust Conference I delivered a session “Philosophies in Education”. I came across some research that I only touched on in the presentation; I’d like to explore this further in this opinion piece. To put a case study from my own teaching: I remember in my early years teaching a cheeky Year 11 student who asked me “Sir, when am I ever going to use trigonometry?”. Remembering that ladders need a safe angle when pitched against a wall, I cleverly cited this reason. Maybe even with a slightly smug feeling that I had contextualised the topic and given an application. But had I? I like maths. I go out of my way to use and enjoy maths. I have never used trigonometry when doing DIY. I somehow doubt that even profession trades men and women use trigonometry to set up ladders. What possessed me to give this reason when I knew it was so absurd? I wonder if the Year 11 student went away feeling convinced that his learning was worthwhile? Or did I give him yet another reason to believe that maths was pointless and irrelevant? Did I do harm rather than good? Maybe if I had thought about it for longer I could have convinced him that he may not need it in life … but it will be in the exam. And passing exams is after all the reason we study maths. Maybe I could have convinced him that if only he remembered how to do it for a few more months, he could then forget all about trigonometry and replace it with something more useful? Would this have been a better response? Perhaps in my previous two paragraphs there is an almost comical bluntness, but I must be honest that when I look at exam questions exams, in text books, schemes of work, even my own, I see false contexts and ridiculous scenarios everywhere. Attempts and pressures to contextualise learning and make it less abstract are everywhere. Hidden in what seems to be a just cause there are subliminal messages that say ‘learning is not worthwhile without a context’. The abstract is something bad, something to hide from something to disguise by a context. Alongside poor contextualisation, particularly in Year 11, the exam machine churns away. Easter school, intervention classes and even Saturday school help students get those all-important results. And yes, those outcomes are important. But they are the biproduct of a meaningful education or the drive and motivation of the curriculum. If we want our students to believe this, we can’t present mixed messages. We learn things because learning is important. We learn things because learning is worthwhile. We learn things because it helps us to be a better people who can contribute to society. To be a person who can think critically and make better choices. At its core, learning is a profoundly enriching and inherently rewarding, a pursuit that transcends external incentives. It is a journey of exploration, curiosity, and intellectual growth that nourishes the mind and soul. This is the ‘buy in’ we want Ben Adams, Trust Lead Professional and Head of Maths at Queen Mary's High School reflects on the relevance and importance of context in the learning process. Philosophies in Education: False Contexts and Contextual Learning 12

and this is message we need to give. Anything that conflicts or dilutes the message needs to be questioned and challenged. The value of learning extends far beyond its practical applications or the contexts in which it may be useful. It is a lifelong endeavour that broadens our horizons, deepens our understanding of the world. It fosters a sense of wonder and appreciation for the complexities of existence. Albert Einstein famously held in highest regard: "The pursuit of knowledge for its own sake”. What less do we want our students to have? I asked Matthew Moore, Head of English at QMHS why they teach poetry. I was not surprised that he spoke about emotions, thinking skills and critical thinking. He spoke of pleasure and enjoyment.   What more noble purpose is there?  Is maths any different? Is any other subject in the curriculum any different? To me and many others maths is like poetry. A desire to share this poetry is one of the many reasons I became a teacher. Barton, B. & Heid, M. (1998) discussed how misconceptions, including those arising from false contexts, can act as barriers to understanding mathematics. The research says that such contexts can confuse students and add to cognitive load. This encourages rote memorisation and superficial out of context understanding rather than deep conceptual understanding and reasoning. So, am I saying that learning should not be contextualised? No, certainly not. There is far more research  that links good contextualisation as being positive for learning. In fact, not just positive but where appropriate, essential.  Please do contextualise, but carefully and only when appropriate. There is no demand for all learning to be contextualised, and attempts to deform a curriculum in this way, I believe, can be harmful. As a personal observation: false contexts are better received by our most able students. Good mathematicians love problem solving in whatever shape or form it takes. It’s our weakest and least engaged students, our disadvantaged students where I feel the most thought and planning is needed to fining good and appropriate contexts. I think that this can be very challenging as a teacher. So, if like I have been, you are challenged by anyone to rationalise how your curriculum and lessons may be useful or relevant. Maybe this is a sign that it lacks contextualisation that you should consider addressing? But don’t panic! Don’t be rushed! Articulate that all learning is worthwhile and beautiful abstract or contextualised. A context is not a requirement of worthwhile learning. “Abstract representations can be just as effective as contextualised representations.”- OFSTED https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ research-review-series-mathematics/researchreview-series-mathematics Interested in the conference session mentioned above? You can still watch on demand! All sessions from the Conference are still available to Mercian Trust staff on demand. to access the sessions, click here: Conference Catch-up 13

" " demand! All sessions from the Conference are still available to Mercian Trust staff 'on demand'. To wasession and to learn more about creating the right conditions for feedback classrooms, click Gilbert- Creating Feedback Classrooms. For other sessions, please see the full on demand conference brochure, here: Conference CatIn a recent study into teaching mixed ability Modern Languages classes, Riordan and Convery (2024) found that the trainee teachers involved in their study tended towards supporting learners who were low prior attainers, rather than stretching those who were high prior attainers. This is a trend that can be found in most classroom settings, because those who have difficulty in accessing the work may be more likely to present behavioural issues, whereas those who complete the tasks with no or little support tend to be more compliant. However, it is important for us to stretch our High Prior Attainers as well as catering for our other learners. Here are 10 ideas to help us meet this challenge of stretching our High Prior Attainers in a mixed ability GCSE Modern Foreign Languages classroom. 1. Seating Plans: Consider having two different seating plans: one where students are sat next to someone of similar ability to them; the other where students are sat next to someone of higher ability to them. An alternative is to have one seating plan, but which allows for a swift change between different groupings. This allows for greater flexibility when planning lessons. If you are focusing on a grammar item, you can get the higher ability students to provide support to lower ability students. However, if the lesson is focused on a skill such as describing a photo, the higher ability students can stretch each other and lower ability students can be provided with more targeted support, such as a writing frame. 2. Targeted Questioning: Questioning is an easy way of adapting your teaching. This can be done in relation to grammar, where you might ask for a translation into English of a sentence of any student, but when you are trying to drill down to the nitty-gritty of a grammar point, you can target your questioning at your High 10 ideas for teaching mixed ability MfL classes Trust Lead Professional for Naomi Beer and Head of Department at Queen Mary's High School shares 10 strategies to ensure high levels of challenge in the Key Stage Four MfL classroom. Offering students choice between tasks gives them greater ownership of their learning and this can lead to greater motivation. Prior Attaining students. All students should also be challenged to use more complex and varied vocabulary and sentence structures and create longer answers and not allowed to get away with saying the minimum. 3. Same stimulus, different task: Sometimes, we can offer students the same reading or listening text, but we can change what it is that we would like them to do with the text. The more complex task should demand a deeper understanding of the text or require the student to infer meaning from the text or ask students to respond in the target language. 4. Offering choice: Offering students a choice between different tasks gives them ownership of their learning, and this can lead to greater motivation. However, if we see a High Prior Attainer choosing the easier of the tasks, we need to be prepared to challenge them and say something to the effect of, 'I know that you can tackle this task. Have a go at this. You've got this.' 5. Colour-coded tasks: Display 2 or 3 different tasks on the board. They could be in response to a photo or a reading or listening stimulus, a written task or a feedback task after an assessment. Each task has a different coloured-background. On each desk, each student has a piece of laminated card with one of the colours. Keep changing the colours around, 14

as recommended by Harry Fletcher-Wood in his book on responsive teaching (2018), so that no student feels labelled as an ‘orange’ or ‘blue’ pupil. 6. Computer Rooms: If you have access to a computer room, aim to book a regular lesson there as it will help you provide your class with more targeted activities. For example, using a computer room where the computers have headphones can allow you to share via Teams Foundation Tier listening tasks with some students and Higher Tier listening tasks with others. You can also direct students to targeted grammar and vocabulary practice based on their previous work. Some students may even complete a task independently, whilst you teach a smaller group of students, tailoring the teaching to their level. 7. Grammar Selection: Think carefully about which grammar items are worth teaching as vocabulary items and which are worth teaching in more detail. In order to stretch our High Prior Attainers, it may be that on top of getting them to practise the I, he/she & we forms of the verb and recognise the other verb forms, that they actively manipulate these other verb forms. We may limit the number of verbs we expect some learners to use, but include more verbs for the High Prior Attainers to manipulate. For some students, we may be getting them to learn some more complex phrases by heart, such as the perfect infinitive or the present participle in French. However, some of our High Prior Attainers need to be challenged to manipulate such complex structures for themselves to say something more original and personal to them. 8. Challenge Activities: This is a more encouraging word for ‘extension activities’ and may incite some of our Medium Prior Attainers to challenge themselves too. For example, if you have a set of 5 sentences to translate into the foreign language, have 2-3 more challenging sentences which test students on the use of different tenses or language structures or verb forms. Where you have a question on the board, the challenge task demands the use of a different tense, the inclusion of an opinion with a reason, and perhaps another more complex structure. 9. Checklists: Checklists were recommended by Harry Fletcher-Wood in his book on Responsive Teaching (2018). They help us to set expectations before a piece of work is attempted by students. This can be particularly helpful if we have some students who need to be stretched. We can give students either different checklists or checklists with 3 different levels as found in the current Pearson textbooks for GCSE Languages (Bell, et al, 2016): a solid answer, aiming higher, aiming for the top. This inclusive checklist clearly spells out for students what is required in order to achieve different grades and sharing this with all students can be motivating for those who wish to improve their marks further. 10. Modelling: “Demonstrating what success looks like helps all students, especially low attainers” (FletcherWood, 2018, p48). However, I would argue that our High Prior Attainers also need to know what a grade 8 or 9 piece of work looks like, and how it is different to a grade 6-7 piece of work. Sometimes this appears to be quite nebulous. We can do modelling in different ways. We could demonstrate how to tackle the 150-word task using the checklist that they will be given, by annotating the question and showing your planning. Students would then look at a different 150-word task and, using the checklist, they must annotate the question and show their planning. We could show students a grade 6 response and a grade 8 or 9 response without the grades next to them and get them to work through the checklist and the mark scheme and work out which is the better response and why. They could write the advice they would give the student with a grade 6 piece of work to help them get a grade 8 or 9. We could then give students a grade 6 piece of work and get them to improve on it so that it becomes a grade 8 or 9 piece of writing. Once they can articulate success, they will hopefully also produce that success themselves. References Bell, C., McLachlan, A., Ramage, G. (2016) Studio: AQA GCSE French Higher. London: Pearson Fletcher-Wood, H. (2018) Responsive Teaching. Cognitive Science and Formative Assessment in Practice. London: Routledge Hart, S. 1996. Differentiation and the Secondary Curriculum: Debates and Dilemmas. London: Routledge. Department for Education. 2011. Teachers’ Standards. Reference: DFE-00066-2011, London. Riordan, T. & Convery, A. (2024) Reimagining the concept of differentiation in languages classrooms, The Language Learning Journal, 52:3, 271-284, DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2022.2130962 15

10 ideas for teaching mixed ability MfL classes Trust Lead Professional for Naomi Beer and Head of Department at Queen Mary's High School shares 10 strategies to ensure high levels of challenge in the Key Stage Four MfL classroom. Don't make school improvement complicated: Using Alastair Campbell's Hourglass of Change Keziah Featherstone is Executive Headteacher at The Mercian Trust. Here, she reflects on some of the challenges of school improvement and how simplicity is key. The Big Cheese First off, Alastair Campbell doesn’t have an Hourglass of Change, I’ve made it up. However, after reading his 2023 book But What Can I Do which is full of advice to those of us wishing to make the world a bit better, I was drawn in particular to Chapter 11: Be a Strategist. Here, Campbell outlines the key principles of effecting change through keeping it simple: O = Objective (what you want to achieve) S = Strategy (the big ‘how’ : your definition of the overall approach) T = Tactics (the detailed plans required to execute the strategy) So, keeping it simple is OST, which linguists will know is the Norwegian word for cheese. In the previous chapter Campbell explored his political Holy Trinity: leadership, teamship, strategy. The whole book is worth a read but these two chapters in particular are a wonderful distillation of how to make real and lasting change. He was, after all, one of the key architects of Labour’s 1997 landslide victory and subsequent electoral wins. Hourglass of Change I have found combining Alastair Campbell’s political Holy Trinity with his change triangle extremely useful. We are all so busy trying to effect change, we sometimes don’t pause to reflect on the plan sitting behind it. We write improvement plans at key moments such as after an Ofsted, exam results or a change of head, but they can then sit in dusty folders or hyperlinked websites. What I have always liked about the Mercian Trust’s Five Year Strategic Plan is that it is simple: the objectives clearly defined and relevant to all. The strategy and tactics are actions for executive leaders but also distributed into schools; we all hold a responsibility to work towards common objectives. More so, our Five Year Strategic Plan, alongside our Big Moves and our Blueprint are fully embedded every leadership narrative between school and Trust. Ultimately: keep it simple, articulate it frequently and keep it at the forefront of all you do. What do we need to do? Clearly defining an objective is essential before considering strategy and tactics. At a personal level, if I am seeking to progress my career, I may define my OST as: 16

Objective: Get that promotion. Strategy: interview practice, polish my supporting statement, ensure that I can articulate the impact of my work on department/school improvement, etc. Tactics: Get that application in on time, check spelling, punctuation and grammar, look smart on the day, be on time, be confident but not cocky and be speak clearly and authoritatively. Just because we get the strategy and tactics right does not mean we will achieve our objective, especially on the first go, but that is why perseviliance is needed (another Alastair Campbell invention, a combination of perseverance and resilience). In schools, our contexts can be far too messy to guarantee we achieve our desired objective; children are not specimens in a hermetically sealed box after all. However, this does not mean we should give up or not try at all. We also have to remember we as the professionals never work in isolation. Our network, when we include all other school colleagues, external agencies and families extends to hundreds of people per child. We ALL contribute to intended change. Holy Trinity The bottom half of the Alastair Campbell’s Hourglass of Change is his political Holy Trinity: strategy, leadership, teamship. This is more complex than it seems. Being a leader can be positional; leadership is a range of behaviours that are positive, ethical and deliver real change. Likewise, simply being in or leading a team is not the same as teamship; teamship is respectful, diverse, inclusive, collaborative. Objectifying the vision Objective: every child lives life to the full. Strategy: appropriate and inspiring curriculum, amazing teaching and learning, great exam results, caring and attentive pastoral support, relentless prioritising of attendance, accessible extra-curricular offer, systematic removal of barriers to learning and access, high-quality CAIEG, etc. As you notice, no ONE person or even one team can take full responsibility for delivering any one strategic arm. It is messier than that; unlike Ghostbusters, nothing will explode if our streams overlap. Who leads? Who is part of the team? What is the difference between being a team, leading a team and active teamship? If I am a Head of Year, I contribute to nearly every strategic arm identified above although my job description may define it as pastoral support and attendance. Thus, the tactics we employ to realise each strategy will be dependent on your role, your experience, your context. • So, what is YOUR objective – for your school, or department, of class, or year group? • What strategies do you need to realise your objective? Who is responsible for these? • Then, what tactics are worth trying? Who can you learn from? How will you measure success? So… As we move into prime school improvement planning time, it is worth remembering that not all improvement is change, keep it simple and it won’t work without real teamship. 17

Educational Debate: How useful is cognitive science in the everyday classroom? Abbie Hornsby is a teacher of MfL at Q3 Academy Langley. She was recently awarded The Certificate in Evidence-Informed Practice by The Chartered College of Teaching. Here, she debates the usefulness of cognitive science in the classroom. Biologically secondary’ knowledge must be instructed for learning to take place and requires effort from the learner, as Geary puts forward (Geary, 2008). Cognitive science is wide-ranging and complex but, it is argued, enables us to consider how learning occurs. Cognitive load theory seeks to explain and inform us of how we remember and forget information, as well as demonstrating the importance of pupil motivation. Given that the human brain relies on memory to learn, i.e. without memory there can be no real learning, having a better understanding of how pupils think and learn is a necessary prerequisite for teachers as it will help to generate more effective teaching as well as improved outcomes for pupils. Cognitive science can assist us in overcoming some of the recurring problems teachers, including myself, often face in the classroom. A teacher, for example, might prepare what they believe to be a well-planned lesson only to discover, subsequently, that pupils are unable to recall or show understanding of the information. Based on the cognitive load theory of the 1980s, Sweller proposes that the human mind comprises both a finite working memory as well as an infinite long-term memory (Sweller et al., 1998). As the working memory can only process a limited amount of information at a time, it can quickly become overloaded. Considering intrinsic cognitive load is useful to the teacher when planning tasks and thinking about how easy or complex these might be depending on the students in the group and whether the task may risk cognitive overload. Shibli and West define intrinsic cognitive load as ‘the inherent difficulty of the material itself, which can be influenced by prior knowledge of the topic’ (Shibli & West, 2018). The intrinsic cognitive load of any given task that I am asking students to complete varies according to their prior knowledge, which is particularly the case I have found within mixed-ability groupings. Taking into account the prior knowledge of each student and ensuring all tasks are suitable to every student is problematical and has proved difficult in my own lessons. Gatherscole and Alloway support the idea that there can be great differences in the working memory capacity of students within one class (Gathercole and Alloway, 2007). Using the example of a class of 30 students from 7 to 8 years old they suggest that at least three would have a working memory capacity of on average 4-year-old, whilst three others of an average 11-year-old. Cognitive load when considered in terms of extraneous load has also been helpful for me in my own practice. This concept refers to processes that put demand on our working memory that are not relevant to the task, leading to a ‘split-attention’ effect (Chandler and Sweller, 1992). Students’ attention is split when they must hold one thing in their working memory while simultaneously searching for another. I have tried to minimise this in my lessons by reducing the amount of text I present on a slide, as well as removing any superfluous images, as Tharby suggests (2019). In Coe’s piece ‘Improving Education’ he discusses poor proxies for learning (Coe, 2013). Even when lots of work is done, when students are really engaged in a task, or when the curriculum has been presented in lesson, it does not necessarily mean that learning is taking place. This has led me to contemplate some of the tasks I am asking pupils to complete and what I am really attempting to achieve. It may be tempting at times in some groups to do tasks that I know will engage the students, but do not really contribute to the objectives of the lesson. Coe states that ‘learning happens when children have to think hard’ (Coe, 2013, p.15), however this ‘thinking hard’ must not, simultaneously, give rise to cognitive overload. As stated previously, part of the intrinsic load is due to the inherent nature of the task, with the rest being due to the students’ prior knowledge. It is important, therefore, for teachers to know their classes as well as possible. Whilst ‘thinking hard’ is certainly a valuable component in the learning process, there are arguably other ways in which learning takes places, such as observation of others, experience, reflection, or repetition. Howard Gardner’s theory support this idea, arguing that learning encompasses a range of processes and experiences, beyond those traditionally labelled as ‘academic’ (Gardner, 1983). Cognitive science is useful for everyday classroom practice as it can guide us in how to help students remember more and forget less. One of the main objectives of teaching and learning is for pupils to retain essential knowledge, with Paas and Sweller asserting that ‘if nothing has altered in long-term memory, nothing has been 18

learned’ (Paas & Sweller, 2004, p.30). Hermann Ebbinghaus produced the ‘forgetting curve’ in 1885, illustrating how, over time, we forget things that we have supposedly ‘learnt’. It is debateable as to whether something has been truly learnt if we have later forgotten it. The curve shows that over time we quickly forget things; even within an hour of elapsed time since the learning took place, the retention rate is down to 44% (Ebbinghaus, 1885). By building in more opportunities to revisit prior knowledge as well as retrieval practice, teachers can strengthen students’ memories. When considering the sequencing of our curriculum within school, for example, we have tried to link new content to the existing knowledge that students have on the topic, with plenty of retrieval activities. Despite this, it must be stated that the forgetting curve is not only outdated, but Ebbinghaus himself was used as the subject of his study. Nevertheless, subsequent psychological studies that have replicated his curve demonstrate its strengths as well as more recent variations. Awareness of cognitive science can support the everyday teacher in considering use of retrieval practice in lessons. As discussed previously, our working memory is limited in the amount of information it can process at once, whereas long-term memory is unlimited. The term ‘retrieval’ is used to describe the process of ‘accessing the stored information’ (Roediger and Gunn, 1996) - recovering information that has been learnt and stored in our long-term memory. By providing opportunities in lessons to retrieve information, we can actually strengthen our memory of it and are less likely to forget information that we remember through retrieval. We must consider, however, how long is long-term memory: years, or just long enough to pass an exam. Agarwal et al. claim that the key to being successful via retrieval is ‘not so much the total time spent learning, but the way in which that time is distributed’ (Agarwal et al., 2020, p.2). They discuss ‘spaced practice’ as a technique whereby the devoted time to learning something is arranged into multiple sessions spread over time. This has been an interesting concept to consider in my own practice as I am often trying to elicit information that students have begun to forget. By creating more opportunities like this in lessons, students’ memory of this information will continually be strengthened. It also serves the purpose of enabling the teacher to identify knowledge gaps. Firth puts forward that the benefits of retrieval do not ‘stem simply from getting feedback on right or wrong answers’ and it is in fact the process of retrieving information which enables it to become consolidated (Firth, 2017). The level of success students experience will, however, affect their motivation and some degree of success is necessary as well. I have sometimes used quizzing in my lessons as a form of low-stakes retrieval; what is important is that this is taking place regularly to be most effective. There are many distinct aspects of cognitive science to be explored in the context of classroom practice, and I believe there are several useful ways in which teachers can utilise this. Understanding cognitive science and how our brain relies on memory to learn can help us in considering how to plan lessons, and how to plan in retrieval practice through spaced learning. As a result of this increased understanding, teachers can improve their pedagogy as well as working to achieve better outcomes for their pupils. The extent of its usefulness, however, is dependent on contextual factors and implementation: not everything will work everywhere. References Chandler P and Sweller J (1992) The split attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology 62(2): 233–246. Coe R (2013) Improving Education: A Triumph of Hope Over Experience. Inaugural lecture, Durham University. 18 June. Available at: http://eachandeverydog.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/ImprovingEducation2013.pdf (accessed 21 January 2024). Ebbinghaus H (1885) Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. New York. Teachers College, Columbia University. Firth J, Smith M, Harvard B, Boxer A (2017) Assessment as learning: The role of retrieval practice in the classroom. Impact, Journal of the Chartered College of Teaching. Available at: https:// my.chartered.college/impact_article/assessment-as-learningthe-role-of-retrieval-practice-in-the-classroom/ (accessed 27 January 2024). Gardner, Howard (1983) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences Gathercole S and Alloway T (2007) Understanding Working Memory: A Classroom Guide. London: Harcourt Assessment. Geary D C (2008) An Evolutionarily Informed Education Science. Educational Psychologist 43(4) 179-195. Paas, F. G. W. C., & Sweller, J. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 27–41). Cambridge University Press. Roediger H L III and Guynn M J (1996) Retrieval processes. In: E L Bjork and R A Bjork (eds.) Handbook of perception and cognition (2nd ed.) p. 197–236. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-012102570-0/50009-4. Sweller J van Merrienboer J J and Paas F G (1998) Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10(3) 251-296. Tharby A (2019) Using Cognitive Load Theory to improve slideshow presentations. Impact (2). 19

“Technology is just a tool. In terms of getting the kids working together and motivating them, the teacher is the most important.” Bill Gates, 1997 I started teaching in 1997, the same year Bill Gates gave this quote in an interview with the Independent on Sunday. I did not have to worry about technology; I had a piece of chalk and a blackboard. I had to model on the blackboard and then wipe off the mathematics I had done and repeat. This developed into using a whiteboard, whiteboard pen, or occasionally an overhead projector. Eventually, the school invested in SMART boards, and I was the lucky member of staff who would have the first of these technologically advanced devices in my classroom. I was so excited, showing off to members of the department what it could do. But did it change my practice? Did it change how students were learning in my classroom? Did this technology advance student outcomes? It enabled me to get more notes onto the board, but I still modelled in real-time because my students needed to see me getting things right or even failing and drawing out the misconceptions; that is just excellent pedagogy, right? Okay, my notes no longer disappeared, and I could save them to a file, but I essentially had a ‘very expensive data projector’ (Christodoulou, 2022, p16) We often hail educational technology as a transformative force in modern education ‘People have been predicting that technology will transform education for over a century. And yet, with relatively few exceptions, education has remained untransformed. Books are not obsolete.’ (Christodoulou, 2022, p14). Yes, technology has become deeply ingrained into our modern lives. It has “the potential to be a great equaliser, providing opportunities for education, communication, and connection like never before.” (attributed to Annan, K, 2005), but does this interplay between technology and teachers aid or hinder the learning process? As with many educational debates, there is not a simple answer. Throughout my research, it is clear that ed-tech has benefits and drawbacks. The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted educational technology, accelerating its adoption while revealing its potential and limitations. Since then, with the ever-increasing role of AI in education, we enter a more complex narrative as it is “already being positioned to transform teaching, learning and administration, well ahead of detailed evidence on its effects or discussions about some of its risks…” (Williamson, B, 2023). Technology can enhance the learning experience in multiple ways. A study by Hattie (2009) found that integrating technology into teaching had a moderate to high effect size on student achievement. Spring forward over ten years, the EEF’s report on Using Digital Technology to Improve Learning (EEF, 2020) highlighted that it was not the technology that improves learning but the interrelationship between how it was used to teach effectively. Luckin (Luckin et al., 2018) further supports this idea. So, what are the benefits of EdTech, and how can they be used to enhance the learning process? Since the dawn of the internet, we have had instant access to information and resources. We can find a journal, download a book or find a video on YouTube and start using it within seconds, way beyond the knowledge of traditional textbooks. These online resources, interactive simulations and multimedia presentations offer students (and teachers) different opportunities for engagement and self-directed learning (Means et al., 2010). Adaptive learning platforms (like Tassomai and Duolingo) are personalising learning, giving the “potential to individualise instruction to an extent never before possible” (Clark & Mayer, 2016). They tend to gamify the learning process, which can “increase student engagement, motivation, and Teachers vs. Tech: To what extent does educational technology help or hinder teaching and learning? Imran Khan is Assistant Headteacher responsible for teaching and learning at Shire Oak Academy. Imran was recently awarded the Certificate in Evidence-Informed Practice from The Chartered College of Teaching. In this debate, he presents the debate surrounding educational technologies and their place in the classroom. 20

learning outcomes.” (de Freitas & Oliver, 2006). The EEF’s trials on online tutoring platforms consistently demonstrate positive effects on learning outcomes (EEF, 2020), and further research found that these systems can raise achievement outcomes by an impressive 0.66 standard deviations over conventional instruction. (Kulik & Fletcher, 2016). These learning tools are now working on how AI Tutors can tailor instruction more conversationally; these AI-powered tutors can offer 24/7 support and assistance to students, regardless of location or time-zone. (UNESCO, 2020). What could this mean for us as educators? Do we need to be worried, or do we need to embrace AI and adapt our pedagogical practices to allow this to happen? In a rapidly evolving world, we need to prepare our students for the demands of the 21st century. We need to ensure that our students have skills in digital literacy, critical thinking, and problem-solving for careers that still need to be created. Vriti Saraf, CEO and founder of K20 Educators in New York, in a recent article, stated: “The less students need educators to be the main source of knowledge, the more educators can focus on developing the ability to curate, guide, critically assess learning, and help students gain skills that are so much more important than memorizing information.” (Agenda, 2023). Studies by Hew & Cheung (2008) suggest that virtual collaboration tools and digital communication technologies empower students and educators to work together on real-world problems leading to deeper understanding, improved critical thinking, and enhanced communication skills. Integrating technology in the classroom can facilitate the cultivation of these skills, providing students with a competitive edge in an increasingly digital and interconnected world. While EdTech brings many advantages, it can also pose challenges. When moving to 1-1 device provision, we must remain mindful that research suggests that the digital divide continues to be a major barrier to equitable access to educational technology (Pew Research Center, 2018). If the students cannot access the internet from home, how will they access their work? Is this exacerbating educational disadvantage? However, a counterargument is that technology provides access to educational resources and opportunities previously unavailable in disadvantaged communities. Additionally, there are studies on the adverse effects of screen time on student’s health and well-being (Council on Communications and Media, 2016), as well as research that suggests that digital distraction can significantly impact students’ ability to focus, learn, and retain information. (Gazzaley & Rosen, 2010). Overreliance on technology can lead to passive learning, so we need to ensure that technology promotes active learning, not passive consumption of information. (Carr, 2008) I previously alluded to the effectiveness of integrating technology into the classroom, which hinges on the role of the teacher. Research by Ertmer (2005) emphasises that teachers play a critical role in mediating technology integration into the learning process. Since the pandemic, teachers' confidence in using technology has increased substantially. Almost all agree that integrating digital technology into learning and teaching is necessary, but technology has yet to become embedded, and its use within and across schools remains variable (Aubrey-Smith & Twining, 2024, p11-12). Is this due to a need for more investment in training and developing teachers' use of new technology for it to become embedded? Does the technology need to be more clearly aligned with instructional goals and integrated into the curriculum? (Tamim et al., 2011) Or is it because we are not focusing on the teacher’s pedagogical stance, which shapes how digital technology is used or not used? (Aubrey-Smith & Twining, 2024, p44). As a senior leader for a trust whose current digital transformation phase focuses on ‘how we teach, learn, lead and operate as a trust.’ and at an academy where we have moved to 1-1 device provision for three different year groups, understanding how these areas integrate is vital for this transformation to be successful. Embedding EdTech successfully requires ongoing training (Teacher Development Trust, 2023). More so, this training needs to equip teachers with the tools to align with their pedagogical approaches, making them more effective in delivering content and addressing the evolving needs of the students ( (Aubrey-Smith & Twining, 2024, p65). The teachers vs tech debate is multifaceted and complex. The drive from EdTech towards PedTech (Aubrey-Smith & Twining, 2024) is compelling. Ensuring that technology enhances the overarching goals of the curriculum and how this aligns with our pedagogical stance could be the key to successful integration into classrooms across our Trust and other schools. As Bill Gates said, the teacher continues to be “the most important.” References Christodoulou, D. (2022). Teachers vs Tech?: The case for an ed tech revolution (Kindle Edition ed.). OUP Oxford. Aubrey-Smith, F., & Twining, P. (2024). From EdTech to PedTech: Changing the Way We Think about Digital Technology (Kindle Edition ed.). Routledge. Annan, K (2003) Attributed to Kofi Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations, exact source is unknown OpenAI. (2024). Gemini [Large language model]. Retrieved February 25, 2024, from https://openai.com/. Williamson, B in UNESCO (2023). International forum on AI and education: steering AI to empower teachers and transform teaching, 5-6 December 2022; analytical report. UNESCO Digital Library. Retrieved February 15, 2024, from https:// unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386162 Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge. Using Digital Technology to Improve Learning | EEF. (2020). Education Endowment Foundation. Retrieved February 15, 2024, from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/ 21

education-evidence/guidance-reports/digital Luckin, R. (2018) Enhancing Learning and Teaching with Technology: What the Research Says. London: UCL Institute of Education Press. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies. US Department of Education. Clark, R. E., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119239086 Sara de Freitas, Martin Oliver. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated?, Computers & Education, Volume 46, Issue 3, Pages 249-264, ISSN 0360-1315, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.007.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131505001600 Kulik, James & Fletcher, J. D.. (2015). Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review. Review of Educational Research. 86. 10.3102/0034654315581420. UNESCO. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/ pf0000366994 Agenda, D. (2023, May 1). How AI can transform education for students and teachers. The World Economic Forum. Retrieved February 15, 2024, from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/05/ai-accelerate-students-holistic-development-teaching-fulfilling/ Khe Foon Hew, Wing Sum Cheung, (2008), Attracting student participation in asynchronous online discussions: A case study of peer facilitation, Computers & Education, Volume 51, Issue 3, Pages 1111-1124, ISSN 0360-1315, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.002 . (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131507001364) Pew Research Center. (2018, January 18). A Decade of Progress, a Century of Disparity: Educational Technology in American Schools. https://hechingerreport.org/a-decade-of-research-on-the-rich-poor-divide-in-education/ Reid Chassiakos, Y. L., Radesky, J., Christakis, D., Moreno, M. A., Cross, C., & COUNCIL ON COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA (2016). Children and Adolescents and Digital Media. Pediatrics, 138(5), e20162593. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016- 2593 Gazzaley, A., & Rosen, L. D. (2016). The distracted mind: Ancient brains in a high-tech world. MIT Press Carr, N. (2008). Is Google making us stupid? The Atlantic Monthly Press. Ertmer, P.A. Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration?. ETR&D 53, 25–39 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683 Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What Forty Years of Research Says About the Impact of Technology on Learning: A Second-Order Meta-Analysis and Validation Study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4-28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310393361 5 tips for enthusiastic adoption of education technology. (2023, September 7). Teacher Development Trust. Retrieved February 15, 2024, from https://tdtrust.org/2023/09/07/5-tips-for-enthusiastic-adoption-of-education-technology/ Congratulations to the following staff from across our Trust who have been awarded the prestigious Certificate in Evidence-Informed Practice from The Chartered College of Teaching. Matthew Moore Queen Mary's High School Abbie Hornsby Q3 Academy Langley Rachael Heitzman-Green Q3 Academy Tipton Jodie Waters Shire Oak Academy Soma Daly Aldridge School Imran Khan Shire Oak Academy 22

Jodie Waters is Head of History at Shire Oak Academy. Last month, Jodie successfully gained her Certificate in Evidence Informed Practice, awarded by the Chartered College of Teaching. Well done, Jodie! Here, Jodie debates the merits of cognitive practice in the teaching of History. As a teacher of history, the word ‘useful’ is a key feature of my daily teaching. When looking at the utility of sources, I teach my students that the question ‘How useful is X?’ is not an easy one to answer, as we cannot talk about how useful something is unless we ask what for. ‘How useful is X for Y?’ would have a quite different focus to ‘How useful is X for Z?’ Thus, when considering how useful cognitive science is for everyday classroom practice, we must consider what it is that teachers are trying to achieve with the application of cognitive science in the classroom. This has been a topic of interest in recent years with a wealth of articles, books, and research available for teachers and schools to access. Teachers have looked to cognitive science and sought to understand the workings of the mind to improve their practice and in turn, improve the learning of their students (Willingham, 2019). The Science of Learning “summarizes existing research from cognitive science related to how students learn, and connect this research to its practical implications for teaching and learning” (Deans for Impact, 2015). It suggests that teachers should understand how students: understand new ideas; learn and retain new information; solve problems; transfer learning to new situations; and become motivated to learn. In addition, they consider common misconceptions about how students think and learn. The EEF (2021) further looks at the role of cognitive science in the classroom, with tangible strategies including spaced learning; interleaving; retrieval practice; managing cognitive load; and dual coding. There is much research presented to show the benefits of these strategies in the classroom and they have been well-utilised to improve learning in many classrooms. Research into cognitive load and memory have been of particular interest, with the EEF reporting that “cognitive science is being used increasingly to inform interventions, practise, and policy in education” (EEF, 2021). The report highlights the Ofsted inspection framework and the Early Career Framework as examples of this, noting that the ECF contains taught content on memory and cognitive load (EEF, 2021). Similarly, the DfE ITT Core Content Framework looks at memory and cognitive load theory in its section ‘How Pupils Learn’ (ITT Core Content Framework, 2019). It is clear that educators who are turning to cognitive science to inform their practice are doing so with the best intentions to improve their offer, improve learning and improve outcomes. However, some experts argue that teachers find difficulties with the application of cognitive science to the classroom due to the lack of time or opportunity to consider how best to do it. Willingham, who argues that teachers should be aware of how students learn, also believes that as teachers do not get enough practice when it comes to the principles of cognitive science, they cannot fully absorb or understand these principles and thus cannot fully utilise them (Willingham, 2018). Some teachers agree that research needs to be “filtered through the professional expertise of those in the classroom” (Enser, 2019) and that theories need to be carefully put into practice. One of the biggest challenges in the use of cognitive science in education comes from the premature application of research to the classroom. Brookman-Byrne and Thomas refer to the existence of persistent ‘neuromyths’ in education as evidence of this. The initial studies and research of theories in labs by researchers can form theories which need to be tested and trialled by researchers and teachers in a collaboration (Brookman-Byrne & Thomas, 2018) and may go back to the drawing board several times before being re-tested and re-trialled. A premature or potentially misinformed application of these theories in the classroom could lead to issues - teachers and schools are working with students for a limited amount of time and want to improve students learning as soon as they possibly can. They want fast changes, and fast implementation. It is little wonder that at time theories can be misunderstood, misconceptions can take hold and application can be rushed as teachers implement strategies. Educational Debate: How useful is cognitive science for classroom practice in History? 23

When considering the utility of cognitive science for everyday classroom practice, we must also consider the journey between the research and researcher to the classroom and teacher. There are several potential pitfalls along this journey which may arise from making the jump too quickly, application that is too fast or too superficial, differences in settings, confirmation bias (Bain, 2021). Turvey et al (2019) raised concerns about the ITE Content Framework due to what they felt was a lack of engagement with research and evidence before application: “our main concern, from a variety of professional and research perspectives, is that the ITE content framework sets worryingly low expectations for a graduate profession based on superficial appropriations of what is already a limited selection of research” (Turvey et al, 2019). They point to misconceptions around research and evidence leading to issues in learning due to the oversimplification of cognitive science and the reduction of cognition to being simply about memory (Turvey et al, 2019). The missing piece of this puzzle is what happens in-between the lab-based research and the classroom practice; the journey from the researcher to the teacher. Brookman-Byrne and Thomas suggest that one way to connect these two points is to consider the expertise that already exists within school – to find something that works well, and find out why it works well, enabling a shared practice and knowledge. (Brookman-Byrne & Thomas, 2018). This approach could be viewed as teachers and researchers working towards each other, rather than research evidence simply being something that trickles down to a classroom level. From my own perspective as a classroom teacher, I can see this type of approach working well at a school based CPD level too. Brookman-Byrne and Thomas state that “teachers rightly do not want to be told what to do” (Brookman-Byrne & Thomas, 2018). My anecdotal experience as a Teaching & Learning Advisor at my school supports this view, and I have worked extensively on supporting staff in their understanding and implementation of metacognition in the classroom. Some of my best experiences in this role have been when working with staff to consider how far their current practice is supported by cognitive science theories, rather than using a ‘this is a promising idea, do this’ approach. This experience has shown me that a ‘working backwards’ approach of establishing what works and why as suggested by Brookman-Byrne and Thomas could have its benefits. I initially considered what it is that teachers are trying to achieve with the application of cognitive science in the classroom. Through engaging with the research around this topic, I can see that there is a common theme: teachers are trying to use all the tools, techniques, and strategies that they can to improve the learning of their students. Theories based in cognitive science have been widely accepted and lauded in education, and teachers have used these theories with a view to better their practice. The application of these theories and the implementation of these strategies in schools should be carefully considered by school leaders, with some caution. Attention should be paid to studies of the theory in practice in different classroom settings, with thought given to what this would look like not only within a school, but within different subject areas and key stages. During the design of a school mathematics curriculum, Foster et al (2024) partnered with schools and teachers to ensure that their resulting resource was relevant in a school setting, and considered the challenges that they faced in applying research to practice and found that “research needs to consider how principles from cognitive science should be applied during the practical process of curriculum design” (Foster et al, 2024). They found that the application of research to resource creation required some balance of theories and ideas rather than a black-and-white application of ‘rules.’ This reflects my view that the journey from researcher to teacher should have pitstops where teachers can engage with research rather than simply follow it, in order than ensure that cognitive science is useful for everyday classroom practice. 24

References (any research directly cited within your debate response) Bain, P (2021) How useful is cognitive science for everyday classroom practice? [Online video] Available from: https://mypd.chartered.college/mod/lesson/view.php?id=13253 [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Brookman-Byrne, A & Thomas, M (2018) Neuroscience, psychology and education: Emerging links. In: Impact. Available at: https://my.chartered.college/impact_article/neuroscience-psychology-and-education-emerging-links/ [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Deans for Impact (2015) The Science of Learning. Available at: thescienceoflearning.pdf (deansforimpact.org) [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Department for Education (2019) ITT Core Content Framework. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov. uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/974307/ITT_core_content_framework_.pdf [Accessed 24/02/2024] Education Endowment Foundation (2021) Cognitive Science Approaches in the Classroom: A Review of the Evidence. Available at: Cognitive science approaches in the classroom | EEF (educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk) Cognitive_science_approaches_in_the_classroom_-_A_review_of_the_evidence.pdf (d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net) [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Enser, M (2019) How useful is cognitive load theory for teachers? TES Magazine, 10 October 2019 Foster et al (2024) Challenges in applying principles from cognitive science to the design of a new mathematics curriculum In: The Curriculum Journal, British Educational Research Association. Available at: https://bera-journals. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/curj.249 [Accessed: 10 February 2024] Turvey, K et al (2019) Total Recall? The ITE content framework, research and teachers’ understandings of learning In: BERA Blog. Available at: https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog/total-recall-the-ite-content-framework-research-andteachers-understandings-of-learning [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Willingham, D.T. (2018) Unlocking the Science of How Kids Think: A new proposal for reforming teacher education. Education Next, 18(3): pp.42-49 Available from: https://www.educationnext.org/unlocking-science-how-kids-think-new-proposal-for-reforming-teacher-education/ [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Willingham, D.T. (2019) Ask the Cognitive Scientist: Should Teachers Know the Basic Science of How Children Learn? American Educator, 43(2): Available from: https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2019/willingham [Accessed: 29 January 2024] Date awarded: as an Reaccreditation Date: in recognition of meeting the required standard. The Chartered College of Teaching certifies Accredited Chartered Status CPD Partner 31 July 2023 Mercian Trust July 2025 The Mercian Trust are proud to be an Accredited Chartered Status CPD Partner of the Chartered College of Teaching. Congratulations to colleagues from across our Trust who have successfully gained the Certificate in Evidence-Informed Practice! To find out more on how you can start your journey to becoming a Chartered Teacher, check out the Mercian Trust's CPD brochure here. 25

Educational Debate: What are the arguments for and against collaborative learning approaches in the MfL classroom? Soma Daly is a teacher of MfL at Aldridge School. Last month, Soma successfully gained her Certificate in Evidence Informed Practice, awarded by the Chartered College of Teaching. Well done, Soma! ollaborative learning has attracted much debate within the educational landscape. The Educational Endowment Foundation define it as an approach that ‘involves pupils working together’, and when effective, it generates at least five months of progress (Primary) and six months (Secondary) respectively (EEF, 2021). While collaborative learning has the potential to ‘reduce cognitive load, as students are able to share information’, it simultaneously poses ‘a negative impact on learning’ when having to ‘communicate and coordinate [which] causes higher levels of extraneous load’ (Pearce, 2022, p. 54). Numerous strategies have been employed to promote successful collaborative learning and thus improve engagement, such as, De Bano’s ‘Thinking Hats’, Jig-Saw groupings, and Think-PairShare. The digital classroom has also accelerated peer collaboration through online breakout rooms and with having the greater opportunities to collaborate on digital platforms, yet the EEF (2021) suggest this has less of an impact than class-based group-work. Despite the positive views towards collaborative learning, it is often substituted for Direct Instruction as the ‘teacher governs most aspects of [the] lessons’, and in some contexts, it is indeed ‘favoured over collaborative group work’ because of ‘its presumed efficiency and effectiveness’ (Sun and Anderson et al., 2022). However, Mansworth challenges this and argues that ‘direct instruction can enable good exam results [but it] should be balanced with other approaches if [teachers] are going to provide […] students with the best preparation’ (2021, p. 87). In my context, students often prefer direct instruction; whilst it does not generate passive learning itself, pupils are often more reluctant to collaboratively lead and regulate their learning, thus indicating that Mansworth’s view is accurate. Indeed, without exposure to collaborative learning, students do not experience different ways of working, and McCallum (2015) aligns with Mansworth as collaborative learning is ‘a crucial part of a balanced teaching diet,’ and therefore, opportunities for it are an important part of a student’s classroom experience. Given the conflicting views surrounding collaborative learning, it is important to assess whether it does enhance student learning or hinders progress. The two polarising views towards collaborative learning are evident within two differing educational contexts: a comprehensive and selective school. In my current setting, collaborative strategies have been employed departmentally to reduce the passive nature of students and to encourage greater participation in English. Literature lessons require students to explore set texts in groups – each with a specific focus – and they construct a lesson to empower their own voice. This model has been implemented throughout Key Three to Five to discourage teacher-led analysis of texts. When launching this idea, it was typically viewed as too idealistic – sentiments that resonate with the wider perception of collaborative learning, as it is seen as a ‘burden for hard working teachers’ and is ‘incredibly time consuming’ with little reward as it encourages ‘havoc [with] behaviour in the classroom’ (Quigley, 2016). Whilst valid concerns – and ones that I personally feared at the beginning of my teaching career – I do, however, now align more so with Quigley’s view that it can be transformational once ‘students bring the necessary focus to group work, and when teachers use it appropriately’ (Quigley, 2016). Here, Quigley’s emphasis on both pupil focus and teachers utilising it effectively are important factors that lead to its overall success in deepening student learning. Tom Bennett also aligns with Quigley’s thinking as ‘group work can go a long way in reinforcing knowledge’, yet ‘it should not take the place of fully guided instruction (2015, p. 26

33). Not only is it necessary for students to value group work then, but an effective framework for it is key. This has led to the implementation of Zoe Elder’s twelve principles of collaborative learning within my context. Disappointingly, although this framework was discussed as a team and CPD was continually included to support its implementation, lesson visits were mixed. Whilst some displayed successful pupil collaboration, others exemplified Bennett’s concern of pupils failing to ‘stay on task’ (2015, p.33). Numerous variables can contribute to the success or failure of collaborative learning, but it was less effective when the teacher did not clarify and model the expectations of group work. In contrast, those that continually reviewed the collaborative process, did cultivate Elder’s notion of ‘a safe learning community’ where ‘everyone [can] make huge gains in their thinking and their progress’ (2011, p. 34), evidenced through students working towards a shared goal. This finding aligns with Campbell and Bokhove (2021), as they argue that generating ‘a high specific learning goal or any goal that implies an element of exploration is more appropriate than a performance goal.’ Within the classroom, both forms can motivate, and on balance, I argue that it is class and context dependent, but goals are fundamental for collaborative learning to be successful, and as Collins et al (2021) also outlines, once students ‘use knowledge actively’ they can build ‘communities of practice where students find an intrinsic motivation for their learning which goes beyond pleasing teachers or gaining examination grades’ (2021, p. 12). Considering these perspectives, embedding collaborative learning so that it becomes normalised is crucial. Undoubtedly, collaboration can enrich student learning, but these two varied experiences highlight that explicit modelling and metacognition are vital. Goos et al (2002) supports this view in that collaborative metacognition is characterised by ‘mutuality’ whereby ‘each student explores their own and others’ ideas […] to construct a shared understanding.’ Departmentally, when the teacher and group had embraced collaborative learning, they displayed greater confidence orally and in their written responses. It is, therefore, possible to conclude that collaborative learning does play a fundamental role in the development of analytical thinking, writing and discussion within English classrooms, and as McCallum (2015) argues, it ‘can provide a range of alternative ideas to use in writing activities’, that ‘might not come into being if dependent solely on individual thought.’ When exploring the factors that impact upon successful group work, Nokes-Malach et al (2015) research highlights elements that should be factored into teacher planning and suggests consideration is needed with ‘how and when collaboration improves outcomes.’ Thus, the practitioner must be adept at establishing whether a particular task lends itself towards individual or collaborative learning. Campbell and Bokhove (2021) note that collaboration leads to students ‘losing [their] train of thought because of paying attention to other group members’, and they suggest that it causes ‘retrieval strategy disruption’, alongside ‘production blocking [taking] place with missed retrieval opportunities, as group members must wait their turns while another person is talking.’ They also observe that social loafing – defined as ‘group members [who] do not contribute optimally because they think other group members will do the work’ - as the key factor that dilutes collaboration. Although this cannot be refuted, Quigley (2016) suggests that the social loafing effect can be avoided through carefully ‘ensuring that each and every student understands their role’ and that ‘each student has a distinct task’. Indeed, my own practice and that across the department correlates with Quigley’s view, highlighting the importance of establishing the clearly defined roles. That is not to say, however, that teachers should avoid giving students the autonomy to select their groups and roles, but I argue that this cannot be expected until collaborative habits are embedded and normalised. In the case of English lessons, when analysing characters in Macbeth, teachers that assigned responsibility for alternative ideas, comparisons, and generating thesis statements within their group seemed to perform better and displayed greater engagement, and the impact of collaboration was also illuminated in their written responses, thus aligning with the EEF (2021) as ‘structured approaches with well-designed tasks lead to the greatest learning gains.’ Overall, it is fitting to conclude with Didau’s view that teachers should ‘make the implicit, explicit’ (2014, p.21), and whilst this sentiment is not directly applied to collaborative learning, the principle behind it does resonate with group work in that it can only be successful if such habits are continually rehearsed and modelled. What are the implications of collaborative learning within your own classroom practice? There are numerous positions that both support and challenge collaborative learning. Within the educational landscape, and indeed within the two contexts that I have worked in thus far, there seems to be a growing emphasis on direct instruction, and such approaches can – in some cases - dominate collaborative learning. It is Kirschner and Sweller’s research that resonates with me the most as they argue that group work can burden ‘extraneous cognitive load’ (2018, p. 219), and so the appropriateness of collaborative learning needs to be considered first, if it is to be effective, and as such, the practitioner must consider this first as part of their planning. They also emphasise that for maximum impact ‘it is very important that all members of the group develop [an] effective experience working together’ as otherwise it prevents ‘every member [from] acquiring domain-specific knowledge’ (2018, p. 219). Not only this, when collaborative learning is embedded effectively, it enables ‘information […] to become available exactly when it [is] needed [thus] resulting in a decreased load and increased learning’ (2018, p. 220). There is an important balance to consider here, as when it is employed for ‘complex tasks/problems [it] becomes a scaffold’ (2018, p. 220), and so, within my practice going forward, it is crucial that I foster mutual dependence between students so that they have a clear sense of ‘task/goal in27

Congratulations to the following staff from across our Trust who have been awarded the prestigious Certificate in Evidence-Informed Practice from The Chartered College of Teaching. Matthew Moore Queen Mary's High School Abbie Hornsby Q3 Academy Langley Rachael Heitzman-Green Q3 Academy Tipton Jodie Waters Shire Oak Academy Soma Daly Aldridge School Imran Khan Shire Oak Academy terdependence’ (2018, p. 220). Overall, there are numerous variables that can shape the effectiveness of collaborative learning, such as, the nature of the class and educational context, and thus, I argue that it is an important element of a teacher’s toolkit, but as with all pedagogical approaches, it must be consistently modelled to enable students to ‘exploit cooperation between each other to enhance the community’s learning’ (Collins, 2021, p. 12) in which the students belong. References Bennett, Tom (2015) Group Work for the Good: Unpacking the Research behind one Popular Classroom Strategy. American Educator. (pp. 32-43). Campbell., Ryan and Bokhov., Christian. (2021), Building learning culture through effective uses of group work. Impact. 5. Spring 2019. Available at: https://my.chartered.college/impact_article/building-learning-culture-through-effective-uses-of-group-work/. Collins et al’s (2021) Cognitive Apprenticeship in Action. Edited by Tomsett, John. Woodbridge: John Catt Educational. Didau, David., (2014), The Secret of Literacy. United Kingdom: Crown House Publisher. Education Endowment Foundation (2021) Teaching and learning toolkit – collaborative learning. Available at: https:// educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/teaching-learning-toolkit/collaborative-learning (accessed 10th January 2024). Elder, Zoe., (2011), Full on Learning: Involve Me and I’ll Understand. United Kingdom: Crown House Publisher. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 193–223. doi: 10.1023/A:1016209010120. Mansworth, Meghan., (2021) Teach to the Top: Aiming High for Every Learner. Woodbridge: John Catt Educational. McCallum, Andew (2015)., English and Media Centre: In Praise of Group Work [online]. [14th November 2023]. Available at: https://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/blog/in-praise-of-group-work/ . Nokes-Malach TJ, Richey JE and Gadgil S (2015) When is it better to learn together? Insights from research on collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review 27(4): 645–656. Pearce, Jade (2022)., What Every Teacher Needs to Know: How to embed evidence-informed teaching and learning in your school. Great Britain: Bloomsbury Publishing. Quigley, Alex (2016). Group Work: An Essential Guide [online]. [14th November 2023]. Available at: https://www.theconfidentteacher.com/2016/05/group-work-essential-guide/. Sun., J and Anderson, Richardson., C et al., (2022) Children’s engagement during collaborative learning and direct instruction through the lens of participant structure. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 69. Available at: https:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X22000200#preview-section-cited 28

@MercianTrustCPD @MercianTrustCPD Contributors Wanted! We would love to hear from more practitioners across our 9 Trust schools who are experimenting with different, research-informed methods in their classrooms and areas of work. If you’d like to write an article for the Expertise Exchange, please email tracy.goodyear@ merciantrust.org.uk with proposed details of your submission. All contributors are given support through the planning stage and all articles are edited prior to publication. Don't forget to follow us: 29