Reflections on Interview
Overall, the most striking things the students said was how they found the task difficult. When I initially set the task, I did not believe it to be something that they would struggle with and only allowed 15 minutes for them to complete the moral lessons and language analysis. Teaching in a mixed ability setting, I was aware some students would find this more challenging however the students interviewed are my MAT / High KS2 students and so I did not anticipate there being much misunderstanding. This struggle was clearly founded in the wording of the second column where students were asked to consider ‘Dickens’ moral lesson for Scrooge and the reader’. As a teacher, I had simply believed that writer’s intentions were directly comparable to the idea of a ‘moral’ and, as writer’s intention is something I have taught explicitly over the last year, they would be able to tell me what Dickens’ was trying to teach us. A moral is defined as being “concerned with the principles of right and wrong behaviour” and this concept is something students are acquainted with in primary school, especially with the teaching of fables. However, my students are vocabulary poor, a consequence of working in an economically deprived area, and, therefore, could not make links between a moral and a writer’s intention which was necessary when completing the task.
Another startling realisation was that students believe that asking for help is a weakness. Teacher perception of learning is that if students can do a task unaided then they are not being challenged enough. However, in the eyes of my students, their struggle was seen as an indicator of their basic intelligence. I suspect that this idea is founded in their natural aptitude being better than many students in the class and therefore they are not used to having to ask for help. They have been trained in fostering an independence, something that will be useful in higher and further education. Nevertheless, this can often lead to misconceptions about the task and incorrect answers being given.
Finally, it is students’ poor awareness of how to approach tasks that are new or different that is surprising. At my school there is a culture of modelling tasks to ensure that students know how to do something. On the whole, I find students benefit from this heavy scaffold, but it does mean that students are reliant on the teacher leading and demonstrating the outline for the task. As a consequence, when students are expected to complete a task on their own, they struggle and cannot adapt what they know to a new setting. As a teacher, it is my duty to make sure my students are taking my models and adapting the process instead of simply copying and therefore not learning anything.
Encouragingly, students demonstrated an understanding of why they are expected to do a task and how this links to the wider context of English. I was pleased about this as often students struggle to understand why they have been asked to do something. This demonstrates a good tailoring to the lesson objectives and a cohesive understanding of the final aims of studying a text; that they need to understand not only the story but what the purpose behind writing it was.
Links to Literature
The Task: The nature of the task was quite difficult for students to comprehend, not in the action of filling out boxes but in what should be in each box and what would constitute a ‘correct’ response. Whilst Black (1998) argues that “the degree to which the task is left open or constrained can be varied – mainly by defining more or less clearly the nature of the outcome” (88). My awareness was that I had made the task easier by providing a model however it is distinctly possible that I narrowed the parameters as students believed this is the exact type of response that was necessary. As Marshall (2014) argues, “critical literacy can also be seen as guiding pupils towards a right answer, although the scope of the question might be deemed more vague” (18). Students in this instance did not need to fill out the boxes in a certain way. It was not an assessment but an application of their learning and therefore could be formatted in any way necessary. If the model had not been there, it would have been interesting to examine whether this would have caused more or less confusion. Black (1998) continues to say that “it would be very likely that some pupils would not do themselves justice because they would not be able to work out what exactly the examiner was looking for” (85). Our push toward exam rhetoric means that we are creating students who are always looking for the ‘right’ answer as opposed to considering English as an open-ended topic where your opinion, if supported, is valid. Students now look for exam rhetoric in tasks and are trained to believe that all tasks are a direct preparation for essay writing in the exam. Here, “the desire to make the criteria for assessment explicit to pupils, in order to help them attain higher levels, has meant that the focus of the subject has narrowed around particular objectives defined by the tests.” (Marshall, 2014: 13). As a consequence, students struggle to approach a task that is framed in any other format than something that resembles the exam.
Independence: During the task, students demonstrated the need for lots of aid from the teacher. As indicated in the interviews, some students are moving toward a level of independence when attempting tasks and understand where to get support from other mechanisms. However, this raises a conflict between asking for help when necessary and relying on the teacher to complete the work on your behalf. Moll and Greenberg (1990) “emphasized the need for students to assume more control over their own learning” (329). The interviews with these students noted that they are trying to undertake this level of responsibility however less able students are struggling with this. Consequently, I need to consider how to support these students better; “teachers must trust (and assist) students to make appropriate decisions and grow into self-responsibility”. (Moll and Greenberg, 1990: 329). The consequence of this lack of independence is a struggle in a world outside of school where independence is the expected norm. Bragg (2007) states that the teacher in her study “had instituted ‘independent time’ with her group, starting each morning with a half hour in which students chose their own activity” (508). Whilst this is not possible in a secondary school setting as the curriculum is dictated by government and you do not see the same children all day, this has raised ideas about conducting an independent project in order to encourage students to complete something they are interested in. This could be linked to an aspect of the curriculum and, in turn, improve engagement in the curriculum. Postlethwaite and Haggerty (2002) highlight that “many students said that their interest in lessons was maintained when there was a match between the work and their own abilities” (187). Giving students the opportunity to pursue their own independent project would allow students to stretch themselves accordingly and complete a piece of work inside their Zone of Proximal Development.
The value of student voice: Listening to students and their perspective on the lessons they have just taken part in is an important part of being a teacher. As Rudduck and McIntyre (2007) assert “they would find these ideas valuable in offering sensible ways in which they might change their classroom practices” (16). Moving forward, I would like to take my conclusions from this investigation and utilise them in my practice. Students can assess what they did or did not understand as well as seeing aspects of the lesson that teachers may not be able to see. Understandably, some teachers feel “that children are not competent to offer comments on their work, that they may not keep confidentiality, that they don’t have the specialist knowledge necessary, or that it gives a platform to the ‘wrong’ students.” (Bragg, 2007: 513) Whilst I do not have these beliefs myself, I did pick students who I believe to be proactive and engaged in lesson time and therefore, potentially subconsciously, avoided the ‘wrong’ students. However, a successful reflective practitioner must confront issues in their own teaching to continually improve. Conducting an investigation like this has the ability to give “attention to pupil perspective and participation in schools can contribute to enhanced pupil engagement and achievement” (Rudduck and McIntyre, 2007: 15). As students believe that they are being listened to, if teachers choose to adapt their teaching accordingly, students believe they are active, not passive, participants in their learning. However, similar to Postlethwaite and Haggerty (2002) I found that “These individual and group interviews gave valuable insights into student thinking. […] such comments may have little validity for the majority of her or his peers.” (188) Therefore, it is important not to extrapolate findings to be applicable for all students who do not have the same backgrounds, gender, characteristics or aptitude.
Implications for Future Teaching
Looking forward this has affected my teaching in two dimensions. In the first instance, I would change the way the resource is formatted. Students would have benefitted from having page numbers on the chart so that they were able to locate the quotation in the text. Their attempts to do this for themselves made the task much slower. I also need to change the wording on the top of the column from ‘Dickens’ moral lesson for Scrooge and the reader’ to ‘Dickens’ lesson for the reader’ or to ‘Dickens’ intention in this part of the text’. This will make links to what students have been previously asked to do in their paragraphs and hopefully alleviate some confusion concerning the task. Furthermore, it would be helpful to not give students the first line as an example. Instead, I would like to walk students through how they get to the answer through targeted questioning and give them a clear approach, so they know what they need to do to be successful in this task.
Outside of this lesson, my approach to scaffolding should be adapted. Over the course of schemes of work, I would like to ensure more independence from my students. They need to be helped in a way that gradually provides more independence, not just in terms of building up to the exam style questions. If students cannot adapt what they know and utilise it in a different context then it is questionable whether I have successfully taught them anything at all.
Reflection on Methodology
The interview method was interesting to focus on during this task. Interviewing undoubtedly has many positives. As the subject, they are able to provide a more personalised response and questions can be tailored to suit those who are being interviewed. It suited the task as students were being asked to show their opinion of learning and this allowed them an open forum to do so. In addition, the questions asked can be much more reactive as conversations may turn to unplanned paths. For example, I did not expect to discuss with students about what they consider success to look like in a task. Furthermore, an interview allowed me to pick up on students’ body language and gestures so that it was easier to ascertain whether they really believed what they were saying or whether it was merely to appease me as the interviewer.
However, as these are two polite young women with whom I have a very positive relationship, I wonder how critical they would be toward my lesson. Students in the interview have a positive view toward English and therefore the pressure of an interviewer may bias their responses in order to maintain their standing with myself. In addition, I only asked two students of similar ability and of the same ethnicity and gender. This may limit the feedback that I received as a male of a different ethnicity or ability may have had a different approach to the task or reflected on it in a different way. Finally, interviews do not allow me to analyse my results in a scientific way, only to interpret the dialogue and adapt my lesson and teaching accordingly. There is no way to channel this information and establish whether it changes over a period of time due to its qualitative nature.