I have spent a lot of time over the last few months coming up with systems to help me with my teaching. When I say ‘systems’, I mean anything that can help me be prepared for the day, help me save time, or both. One such system I’ve been working on is a planning process that I can look at and use as a checklist for each lesson that I plan. The process I’ve created is (in my mind at least) chronological, but there is obviously crossover between sections, and there will also likely be times when you want to add bits to earlier sections as you think of new ideas for the lesson you’re planning. So here it is, my planning process:
I’d now like to challenge two things about the idea of one-age classes.
Firstly, children of the same age can display large differences in maturity level (influenced, largely, by their environment at home), level of reading (again, heavily impacted by home life), physical ability etc. This can have positive and negative repercussions: positively, children can be exposed to these differences ‘naturally’ even within a single-age class; negatively, their exposure to children of other ages is limited, and limits their access to the benefits that these children have.
This leads to my second point: there are things that children can’t get from children their own age. For example, how much benefit would a five year old get from the attention, teaching and wisdom from an 11 year old? And how much benefit would the 11 year old get from teaching the younger child? I believe passionately in this. I think that, in some ways, it would be more important for the five year-old to learn from an older child than from an adult because the younger child can relate more easily to someone who is much nearer their age.
At the moment, I don’t have an answer about whether it’s best for children to be with others of the same age or in a mixed age class, or whether there is a compromise to be reached. At the moment I think that schools that use single-age classes should encourage collaboration across children from Reception to Year 6.
Moving forward I hope to shed some light on what the optimal way to organise a classroom is, and how best to implement this strategy.
How many things have you enjoyed learning when you didn’t want to learn them? And how much did you learn?
English (e.g. writing instructions for how to board a plane);
Maths (e.g. calculating distances and times of journeys; working out takeoff angles);
Science (e.g. magnets, electricity, gravity);
Art and Design (e.g. designing a new logo for a plane company);
Computing (e.g. programming an ‘aeroplane’ to go from A to B);
Design and Technology (e.g. building a model plane);
Geography (e.g. interpreting a map of an island your plane has landed on);
History (e.g. looking at what life was like in the time when the first plane was built);
Languages (e.g. communicating with plane enthusiasts in other countries);
Music (e.g. creating their own music to play to passengers of their planes);
PE (e.g. training like cabin crew in order to be able to stay balanced during turbulence).
Working within the national curriculum, this means that we have to make the objectives relevant to the children so that, even if they’re not consciously choosing what to learn, we’re making them ‘think’ that they are. In this way, we could plant some ‘bait’ to pique the children’s curiosity.
For example, suppose we’re planning a lesson on magnets. You could, quite easily, begin by talking about what magnets are and how they work. The children would learn, sure, but would they really care? What if you started the lesson by, for example, throwing paper clips at a magnet? I think that if the lesson began in this way, it would be hard for the children not to be curious and want to learn more! I believe that this kind of lesson starter inspires children to want to learn more and, from this choosing, they have more invested in the lesson and therefore will learn (and enjoy the lesson) more.
As good as it is to engage all children in this way, where they all learn the same thing at the same time, is it possible that at least part of the school week could include an individualised curriculum, where children with similar interests work together across all areas of the national curriculum? Which child wouldn’t want to go to school if that were the case?
The importance of differentiation is obvious: everyone is unique. In an ideal world, teaching would be individualised and tailored to a single child’s unique personality, needs, knowledge, strengths, challenges and goals. Not only is this very nearly impossible in a class of 30 children, it is also not desirable because this individualised approach does not allow for social interaction and social learning.
Differentiation bridges the gap between the individual approach, mentioned above, and ‘one size fits all’ methods of teaching. It allows students to work at their own level with peers of a similar level of understanding/competence. This process also allows for children to work with others with different understanding and competencies. This forms the basis of teamwork: working with others in a way that collates and integrates individuals’ resources and skills in order to achieve an outcome that benefits each individual and the group as a whole.
Would you like to connect more deeply to your true self and be more ‘you’? I believe this is what everyone wants, deep down.
I believe in continually discovering and expressing who I really am and I love empowering other people to do the same, so I’ve taken almost three decades of life experiences, meditation, self-development books, audio programmes and videos, and condensed them into 16 of the most important things that I’ve learned – and have helped me – along the way… Here’s the result:
In this book you will learn: how to connect to your true self; why everything is OK; how to meditate and breathe; the ‘1% rule’; how to deal with negative thoughts; how to be kind to yourself; how to get what you want; and more! You even get a bonus poem!