Assessment for learning (AFL) is something as teachers; we need to consider for children’s learning and progression. Ofsted (2011) exemplifies the importance of teachers using AFL, building awareness of children’s learning and alternate their planning to address individual needs. However, ensuring AFL is effective, we cannot merely focus upon teachers using just testing and measuring, teachers need to become flexible using formative assessment (Clarke, 2005). From my own experiences, children within my class played an active role within their work. According to Berry (2008), by allowing children to become actively involved in assessing their work, children tend to become more motivated towards their own progression.

Drawing back to my own experiences, the teacher demonstrated a variety of strategies for assessing learning. In particular, the use of questioning proved to be a resourceful use of AFL, within the context of my placement. With the teacher using a range of questioning, allowing children to provide clear indication of their understanding. Clarke (2005) believed by implementing questioning into a teaching practice, teachers can go beyond children’s initial level of understanding, through further questioning to accumulate further learning. In association with questioning the teachers also provided children the opportunity for self-evaluation. Too often, children’s learning becomes determined through marking, yet children’s voices using self-evaluation can become teacher’s greatest tool, allowing teachers to deepen their knowledge of children’s learning (Berry,2008).

Reflecting upon my own experiences, as teachers we need to be cautious when using questioning for AFL. According to James (2008), children are better equipped to learn, when they are active participants within the lesson. However, within my own placement differentiation of ability became a challenge for questioning. With higher ability children becoming more willing to share their knowledge and raise their hands. In turn, preventing real understanding to assess the learning of lower ability children.

In overcoming this challenge, we used a method known as ‘Lollypop Method’. Using lollypop sticks with children’s names on, to decide who would answer the questions. With this method, there was an equal opportunity for all children to be involved within the lesson (Gilbert, 2010). Although, for effective use of this method, Clarke (2005) would argue, it is fundamental during questioning the children, to provide allotted thinking time. In doing this independently or collaboratively, children are able to deepen their learning (ibid).

An alternative formative assessment strategy used in practice was both oral and written feedback provided by the teacher. The feedback allows teachers to determine whether the learning objective was met and identify future actions. Furthermore, the class teacher objected to providing children with grades to their work, merely providing insightful feedback. Black, et al (2003) would argue this further, as he believes children become actively involved within feedback when they are not produced with a mark. Allowing children’s attention to not be absorbed on the surface of the grade and what went well, rather reflecting upon their learning and how this can be progressed (Berry, 2008).

Image curtsey of dailymail link here

Challenges within the context of my setting, was the time consumption of marking for teachers, becoming a too demanding requirement. Hence, leading to the possibility of some lesson marking becoming overshadowed (Black et al, 2003). Therefore, restricting an overall understanding of children’s learning throughout different subjects. In turn, impacting on the understanding of children’s learning and inevitably restrict children’s progression (ibid). To overcome this within my setting, the teacher attempted to reduce time spent on marking after lesson, by offering ‘in-lesson marking’. To do this during children’s work, the teacher would go over what the children have done with them. In doing this, the teacher has automatically provided feedback both orally and written there and then, allowing the child while actively involved in a task to identify changes needed in their learning to progress (Clarke, 2005).

In conclusion, AFL can be used in numerous ways, Clarke (2005) has provided insight into moving away from measuring learning and understand how children learn.

Word Count: 660

Reference:

Berry, R. (2008). Assessment for learning, (1). Hong Kong: University Press.

Black, P. & Harrison, C. & Lee, C. & Marshall, B. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Clarke, S. (2005) ‘Defining formative assessment’, Chapter 1 in Formative Assessment in Action; Weaving the elements together. London: Routledge.

Gilbert, G. (2011) “The six secret of a happy classroom”, Independent. [online]. Available:< http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/schools/the-six-secrets-of-a-happy-classroom-2086855.html> [Accessed 14^th December 2016].

James, M. (2008) “Assessment and learning.” Unlocking assessment: Understanding for reflection and application p.p. 20-35.

Ofsted (2011) “The impact of the ‘Assessing pupils’ progress’ initiative”, [online] Available:< https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/379101/The_20impact_20of_20the_20Assessing_20pupils_20progress_20initiative.pdf> [Accessed 14^th December 2016].

Until recently, computing was not considered a subject within the National Curriculum (Berry, 2014). Since recent changes in 2014, computing has since replaced ICT, after the subject being portrayed as unchallenging and outdated (Burns, 2012). Department for Education (2014) introduced computing, in the aim to allow children access to opportunities that build and develop computational logic. With further expectations for children to progress their knowledge of computing systems and programming. Berry (2014), supported the importance of computational thinking for opportunities in later life, arguing it allows them to adapt with adequate knowledge to the ever-evolving digital world.

Within the current National Curriculum, the term “computational thinking”, has been addressed over a wider range of curriculum subjects, such as the computational aspects used for science experiments (Rubinstein and Chor, 2014). The introduction of computing as a practical subject, has provided teachers further opportunity to advance aspects of learning, such as problem solving (Turvey et al, 2016).

 
Image courtesy of BBC Bitesize link here

Drawing on my own experiences, it was evident there was a lack of emphasis towards computing, due to the demands of the teachers timetable. When providing a small group of children the opportunity to participate with a computing activity, the children responded positively, demonstrating empowerment and confidence. Berry (2014), can support this display of empowerment, through discussing the use of computing in schools, allowing children to gain a sense of empowerment, to become active and creative in their own work.

However, when providing further details for creating a PowerPoint quiz, children surprisingly displayed confusion when understanding the basic requirements of this programme. Consequently, this caused a high demand for support when enabling children to gain a real sense of confidence in understanding the functions of PowerPoint.

During the activity, children were supported through a variety of strategies for their learning. Within the first stage of the activity, the task was broken down into small steps. In doing this, children were able to grasp confidence in understanding different aspects of using PowerPoint. Once children demonstrated sufficient understanding and knowledge of each stage, they would refer to me showing their work before progressing to the next stage. Once children successfully worked through all the phases of creating a PowerPoint quiz, they were offered extra time to independently complete the quiz themselves, allowing myself time, to assess the children’s progress in computational thinking. In addition to these strategies, each stage of the activity was modelled by myself, thus ensuring children could visualise and understand each stage for themselves, before applying this to their own work.

Image courtesy of The Economist link here

As indicated previously, children demonstrated a lack of experience when using PowerPoint, which may have stemmed from the development of computing within the National Curriculum and in schools. With learning the uses of programming becoming overshadowed by more prioritised concepts, such as debugging and algorithms (DfE, 2013). When drawing upon my own experiences, the use of application, like Microsoft Office, were less familiar to children.

When reflecting upon this for my own future practice, I need to ensure progression of children’s computational thinking by taking a more directed focus, specifically with the systems and key concepts of programmes. Rather than merely addressing aspects of digital literacy, such as confidence in using programmes. Therefore, for future planning and strategies, it would be necessary for myself to become more familiar and confident with the aims of the updated concepts and terminology in computing. Brown et al (2014), would argue the lack of confidence to delivering computing lessons is a common issue among many teachers. Furthermore, he discussed that because teachers themselves are unfamiliar with computing and the key concepts, they tend to avoid teaching it to children (ibid). Therefore, for my own future practice, I need to be able to become familiar with the statutory terms of computing, ensuring children with endless possibilities to progress their computational thinking in our so called ‘digital world’ (Berry, 2014).

Word count: 655

References:

Berry, M. (2014) Computing in the national curriculum; a guide for primary teachers. [online]. Available:< http://www.computingatschool.org.uk/data/uploads/CASPrimaryComputing.pdf> [Accessed 1^st December 2016].

Brown, N. C., Sentance, S., Crick, T., Humphreys, S. (2014). “Restart: The resurgence of computer science in UK schools”. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(2), p.9.

Burns, J. (2012) “ School ICT to be replaced by computer science programme” BBC News, [online]. Available:< http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16493929> [Accessed 14^th December 2016].

Department of Education (2013) National curriculum in England: computing programmes of study, [online]. Available:< https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study> [Accessed 1^st December 2016].

Department of Education (2014) National curriculum and assessment from September 2014: information for schools, [online]. Available:< https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/358070/NC_assessment_quals_factsheet_Sept_update.pdf> [Accessed 1^st December 2016].

Rubinstein, A. and Chor, B. (2014). “Computational thinking in life science education”. PLoS Comput Biol, 10 (11).

Turvey, K., Potter, J., Burton, J. (2016) Primary Computing and Digital Technologies: Knowledge Understanding and Practice (7^th Ed.), London: Sage.