This year I teach two Year 9 History classes, one in the ‘conventional’ fashion and one using co-construction. Without further ado and to save you scrolling to the end of this post to see my assessment of the benefits to learning I believe I’m detecting, here they are:
- there is a much stronger sense among students of how a lesson is put together to achieve learning
- there is a much stronger sense of what that learning might actually be
- they now have hard, practical experience of constructing a lesson, and then reviewing it and refining it for next time
- this has generated an overview of learning and progress which I might have occasionally managed with Sixth Form classes in the past but not with younger classes; this is metacognition
These are bold claims, perhaps, and they need to be accompanied by disclaimers. I’m certainly not claiming that co-construction is the answer for my own teaching, let alone anyone else’s, nor that what follows is in any way worthy of terms such as ‘research’ or ‘scientific’, ‘control group’ or ‘quantifiable’. This is anecdotal, local, particular and personal but, imperfect as it is, my experience so far is summarised here in the hope that it may trigger responses and dialogue.
What is Co-Construction?
The easiest way to answer this is to read Tom Sherrington’s inspirational posts:
It was this that encouraged me to pick up some bricks. I went through some of the ‘cons’ of what I perceived to be Tom’s situation: ‘He’s a Head, his kids are bound to be onside’; ‘Parents won’t get too stroppy if it goes a bit wrong’ and for each force found an equal and opposite force: ‘He’s walking the walk and is under pressure to get it right’; ‘He’s doing this with an IGCSE Physics class, that’s really high stakes’. In the end, the matter mattered more than the anti-matter and I decided to launch my own experiment. I am helped by the circumstances of a Head, SLT and Head of Department who are willing to encourage different methods of teaching and learning, which I realise is an enormous privilege, but none of them will sit on the sidelines, either, if the particles collide, nothing measurable results and learning is harmed. Having said that, one of the points I made when offering these thoughts to @Teach_MeetBristol led by the admirable @betsysalt and the inimitable @ICTEvangelist this week was that we can wait forever for the ‘right’ circumstances in terms of class, year group, set of resources, the absence or likely absence of inspectors, and so on, and these delays will just mean that we don’t do it.
Action this day, as Churchill reputedly urged. I chose one of my two Year 9 classes for the launch of co-construction and this was the class with the less difficult reputation, but looking back now I think that the tougher class could have benefited just as much.
How does it work?
Students are in groups of 4-5. We’ve changed them around a few times but now they’re settled in groups to which they like to belong. We have fixed points we need to hit, ie Common Assessments derived from the Scheme of Work. How we go about learning skills and knowledge to do well in those assessments is up to us. We’ve planned sequences of lessons, some of which students have presented and some of which I’ve led in conventional fashion. What’s different about co-construction is that it takes what we’ve all done as teachers in a typical double lesson, asking students to research and plan a topic on say, factory conditions for children during the Industrial Revolution and then present their findings to the class, and makes that process part of a template for the whole year. Just like us, the more they practise, the better they become. The better they become, the more they think about what’s working and why. They take full and equal responsibility for their learning. It has been hard work. Co-construction has needed a hard hat at times, but then I’m learning, too.
The prefix ‘co’ is vital. This process doesn’t involve me sitting back and letting them get on with lessons. Tom Sherrington makes this point very strongly. He also affirms that there has to be stretch and challenge and sheer academic rigour to the process, otherwise we sink to the lowest common denominator of dodgy Powerpoints and performance masquerading as progress. We want enjoyable lessons but I’m not interested in ‘fun’ as a discrete aim.
The building site so far…
We’re only part way through the year, and it won’t be until the summer that I can take stock properly. Pupils have filled in self-assessment sheets and stuck them in their books, and seem to respect what we are doing. Their goodwill has, of course, been the cement holding the whole edifice together.
I said to them back in September, rather naively, that with their vast experience as lesson observers they could use this year to share with me some of the best lessons and learning experiences they’d ever had, in any subject and at any age. They therefore had every freedom to think about how to research and present to the class a topic such as the introduction of railways. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, their first efforts were fairly low-level and unskilful, with all due respect! Over-reliance on the textbook, Q and A sessions which fell into ‘shout out the answer’, it was all there. Of course, they needed to master the basics before they could move on. The turning point came from them, not from me. Emma and Sam (I’ve changed their names) came up with a lesson plan which immediately raised the bar. If you click on the photo you can see it clearly:
Sam’s mother is a primary school teacher, and that influence shows clearly in the plan, but I’m assured that Sam did much of the work himself and the sheer quality of his and Emma’s mini-lesson with the class supports that view. They managed a variety of resources and methods, they hooked nineteenth-century railways to debates about HS2 today, and they thought about different ability levels in the class.
We’ve now moved on to look at World War I. This is where it gets exciting. Having taken a lead within their old group, Sam and Emma are now coaching their new group through the planning of a mini-lesson on what happened at the end of the war, a topic their group has opted for. They’ve had several stabs at a simpler lesson plan; click on the photo to see what’s changed:
I love the term ‘cool down’ as an alternative to plenary. I’m as excited by the process as much as the outcome. They and the other groups have become self-aware, self-critical lesson constructors. I’ve thrown at them some questions familiar to us all: When you offer us your mini-lesson, how will the class learn? How will you know what they’ve learnt? How will the class know how to do well in the written taks you set them? In the next couple of weeks they will peer-assess their mini-lessons and, as the next stage of our co-construction self-build, they will assess each other’s homework tasks using mark schemes I’ll help them put together. If we can extend that by the end of the year to include parents in the loop of feedback and assessment, I’ll be delighted.
- To repeat the point, co-construction is self-build, Grand Designs, with the associated learning rollercoaster to experience. I’ve spent more time meeting students outside of lessons and planning lessons than I have with the parallel class
- I’ve failed to inspire them so far to offer, for example, an ICT strand to run alongside what we do: a class blog, for example
- We’ve gone at a slower pace and have covered less content than the parallel class
- They haven’t magically stopped being Year 9s, so there have been some tetchy moments within groups
None of the above outweighs some of the gains:
- This is student-centred learning in action, and it works. There is a balance of individual, pair and group work but most of the time they have to make their groups work
- They’ve raised their knowledge and skills bar and we are now all teaching to the top. My sense is, although I need to think about this more, that the weaker ones are more secure in their groups and are being helped by what we are doing rather than floundering
- Classically, my ‘weaker-on-paper’ boys are genuinely coming to the fore when talking to the class, and our collective peer assessment is able to reward this in ways which my book-marking would not. This is differentiation, n’est-ce pas, and it has just arisen organically rather than artificially.
- The fact that we are doing this across whole sequences of lessons makes genuine progress in History, whatever that is and however we might define it, more likely to happen than within a snapshot single lesson
With all due respect, I deliberately haven’t read Tom Sherrington’s more recent posts on his journey with co-construction, which include:
I’m just including the links without reading the text properly! I know his great practice is out there, and I’m sure his Grand Design takes the whole process to a different level, but I have to do this in my own terms and adapt the general principles to my own class’s learning needs. I’ll catch up with that reading at the end of the year. Meanwhile, the building work continues.