An evaluation of the collaboration between Mathematics and Science ITE tutors in developing teaching

strategies to support their students with M level writing

Maarten Tas and Sue Forsythe

School of Education

www.le.ac.uk

Overview

• Introduction• Aim• Extra support for Mathematics and

Science PGCE Students (UA1 and UA2)• Methods• Results• Conclusions• Recommendations

Introduction

Subject No. of students achieving Masters

2007-2008 2008-2009

All secondary PGCE subjects

126/152 (83%) 131/142 (92%)

Mathematics 5/11 (45%) 14/19 (74%)

Science 22/38 (59%) 28/34 (82%)

In 2007-2008 the proportion of Mathematics and Science PGCE students at the University of Leicester being successful in writing assignments at Masters level was worryingly lower than the whole cohort of Secondary PGCE students.

In 2008-2009 an extra programme of support for Mathematics and Science was put in place, in particular peer assessment of a synopsis for the second assignment, resulting in a much higher percentage.

Aim for 2009-10

• For the Mathematics and Science Tutors to work collaboratively supporting the Mathematics and Science Post Graduate Certificate of Education (PGCE) students at the University of Leicester, leading to an even higher proportion gaining Masters level credits.

Extra support for Mathematics and Science PGCE Students (assignment 1

– UA1)Support for Mathematics students

Support for Science students

Subject session on writing a practice assignment, Harvard style of referencing and introducing a mark scheme

Critical Review Library session

Peer marking the practice assignment

Session on structuring assignment and marking exemplar assignments using level descriptors and mark scheme

Peer conversation following on from the peer marking

Twilight session with tutor in December

University tutor feedback on the practice assignment

Session with university student support staff on writing skills

Peer conversations about the assignment in December

Extra support for Mathematics and Science PGCE Students (UA2)Peer assessment of the synopsis and tutor feedback using the following framework:

Content To be added Not needed Other comments

Introduction

Focus

Why questions

What questions

How questions

Outline of some learning and teaching strategies

Literature

Title:

Methods• Questionnaire after submitting UA1:

– Mathematics n=29– Science n=37

• Questionnaire after the support session for UA2, comparing the attitudes of current students and cohorts from the previous year:– 2008-2009 Mathematics and Science n=33– 2009-2010 Mathematics and Science n=41

• Interviews with PGCE students– Mathematics n=4– Science n=6

Student feedback on the support for UA1• The Mathematics and Science

students received different forms of support and therefore the questionnaires addressed different foci.

• However, through this collaboration clear needs and direction can be identified.

Mathematics

Support strategy Helpful Not helpful

Subject session on writing the assignment 27 2

Writing the practice assignment 27 2Whole course session on writing the assignment 11 18

Seeing the markscheme 27 2Marking the practice assignment of another student 22 7

Getting oral feedback from another student on your practice assignment

18 11

University tutor feedback on the practice assignment 26 3

Exemplar assignments on Blackboard 20 10

The peer conversations about the assignment 15 14

Help from university tutor 26 3

Results of questionnaire on support for UA1 n=29

Some issues raised by the Mathematic students:

• Wanted more tutor feedback on practice assignments

• There was not enough advice on how to structure the assignment

• Wanted more direct input on locating research material

Science

Support strategy Helpful Not helpful

Whole course session 1 Research/writing at Masters level

19 18

Whole course session 2 in mixed groups 17 20

Critical Review Library session 27 10

Session on structuring assignment and marking exemplar assignments using level descriptors

37 0

Twilight session with tutor in December 31 6

Session with student support staff (individual and/or group work)

11 0

Exemplar Assignments and other info on VLE 33 4

Handbook for Writing Assignments 32 5

Individual support from tutor 37 0

Results of questionnaire on support for UA1 n=37

Some issues raised by the Science students• Twilight session; good to know others were in the same boat

• Whole course session needs to be optional (2)

• Did not ask for any individual tutor support

• Handbook; more detail needed for requirement at each level

• Some kind of feedback on draft assignment would be helpful

to know whether on track (2)

• One-on-one very useful, but needed more

Suggestions for further support (Science) Extra tutorial in

small groupsn=16

Marking more exemplar

assignments using the marking criteria

and level descriptorsn=13

Peer marking a practice assignment (to check the referencing and academic

writing for Social Sciences) n=8

An extra workshop on professional writing in TDC

n=0

Opportunity to read the work of your

peersn=11

Other suggestions:-Time management

seminar-Extra individual tutorials

• I didn’t find this assignment aided my teaching in any way and provided lots of stress and extra work at a time when all I wanted to focus on was my classroom persona and ability to teach

This is a comment by a student; How do we address this and make it relevant to

their training?

Conclusions • Sessions in subject specific groups are more valued than the

whole course sessions• Individual support from tutor is more valued than support

from peers• Students need more training for being peer assessors• Writing and assessment of the practice assignment in

Mathematics was successful• A session on structuring the assignment and marking

exemplar assignments using level descriptors in Science was successful

• The Mathematics and Science students identified needs which were fulfilled in the support strategies in the other subject.

Recommendations for UA1 support in 2010-2011

• Session 1: – On the structure of an M level assignment,

including referencing;– The marking of exemplar assignments using the

mark scheme and level descriptors;– Homework to write a practice assignment.

• Session 2:– Peer review of the practice assignments on

Assessment for Learning (AfL)• Session 3:

– Students bring in a one page draft (either written or diagrammatic) for Learning Conversations in small groups

• Individual tutorials

YES NO

Was this feedback worthwhile in your opinion?

2008-9

2009-10

85

80

15

20

Support for UA2Results of questionnaire on verbal and written feedback on the synopsis by fellow students.

YES NO

Was this feedback worthwhile in your opinion?

2008-9

2009-10

88

90

12

10

Results of questionnaire on verbal and written feedback on the synopsis by tutor.

Improvements suggested by students

• More discussion with more peers (4)

• Longer time given to read and assess synopsis (2)

• More feedback from course tutor (11)

• Do synopsis earlier (2)

• More help on understanding grid (2)

• Help on how to write a synopsis (6)

• Peer marking other’s work who is working on a similar topic

(3)

Other support reported useful

• Blackboard material (4)• Support from the librarian (3)• Brainstorming ideas in an earlier session (2)• Previous assignment feedback (1)• Time spent on discussion on requirements (2)• Finding another peer who worked on a similar

topic (1)• Example outline (1)• Guidance from handbooks (1)• Marking grid (1)

 Other issues raised

• Peer assessment didn’t give any new ideas (1)

• Blind leading the blind for peer assessment (1)

• It (peer assessment strategy) brought the assessment

into focus which was useful in planning (1)

• Good exercise, very useful (peer assessment strategy)

(1)

• Some good interactive debates would be good (1)

Conclusion

• The questionnaire should have focused more on the relevance, perception and ideas about learning conversations rather than asking about the written feedback of the peer-assessment exercise.

The main points raised in the interviews (1) (Mathematics n=4; Science n=6)• Focus:

– Students learnt from their experience of writing UA1 and put this in place for UA2

– Most students decided earlier on their focus– Having to write the synopsis was helpful

• Peer assessment exercise:– Some students said the process was only helpful

if the peers they were working with had the skills to be able to give good feedback and ideas

– In the Science group it was mentioned that it would be useful to work with peers who write about the same topic

The main points raised in the interviews (2) (Mathematics n=4; Science n=6)

• Other support:– The value of the tutor’s input, the help of

the university library staff and the marking of exemplar assignments using the mark scheme with level descriptors were mentioned

• Suggestions for extra support:– More one-on-one tutorials and unstructured

discussion with their peers were mentioned

Discussion

• Students need to have good skills for self-assessment and peer-assessment to make learning conversations productive

• The developed skills of peer assessment in our students can be transferred to their own classroom teaching and learning environment

Bibliography• Black, P. and Wiliam, D.(1998) 'Assessment and Classroom Learning', Assessment in

Education:Principles, Policy & Practice, 5: 1, 7 — 74• Bloxham, S. and West, A. (2004) Understanding the rules of the game: marking peer assessment as a

medium for developing students’conceptions of assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29: 6, 721-733

• Elwood, Jannette andKlenowski, Val(2002) 'Creating Communities of Shared Practice: the challenges ofassessment use in learning and teaching', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27: 3, 243 — 256

• Minjeong, K. (2009) The Impact of an Elaborated Assessee’s Role in Peer Assessment, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34 : 1,105-114

• Norton, L (2009) Assessing student learning, in S. Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall (eds) A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Enhancing Academic Practice. 3rd Edition (New York and London, Routledge: 141)

• Rust, C., Price, M., and O'Donovan, B. (2003) 'Improving Students' Learning by Developing their Understanding of Assessment Criteria and Processes', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28 : 2, 147 -164

• Sluijsmans, J., Brand-Gruwl. S., van Merriemboer, J.G., and Bastiaens, T.J. (2003) The Training of Peer assessment Skills to Promote the Development of Reflection Skills in Teacher education, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 23-42

• Smyth, Karen (2004) The benefits of students learning about critical evaluation rather than being summatively judged, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29: 3, 370 -378 

• Taras, Maddalena(2010) 'Student self-assessment: processes and consequences', Teaching in HigherEducation, 15: 2, 199 — 209

• Topping, K.J., Smith, E.F., Swanson, I. and Elliot, A. (2000) Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing between Postgraduate students, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25: 2,149 – 169