Formative Teaching Methods Geoff Petty Jan 2004

The strategies below are mostly for teaching where there is a right way to answer
questions (convergent learning). For example:
calculations in mathematics science accounts or similar
punctuation grammar translation or other language s!ills
mastering content: basic !nowle"ge an" comprehension in any sub#ect
they can be a"apte" to teach practical s!ills in"ee" to most s!ills teaching
they can be a"apte" to teach social s!ills such as "ealing with a customer complaint.

Groundrules for self and peer assessment:

$f Formative Teaching %etho"s are to be use" effectively stu"ents must enter into the
metho"s with the right spirit. Try to agree the following with your stu"ents:
We ill learn !est if e all agree that:
$ts o!ay if you "ont fully un"erstan" a concept first time learning ta!es time.
$f wor! is gra"e" aim to beat your own recor" not someone elses. &owever gra"ing
shoul" be avoi"e" where possible.
what counts is whether you un"erstan" the problem an" solution or question an"
answer eventually:
not whether you got it right first time
not whether you got it wrong #ust because of a silly slip
$t is not humiliating to ma!e a mista!e. 'e all ma!e mista!es when we learn. $n"ee"
is part of how we learn. $f we "ont ma!e mista!es the wor! is too easy for us to learn
at our maximum rate.
%ista!es are useful because they tell us where we can improve.
$ts goo" for learning to a"mit to not un"erstan"ing an" to a"mit to mista!es an" then
as! for clarification.
we shoul" never ri"icule each other for mista!es even in a #o!ing way
(ou will learn from mista!es if you fin" out how to "o it without mista!es next time an"
really un"erstan" this.
)re you brave* )s an half+hour long exercise to get your stu"ents into the right spirit you
might li!e to as! them to say hooray every time they notice one of their own mista!es,
When to use Formative Teaching strategies
-ome of the strategies that follow are very "eman"ing. $f stu"ents fin" them "ifficult or
tiring you might li!e to re"uce the time spent on them but "ont give them up. They are
too powerful to aban"on.
.o listen in to the peer explaining an" peer assessing conversations they will give you
valuable if "epressing insight into the level of your stu"ents un"erstan"ing but "ont butt
in.
$f stu"ents are not much goo" at peer explaining self+assessment or peer+assessment
this is no reason to aban"on them. $t is a reason to give your stu"ents more practice in it.
&owever you might want to use corrective peer explaining an" to review peer an" self
assessment after it has ta!en place to stress the !ey points an" "eal with common
wea!nesses.

Formative Teaching "trategies
#$ Peer %ssessment in pairs
The simplest form of peer assessment is to get stu"ents to wor! alone on an exercise for
five minutes or so an" then get pairs to swap their wor! an" assess each others.
Fee"bac! is usually verbal rather than in writing. $t nee"s to be given in a supportive way.
/eer assessment in pairs with mo"el answers
)nother strategy which 0ibbs foun" almost "ouble" attainment on a university engineering
course is as follows. This strategy is useful if you are setting less wor! for stu"ents than
you woul" li!e because you cant !eep up with mar!ing. &owever peer assessment is
goo" practice anyway.
-tu"ents "o a wor!sheet of questions an" put their name on it
They han" these to the teacher who gives them out to other stu"ents to mar!.
-tu"ents "o not !now who is mar!ing their wor!.
-tu"ents mar! their peers wor! using mo"el answers or wor!e" solutions
inclu"ing a mar! scheme provi"e" by the teacher.
The wor! is han"e" bac! to its rightful owner an" stu"ents each !eep the wor!e"
solutions. %ost stu"ents will probably chec! the quality of the peers mar!ing but
the teacher "oes not.
$n the case 0ibbs reports the teacher "i" not even ta!e "own the mar!s that the
stu"ents obtaine". The average mar! on the unit rose from aroun" 123 to aroun"
423 as a result of this strategy, ((ou coul" of course collect mar!s at this stage if
you prefer.)
The process of mar!ing anothers wor! has a number of stri!ing a"vantages over having
your wor! mar!e" by the teacher. -tu"ents see alternative ways of answering the questin
or solving the problem5 they see mo"el answers or wor!e" solutions an" have to stu"y
these closely "uring the mar!ing5 an" they see where mar!s are gaine" an" lost. This
ma!es the goals clear. -tu"ents also have to ma!e #u"gements about their peers wor!
which requires them to clarify their un"erstan"ing of the sub#ect matter an" the goals set.
'hat is more the goals are learne" by in"uction from stu"ying the concrete wor!e"
solutions this is a powerful way to learn.
This is an excellent way of getting stu"ents to "o more wor! than you can mar! but it is
much more than this. The metho" contains a hi""en message. $t teaches stu"ents how
to avoi" mista!es an" how to improve but more than this it teaches them that mista!es
are avoi"able an" that improvement is possible. $t shows stu"ents that achievement is
not "epen"ent on innate talent but on "oing the #ob well. $t is "ifficult to overestimate the
importance of this message it has been shown to have a huge effect on stu"ents
motivation an" achievement. (-ee the .wec! han"out on the motivation page of my
moonfruit site).
$t "oes not matter if stu"ents "o not ma!e perfect #u"gements an" you nee" not arbitrate
in every case. The "esire" outcome is that learners clarify their un"erstan"ing an" set
themselves goals for improvement if this outcome is achieve" that is often sufficient. $ am
not of course saying that teachers nee" not mar! stu"ents wor! only that peer
assessment is very useful.
2$ Peer %ssessment in groups
-tu"ents are arrange" in groups of three or four its best if they are not frien"ship
groups. $t can be "one in pairs but the more learners in the group the more their
answers are li!ely to "iffer in ways that help stu"ents to learn.
-tu"ents are given questions or calculations to "o which they wor! on alone in the
first instance (say five minutes)
-tu"ents compare their answers reasoning metho"s wor!ing etc noting
"ifferences. They "iscuss an" try to agree:
'hich are the correct or best metho"s wor!ings reasoning an"
answers etc an" why
The groups i"ea of the best answer.
'hat errors were ma"e by group members an" why (this is "one in a
supportive an" constructive manner)
The stu"ents are then given mo"el answers an" compare their group
answer with the teachers mo"el answer.
-ee also 1 /eer assessment of "eliberate errors below.
&$ Peer '(plaining
/eers explaining of mo"el answers
This is a variant of the above an" was "evise" an"
researche" by 6arroll. -he foun" that this metho"
enable" stu"ents to learn the s!ill faster while
ma!ing less errors even though more stages are
involve" than the usual metho" (which is to use
only 7 an" 8 below).
7. The teacher "emonstrates how to "o it on the
boar" explaining an" thin!ing out lou" in the usual
way. 9.g. how to use tangents to "etermine an
un!nown angle how to use apostrophes how to
write a care plan from a scenario etc
:. -tu"ents are arrange" in pairs not necessarily with frien"s.
;. The teacher has prepare" two sets of questions with their mo"el answers fully
wor!e". 9ach contains a variety of "ifferent types of questions very similar to the
ones "emonstrate" by the teacher. 9ach pair has one of each set. 9ach stu"ent
only wor!s with one of the sets in the next stage.
Peer explaining of
model answers
1. -tu"ents stu"y their own mo"el answers alone preparing for the next stage (say 2
minutes)
2. 9ach stu"ent explains their set of mo"el answers to their partner pointing out
what was "one an" why an" why the metho" an" wor!ing is soun".
8. -tu"ents then practice "oing some by themselves in the usual way.
The i"ea behin" this metho" is that if teachers go straight from 7 to 8 this is too big a leap
for many stu"ents. $t goes straight from !nowle"ge to application on <looms taxonomy.
6onsequently wea! stu"ents are trying to comprehen" the metho" at the same time as
trying to apply it which is too much for them.
'ea! stu"ents often report that they un"erstan" the teacher "emonstration yet are
unable to ="o one by themselves.> This strategy provi"es an extra rung on the la""er
(strengthening comprehension on <looms taxonomy) which ma!es stu"ents
conceptualise the metho" by requiring them to express it in their own wor"s.
?nce stu"ents are use" to peer explaining they can be encourage" to explain to small
groups or to the class as a whole. =@ohn can you explain your solution to question A on
the boar"*>
Teacher shows
how on the board
Students do
some on their
own
Peer explaining
Usual 2 step
approach
Carrolls 3 step
approach
Students do some
on their own
Teacher shows
how on the board
knowledge
application
comprehension
application
knowledge
/ilot an" navigator:
This wor!s well for stu"ents wor!ing on computers in pairs but can be use" in other
contexts. -tu"ents are paire" up one ta!es the role of navigator an" the other is the
pilot. The navigator tells the pilot what to "o an" why. 9.g. =?!ay with the mouse go
up to File an" choose /rint.>
The pilot "oes this an" is correcte" by the navigator if necessary. The navigator is not
allowe" to ta!e the controls. This wor!s best if the navigator is the stronger stu"ent
however ta!ing turns in the roles also wor!s well. $ts har"er to explain clearly than iit is to
"o it so navigators often learn more than their pilots.
/eers explain a summary of !ey points
)t the beginning of the lesson the teacher ma!es it clear to learners that at the en" of the
lesson they will be require" to peer explain the !ey points of the lesson. These two points
are given in a"vance for example:
='hat is /ythagorass Theorem an" when "oes it apply or not apply*>
=&ow can the theorem be use" to fin" an un!nown si"e of a triangle*>
?r
='ho supporte" 6romwell an" why*>
='hat were 6romwells !ey goals an" how "o we !now these*>
The lesson then continues in the usual way with the aim of teaching the two !ey points
mentione". )t the en" of the lesson the peer explaining ta!es place li!e this. $t usually
ta!es between five to ten minutes.
-tu"ents are put into pairs an" given one ob#ective each those nearest the
win"ow please answer the first question
-tu"ents prepare for a minute what they will say to each other
They peer explain their !ey points to each other the listener is allowe" to
mention ways of improving their partners explanation only after they have
finishe".
The teacher then gives mo"el answers an" as!s the pair what "i" you miss out
or get wrong* /airs then "iscuss this correcting themselves first an" then
each other.
The teacher can then as! stu"ents to prepare for a repeat peer explaining
session at the beginning of the next lesson. The challenge is to fix any
wea!nesses foun" in the first peer explaining session.
There is a "anger that stu"ents or their teacher will see this metho" as a cramming
technique to force rote memory. &owever it purpose shoul" be to ensure that !ey points
the structure of the material an" their an" meaning are properly un"erstoo". -o stress
why the !ey points are !ey points an" stress the meaning of the structure of the
information. )tten" at least as much to the why as to the what of the leraning.
This strategy has some of the properties of mastery learning which a""s at least a gra"e
to stu"ent achievement see =Teaching To"ay> 0eoffrey /etty for more on mastery
learning.
/eers explain their answers to questions.
This is a simpler version of the above. $t is a useful way of encouraging participation in
question an" answer an" for provi"ing the =wait time> nee"e" for stu"ents to engage with
questions fully.
The teacher explains the following process so stu"ents !now what is about to
happen
The teacher as!s a question that is reasonably thought provo!ing or sets them a
short tas! to "o on paper or similar.
The stu"ents are as!e" to wor! on this alone for a given perio" of time.
-tu"ents explain their answers to each other. ?nly after their partner has finishe"
explaining can they challenge or comment on the answer. 'hen both answers
have been expresse" they can compare an" "iscuss their answers.
The teacher gives the correct answer to the question an" as!s stu"ents to "iscuss
the extent to which they both got it right an" to explore any misun"erstan"ings that
they ha".
?ptionally there can be a class "iscussion on any issues raise" an" on
misun"erstan"ings etc which shoul" be consi"ere" as interesting an" useful
learning opportunities. (-ee the groun"+rules above)
4$ Peer assessment of deli!erate errors
This is a variant of peer explaining exemplars "escribe" above an" is often "one
imme"iately after it.
-tu"ents are put in pairs
-tu"ents are given a set of wor!e" examples containing "eliberate errors. The two
stu"ents in each pair have "ifferent examples.
-tu"ents wor! on the own to fin":
'hats wrong
'hy its wrong
&ow to "o it right
9ach stu"ent in the pair explains the errors in each of their examples to their partner
$f a stu"ents has notice" errors in their partners examples that they have misse" they
now point these out.
The teacher then as!s stu"ents for the errors they have foun" an" confirms or "enies
these. The teacher clarifies misconceptions carefully.
This is a fun activity an" a useful exercise to =inoculate> stu"ents against common errors
an" misun"erstan"ings. $t shoul" not be "one too early in a topic for fear of confusing
stu"ents but it very useful at the en" of a topic to "iscover an" correct any lingering
misconceptions. $f stu"ents cannot error spot they will not be able to proof+rea" their own
wor!.
%dvantages of Peer %ssessment:
-tu"ents learn other ways of "oing it an" gain a wi"er view of what is possible.
<y evaluating metho"s they come to un"erstan" them better
They become more reflective of their own learning. For example if a stu"ent realises
they got one calculation wrong because they confuse" a sine with a tangent that is very
helpful.
-tu"ents greatly en#oy this metho" an" both helpers an" helpe" learn if they support
each other constructively. (The stan"ar" of "iscussion is commonly higher than you
expect,)
They attribute success to effort using the right strategy etc rather than innate ability.
This empowers learners to improve.
)$ "elf %ssessment
-elf+assessment using goals assessment criteria or ob#ectives
)t the en" of a tas! topic or lesson stu"ents are remin"e" of the goals
ob#ectives or assessment criteria. -tu"ents are then as!e" to ta!e say five
minutes to loo! over their wor! an" self assess:
'hat they have learne" !now an" can "o
'hat they still nee" to learn or practice to achieve the goal or
ob#ectives
-tu"ents use this to set themselves an in"ivi"ual action plan
The action plan is implemente" next lesson
'(amples:
-tu"ents have #ust complete" "rawing a graph they use assessment criteria "evelope" an"
explaine" "uring the lesson to assess their own wor!.
-tu"ents have complete" a lesson on hair colouring which ha" three ob#ectives given in a"vance.
The ob#ectives are presente" on the ?&/ an" stu"ents reflect on whether they believe they have
met them.
-tu"ents have complete" three lessons on the rift valley. The teacher writes up a chec!list of
statements in the form =$ can now i"entify a rift valley on a map> etc. -tu"ents wor! alone to "eci"e
whether they can meet these goals.
-tu"ents have #ust complete" the first of two presentations. They self+assess against criteria which
were "etermine" in a"vance an" then set themselves goals for their next presentation.
Bsing an assessment proforma to assist self peer an" teacher assessment
&ere is an assessment proforma for mar!ing calculation in mathematics or science etc. $t
helps to focus stu"ents efforts on the most important s!ills rather than #ust on getting the
right answer. -ee http:**geoffpetty$moonfruit$com for many more examples of
assessment proformas.
%ssessment criteria grade Teacher+ peer+ or self,assessment
Methods: aim to ma!e these
appropriate an" as simple or elegant
as possible.
Methods -ustified: The principles or
formulae use" are ma"e clear
Wor.ing: aim to ma!e wor!ing clear5
complete5 easy to follow5 stating
principles or formulae use" where
necessary.
/are ta.en: aim to chec! your wor!
for errors an" present wor! neatly.
Main strengths
-elf assessment as a wor!shop review
6arol Cyssen of ?xfor" 6ollege uses this strategy with her &air"ressing an" <eauty
stu"ents. -he uses the strategy with her whole teaching team but it coul" be easily
a"apte" for use with a single teacher.
?b#ectives are state" at the beginning of each lesson by every teacher in the team
an" are written by stu"ents in an exercise boo! specifically for this purpose.
-tu"ents review their learning against the ob#ectives at the en" of each session.
There are wee!ly s!ills wor!shops where stu"ents review the ob#ectives for the
whole wee! pic!ing out those they feel least confi"ent about.
The wor!shop teacher "eals with any ob#ectives the whole class has ha" trouble
with
-tu"ents are supporte" in personal wor! towar"s the ob#ectives they have personal
"ifficulty with.
This requires that the wor!shop is run by a teacher who can thin! on her feet an" who has
an excellent grasp of the whole curriculum. $t also requires the availability of suitable
boo!s an" other learning materials.
-elf+assessment using mo"el answers
This is a stu"ent activity which follows the teacher explaining an" mo"elling how to "o it
to the class
The teacher explains that stu"ents will mar! their own wor! on this exercise an"
that the teacher will not mar! it. (&owever the teacher can chec! whether or not
stu"ents have self+assesse".)
-tu"ents "o an exercise which might be a series of questions. 'hen they have
finishe" they proof+rea" their own wor! before the next stage.
-tu"ents are given mo"el answers or examplars. These might have a mar! scheme
on them.
The stu"ents mar! their own wor! against these mo"el answers. $f they "o not
un"erstan" an answer or why their answer is wrong they try to puDDle this out for
themselves rather than as! imme"iately for help. The teacher offers help where
nee"e" but "oes not mar! the wor! or chec! the stu"ents own mar!ing usually.
-tu"ents can then "o the next few questions an" so on. The self assessment using
mo"el answers can be "one in stages through a wor!sheet for example every two
questions.
?ptionally the stu"ents coul" correct their wor!. &owever it is best if they "o not
offer this wor! for mar!ing by the teacher. $f they expect the teacher will mar! their
wor! they will often #ust copy the right answers from the mo"el without trying to
un"erstan" them, $f the teacher will not mar! their wor! they are motivate" to wor!
out for themselves how they have "one.
-ome stu"ents fin" mar!ing their own wor! preferable to a peer or teacher mar!ing. -elf+
assessment "evelops un"erstan"ing an" confi"ence. $t ma!es more "eman"s of the
learner an" less of the teacher a characteristic of effective learning metho"s generally.
This metho" is relate" to peer assessment metho"s. $n"ee" the same resources coul" be
use" to "o both or either "epen"ing on stu"ent choice. ) compromise metho" is that
stu"ents share the mo"el answers but mar! their own wor! "iscussing any issues
together where necessary.
-tu"ents en#oy this metho" much more than you woul" thin!. <ecause the fee"bac! is
almost imme"iate it is very motivating an" the more frequently the fee"bac! occurs the
more motivating it is. Try arranging the questions an" mo"el answers so that self+
assessment occurs after about every five minutes of stu"ent wor!. (ou must then ma!e
sure that stu"ents only see the mo"el answers for the questions that they have complete"
of course,
-ome stu"ents will nee" help conclu"ing what they have learne" from comparing their
answers with the mo"el answers. (ou coul" as! them to write this "own or relate it to you
before procee"ing. )s! them what are the rules about how to "o it* )s they relate these
ac!nowle"ge correct responses an" then as! =why*>. That is why "oes this rule apply.
-elf assessment with a formative test
-tu"ents complete a test on the wor! they have "one "uring the last half term
They self+mar! their paper using wor!e" solutions provi"e" by the teacher
They are provi"e" with a list of topics an" subtopics that appeare" in the test an"
are as!e" to mar! each as:
0reen if they can un"erstan" how to "o them (ignoring careless slips)
Ee" if they "o not un"erstan" how to "o them
)mber if they are not sure
The teacher loo!s through these self+assessments. $f there are lots of re" blobs
next to a topic then this topic is reviewe".
-tu"ents write action plans to respon" to their in"ivi"ual wea!nesses. 9.g. =$ nee"
to remember to square root my answer when $ use pythagoras theorom>
This action plan coul" be chec!e" by teacher or by a peer (preferably not a close frien").
For example stu"ents coul" be as!e" to explain how to "o the questions they have been
wor!ing on to their peer. (-ee peer explaining below).
Advantages of self assessment
) research stu"y employing a similar metho" to the above "ouble" attainment in
numeracy. (-ee the <lac! an" 'iliam Eeview (7FFA))
$t ma!es stu"ents aware of the goals an" familiarises them with the characteristics of
acceptable wor!
$t helps them wor! out how to improve that is to i"entify the gap between their present
s!ills an" the learning goals.
$t encourages stu"ents to ta!e responsibility for their own learning
-tu"ents reflect on themselves as learners an" so learn to learn this meta+cognition
(thin!ing about thin!ing an" self+regulating their own learning) has been shown in many
stu"ies to greatly improve learning.
How did you do on: Name:
0ed
$ts hol"ing me up
%m!er
Cot sure
Green
$ts not hol"ing me up
sin
cosine
tangent
/ythagoras
The most important a"vantage of self+assessment accor"ing to many theorists is that it
ma!es stu"ents realise that success or failure "epen"s not on talent luc! or ability but
on practice effort an" using the right strategies. 'hen stu"ents realise this they are
motivate" to improve. -ee internal attribution at the en" of this "ocument.
1$ "poof,assessment
) spoof piece of wor! is one create" by the teacher specifically for the purpose of spoof+
assessment. $t is presente" as if it were "one by an imaginary stu"ent. For example:
) teacher presents two pieces of wor! G an" ( an" as!s stu"ents to mar! an" gra"e
these.
For mathematics or similar work stu"ents are given the answers to the wor!:
?ne piece of wor! has all the right answers but the metho"s are not explaine" or #ustifie"
some are over long an" the wor!ing is not clear.
The other piece of wor! has some wrong answers but the metho"s are correct fully
explaine" an" #ustifie" an" the wor!ing is well lai" out an" easy to follow.
%ost stu"ents will give the worst wor! the best mar! because they believe the goal is to
get the right answer an" "o not consi"er metho"s an" wor!ing.
For written work: ?ne piece of wor! is long has many technical terms an" impressive
"iagrams an" is written in long sentences with quite complex grammar. 'hile superficially
impressive the wor! "oes not answer the question. The other spoof piece of wor! is short
only uses technical terms where necessary an" answers the question very well an" very
concisely. )gain stu"ents usually give the worst wor! the best gra"e because when they
rea" tas!s or assessment criteria they "o not pay enough attention to them or "o not
un"erstan" them well enough.
$n both cases there is class "iscussion after stu"ents have given their #u"gements. This is
use" to un"erline learning points an" to explain the criteria for goo" wor!. This "iscussion
is very important an" is ai"e" by the fact that all learners have copies of the sames pieces
of wor! unli!e peer or self assessment. The teacher can "irect attention to this wor! an"
to the criteria. =Hoo! at wor! G "i" they #ustify their answer as question ; require"* 'hat
"oes it mean to #ustify an answer* Hets loo! at how ( "i" thisII >
The first time you use spoof assessment it is fun to tell stu"ents that one piece of wor! is
an ) gra"e an" one is a . gra"e an" as! them which is which. 'hen they get them the
wrong way roun" as they usually "o as! them for a homewor! to go away an" wor! out
why.
-tu"ents may or may not be given assessment criteria the first time they "o spoof
assessment. $f no criteria are given it helps to conclu"e "iscussions on the wor! by
stressing how important these criteria are an" what they are. &owever stu"ents will
benefit greatly from being given criteria for later attempts so they can practice interpreting
them an" so learn what they mean. -poof assessment is one of the best ways of getting
stu"ents to really un"erstan" assessment criteria an" assessment language. The teacher
"iscussion can be use" to explain any misun"erstan"ings.
-poof wor! can in fact be wor! "one by a stu"ent in a previous year but with their name
remove". $n this case you ought to have that stu"ents approval to meet copyright law
even thought their name is not being use". $f stu"ents present wor! electronically it is not
too "ifficult to save wor! for this purpose.
-poof assessment with one piece of wor!
$t is not always possible to have two pieces of wor! as "escribe" above or the time to
"iscuss it. )n excellent homewor! activity is to give stu"ents one goo" piece of wor! from
last year to assess against clear criteria imme"iately after stu"ents have complete" an
i"entical or similar tas!.
-tu"ents learn a great "eal from examples of goo" practice li!e this. $t is a very natural
way to learn animals learn this way J an" we are animals after all,
)t first stu"ents may copy the surface characteristics of the goo" wor! they assess but
with s!illful me"iation from the teacher they get to learn the important characteristics of
this goo" wor! an" a"apt what they see to new situations.
2$ '(plaining tas.s
-tu"ents nee" to learn that the ob#ective is not simply to rote+learn proce"ures to get
the right answer but to become a mathematician (or language specialist etc). This
requires that they un"erstan" strategies !now when a strategy will wor! or not wor!
an" why an" !now more than one way of "oing things an" so on. %athematics an"
other s!ills teachers can set explaining tas!s to assist this "evelopment. For example:
In your own words, explain Pythagorass heorem, descri!ing when it does and
does not apply" #xplain also how it can !e used to find an unknown side of a
triangle"$
-uch tas!s help stu"ents to "evelop an un"erstan"ing of concepts an" to remember
them.
/eer explaining
9xplaining tas!s can be set as written homewor! or as verbal pair+wor! in class. For
example the tas! above coul" be split into two an" a pair of stu"ents be as!e" to ta!e half
each an" explain to each other. They coul" then peer+assess each others explanation
giving one strength an" one suggeste" improvement.
6orrective /eer 9xplaining
%any stu"ents believe that "escribe explain analyse an" evaluate all
mean pretty much the same thing: write about. -poof assessment can really
help them to un"erstan" assessment language.
)nother useful metho" is to use "ecisions+"ecisions. -tu"ents are given
phrases or short paragraphs of text to classify as "escriptions explanations
analyses an" evaluations.
To ma!e the peer explaining activity "escribe" above truly formative the teacher now
gives the stu"ents the correct explanations very briefly an" as!s the stu"ents to i"entify
how their explanations coul" have been improve". -tu"ents "o this for themselves first
an" then explain these self+improvements to each other. ?nly then can pairs suggest
improvements to each others wor!. -tu"ents are then as!e" to prepare for the next
activity with the goal of explaining without any mista!es or omissions.
)t the beginning of the next lesson the same peer+explaining tas! is repeate" as a review
but also to chec! that improvements have been ma"e. -tu"ents nee" to be "iscourage"
from rote learning they shoul" explain their answers an" give them in their own wor"s.
)"vantages of /eer 9xplaining
9xplaining tas!s require stu"ents to clarify their un"erstan"ing an" chec! this. There
may also be corrective wor! "one on these un"erstan"ings. There is a focus on !ey
points as explanations are usually short. This requires stu"ents to structure their
un"erstan"ing a prerequisite for it to pass into the long term memory.
3$ 4oing corrections
0etting questions right you initially got wrong ensures you improve un"erstan"ing an"
unlearn misconceptions. $t also ma!es stu"ents more careful if they !now they must
correct errors. &owever errors "ue to simple slips can usually be ignore" its
fun"amental errors that require correction.
This strategy li!e most teaching strategies can be overuse". -tu"ents may fin" it too
"ispiriting if you as! them to correct all their wor! an" they may well not be able to !eep
up. &owever the metho" can be un"eruse" too. -tu"ents sometimes nee" to have
another go at something if they are really to un"erstan" how to "o it properly.
5$ 4iagnostic 6uestioning
6ompare the following two alternative approaches to questioning the same stu"ent.
%ome examples of tasks for peer explaining
&ow can you tell whether to use a sine or a cosine to fin" the un!nown si"e
of a triangle* .raw some "iagrams to help you explain. ?ne of you ta!e sin
the other cosin.
9xplain in your own wor"s where you woul" we use a comma an" where
you woul" use a full+stop in a sentence. ?ne of you ta!e the full stop the
other the comma.
The one nearest the win"ow explain what is meant by a care plan an" the
other explain the main criteria for evaluating a care plan.
Teacher: =$s 4 a prime number*>
-tu"ent: =(es>
Teacher: ='hy*>
-tu"ent: =<ecause its o"">
Teacher: =$s 4 a prime number*>
-tu"ent: =(es>
The first question being factual low on <looms Taxonomy an" close" has not
"iagnose" that the stu"ent is suffering the misun"erstan"ing that prime numbers are the
same as o"" numbers. The why* question because it requires explanation "iscovers the
misun"erstan"ing. Further questioning an" explanation can then be use" to "iagnose the
misconception more fully if necessary an" then to correct it.
Kuestioning is an excellent an" imme"iate metho" to fin" faults an" fix but only wor!s if
the questions are "iagnostic an" if there is corrective follow+up. )s! searching questions
an" thin! about the misconceptions behin" wrong answers. The K6) reference has some
fascinating "etail on this for mathematics teachers.
#0$ Mastery test
-et a simple quiD or test focussing on !ey points. This coul" consist of almost
any activity for stu"ents:
recall questions on !ey facts
a number of simple calculations to "o
a practical activity
some simple past paper question(s) etc.
-tu"ents mar! their own. -tu"ents compare their answer with the mo"el
answers you give them an" mar! their own papers. The questions nee" to be
easy enough for stu"ents to un"erstan" the mo"el answers an" to be able to
mar! their own paper.
-tu"ents note the questions they got wrong an" note also the correct answers
for these questions. They coul" ta!e photocopies of the test an" mo"el answers
away to wor! on the questions they got wrong.
-tu"ents reta!e the test "oing only those questions they got wrong the first
time. )lternatively they coul" "o a retest again only "oing the questions similar
to those they got wrong. This coul" be a few "ays after the first test an" will not
ta!e long. $f a stu"ent nee"s to "o most of the questions they can "o it in their
own time. -tu"ents also mar! this re+test themselves. ?ptionally stu"ents
coul" ta!e a similar but "ifferent test..
-tu"ents report on any improvement. $"eally stu"ents have a target to aim at
say a mar! of AL7M an" !eep correcting their wor! until they achieve this.
)s in peer explaining of !ey points above ma!e sure stu"ents un"erstan" the materials
an" its structure atten" to the why at least as much as the what of the learning. -ee
Teaching To"ay 0eoffrey /etty for a full account if you inten" using this metho" as it has
some pitfalls.
## "tudent 7uestioning and 8mountain clim!ing9
This is less rigorous than mastery testing but more fun. $ will "escribe a version of this
game for level : learners but it can easily be a"apte" for more a"vance" learners.
(ou split the past wee! or twos teaching between teams of stu"ents who write three or
four mastery questions (low on <looms taxonomy) with answers for their subtopic. (ou
chec! these questions an" answers ma!ing sure they are on vital material are truly
mastery questions an" have goo" answers. 0roups ma!e enough copies of their car"s
for what follows.
The following are examples of question car"s for a game on the topic of mastery learning.
The stu"ents who have written these questions an" answers have alrea"y learne" a goo"
"eal. The questions can be type" into a table in a wor" processing application. ($f you set
autofit to "istribute rows an" columns evenly all the car"s become the same siDe.) (ou
can then print on thin car" with a "ifferent colour for each topic if necessary an" cut into
question car"s. )lternatively they can be han"written.
6uestion:
0ive two !ey characteristics that ma!e a
question suitable for a mastery test
6uestion:
0ive two !ey "ifferences between a
mastery test an" a conventional test
%nser: accept : from:
$t shoul" test vital !nowle"ge an" be low on
<looms taxonomy.
The material must have been practice"
%nser: accept : from:
The stu"ents must "o reme"ial wor!.
9veryone passes eventually.
There is no mar! #ust pass or not yet
passe".
Kuestions are low on <loom
-tu"ents can pass their groups questions on to the next group so every group gets a set
of questions an" the sets rotate.
)lternatively -tu"ents wor! in pairs with a complete set of the car"s. They ta!e it in turn to
as! each other a question. $f the stu"ent gets it right they move their counter up one
square on a game boar" with a mountain "rawn on it. There are almost as many squares
up the mountain as there are question car"s. $f a stu"ent "oes not get their question right
they !eep their wrong car" an" can stu"y the correct answer "uring the game. ?ne
square before the sumit of the mountain is a base camp where stu"ents must ta!e a
secon" attempt at all their wrong car"s. The ob#ect of the game is not to get to the
summit first but for the team of two climbers to both get to the top of the mounain.
This is about twice as much fun as it soun"s yet it has a very serious purpose. %astery
games can be use" by themselves or can of course be use" to prepare for mastery tests.

Eesearch on as!ing stu"ents to generate questions an" answers for each other
has shown that the approach pro"uces mar!e" improvements in achievement.
'hy is this*
#2 /oncept Map /hec.
This has the a"vantage that it focuses on "eep levels of un"erstan"ing. )lso for learning
to go into the long term memory it must be structure" first an" this teaching strategy
requires stu"ents to structure their un"erstan"ing an" chec!s this structure is soun".
-tu"ents create their own concept map . )fter completing a topic stu"ents are
as!e" to complete a concept map or spi"er "iagram that summarises the !ey
points an" inclu"es the main relations an" principles. ?ne way of "oing this is to
pro"uce a /rinciple %ap which starts with the main principles criteria causes or
issues etc an" then the rest of the topic is connecte" to these. )n alternative is to
as! stu"ents to pro"uce the more usual content base" map.
-tu"ent compare their maps in groups of about three. They suggest improvements
to their own maps an" then to each others.
The teacher shows their map
The group notes "ifferences between their maps an" the teachers map "iscuss
these an" then suggest improvements to their own maps an" then to each others.
These improvements are ma"e.
This activity can be repeate" for the same topic as a review exercise.
What is so special a!out Formative Teaching:
/rofessor @ohn &attie showe" that fee"bac! ha" more impact on learning quality than any
other single factor. -a"ler AF analyse" fee"bac! to show that for learning to ta!e place
the learner nee"s to !now:
The goal e.g. =$ nee" to use the correct metho" to solve a right angle" triangle with
trigonometry. $ nee" to use "iagrams an" lay out my wor!ing correctly showing the
metho"s an" equations $ am using an" to calculate with few errors>
Their present position: how far they have achieve" the goal. 9.g. what they "o right
an" what they "o wrong =$ use the correct metho" usually an" show my wor!ing
a"equately my "iagrams are clear an" $ refer to them well in my wor!ing.>
;o to close the gap between the goal an" their present position e.g. =$ nee" to
ensure $ "ont confuse sines an" tangents. $ nee" to be better at splitting up complex
"iagrams into right angle" triangles.>
Formative Teaching -trategies provi"e these three vital pieces of information often in a
very vivi" way. Cote that fee"bac! "oes not nee" to be provi"e" only by the teacher
in"ee" it is often best provi"e" by the learner or by a peer. This is because peer an" self+
assessment are very powerful ways to clarify goals+ sho ho to improve+ encourage
the learner to ta.e responsi!ility for their learning+ and create in the learner a !elief
that improvement is possi!le$
0eferences$
http:LLgeoffpetty.moonfruit.com
http:**$7ca$org$u.*pdf$asp:*ca*),#4*afl*afl<maths$pdf
http:LLwww.p"!intl.orgL!appanL!blaFA7M.htm
http:LLwww.qca.org.u!LcaL2+71LaflL
=Teaching Today a practical guide> :
n"
9" 0eoffrey /etty publishe" by Celson
Thornes (7FFA)