1

Let’s Think in EnglishCognitive Acceleration in

EnglishLaurie Smith

laurie.smith@kcl.ac.uk10th February 2016

2

Origins of Cognitive Acceleration

• The Concepts in Secondary Mathematics and Science programme (1974 – 1980) analysed school students’ developing understanding of concepts in Piagetian terms – 1000 to 2000 students each year.

• Cognitive Acceleration in Science Education (CASE) developed by Philip Adey and Michael Shayer of King’s College for Science 1980 – 1987.

3

Principles of Cognitive Acceleration in Science (1)

• 8 reasoning patterns underlying scientific understanding identified, e.g. handling variables, classification, correlation, probability, etc

• lessons created to stimulate students to develop these reasoning patterns

4

Principles of Cognitive Acceleration in Science (2)

Three concepts from Lev Vygotsky:• social construction of understanding (“we become

ourselves through working with others”)• the more knowledgeable other (teacher, peer,

parent)• students challenged to work at the upper limit of

their current ability (zone of proximal development)

Progress assessed in terms of Piaget’s stages of cognitive development

5

Evidence of CA’s success• CASE lessons used once per fortnight in

Years 7 and 8• Students achieve significantly higher

KS3 Science test results (1 year later)• Students achieve significantly higher

GCSE results (3 years later)

6

Further evidence :GCSE 1999 (1)

• Science Departments trained to use CASE in 11 schools of different kinds

• used with Years 7 and 8 one lesson per fortnight in 1994–1996 only

• 1999 GCSE results of these schools analysed and compared with a matched group of non-CA schools

7

Further evidence: GCSE 1999 (2)• Science grades much improved compared with

matched non-CA (50.8% to 77.2% A – C grades if replicated nationally)BUT

• Maths also much improved (48.0% to 76.6%)AND

• English much improved too (57.7% to 79.7%)

Therefore CA enhances general thinking skills, not just scientific ones

Shayer – GCSE 1999: Added-value from schools adopting the CASE intervention available at www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/sspp/education/research/appandcog

8

Further developments in CADevelopments during 1990s:• Cognitive Acceleration in Maths Education

(CAME) with similar results as CASE• Cognitive Acceleration in Technology Education

(CATE)• CA programmes in Drama, Music and Visual Art• CA programmes in language, Mathematics and

Science in primary schools

Shayer and Adey – Learning Intelligence : Cognitive Acceleration Across the Curriculum from 5 to 15 Year [Open University Press 2002]

9

CA ‘shutdown’ and revivalCA squeezed out of curricula during 2000s by:• National Strategies’ emphasis on particular

approaches to teaching• increased emphasis on detailed assessment (e.g.

APP) and tracking Revival brought about by: abolition of KS3 tests

(2008);discontinuation of National Strategies (March 2010); removal of APP (May 2010); National Curriculum review leading to new NC without levels (from September 2014); new higher-demand GCSEs with more open questions requiring higher thinking skills (from September 2015)

10

VISIBLE LEARNING FOR TEACHERS – JOHN HATTIE (2012)

• Analyses 150 influences on achievement in schools• Ranks the influences in order of effect on achievement• Places Piagetian programs 2nd with effect size of 1.28 • Self-reported grades / Student expectations came 1st (1.44); Response to intervention 3rd (1.07)• No other influence of the 150 exceeded 1.0

11

Toolkit of Strategies to Improve Learning (May 2012)

• University of Durham’s analysis for the Sutton Trust of most effective ways of spending pupil premium, updated for the Education Endowment Fund

• places ‘Metacognition and self-regulation strategies’ like Let’s Think as the equal most effective of the 30 strategies considered.

• The researchers comment: “These are substantial gains equivalent to moving a class from 50th place in a league table of 100 schools to about 25th. Encouragingly there is also evidence it is particularly helpful for low achieving pupils.” See www.suttontrust.com/research/toolkit-of-strategies-to-improve-learning

12

LTE Case Study 1 – Shirley High School, Croydon

parallel high ability Y8 groups,common end of year Reading and Writing

examinations

Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7With LTE 1 4 11 14Without LTE

0 19 11 0

Without LTE

1 13 13 0

13

LTE Case Study 2 – Hampshire6 schools each with 2 LTE classes and

2 comparison non-LTE classes

Level gains in one year compared with non-LTE classes

TA Reading

TA Writing

All students

2.1 1.81

3 lowest attaining classes

2.35 2.25

Level gains by two comparable low ability Y9 classes, one LTE and non-LTE

TA Reading

TA Writing

LTE group 2.55 2.77Non-LTE group

1.27 1.09

14

LTE Case Study 3 – London (2013 – 15)

Each school provided parallel LTE and non-LTE classes. Pre- and post tests taken.

Expected progress between tests taken 1 year apart = +3.0

Secondary: LTE classes’ scores exceeded non-LTE by an average of +2.9 = almost an additional year

Primary: LTE classes’ scores exceeded non-LTE by an average of +2.45 = 10 months though the tests were taken 9 months apart

15

Some comments on LTE (1)• “… pupils were challenged to discuss their ideas about a story

based on very limited information. Skilful questioning probed pupils’ understanding and engaged them in quite a sophisticated debate which developed their critical thinking very well.” – Ofsted report

• “Teaching the LTE lessons and discussing the process with colleagues has given me a lot of confidence in setting higher aspirations for students. It has allowed me to reflect on students' learning and the impact of strategic questioning”. – London teacher

 • “Let's Think has encouraged me to consider the impact of student

responses to a variety of material. Because the emphasis is on individual opinion and how to express that articulately, this has had an impact on their ability to think critically. It has made me slow down in my teaching in their lessons, and others and consider that some detailed work on a smaller piece of text can have a bigger impact overall.” – London teacher

16

Some comments on LTE (2)

• “LTE has forced me to rethink the types of questions I ask during my lessons and to plan for a wider range of questions in order to elicit more thoughtful responses. I've also noticed the students have been empowered to ask more insightful questions themselves - some of which I can respond to and others which we have to investigate further, helping the students see learning as a lifelong process.” – London teacher

• “Love the sample lessons on your website which I have used with mixed ability KS3 group – very effective – pupils have reacted very positively as have colleagues.” – Course attendee

17

The LTE approach in practice• Concrete preparation:

explanation of the topic

• Social construction:discussion with others to establish understanding of topic

• Cognitive conflict:challenge to resolve a problem – requires new way of thinking;understanding of topic altered to accommodate conflict

• Metacognitive phase: explicit review of the thinking that has taken place• Bridging:

using the same kind of thinking in other contexts

18

CA/LT and AfL• Dylan Wiliam and Paul Black, the originators of

AfL, have said that most schools do not implement AfL effectively [ e.g. TES 13 July 2012]

• This is because each teacher has to create a structure for delivering AfL for themselves and then deliver it, usually without much guidance or support

• CA provides structure for AfL• CA cannot be delivered except by using AfL

techniques• There is evidence that using CA gives teachers

confidence to introduce AfL approaches in other lessons

19

The reasoning patterns for English

• Classification• Frames of reference• Intentions and consequences• Symbolic representation• Genre modelling• Narrative sequencing

20

Other issuesCA/LT activities need to be regular, so they can be:

• stand-alone lessons• part of schemes of work• a combination of these

21

References and materialsAdey & Shayer – Really Raising Standards (Routledge

1994, reprinted 1997 and 2001]

Shayer & Adey (eds) – Learning intelligence: cognitive acceleration across the curriculum 5 – 15 years (Open University Press 2002)

Thinking Ahead! developing thinking through drama / music / the visual arts (GL Assessment 2006)

John Hattie – Visible Learning for Teachers (Routledge 2012)

www.letsthinkinenglish.org

www.kcl.ac.uk – search by Let’s Think