‘At the heart of the educational process lies the child’. An observation coined in the 1967 Plowden Report (Blackstone, 1967) that is still prevalent in the empirical research into cognitive development by many affluent academics today. Within the 2015 report ‘Children’s Cognitive Development and Learning’, researcher Usha Goswami draws upon and concludes a variety of aspects that can affect a child’s cognitive development and how these may facilitate learning in educational settings. (2015)
The importance of language, and how it is a ‘crucial’ aspect of child development is highlighted throughout Goswami’s report. (2015, p25) During my time in School-Based Training 1 (SBT1) I observed how the way in which teachers communication with children have these crucial influences on their learning, whether it be through memory, understanding or motivation. (Goswami, 2015, p25) This was something the class teacher was very thorough about in her pedagogic approach and something I was keen to adopt quickly for my continued professional development (CPD).
(teachingideas, 2015)
During an English lesson, focusing on the ‘Traction Man’ by Mini Grey, the pupils’ objective was to produce a whole class story map to use as a chronological guide for writing their own independent story and ultimately changing the ending. First, the story was read through from start to finish a few times, stopping and discussing at important stages. The pupils were then asked to think about how the story could have ended differently. By using lolly sticks (with the pupil’s names on) the teacher modelled the beginning of their story using all the learners’ new ideas, whilst giving only positive feedback and celebrating their creative vocabulary which, in turn encouraged them to be more adventurous. Here, the teacher used Vygotsky’s ‘zone of proximal development’ (1978) to assess how far the learners could go under the guidance of herself, using a ‘thumbs up/thumbs down’ to assess whether the pupils understood the task. We then knew which learners still needed further ‘scaffolding’ with their ideas and were able to support them appropriately.
This approach is commonly known as ‘Talk for Writing’ and can be explained by Pie Corbett himself here:
By implementing Pie Corbett’s ‘Talk for Writing’ approach, the pupil’s writing then became more innovative, having had the opportunity to discuss their ideas first. This supports Goswami’s belief that “learning relies on what is being said around them” (2015, p.13), allowing learners to ‘magpie’ new vocabulary and descriptive and inquisitive language from both their peers during ‘Talk Partner’ discussions and their teachers during pupil-teacher or whole class interaction. This was also seen effectively using mid-task plenaries. Whilst circulating the room, offering verbal-feedback and marking the learner’s work with them, the teacher would pick up on exciting vocabulary that pupils used and share it with the whole class, both defining what it meant and using it in a contextual sentence.
Although it is argued that the Talk for Writing’ approach is too structured and therefore is ‘too much help’ resulting in ‘inflated progess’ (chowatson, in tes, 2017), I could see how the approach was having a positive impact on the cognitive development of the class I was in.
(singteach, 2019)
This use of ‘scaffold’ modelling is seen considerably within primary education, and especially within Key Stage 1 (KS1). This is whenever a teacher demonstrates a concept for a student; that teacher is modelling. (Haston, 2007) It is another aspect of cognitive development concluded by Goswami, where she states that “children think and reason largely in the same ways as adults. However, they lack experience, and they are still developing important metacognitive and executive function skills”. (2015, p25) The use of modelling enables a child to understand and observe what the outcome may/will look like and the process to get there by ‘imitating’. (Meltzoff and Moore, 1983)
When used in my SBT1 classroom, modelling allowed for a growth in confidence among the learners, to then tackle things independently with the clarity of an end goal. It also begins to make room for, as Goswami describes, “children to develop self-reflective and self-regulatory skills” (2015) and invites a ‘trial and improvement’ approach to new things, with ‘scaffolding’ from a ‘more knowledgeable other’ (Vygotsky, 1978) whether that then be a teacher or a fellow pupil.
On reflection, the two conclusions I have discussed have been successfully implemented in my experience in SBT1. I have seen how through the use of various strategies, the criticality of language development and the successful use of modelling and/or scaffolding, are central aspects of child development, thinking and learning in the primary years. However, I am aware that these approaches will differ, in being context-specific for the developmental level/KS of each individual learner.
References
Blackstone, T. (1967). The Plowden Report. [Online]. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/588641?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents [Accessed 14/01/19]
Goswami, U. (2015). Child Development. [Online]. Available at: https://www.cne.psychol.cam.ac.uk/pdfs/publication-pdfs/Primary_Review_2-1a_report_CogDevLearn_Goswami-Bryant_2007.pdf [Accessed 14/01/19]
Haston, W. (2007). Teacher Modeling as an Effective Teaching Strategy. [Online]. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4127130?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents [Accessed 14/01/19]
Meltzoff, A. Moore, K. (1983). Newborn Infants Imitate Adult Facial Features. [Online]. Available at: http://ilabs.washington.edu/meltzoff/pdf/83Meltzoff_Moore_ChildDev.pdf [Accessed 14/01/19]
TES. (2017). Talk for Writing – Thoughts? [Online]. Available at: https://community.tes.com/threads/talk-for-writing-thoughts.774335/ [Accessed 14/01/19]
