University of Leicester - WordPress.com… · 8/3/2014 · My interest in the use of starters began when I volunteered to run a staff training session on starters and plenaries. As

The Bridge: Journal of Educational Research-Informed Practice Volume 1, Issue 1: June 2014

22 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License.

Lesson Starters: An outdated idea or a meaningful teaching tool1?

Karen Stephens

University of Leicester

Abstract

Current Ofsted guidelines (2014b, p. 18) state that inspectors should ‘not give the impression

that Ofsted favours a particular teaching style’; neither should inspectors ‘focus on the lesson

structure at the expense of its content’. This paper proposes that starter activities can still be

used to good effect with their function tailored to achieve specific outcomes. Based on a

research project (Stephens, 2010) designed to generate training material to be used in starters and

plenaries INSET training, with the specific aim of developing a model that would constitute the

basis of future training, this article considers the impact that well selected starters can have on

student behaviour, classroom collaboration and learning. Existing guidance and rationale for

using lessons starters is explored through a review of guidance documents and pedagogic

literature. Concepts and suggestions found in available guidance documents have been restated

to add support to a 3-Part Starter Model (3-PS Model) which has been developed and used in the

training of student teachers and newly qualified teachers.

Keywords: starters; behaviour; collaboration; learning; thinking; motivation.

1 The use of the term ‘tool’ is not meant to infer that learning is mechanistic, but alludes to the analogy of the teacher’s toolkit, being the repertoire of techniques and strategies deployed in the complex task of helping students to learn, as used by Brookfield (2011; 2012). The point of this paper is to argue that lesson starters can and should be more than an activity at the start of a lesson.

https://href.li/?http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/



Introduction

Current Ofsted guidelines (2014b, p. 18) state that inspectors should ‘not give the impression

that Ofsted favours a particular teaching style’; neither should inspectors ‘focus on the lesson

structure at the expense of its content’. While this gives the impression that 3 or 4 part lessons

are no longer a requirement, I propose that the initial activities in a lesson can still be used to

good effect if their function is clearly understood. The subject of my Master’s dissertation

(Stephens, 2010), from which this article will draw heavily, was the use and theory of starter

activities in lessons. When conducting the literature review, I found little empirical research to

explicitly support the use of starter activities in lessons. Combining this small body of literature

with pedagogic theory, I sought to categorise and explore the usefulness of different types of

starters. The insights gained have since been used in training sessions for student teachers and

newly qualified teachers.

Developing a model

My interest in the use of starters began when I volunteered to run a staff training session on

starters and plenaries. As my experience of starters was confined to their use in Religious

Education, with ideas taken from a small selection of resources (Cheshire RE Teachers, undated;

Mason, 2002; Beard & Wilson, 2006), I searched for available cross-curricular courses. Failure to

find any led to a search of the internet and libraries which unearthed several documents

describing the outcomes of a good starter, or giving hints on their administration (DfES, 2004a;

2004b; Lodge, 2008; Bristol City Council, undated; Dodds & Smith, undated; Magnan, 2005;

Cheshire RE Teachers, undated; Sullivan, 2003; QCA, 2001). Tracking down theory or research

supporting the stated outcomes proved more difficult.

From the initial literature search, which is explained in the methods section below, it appeared

the humble starter was asked to fulfil a range of functions, including:




- Host/ hostess – introducing the learning menu;

- Reminder/ bridge – linking back to previous lessons;

- Motivator – getting students into the right frame of mind for learning;

- Brain coach – through the use of puzzles or activities calling for logical thinking;

- Crowd control – calming ‘hyper’ children;

- Learning Styles – including something visual, audible and kinaesthetic by means of a

short, introductory activity.

The different sets of guidelines and advice appeared very disjointed. In an attempt to produce

something visual and memorable for training sessions, I sought to develop a model or outline to

pull the ideas together. The model described below (Diagram 1) emerged from many months of

reflection and reading and incorporated the guidelines and theory as they pertained to the three

possible focus points. The model is not meant to be definitive, but is offered as one way in

which to think about how we use starter activities. Using the idea of ‘starting the lesson as we

mean to continue’, a phrase I settled on after exploring different conceptions of the word

‘starter’, I wanted to explore ways of using these initial steps into the lesson as tools for

establishing classroom expectations and a learning ethos within the classroom.

The guidelines emphasise the need to get students working through phrases such as, ‘quickly on

task’, ‘sense of pace’, ‘essentially active’, ‘interactive’ (DfES, 2004a, p. 557). Although the new

guidelines acknowledge that students can, on occasions, be ‘passive rather than active recipients

of learning’ (Ofsted, 2014b, p. 18), it is still important that students need to be ‘engaged in

learning’ (Ofsted, 2014a, p. 39). However, the original guidelines from 2004 acknowledged that

many teachers avoid whole class, interactive scenarios due to fears over behaviour. They seemed

to imply that if teachers could quickly elicit students’ engagement in activities, this would provide

a cure for poor behaviour, avoidance or apathy. This assumption will be explored later through




Diagrams 2, 3 and 4. My research aimed to explore the following hypothesis: rather than

avoiding activity, for fear of losing control of the classroom, structured activity can be used to

highlight expectations for behaviour. This can include establishing routines and habits within

the group by administering the starter activities in a structured manner. My first focus point,

therefore, became one of teaching classroom rules and expectations at the same time as getting

students involved and active. Although behaviour management must be honed through the

whole of the lesson, a careful selection of starter activity can help ensure that students are

hooked from the beginning. If engaged with activities that grab their attention, they might be

less likely to be involved in poor behaviour (Cowley, 2010) because their attention and energies

are focused on the task. Secondly, allowing students to engage with activities they can access

facilitates the opportunity to ‘catch [them) being good’ (Cowley, 2010, p. 136) and build that all

important relationship of trust and respect between the teacher and his or her students.




Diagram 1:3-Part Starter Model (3-PS Model).




The DfES’ (2004a) emphasis on engaging students seemed to correlate with the need to develop

classrooms where behaviour was well managed, allowing for the DfES’s second focus of

developing higher order thinking skills. However, there seemed to be a step missing. While

attempting to track the origins of starters, I was struck by the importance of class dynamic

between students and teacher and between students themselves. Petty’s version of Maslow’s

Hierarchy of Needs (2009) describes progression from safety needs, through belongingness,

toward esteem and self-actualisation. The use of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs was considered

appropriate because starters aim to spark motivation, enthusiasm and/or compliance, all of

which have stronger links to the psychological rather than the cognitive element emphasised in

other hierarchies. This led to the second point in my model of establishing an atmosphere or

ethos that facilitated collaborative work.

A further, general focus of my model was to start with the student, using their lives, experiences

and knowledge in order to progress into new areas of understanding (Hammond et al., 1990).

Consequently, the aim at all stages was to begin with something the students could already do,

grasp or understand. This need not clash with ideas of novelty or mystery, which are useful for

catching students’ attention as they are drawn in by the need to discover an answer to a problem.

In terms of what students are asked to do or produce, the activities should begin at an accessible

level. For instance, in one of my classes where 70% of the students were heavily statement, I

discovered that they not only enjoyed doing mazes and puzzles, but that the attention required to

solve these calmed their behaviour and resulted in some students helping others. Activities that

are accessible can inspire the confidence required for transitions to activities which call for

interaction with others or risk-taking as ideas are stretched and challenged.




Methods

Gorard & Taylor (2004) argue that indirect, mixed methods of research can be better suited

where a direct answer is not directly available. The researcher may need to imagine and calculate

the implication of the answer, checking for evidence of that answer. Anderson & Arsenault

(1998) use the analogy of a fisherman who has a feeling about what lies beneath unchartered

water, but who cannot always be sure of what, if anything, he will find. My original research

paper, utilising a mixed methods practitioner research approach, worked from the assumption

that the pedagogic theory for the use of starters was already available in educational literature,

but not explicitly applied to the concept of their use. Information was gathered from teachers

across the curriculum through questionnaires on their use of starter activities. Within the RE

department, the effect of using different starter activities in two Year 8 RE classes was assessed

through classroom observations, analysis of student work and student questionnaires. The

conclusions drawn constitute suggestions for improved practice, but these need exploration and

adjustment within different settings. Although the original research project involved an iterative

exploration of the use and development of starters, this article will focus on the theoretical

findings used to develop the 3-part starter model.

All documents offering guidance and advice, ranging from government initiative documents to

those created by schools, Local Education Authorities and practising teachers, were collated and

analysed. An internet and library search produced three types of document. Firstly, several sites

offer examples of starters, without any rationale. Other sites or books gave a bulleted list of

reasons or guidelines for their use, often repeating the Ofsted guidelines. A few texts included

brief discussions of starters (Sullivan, 2003; Phillips, 2001; PLS, undated; Robinson, 2009; Butt,

2008). All the statements from these sources were collated and analysed under the broad

headings: ‘Behaviour, motivation, class dynamic’, ‘Cooperation and confidence within the group’




and ‘Starting with the Learner’. The focus was to explore why starter activities might assist

student engagement, or how they differ from the rest of the lesson.

Theoretical Development

The theoretical development sought to explore pedagogic support for the proposed model.

Using a ‘hook’ to snag the attention of an audience is as old as the art of storytelling (Straker,

2008) and Homer’s technique of in medias res (Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, 2010). Lesson

starters, likewise, are meant to draw the student into the experience (Ogunleye, 2007; Riley, 2005;

Riley & Byrom, 2005), but are also related to ‘Ice Breakers’, which recognise that a group of

strangers work and learn better together if relaxed (Magnan, 2005). The question is, ‘What types

of activities are likely to fulfil this function’, or, ‘What factors prevent students from engaging in

learning?’

In the training sessions that I led on the use of starters, one of the activities required participants

to compare how young children, teens and further or higher education students learn. Feedback

from the exercise consistently showed that toddlers and small children were thought to

‘experience’, ‘do’, ‘test’, ‘imitate’, ‘experiment’, ‘using their senses’ and ‘getting stuck in’, while

teen learning was described using words such as ‘classroom’, ‘books’, ‘abstract’, ‘inhibitions’ and

‘teacher-led’. This showed that these teachers didn’t naturally think of teens learning through

‘play’ and ‘experience’. Education is ‘a basic human process’ where ‘all kinds of activities count

as education’ (Shank & Brown, 2007, pp. 2-3). If the starter aims to start the learning process, it

should perhaps capitalise more on how we learn naturally.




Behaviour

Many teachers worry that lively, interactive starters may lead to poor behaviour, so that phrases

like ‘lots of pace’, ‘essentially active’, and ‘work without intervention’ (DfES, 2004a; 2004b) make

them nervous. If good classroom management is required for lively and interactive learning, can

the starters at the beginning of the academic year be used to establish routines and expectations?

Studies suggest that student satisfaction with the teacher corresponds with improvement in

effort from students (Pounder, 2008; Krishnan, 2003; Burns, 1978). Leaders should model high

performance expectations (Cooper, 2000), give continual feedback, include all members of the

group and care about students’ concerns and developmental needs. A combination of success

and failure can provide more motivation than continual success or continual failure (Child,

2007), but effort and motivation depend on the degree to which students expect to succeed, the

value they place on the task and the extent to which they contribute to the process (Brophy,

2004; Dewey, 1991). Short, manageable yet challenging tasks involving everyone and providing

feedback are more likely to produce a positive response (Hawkins & Heflin, 2011).

In order to select appropriate activities, it is important to understand the cause of poor

behaviour. The emphasis of the DFES guidelines (2004a; 2004b) appears focused on the wrong

part of the problem. As a reflection exercise I attempted to draw out the implied relationship

between the starter activity and the desired outcome (Diagram 2). The top row of text describes

the student’s experience, with the bottom row describing the implied objective of the lesson

starter.




THE STUDENT EXHIBITS POOR

BEHAVIOUR2

The starter gets the

student working and

learning quickly ...

... so that they will be

too busy to

misbehave

Diagram 2: Applying the starter to poor behaviour.

It seemed to me that the assumption here was that if the lesson is more interesting than the

punishment for non-compliance (being isolated or sent out of the room) students will be too

busy and interested to have time to misbehave (Tauber, 2007). However, activity does not

necessarily mean that learning or change is taking place (Barrow & Woods, 1993). This is

transactional leadership (Wofford, 1994; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000; Tyssen et al., 2014), a

leadership style based on barter, where one outcome (good behaviour) is traded for another (free

time at lunch). Students work if they ‘feel like it’, which is only effective until they stop feeling

like it, until the next distraction, lapse in concentration or pressure from peers. The guidelines

acknowledge that students’ ‘ability to engage in learning is also influenced by their emotional

state’ (DfES, 2004b, p. 4), but this is not fully explored. I then attempted to revise my previous

model (Diagram 2) in order to focus the attention of the starter activity onto the reason for the

poor behaviour (Diagram 3).

2 I have deliberately used the term poor behaviour to make a distinction between the student misbehaving or being disengaged. Here I am referring to students whose behaviour is disruptive or challenging as opposed to the student who can be amenable without being fully engaged with the learning process.




SOMETHING

CAUSES

THE

STUDENT

TO EXHIBIT

POOR

BEHAVIOUR

Poor self-esteem

means that...

... the student

hides their

insecurity...

...behind poor

behaviour.

The starter aims

to build self-

esteem...

... with the result

that the

student’s self-

image changes/

develops...

... and they are

freed to engage

with the work.

Diagram 3: Applying the starter to the reason for the poor behaviour.

Here the starter addresses poor self-esteem, rather than the child per se. Regular starters that

address students’ needs have a greater chance of starting the lesson positively. If self-esteem is

poor, then it is again important that starters should be accessible and create the opportunity for

affirmation of students’ worth.

Problems stemming from all areas of the model can have a negative effect on behaviour.

Esteem needs, when not met, can produce fear of criticism, reluctance to take risks, frustration

and anger. Belongingness and love needs can lead to dislike, hostility and flight-or-fight

behaviour. Self-actualisation needs can lead to boredom, restlessness, avoidance (Petty, 2009).

To address these, starters could include time for discussion and setting up ground rules for the

group. For instance, instead of starting the lesson with an activity that requires students to solve

equations, activities could explore students’ attitudes towards, or difficulties with, equations. Or,




if the equation is disguised within everyday problems, making it relevant to students’ lives, it

could include reflection on other situations where equations may be useful.

Individuals learn differently (Barrow & Woods, 1993), and have different needs, making a variety

of starters essential to cater for all students. More challenging for teachers might be to structure

starters that cater for different needs at the same time, allowing every student to feel confident in

making a contribution. This could utilise choice and self expression, but be administered so as

to create opportunities for success and reward, rather than disruption and punishment. Here

links with collaborative starters begin to appear because the needs of the individual are often

intertwined with the dynamics of the group. Expectations link to the headings ‘relationship with

the teacher’ and ‘classroom atmosphere and management’ (Diagram 1). The regular use of

starters can contribute to creating a space where students arrive knowing what is expected of

them, and what they can expect from the lesson (Brown, 2009). Creating expectations of

success, stretching without embarrassing, and clarifying the point of the learning can be done

from the beginning of the lesson through a careful selection of the first activities on offer.

Collaboration

In Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Petty, 2009; Forsyth, 2009), ‘belongingness’ precedes self-

esteem and self-actualisation, and refers to the student’s need to feel part of the group. Fun,

challenging activities can allow students to forget themselves as they concentrate on the task.

Fulfilling the role of icebreakers (Magnan, 2005; Cheshire RE Teachers, undated), students are

given the chance to participate and notice themselves being heard. However, making students

work in groups and share resources does not necessarily address this need for belongingness.

Outside the classroom, students can choose who will witness them at play through the selection

of their peer groups and the activities in which they elect to involve themselves. Identity is the

result of socialisation with others (Reeves, 2008), but if this sense of belonging is absent, hostility




towards ‘out-group’ members results, which could produce discord between students, or hostility

and lack of cooperation towards the teacher. Students use coping mechanisms such as

projection, displacement and acting out to avoid feelings of fear or inadequacy (Granström,

2006; Child, 2007). This could include blaming the teacher who is not explaining properly or

who is picking on them, refusing to work with other students who are not involving or listening

to them, or perhaps blaming the subject matter for being too boring, difficult or irrelevant. The

real problem may be that the individual lacks confidence within the group, and so will not risk

failure.

Alternately, the frequent experience of positive emotions improves both cognitive and

behavioural coping strategies, which in turn affect engagement (Reschly et al., 2008; Sullivan,

2003). Students who feel they ‘fit in’ are more likely to engage in learning that produces

academic success (Singh et al., 2008). Extending the thought experiment illustrated in Diagrams

2 and 3, I then attempted to extend the model further to explore how starter activities might be

used in an attempt to address group and social needs (Diagram 4).

SOMETHING

WITHIN THIS

GROUP

CAUSES

THE

STUDENT

TO EXHIBIT

POOR

BEHAVIOUR

Feelings of

insecurity, lack of

belongingness

mean that...

... the student

deals with the pain

of perceived

rejection...

... by acting out/

attention seeking/

not caring, etc.

The starter

addresses the

group dynamic...

... so that the

student feels safe/

accepted...

... and is willing to

try new things

within the group.

Diagram 4: Applying the starter to group/social needs that might cause poor behaviour.




O’Donnell (undated) recommends working in dyads rather than larger groups. Larger groups

produce more resources in terms of ideas and ability, but they also allow the exclusion of some

members or the shifting of effort onto others. Larger groups also require more relationship ties

to connect members to each other and to the group as a whole (Forsyth, 2009). Dyads or triads

allow students to find common ground. They can rehearse ideas and receive positive feedback

before presenting to larger groups, giving the individual space and time to improve self-efficacy

(Griffin & Griffin, 1995) with peer questioning used to scaffold subsequent discussions (Hebl et

al., 2000). Building group dynamics may require teacher intervention or stimulus. Scripted

cooperation, giving students a clear method of working through material, can ensure students

take turns in describing and assessing different ideas (O’Donnell, undated). Snowballing can

build on this, allowing skills and confidence acquired in small groups to be extended into the

wider group.

However, good group dynamics do not necessarily mean that students are cooperating in order

to learn. Granström (2006, pp. 1143-1145) describes two types of ‘projects’ in the classroom –

‘the teacher’s instructional projects and the students’ project concerning self-knowledge, self-

esteem, group values, and belongingness’. Some types of disruption, including ‘chattering,

inattentiveness, hindering other students, being noisy, and late arrival’, involve the students’

private interactions and their relation-creating projects. Where a group has cohesion, their social

interaction itself can cause distractions from the learning tasks as they interact with each other,

but where a group is divided, the resultant fear or lack of ‘group-esteem’ can trigger disruptions.

In the first instance, starters should aim to utilise that natural social dynamic in order to focus

the group, whereas the second scenario requires starters that build confidence, group language

and vision. Regular starter activities that require cooperation and that build on knowledge of

students’ interactions outside the classroom can help towards building an expectation for

supportive group work. Activities seeking predetermined ideas mean some may reach the




answer before others, widening rather than narrowing the divide between abilities. Open-ended

starters require discussion, persuasion and new ideas, demanding collaboration to reach a

conclusion.

Learning

Hart et al. (2004, pp. 17-18) argue that some ‘young people undeniably do seem to grasp ideas

much more rapidly than others’. They are more curious, display greater imagination and can

better express their ideas, meaning that development is better measured against the student’s

own formal reasoning (Adey & Shayer, 1990; Valanides, 1997), rather than measuring students

against each other. The discussion in Hart et al. (2004) focuses more on allowing students to

progress without being labelled than on the idea of all students being able to make limitless

progress. If ‘ability’ means what we are born with, and ‘potential’ represents development of

that ability, then starters should focus on encouraging students to work with and develop what

they have or can already access (Knight & Benson, 2014). Their natural learning capabilities

need to be trained and directed in order to develop and stimulate learning (Dewey, 1991). In one

of the training sessions I ran, a teacher expressed concern at starting with the student’s ideas in

case the student is mistaken in their view. This, however, focuses the starters on knowledge

rather than their ability to think creatively within specific disciplines (Knight & Benson, 2014).

It should be remembered that there are many ways of knowing. The word ‘learn’ includes

acquiring knowledge of, or skill in, something through study or experience (Compact Oxford

Dictionary, 2008). ‘Acquire’ derives from the Latin word acquirere, meaning to ‘get in addition’,

which in turns comes from ‘quaerere’, ‘to seek’. Seeking implies actively looking for, suggesting

activities that seek answers to problems. To ‘get in addition’ defines knowledge as cumulative,

which could mean knowing more quantitatively (I knew 3 facts but now know 5 facts), or




developing knowledge qualitatively (I know more about cats today and how to look after them

and how this links to the way we look after other pets).

Mind maps encourage open-ended thinking, allowing words to link to further ideas, and creating

room for free thinking which produces unexpected connections. Ideas that provide controversy

can generate new issues to be explored (Dewey, 1991). Open-ended questions that seek reasons

and justifications also extend thinking (Petty, 2009), as more links can always be added. Relating

information to what students already know produces chunking or recognition (Dodds & Smith,

undated). Grouping similar items together helps transfer held knowledge or beliefs onto the

unfamiliar, which aids understanding and recall through association (Child, 2007).

In order to develop or challenge students’ beliefs and value systems, starters should also be

creative, moving the student away from the familiar (White, 2002). Whole-brain learning (Curry,

1983; Eagleton & Muller, 2011), which recognises the complex interaction between personality,

learning styles, environmental and instructional preferences, stimulates creativity and assists

higher order thinking tasks such as seeing the whole picture, sorting, interpreting and feeding

back (Buzan, 2007). Whole-brain activity is stimulated when a variety of techniques are

incorporated (Petty, 2009), including:

• The five senses

• Exaggeration

• Rhythm and

movement

• Colour

• Laughter

• Pictures and images

• Numbers

• Words

• Symbols

• Order

• Patterns

Using pictures, movement, role play and action can help some students engage with the

material using different parts of their brains, which in turn stimulates learning (Fayolle,

2007).




In terms of ‘engagement’, a distinction is needed between students appearing busy and

those actively learning. Students easily perfect the art of looking busy behind a book or

task, requiring constant prompting and monitoring (Sanguras 2005, p. 17), or alternately

can submissively work through the steps of an activity without fully engaging with it. It

may be possible to settle students within a familiar routine (Robinson, 2009), but starters

that promote learning are more difficult to judge or measure. Focal awareness means

students are actively concentrating or focussing on a task while peripheral awareness refers

to partial attention (White, 2002). A learning starter should seek to direct the student’s

focal attention onto the object or experience that will provide the learning. Students need

to know that they may be called on to respond, giving them ‘a reason to pay attention’

(PLS, undated; Butt, 2008).

In daily life, curiosity responds to something new, unusual or unexplained, while everyday

occurrences are often experienced subconsciously. This means, again, that starters should

be varied and aim to take students by surprise (Butt, 2008; Davies, 2008). The use of the

curious in history lessons (Phillips, 2001) has been popularised through the ‘Horrible

Histories’ series (Deary & Brown, various). Pictures that elicit questions (requiring

students to make sense of the image), problems that need solving (asking students to take

on the role of amateur detectives), and information that is deliberately oblique (requiring

further investigation) generate curiosity (Davies, 2008). A good story includes a hook that

requires the listener to gather bits of information in order to answer questions that have

been posed at the start (Phillips, 2001; Robinson, 2009; Butt, 2008). The need to find the

answer is what engages interest, and Sullivan (2003) again stresses the importance of fun,




competition and collaboration. Engaging activities stimulate curiosity, encourage creativity

and help to build positive relationships between students and the teacher (Strong et al.,

1995). If starters snag students’ focal attention, with the rest of the lesson reeling them

into the learning experience (Phillips, 2001), then perhaps starters should avoid having an

‘answer’ or and ‘end’.

Conclusion

The model described above has been used in training sessions, resulting in some

adaptations as the ideas have been discussed and explored. When I started using it, my

idea was that the types of starter would be used sequentially, beginning with those aimed at

developing behaviour, moving through the building of classroom collaboration, and

developing into activities that extend high order thinking. My view now is that these

elements cannot be so neatly separated, and that a more complex relationship between

them should not be ignored. Classrooms are dynamic and changing, and part of the

teacher’s craft is to maintain awareness of students’ needs. I would suggest that the regular

use of starter activities still has a place in learning, especially when focused on beginning

the lesson in a positive manner, aimed at helping students engage with the learning in a

meaningful way. However, a clearer understanding of the purpose of these introductory

activities calls for a discriminative selection and application of activities that take account of

students’ needs.




References

Adey, P. & Shayer, M. (1990) Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle

and high school students, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 267-285. Available

online at: DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660270309 (accessed 20 May 2014).

Anderson, G. & Arsenault, N. (1998) Fundamentals of educational research, 2nd ed. (London,

RoutledgeFalmer).

Barrow, R. & Woods, R. (1993) An introduction to philosophy of education, 3rd ed. (London,

Routledge).

Beard, B. & Wilson, J. P. (2006) Experiential learning, a best practice handbook for educators and

trainers, 2nd ed. (London, Kogan Page).

Bristol City Council (undated) Key stage 3 science starters and plenaries. Available online at:

http://www.bristol-cyps.org.uk/teaching/secondary/science/pdf/el_starters.pdf (accessed

13 April 2009).

Brookfield, S. D. (2011) Teaching for critical thinking, tools and techniques to help students question

their assumptions (San Francisco, John Wiley & Sons).

Brookfield, S. D. & Preskill, S. (2012) Discussion as a way of teaching, tools and techniques for

democratic classrooms, 2nd ed. (San Francisco, John Wiley & Sons).

Brophy, J. (2004) Motivating students to learn, 2nd ed. (New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum).

Brown, K. (2009) Classroom starters and plenaries, creative ideas for use across the curriculum

(London, Continuum).

Burns, J. M. (1978) Leadership (New York, Harper & Row).

Butt, G. (2008) Lesson planning, 2nd ed. (London, Continuum).


http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=FUL-VEFGGFMC&oi=fnd&pg=PT12&dq=teaching+tools&ots=1JqOY15s2M&sig=Y7Yr33tvaGG3iaFBfXRI3JPsKDY

http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=FUL-VEFGGFMC&oi=fnd&pg=PT12&dq=teaching+tools&ots=1JqOY15s2M&sig=Y7Yr33tvaGG3iaFBfXRI3JPsKDY



Buzan, T. (2007) The Buzan study skills handbook (Essex, BBC Active).

Cheshire RE Teachers (undated) Starters and plenaries in Religious Education (KS3 and KS4)

(Cheshire). Available online at:

http://yorksjre.files.wordpress.com/2006/12/startersandplenaries1.pdf (accessed 18 April

2014).

Child, D. (2007) Psychology and the teacher, 8th ed. (London, Continuum).

Compact Oxford English Dictionary of Current English, 3rd ed. (2008) (Oxford, Oxford University

Press).

Cooper, H. M. (2000) Pygmalion grows up, a model for teacher expectation

communication and performance influence, in: Smith, P. K. & Pellegrini, A. D. (Eds)

Psychology of education, major themes (London, Routledge Falmer).

Cowley, S. (2007) Getting the buggers to behave (London, Continuum).

Curry, L. (1983) An organization of learning styles theory and constructs, in: The annual

meeting of the American educational research association, 11-15 April 1983 Montreal, Quebec.

Available online at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED235185.pdf (accessed 20 May

2014).

Davies, L. (2008) A new model for making sense of experience (Hampshire, Gower Publishing).

Deary, T. & Brown, M. (various) Horrible Histories Series. Available online at:

http://horrible-histories.co.uk/ (accessed 31 May 2014).

Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2004a) Starter activities for teaching designing,

presenter’s notes (Norwich, HMSO). Available online at:

www.nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/downloader/8c4ee92cf2c768cccabfff72ab08

5f6b.pdf (accessed 7 April 2009).


http://yorksjre.files.wordpress.com/2006/12/startersandplenaries1.pdf

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED235185.pdf

http://horrible-histories.co.uk/

http://www.nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/downloader/8c4ee92cf2c768cccabfff72ab085f6b.pdf

http://www.nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/downloader/8c4ee92cf2c768cccabfff72ab085f6b.pdf



Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2004b) Pedagogy and practice, teaching and learning

is secondary schools. (Unit 5, Starters and Plenaries) (London, HMSO). Available online at:

https://www.school-

portal.co.uk/GroupDownloadFile.asp?GroupId=1216473&ResourceId=4674543

(accessed 18 April 2014).

Dewey, J. (1991) How we think (New York, Prometheus).

Dodds, H. & Smith, L (undated) Starters and plenaries (Seaford, Teachit). Available online at:

http://static2.docstoccdn.com/docs/75095875/starters-and-plenaries (accessed 18 April

2014).

Eagleton, S. & Muller, A. (2011) Development of a model for whole brain learning of

physiology, Advances in Physiology Education, 35(1), 421-426. Available online at:

http://advan.physiology.org.ezproxy4.lib.le.ac.uk/content/35/4/421 (accessed 20 May

2014).

Encyclopaedia Britannica Online (2010) Available online at:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/284369/in-medias-res (accessed 15

February 2010).

Fayolle, A (2007) (Ed) Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education (Volume 1), a general

perspective (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing).

Forsyth, D. R. (2009) Group dynamics, 5th ed. (Belmont, CA, Wadsworth Publishing).

Gorard, S. & Taylor, C. (2004) Combining methods in educational and social research (Berkshire,

Open University).

Granström, K. (2006) Group phenomena and classroom management in Sweden, in:

Evertson, M. C. & Weinstein, C. S. (Eds) Handbook of classroom management (Mahwah, New

Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).


https://www.school-portal.co.uk/GroupDownloadFile.asp?GroupId=1216473&ResourceId=4674543

https://www.school-portal.co.uk/GroupDownloadFile.asp?GroupId=1216473&ResourceId=4674543

http://static2.docstoccdn.com/docs/75095875/starters-and-plenaries

http://advan.physiology.org.ezproxy4.lib.le.ac.uk/content/35/4/421

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/284369/in-medias-res



Griffin, M. M. & Griffin, B. W. (1995) An investigation of the effects of reciprocal peer

tutoring on achievement, self-efficacy, and test anxiety, Annual meeting of the national

consortium for instruction and cognition (San Francisco), 18th - 22nd April.

Hammond, J., Hay, D. Moxon, J., Netto, B., Raban, K., Straugheir, G. & Williams, C.

(1990) New methods in RE, an experiential approach (Essex; Oliver & Boyd).

Hart, S., Dixon, A., Drummond, M.J., McIntyre, D. & Conway, C. (2004) Learning without

limits (Maidenhead, Open University).

Hawkins, S. M. & Heflin, L. J. (2011) Increasing secondary teachers’ behavior-specific

praise using a video self-modeling and visual performance feedback intervention, Journal of

Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(2), 97–108. Available online at:

http://pbi.sagepub.com/content/13/2/97 (accessed 20 May 2014).

Hebl, M. R., Brewer, C. L. & Benjamin (Jr,) L. T. (2000) Handbook for teaching introductory

psychology (Volume 2) (New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).

Knight, O. & Benson, D. (2014) Creating outstanding classrooms: a whole-school approach (Oxon:

Routledge).

Krishnan, V. R. (2003) Modernization without demolishing cultural roots, the role of

transformational leadership, in: Gifford, J. & Zezulka-Maillous, G. (Eds) Culture + the state,

alternative interventions (Edmonton, CRC Humanities Studio).

Leithwood, K. & Jantzi D. (2000) The effects of transformational leadership on

organisational conditions and student engagement with school, Emerald 38. Available

online at:

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/case_studies.htm/case_studies.htm?articleid=839168&sh

ow=html (accessed 14 May 2014).

Lodge, R. (archived 2008) Teaching ideas, further details on starters. Available online at:

http://www.geographypages.co.uk/start.htm (accessed 13 April 2009).


http://pbi.sagepub.com/content/13/2/97

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/case_studies.htm/case_studies.htm?articleid=839168&show=html

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/case_studies.htm/case_studies.htm?articleid=839168&show=html

http://www.geographypages.co.uk/start.htm



Magnan, R. (2005) 147 practical tips for using icebreakers with college students (Madison, Atwood).

Mason, R. (2002) Key Stage 3 national strategy, starters and plenaries (Scunthorpe, North

Lincolnshire Council).

O'Donnell, A. M. (undated) Cooperative and collaborative learning, theoretical perspectives on

collaboration, collaborative learning in dyads and groups, group and individual performance (Education

Encyclopaedia, State Univerity.com). Available online at:

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1885/Cooperative-Collaborative-

Learning.html (accessed 18 April 2014).

Ofsted (2014a) School inspection handbook, handbook for inspecting schools in England under section 5

of the Education Act 2005 (Manchester, Ofsted, under Crown copyright). Available online at:

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/inspection--forms-and-

guides/Schools-April-2014/School%20inspection%20handbook.doc (accessed 7 April

2014).

Ofsted (2014b) Subsidiary guidance, supporting the inspection of maintained schools and academies

(Manchester, Ofsted, under Crown copyright). Available online at:

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/inspection--forms-and-

guides/Schools-April-2014/Subsidiary%20guidance.doc (accessed 7 April 2014).

Ogunleye, G. (2007) Guide to teaching 14–19, essential FE toolkit (London, Continuum

International).

Performance Learning Systems (PLS) (undated) Cooperative starters (Cadez, Kentucky).

Available online at:

http://www.plsweb.com/resources/newsletters/enews_archives/28/2003/02/07/

(accessed 30 July 2009).


http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1885/Cooperative-Collaborative-Learning.html

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1885/Cooperative-Collaborative-Learning.html

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/inspection--forms-and-guides/Schools-April-2014/School%20inspection%20handbook.doc

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/inspection--forms-and-guides/Schools-April-2014/School%20inspection%20handbook.doc

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/inspection--forms-and-guides/Schools-April-2014/Subsidiary%20guidance.doc

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/inspection--forms-and-guides/Schools-April-2014/Subsidiary%20guidance.doc

http://www.plsweb.com/resources/newsletters/enews_archives/28/2003/02/07/



Petty, G. (2009) Evidence-based teaching, a practical approach, 2nd ed. (Cheltenham, Nelson

Thornes).

Phillips, R. (2001) Making History curious, using initial stimulus material (ISM) to promote

enquiry, thinking and literacy, Teaching History 105, December, 19-24.

Pounder, J. S. (2008) Transformational leadership, practicing what we teach in the

management classroom, Journal of Education for Business, 84(1), 2-6.

Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2001) Key Stage 3 lesson starters (London, HMSO).

Available online at: http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/pdf/Starter_activities.pdf (accessed

13 July 2009).

Reeves, J. (2008) Teacher investment in learner identity, Teaching and Teacher Education,

25(1), 34-41.

Reschly, A.L., Huebner, E.S., Appleton, J.J., & Antaramian, S. (2008) Engagement as

flourishing, the contribution of positive emotions and coping to adolescents’ engagement

at school and with learning, Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 419-431.

Riley, M. (2005) How to select different historical sources and provide effective learning in

History, Workshops on ‘The use of sources in teaching and learning History’, November, 13-14,

Cyprus. Available online at:

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/historyteaching/Source/Cooperation/Cyprus/Cypr

us%202005_2006_en.pdf (accessed 18 April 2014).

Riley, M. & Byrom, J. (2005) The use of historical sources when teaching History in

schools - challenges and different perspectives, examples from the United Kingdom,

Workshops on ‘The use of sources in teaching and learning History’, November 13-14, Cyprus.

Available online at:

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/historyteaching/Source/Cooperation/Cyprus/Cypr

us%202005_2006_en.pdf (accessed 18 April 2014).


http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/pdf/Starter_activities.pdf

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/historyteaching/Source/Cooperation/Cyprus/Cyprus%202005_2006_en.pdf






Robinson, J. (2009) The importance of RE lesson starters. Available online at:

http://news.reonline.org.uk/article.php?30 (accessed 27 December 2009)

Sanguras, L. Y. (2005) Effects of adolescents' perceived motivators on academic

achievement and self-efficiency, in: Caskey, M. M. (ed) Making a difference, action research in

middle level education (Charlotte, NC, Information Age).

Shank, G. & Brown, L. (2007) Exploring educational research literacy (London, Routledge).

Singh, K. Chang, M. & Dika, S. (2008) School engagement and school learning, ethnicity,

self-concept, and school belonging, The International Journal of Learning, 15(2), 205-213.

Stephens, K. (2010) Lesson starters, how and why do they enhance learning? (MEd dissertation,

Bishop Grossesteste University College Lincoln).

Straker, D. (2008) Changing minds in detail (Syque Press). Available online at:

http://changingminds.org/books/changingminds_book_pages.htm (accessed 7 April

2014).

Strong, R., Silver, H., & Robinson, A. (1995) Strengthening student engagement, what do

students want (and what really motivates them)?, Educational Leadership, 53(1), 8–12.

Sullivan, C. (2003) A flying start, using and managing lesson starters in foundation subjects (Brighton,

Education Online). Available online at:

http://ormskirkschool.primaryblogger.co.uk/files/2011/11/Engaging-Starter-Activities-

NQT-8.2.11.pdf (accessed 18 April 2014).

Tauber, R. T. (2007) Classroom management, sound theory and effective practice, 4th ed. (London,

Praeger).

Tyssen, A. K., Wald, A. & Spieth, P. (2014) The challenge of transactional and

transformational leadership in projects, International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 365-


http://news.reonline.org.uk/article.php?30

http://changingminds.org/books/changingminds_book_pages.htm

http://ormskirkschool.primaryblogger.co.uk/files/2011/11/Engaging-Starter-Activities-NQT-8.2.11.pdf

http://ormskirkschool.primaryblogger.co.uk/files/2011/11/Engaging-Starter-Activities-NQT-8.2.11.pdf



375. Available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.05.010 (accessed 20

May 2014).

Valanides, N. (1997) Cognitive abilities among twelfth‐grade students: implications for

Science teaching, Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and

Practice, 3(2), 160-186. Available online at: DOI:10.1080/1380361970030204 (accessed 31

May 2014).

White, J. (2002) The child’s mind (London, Routledge Falmer).

Wofford, J. C. & Goodwin, V. L. (1994) A cognitive interpretation of transactional and

transformational leadership theories, Leadership quarterly, 5(2), 161-186. Available online at:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(94)90026-4 (accessed 20 May 2014).


Documents

University of Leicester - WordPress.com… · 8/3/2014 · My interest in the use of starters began when I volunteered to run a staff training session on starters and plenaries. As