Sitting down after A level results day last
year reflecting on the previous year I found myself disappointed with the
results. It was my first year teaching AS level PE and I had the advantage of
only having to teach a class of three students, so I had hoped that these
students would have achieved higher grades than they did. They achieved one C
grade and two D grades, when I had hoped they would all achieve C grades.
This lead to me reflecting on where I felt I
had gone wrong, what I could change and what I could do better that was going
to have a positive effect on student outcomes. Therefore this year I have
really focused on my theory teaching and have had my performance management
observations with my AS PE class to measure the progress I have made within my
teaching and learning here. This has been made even more important by there
being eleven students in the class this year and my teaching percentage of the
AS level going from one section to two sections and the practical coursework.
One area I identified as needed a large
improvement was the revision strategies I deployed. I did a lot of exam
questions with this group and although important to look at exam technique I
now wish I had looked at a range of strategies to take account of different
styles and personal preferences the students had.
I decided to start by spending some time
looking at the technique to answer the 10 mark questions, which are the largest
questions on the AS PE exam at the end of each section. I had not looked too
much at 10 mark questions through the year until after February half term. I
felt the need to ensure students were confident in the content before looking
at the larger question techniques. I decided to start by throwing the students
in at the deep end and giving them a 10 mark question to complete with no work
on technique, as a class the average mark was four. We then worked back from
this point and focused on the technique students had used to answer the question.
Firstly we looked at the question and picked apart everything it had asked and
what that meant should be done with the question. We looked at command words in
detail to ensure each student was sure exactly what the question was asking.
A plan was then used to help students with
how to structure their answer and ensure that they included everything that was
asked of them in the question. It was only then we looked at the content. This
proved to have a great impact, students were previously scoring on average four
per 10 mark question and we now had an average of six per 10 mark question.
It became quickly evident that students were
analysing well, but were missing some of the key basic descriptions of terms,
which was limiting their answers in 10 marks questions and worried me for some
of the shorter questions in the exam. Therefore I set about trying to ensure
students knew basic descriptions for as many of the key terms as possible
throughout the course. The first technique I decided to use were mini
whiteboards. Each student collected a mini whiteboard at the start of the
lesson and at various points throughout the lesson students were asked to
describe one of the key terms. I began by using the key terms that we were
looking at in the lesson but this quickly grew to random key terms as I found
it challenged the students more.
Students were now able to give good basic
descriptions of key terms, but when it came to explaining these terms there
were some gaps in their knowledge. I called upon the classic game of taboo here
to force students to go a little further in their explanations of the key
terms. It was used in much the same way as the mini whiteboards, in that at
various points throughout the lesson a student was given a key term to explain
to the rest of the class. Although this brought about a positive impact on
students work, the impact was far smaller than the previous two techniques I
had used. Upon reflection it became evident that the impact could be seen with
my more able students, but not with my less able students. As a result I
realised the revision strategies I decided to use were not differentiated enough
to ensure all students were making the required improvements.
Desk writing had been something I had wanted
to try for a while; I believed this point was a good opportunity to use this.
As a starter I put students into ability groupings and asked them to write on
the desks everything they knew about a topic. Students then swapped tables so
the more able students sat on the less able students tables and vice versa. The
students were then given a choice of three activities; if they felt they had
gaps in their knowledge and needed to relearn some of the content they sat with
me and we looked over the section; other students were making flash cards and
mind maps and testing each other using their flash cards; while the most able
students were completing a range of exam questions on the section that were
peer marked. Students were free to move between groups as they saw fit within the
lesson. We completed a few lessons using similar techniques to this with
students having ownership over their revision within the sessions. This made
the lessons feel dynamic and students were enthusiastic about their revision.
Being the perfectionist that I am, I am never
happy and although the revision strategies I had been using were far more
effective than just looking at various exam questions, I felt there was still
room for improvement. It was in this quest that I came across the Bulmershe
School Toolkit (http://www.bulmershetoolkit.blogspot.co.uk/)
Using
some of the tips and techniques on this website I was able to create what I
believe to be one of the best revision lessons that I have ever delivered.
I started by greeting the students with a
list of the topics we had covered this year in the anatomy & physiology
section of the AS PE course. They then had to use stickers to traffic light
where they felt they were at with their revision in that topic.
Red sticker = There are gaps in their knowledge and they need
to look at this area in detail
Yellow sticker = They know this
area but still need to do some revision on it to improve the depth of their
knowledge
Green sticker = They are
confident in this area and when they complete exam questions in this topic they
are getting very good marks
Students then went around a variety of
revision stations to test their self assessment of their knowledge on the topic
areas.
Station 1 = Descriptions station, where
students were given a list of key words that they had to describe or draw.
Their partner then had to either state five facts about that key word or create
an exam question that was worth a minimum of four marks.
Station 2 = Back to back station, where
students sat back to back with their partner and talked for one minute about
the topic area they had selected from either the easy, medium or hard lists.
Their partner had to write down the key points they had mentioned and at the
end provide feedback as to whether they deserved the reward.
Station 3 = Desk writing mind map station,
this station was designed for students to get creative and produce a giant mind
map across a number of desks about everything they knew about the anatomy &
physiology section, each pair came along and added further to the mind map.
Station 4 = Paper chain station, this station
involved students selecting a key word and creating one chain with this, then
having to write the definition of that key word on another chain, they then had
to select another key word that related and do the same for that. This station
was all about making links between the key words. Students could select the key
words from an easy, medium or hard list.
Station 5 = Exam questions station, the final
station involved students selecting an exam question from a variety of topics,
they had a minute a mark to answer the question and this was then peer marked
by their partner using the 5 in 3 method.
The 5 in 3 method is where no matter how many
marks the question is worth they can only get a maximum of five marks, but to
get the five marks they must go above and beyond. The mark scheme is as
follows:
1 mark
- Student has gaps in their knowledge and has not given enough
information about the topic.
2 marks - Student has given information about
the topic but has not given enough detail about the topic to meet the needs of
the mark scheme.
3 marks - The student would have got full
marks for the question
4 marks - The student has gone beyond the level
of detail required by the mark scheme
5 marks - The student has included everything
in the mark scheme and has answered the question in lots of detail.
To ensure that the whole range of students
abilities were catered for the descriptions, back to back and paper chain
stations all had three different levels of challenge. Students were also
rewarded for challenging themselves, at each station they could earn poker
chips according to what level of challenge they took on and how successful they
were at the station. At the end of the lesson we revisited the topic sheet so
that students could assess the progress they had made for each topic area in
addition to if they had been incorrect with any of their self assessments of
the topic areas. I was lucky enough to have this lesson observed for my
performance management and it was judged as outstanding.
I continued to use variations of this
revision lesson for the remainder of the revision lessons up until the exam for
both of the sections I taught. I am confident that my students this year have
had far superior preparation for their exam than my students last year and as a
result am quietly confident that we should have some outstanding grades from
this group based upon our assessments of them. In the process the most
important thing I have learnt is that I need to ensure my revision sessions are
differentiated for my students and also cater for their personal preferences. I
was fortunate enough to have a very competitive group who thrived on any type
of competition, so I was able to use this as a tool to drive the challenge
aspect of my revision lessons.
