i have been working as a trainee teacher in an english

201915287771699 - Reflections on Teaching and Learning in Secondary – Essay (SCITT)

1

I have been working as a trainee teacher in an English department since

September 2019, observing and teaching classes from Years 7 to 10. The

school environment I have been working in since September 2019 is my host

school, hereby HS, a secondary school in a semi-rural location. It has a wide

catchment area, and, as such, comprises 1,449 pupils aged 11-18 years (HS

Administration, 2019). The school was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’ by

Ofsted in 2017 (HS Administration, 2019). HS is non-selective, but is under a

local authority that does offer grammar schools (HS Administration, 2019).

Currently, 16.8% of pupils are eligible for Pupil Premium (PP) funding, with

9.7% of pupils eligible for free school meals (HS Administration, 2019). HS has

approximately 100 pupils with English as an additional language, and

approximately 98 pupils with special education needs (HS Administration,

2019).

In writing this essay, I seek to reflect on pedagogical ideas on teaching and

learning in secondary schools, and the effect they have had and will have on my

practice as an English teacher in secondary schools. I have first described the

school setting of my first placement this academic year, in order to later

describe some of the practices I have seen encouraged in the school and

department and to relate these to my reviewed literature. Secondly, I will

provide a brief overview of how epistemological ideas affect how teachers help

pupils to learn. I will then review historical and contemporary literature across

two of the broad and overlapping schools of thought prevalent in pedagogy,

cognitivism and social constructivism, exploring how these ideas in pedagogy

can be linked to the teaching and learning that takes place in my subject area of

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


2

English, and referencing events that I have observed or experienced, as noted

above. Finally, I will critically reflect on how such research and events will

impact my future practice, and conclude.

Epistemology is the academic study of three areas: what knowledge is, what the

best ways of acquiring knowledge are, and what the value of knowledge is

(Wong, 2008). In teaching, what we hope to pass on to students is what we

deem knowledge – valuable knowledge. This is much more politically and

culturally – at global, national, and school levels of politics and culture –

determined; for example, the study of literature has often focused on the

‘Western canon’ to the exclusion of much else (Stevenson, 2007), whilst the

current curriculum of the exam board OCR excludes American literature in

favour of British authors, admitting such a move was under influence from

politicians (Kennedy, 2014). The other debate currently prominent in education

is whether the focus of a curriculum should be on ‘knowledge’ – as information

– or ‘skills’ (Oates, 2018), as the value of knowledge is debated, rightly or

wrongly. Unfortunately, however, this essay will not have scope to explore all

these debates, as the focus required is on the best ways of acquiring

knowledge – the pedagogical debates on how best learning takes place.

Epistemological beliefs are prominent in their effect on knowledge interpretation

and cognition (Pajares, 1992). Teachers must have an awareness of their own

values and beliefs with regards to epistemology, as well as those of their

students, which form early, and will have been influenced by their family and

upbringing, their peers, their educational experiences thus far, and wider culture

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Yes - Gove did not like American Novels or Novellas!

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good situating paragraph


3

(Pajares, 1992). This awareness must be sought as teacher’s and students’

beliefs will affect their teaching and learning (Schommer, 1990; Schommer,

1993; Tillema, 1995; Elliott & Chan, 1998). For example, Schommer (1990)

found that students who had stronger belief in ‘speed of learning’ – that learning

is either quick, or not at all (Elliott & Chan, 1998) – were overconfident in their

ability when tested, whilst those with stronger belief in the ‘certainty of

knowledge’ – that knowledge is certain over indefinite (Elliott & Chan, 1998) –

made “inappropriately absolute conclusions” (Schommer, 1990:498).

Pajares (1992), however, acknowledges the difficulty in challenging and

changing such beliefs, as they persevere even when presented with multiple

contraindications to them being correct, a barrier to reflection (see below),

although Pajares (1992) notes that belief change is easier and more likely

before adulthood. Therefore, teachers have an obligation to challenge negative

epistemological beliefs in students; for example, if a student believes in ‘speed

of learning’ (Elliott & Chan, 1998), this might lead to antagonism when a student

is presented with material they have seen before to recap learning, as beliefs

doubtlessly affect behaviour (Pajares, 1992).

The pedagogic ontologies on which I will focus are as follows: the area of

cognitivism, which focuses on the way information is processed within the mind

of the learner, and how this can best be optimised (Svinicki, 1999), and

constructivism, which understands learning to be a process of co-construction

of knowledge (Svinicki, 1999). Cognitivism asserts that teaching is the

transmission of information to learners, and learning is the processing of that

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Excellent paragraph


4

information, whilst constructivism asserts teaching to be the facilitation of

activities where learners make meaning, and learning to be such making of

meaning through doing (Bates, 2016). It should be noted that cognitivism,

constructivism, and behaviourism, which is not the focus of this essay, are not

distinct and obvious schools of thought within pedagogy and teaching practice;

much of theory and research builds on and borrows from each of the broad

schools. However, I will briefly note here how behaviourism influenced

cognitivism in the chronological timeline of development of teaching and

learning theories, before then introducing more on cognitivism, and then

constructivism.

Behaviourism builds on research first performed on animal subjects, effecting a

response through applying a stimulus (Bates, 2016). Applied to learning in

human subjects, behaviourist advocates assert that humans learn through trial

and error, and by being either punished for wrong behaviours - incorrect

answers to assessment - or rewarded for correct ones (Bates, 2016). Ultimately,

as Svinicki (1999) notes, behaviourism provided insufficient answers for

questions raised about thinking and learning, as it was so focused on external

performance.

Bandura’s work was a bridge between behaviourism and cognitivism. He stated

that learning involves four processes: attention, and retention, two cognitive

process that he melded with behaviourist work on reproduction, and motivation

(Bandura, 2006, cited in Findon & Johnston-Wilder, 2019). First, he proposed

that we cannot learn if we are not paying attention to the learning task at hand.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


5

He also stated that we learn through retaining information in our mind, and then

by reproducing that learnt information as required. Finally, he argued that we

require motivation to learn, and this motivation is often in the form of visible

reward (Bandura, 2006, cited in Findon & Johnston-Wilder, 2019). Cognitivist

theories examined in this essay tend to seek to optimise the attention and

retention of information parts of Bandura’s (2006, cited in Findon & Johnston-

Wilder, 2019) theory as those most important to learning.

Svinicki (1999), a Professor of Educational Psychology, relates such ideas on

learning to instructional strategies, in an article discussing the changes in

learning theory since the journal New Directions for Teaching and Learning’s

inception in 1980. She first discusses the paradigm shift within research on

learning in the early 1980s, when cognitive psychology began to overtake

behavioural theories (Svinicki, 1999). Relevant teaching strategies for this

essay that relate to early cognitive theories of learning include: those for

emphasis on the organisation of material, those that makes information more

meaningful for the learner, and those that understand the limitations of the

learning system in the mind of the learner (Svinicki, 1999). Later theories within

cognitivism sought to fill gaps in cognitivist research by taking the role of the

learner in the learning process into account more fully (Svinicki, 1999). These

later cognitive theories emphasised the following for the instructor: direct

instruction of strategies, and supporting metacognition, perhaps by modelling

how a teacher thinks about their own strategy choice (Svinicki, 1999).

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


6

Finally, Svinicki (1999) notes that there has been a shift in learning theory

following this turn to the learner in cognitivist theory, to incorporate the learner

even further and to situate them at the centre of any learning, by integrating

active learning theories and constructivist world views (Svinicki, 1999). The

instructional strategies this initiated were as follows: instructors might allow

students to self-monitor and self-regulate their own learning, learners can be

directed to learn in groups, problems or tasks given are to be situated in

authentic practices, and the teacher might take the role of a master in a

‘cognitive apprenticeship’ (Svinicki, 1999). Thus, it can be seen here how

cognitivist and constructivist theories might struggle to be separated in literature

as noted above.

The key theorists I will discuss that I understand to use cognitivist principles are

as follows: Sweller’s (1988) cognitive load theory, and Bruner’s (1960, cited in

Harden & Stamper, 1999) concept of a spiral curriculum. I have chosen these

theorists as these have been a large part of my first teaching experiences.

Within my role, in the English department, and the wider HS environment, there

are several cognitivist practices that are commonplace. Firstly, there is a

school-wide focus on meta-cognitive processes. Students are encouraged,

through tasks in lessons, to ‘think hard’ using 12 devices: reduce, transform,

deconstruct, derive, prioritise, categorise, criticise, find trends and patterns,

practise, make connections, compare, and extend.

There is also a focus on the cognitive process of learning; lessons are taught

with explicit reference to prior learning, as well as plenaries implementing

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


7

‘recap’ activities in order to restate and recapitulate learning. The curriculum is

designed as a ‘spiral curriculum’, revisiting topics and skills more than once, a

system developed by Bruner (1960, cited in Harden & Stamper, 1999). Finally,

as discussed further below, there are periods of direct instruction within the

lessons. Within the department, it is policy to read the text being explored aloud

to the students before moving onto higher-level thinking about the text such as

language analysis. The text should also be read aloud by the teacher rather

than the students themselves, with no urging to ‘follow along’. These methods

seek to reduce cognitive load (Sweller, 1988), which is the stress placed onto a

child’s working memory in order to learn.

First, I will look at Bruner’s (1960, cited in Harden & Stamper, 1999) idea of a

‘spiral curriculum’, which seeks to structure any learning curriculum in a series

of constant loopbacks, in order that each time the information taught on the

curriculum is revisited, its presence in the learner’s memory is reinforced and

built upon (Bates, 2016). The difference between this theory and simple

repetition is that increasing levels of difficulty are introduced each time (Harden

& Stamper, 1999). Each time knowledge and skills are revisited, the learning is

related back to prior learning in order to make explicit the links and to reactivate

schemata in the mind of the learner (Harden & Stamper, 1999). Schema theory

makes up part of cognitive epistemology: it suggests that knowledge is a series

of mental frameworks, pathways within the brain that store information and

process it in specific ways again and again. The more the pathways are utilised,

the stronger and more reflexive they become.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good - I think that Sweller draws on Bruner without always acknowledging this

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

reference needed - could have linked this Piaget or indeed Sweller


8

HS’s English department has recently restructured their schemes of work to

form a spiral curriculum. For example, in Year 7, students are introduced to the

work of Charles Dickens through focusing on Oliver Twist for a whole term, but

the book they read at first is a simplified version of the original text. This

scheme introduces them to the Victorian era, to the context in which Dickens

was writing, as well as concepts such as poverty and redemption, in a simplified

and age-appropriate context. In Years 8 and 9, novels from the same era are

taught, so by the time students are in their GCSE year working on A Christmas

Carol, they will hopefully be encountering nothing new other than the actual plot

and text – many of the concepts, contexts, and language will be familiar to them

due to their consistently-trodden schema pathways.

This style of curriculum design is difficult to find research on, but more broadly

Hattie (2009) notes that “[i]t is less the content of curricula that is important than

the strategies teachers use to implement the curriculum so that students

progress upwards through the curricula content” (Hattie, 2009:159), which the

implementation of a spiral curriculum certainly seeks to do. Further, Mccrea

(2017) notes that such “predictability builds trust” (Mccrea, 2017:50), and, as

discussed below, Hattie (2009) also shows that positive and strong teacher-

student relationships have a good influence on student achievement. Such work

that involves regular recap and review is also supported by Rosenshine’s

(2012) research-based principles of instruction.

I will now look to Sweller’s (1988) cognitive load theory, which builds on schema

theory. Cognitive load theory is highly influential within teaching practice, as not

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good - though Rosenshine himself mostly draws on work from himself (2010) and much earlier work than some others you have cited.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good - and interesting

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

reference needed


9

only does it receive wide support in research literature, it is one of those

theories that just makes intuitive sense – if too much information is presented at

once, at too high a level, learning becomes onerous. There are, however,

criticisms of the theory; de Jong (2010) writes that there is no reliable, valid

measure of cognitive load yet. However, even as a very new teacher, I feel that

I have experienced several times the moment when cognitive overload occurs

in a student, and it is then hard to backtrack from this moment. Equally, it is

difficult to balance where each student’s load-bearing capacity sits, without

painstakingly providing personalised learning for each student; Webb (2019)

states that in order to create the right conditions for learning in an English

literature class the impact on a student’s cognitive load should be reduced as

much as possible whilst still creating challenge or ‘struggle’.

In my department, when a new text is commenced, the scheme of work tends to

provide some introductory lessons on the context; to continue the example used

above, before reading Oliver Twist, lessons covered the Industrial Revolution,

who Charles Dickens was, and what orphanages and workhouses were like in

Victorian England. The book is then read to the children in full by the teacher,

split over as many lessons as required, with only some starter recap activities

and some quick checks for comprehension as plenary activities. The children

are given the book to follow along the reading if they wish, but are allowed to

otherwise just sit and listen.

This technique is supported by Kalyuga et al.’s (2004) study on receiving the

same information at the same time through two presentations, auditory and

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Yes, but be careful about this - as this has been said about things which have subsequently been discarded or challenged.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

yes - most of the measures are self-rerooting Likert scales asking students to reflect on the 'difficulty' of tasks.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

reference needed


10

textual. They found that receiving such simultaneous input meant that students

scored lower on comprehension tests and reported higher mental load.

However, this research was performed on only 25 students, so further research

is required to support the conclusions. Riches (2019) proposes that this

overload, which exists in contrast to other research that supports verbal and

non-verbal input being presented simultaneously, is due to the fact that when

we read, the information is not actually processed as visual information, but as

a voice in our heads, which then competes with the second voice being

presented auditorily. This research will be particularly relevant for children with

SEN requirements that mean they struggle with processing such input, which

will help me meet ‘Teacher Standard 5: respond to needs’.

Though there is some reference in my HS to meta-cognitive ideas, which Hattie

(2009) rates as having some of the strongest effects on achievement (Hattie,

2009:188-9), I have not found a strong adherence to the work of Shayer and

Adey’s (Shayer & Adey, 2002; Adey, 2008; Adey & Shayer, 2013, cited in

Burton, 2019) cognitive acceleration programme, which aims to teach pupils to

‘learn how to learn’, ultimately increasing ability to learn across subject areas

(Adey & Serret, 2010, cited in Ireson & Davies, 2019). This is something I will

seek to explore and perhaps implement more concretely in my future practice,

particularly as Husbands and Pearce (2012) also state that effective

pedagogies incorporate metacognition and development of higher-order

thinking.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


11

The key theorists I will discuss that I understand to use constructivist principles

are as follows: Vygotsky (1978, cited in Watson & Myhill, 2019) and his work’s

application to modelling and scaffolding, and the work of Brown et al. (1989) on

situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship. Critique from the perspective of

Clark, Kirschner, and Sweller’s works on direct instruction (Kirschner et al.,

2006; Clark et al., 2012) will also be offered. I have chosen these theorists as

these have also been a large part of my first teaching experiences. Within my

role, in the English department, and the wider HS environment, there are

several constructivist practices that are commonplace.

Within the English department, modelling is understood to be a key cornerstone

of ‘making every lesson count’, per Allison and Tharby (2015). Each lesson

should include an instance of the teacher modelling good practice for a task set.

The structure of a lesson is encouraged to include at least once instance each

of an “I do”, a “We do”, and a “You do” learning episode. The “I do” is a period

of direct instruction from the teacher, the “We do” some questioning or

collaborative modelling between the teacher and the students, and the “You do”

instructs students to work self-directedly, whether independently or in pairs or

small groups. These three sections relate to Whittaker et al.’s (2006, cited in

Watson & Myhill, 2019) three-step process of modelling. This also utilises the

teacher as the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO), the facilitator of learning, in a

classroom, part of Vygotsky’s (1978, cited in Watson & Myhill, 2019) theories of

learning. As my subject area is also specifically focused on language, as well as

the school-wide use of the above, the second area I will focus on for my

literature review is constructivism.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Not in the reference list?


12

Vygotsky (1978, cited in Watson & Myhill, 2019) stated learning involves

language and is a social activity. Whilst such social constructivist ideas

presented a contrast to behavioural theories presented at the time Vygotsky

was researching, his work can be linked back to the principles of Socratic

dialogue, and have persisted until now. For Vygotsky, cognitivism and focus on

brain functionality lacked consideration of sociocultural inputs. Contrary to ideas

of making metacognitive processes explicit, constructivist thinkers state that

learners learn to learn through just learning itself. Vygotsky’s work centred the

child’s social connections and how language is formed to facilitate them

(Vygotsky, 1978, cited in Watson & Myhill, 2019).

Bates (2016) writes that Vygotsky used scaffolding to help a learner “reach a

higher level of understanding than would be possible by the individual’s efforts

alone” (Bates, 2016:46). Schaffer (1996) uses the example of someone

experiencing completing a jigsaw puzzle for the first time. The MKO with them

might allow some independent exploration, then should either suggest or model

some strategies for completion to scaffold the learning, letting the learner

become more independent again as they learn. Therefore, this learning is

completed through social co-operation (Schafffer, 1996).

This is used in classrooms, where the teacher most often takes the role of

MKO, but not always. I have rearranged the seating plans for the classes I

teach, making use of prior assessment knowledge and my mentor’s prior

knowledge of the class. In rearranging the class, in a room where the seat are

arranged in tables of four to six, I endeavoured to consider the needs of all

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


13

students, but I also was aware of positioning weaker students with students

working at a level they could reasonably aspire too, making the student with

high prior attainment the MKO on their table. This also benefited behaviour in

the classes, as each student remained more engaged as they could look to

someone on their table for help rather than waiting for my help and getting

distracted if there was any wait time for my attention.

Furthermore, in looking at students’ literacy learning, Mariage et al. (2000)

found that teachers don’t just have a strong level of subject knowledge to

support learning, but also give students “a language for talking about spoken

and written text” (Mariage et al., 2000:299). This can be related to my own

classroom practice, where, when work is modelled, key vocabulary is displayed,

used, or provided as prompts to underline how to talk about the work being

examined. Students can then use higher-level vocabulary to practise withs such

scaffolding, in preparation for future work where scaffolding will be more limited

in order to develop learning. Webb (2019) further supports this idea; though

meaning of language can be co-constructed, she agrees with Vygotsky that

cultural meanings might need to be taught to those children who have not

encountered the concepts before in life.

It should be noted that models and scaffolding need to be provided with due

consideration to broader application; Brown et al. (1989) write that the MKO

should act as if the learner is their ‘cognitive apprentice’, “by enabling students

to acquire, develop and use cognitive tools in authentic domain activity.

Learning, both outside and inside school, advances through collaborative social

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


14

interaction and the social construction of knowledge” (Brown et al., 1989:39).

Both Hattie (2009) and Rosenshine (2012) find support for the idea of providing

models and worked examples in educational research literature.

However, Clark, Kirschner, and Sweller’s work greatly urges caution for the use

of constructivist pedagogical practice (Kirschner et al., 2006), and instead

preaches the use of direct instruction (Clark et al., 2012). To further the

example used above of a jigsaw puzzle novice, they advise, based on evidence,

to not allow the learner to use attempt the puzzle without first offering a “direct,

explicit instruction” (Clark et al., 2012:6) for completion. Their theory is

supported by Stockard et al.’s (2018) meta-analysis of 328 studies on direct

instruction, which reports entirely positive estimated effects on a multitude of

factors related to teaching and learning, including reading, language, and

spelling, factors key to my subject area. Further, Hattie’s (2009:205) even larger

meta-analysis offered similar support of direct instruction on achievement.

Reflective practice when used best is useful for two main reasons: identifying

attitudes or practices which are convenient in the short term, but ineffective in

the long term, and pinpointing hegemonic effects (Bolton & Delderfield, 2018).

This section will lay out Gibbs’s (1988) model for reflection, and then undertake

that reflection in six parts. Gibbs’s (1988) reflection model requires description

of what happened during a chosen episode and my feelings during that period,

evaluation of the experience, analysis of the situation, drawing of conclusions,

and creation of an action plan for the next episode in order to meet these aims.

Whilst Willis (2010) critiques Gibbs’s (1988) model as confusing, given some of

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good analysis

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

It does but then claims scaffolding for DI rather than crediting Bruner!!


15

its stages might be easily combined, Starr et al. (2013) and Bolton and

Delderfield (2018) describe the model as useful for beginners such as myself.

The first and second steps in Gibbs’s (1988) cycle are to describe the events

and my feelings during them. Although this model requires description and

evaluation of the event, Moon (2008) writes that good reflection is neither just

“conveyance of information… [nor] simple problem solving” (Moon, 2008:187),

so I will aim to bear that in mind in performing the reflective practice. This

essay has described the epistemological background to teaching and learning

theories. I have then reviewed some historical and contemporary literature, on

the two broad schools of cognitivism and constructivism, relating these theories

to practices in my subject department and host school. In doing this, I have read

many journal articles, more journal article abstracts, and books on teaching,

learning, and education.

Dye (2011) notes that “[e]ducational theory and teaching practice are not

always comfortable bedfellows” (Dye, 2011:219), and though I have sought to

alleviate some of the discomfort in this essay, reflecting on this experience of

completing a reflective assignment, my main feelings have been of frustration. It

is often difficult to reconcile the deeply academic language of education theory

with the day-to-day reality of a classroom, where the most pressing issues are

often lost pencil cases, newly-broken hearts, and whether the newly-arrived

student from Spain understands what the Victorian era even is, let alone

Charles Dickens, the workhouse, or Oliver Twist. I have also found it difficult to

find research that relates most specifically to the curriculum I have been

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good


16

directed to deliver as an English teacher in England; lots of literature focuses on

learning English as a foreign language.

The third and fourth parts of Gibbs’s (1988) model are to evaluate and analyse

the experience. Despite the above feelings described, when I have found

theories that have achievable practical applications, I have felt interested and

curious. Overall, there was good and bad in the experience of writing this essay

and reflecting on theories of teaching and learning., I have taken away the

applications of cognitivist theory, direct instruction, and cognitive acceleration,

as areas of study that I am specifically interested in applying as my practice

grows in autonomy. This essay has also been useful as I reflect on the Teacher

Standards, specifically those that look at the ability to promote progress (2),

respond to needs (5), and manage behaviour (7), all of which, and the above,

seek to impact on pupil progress as a teacher’s ultimate goal.

Furthermore, comfort can be found in the work of Hattie (2009), whose

landmark work, the synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to educational

achievement, points out that realistically, most things teachers try work, and in

actuality there is very little we as teachers can do to actively cause negative

effects on achievement and progress. The key point Hattie (2009) highlights is

that teachers must just try; particularly the most positive effects on achievement

are seen when teachers have consider their relationships with students before

anything else, because as such they can have high expectations of all students

and can communicate what that expectation of progress should look like to

them (Hattie, 2009). I am aware of the difficulties in challenging one’s own


17

views and epistemological beliefs, and therefore I am both keen and nervous to

receive feedback on this essay which may challenge me.

The fifth and sixth parts of Gibbs’s (1988) model require drawing conclusions on

what else could have been done, and creating an action plan, describing what I

would do in future based on those conclusions. I feel these two steps are the

main ones that can be combined as Willis (2010) discusses. Gibbs’s (1988)

model might not prove useful for every situation within my teaching practice, as

it does not aim to account for underlying power dynamics that may have also

affected a situation, the second part of best reflective practice according to

Bolton and Delderfield (2018), so in the future, I will look to further address this.

Broadly, reflective practice as a teacher should involve using the ‘four lenses’ of

critical reflection: looking at our practice through our own eyes, the experiences

of our students and our colleagues, and through the lens of theoretical literature

(Brookfield, 2017). This essay has aimed to consider all of these, but most fully

has explored the experiences of myself and my colleagues, as well as the

pedagogical literature on teaching and learning. In the future, I will look to do

the following: incorporate more structure and rigid reflection into my practice;

incorporate specific practices to balance my student’s cognitive load; explore

further the applications of cognitive acceleration in the classroom; and feedback

to my department on the importance of direct instruction in the classroom.

Reflecting on the teaching and learning undertaken while completing my HS

placement, how it could have been done differently, and learning more about


18

the usefulness of reflective models in this essay has led me to the first

conclusion, whilst the rest of this essay have lead me to the next three.

However, I will also bear in mind Husbands and Pearce’s (2012) warning: that

“[o]ne of the key outcomes of research on successful pedagogies is that there

are no ‘magic bullets’ in terms of classroom strategies” (Husbands and Pearce,

2012:8). This essay grapples throughout with what Cochran-Smith (2003) calls

“the incredible complexity of teaching and learning” (Cochran-Smith, 2003:4),

and, ultimately, through investigating epistemology, pedagogies of cognitivism

and constructivism, and reflecting on my own experiences, I have found it

worthwhile to try to understand some of the educational theory and research

behind practices in my work, school, and department.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good sumary

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Good use fo the Gibbs model to reflect on your own teaching and learning


19

References

Allison, S., & Tharby, A. (2015) Making Every Lesson Count: Six principles to

support great teaching and learning. Carmarthen: Crown House Publishing Ltd.

Bates, B. (2016) Learning Theories Simplified… and how to apply them to

teaching. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bolton, G., & Delderfield, R. (2018) Reflective Practice: Writing and Professional

Development, 5th edition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Brookfield, S.D. (2017) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, 2nd edition.

San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, J.S., Collins, A. & Duguid, S. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture

of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

Burton, D. (2019) Ways pupils learn. In Capel, S., Leask, M., & Younie, S.

(eds.) Learning to Teach in the Secondary School: A Companion to School

Experience. Abingdon: Routledge, 293-307.

Clark, R.E., Kirschner, P.A., & Sweller, J. (2012) Putting students on the path to

learning: The case for fully guided instruction. American Educator, 36(1), 6-11.

Cochran-Smith, M. (2003) The Unforgiving Complexity Of Teaching: Avoiding

Simplicity In The Age Of Accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 3–

5.


20

De Jong, T. (2010) Cognitive load theory, educational research, and

instructional design: some food for thought. Instr Sci, 38, 105-134.

Dye, V. (2011). ‘Reflection, Reflection, Reflection. I’m thinking all the time, why

do I need a theory or model of reflection?’, in McGregor, D. and Cartwright, L.

(ed.) Developing Reflective Practice: A guide for beginning teachers.

Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education, 217-234.

Elliott, B., & Chan, K.W. (1998) Epistemological beliefs in learning to teach:

Resolving conceptual and empirical issues. European Conference on Education

Research, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 17-20 September 1998.

Findon, M., & Johnston-Wilder, S. (2019) Developing your resilience: Managing

your stress, workload, and time. In Capel, S., Leask, M., & Younie, S. (eds.)

Learning to Teach in the Secondary School: A Companion to School

Experience. Abingdon: Routledge, 43-59.

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by Doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning

Methods. London: FEU.

Harden, R.M., & Stamper, N. (1999) What is a spiral curriculum?. Medical

teacher, 21(2), 141-143.

Hattie, J.A.C. (2009) Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses

relating to achievement. Abingdon: Routledge.

HS Administration (2019) RE: School information [Email]. Message sent to

Student 201915287. 15 November 2019, 12:40.


21

Husbands, C., & Pearce, J. (2012) What makes great pedagogy? Nine claims

from research. National College for School Leadership. Available online:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/what-makes-great-pedagogy-nine-

claims-from-research [Accessed 05/01/2020].

Ireson, J., & Davies, P. (2019) Cognitive development. In Capel, S., Leask, M.,

& Younie, S. (eds) Learning to Teach in the Secondary School: A Companion to

School Experience. Abingdon: Routledge, 230-243.

Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2004) When redundant on-screen text

in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human

factors, 46(3), 567-581.

Kennedy, M. (2014) To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men axed as Gove

orders more Brit lit. The Guardian, 25 May [Online]. Available at:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/25/mockingbird-mice-and-

men-axed-michael-gove-gcse [Accessed 05/01/2020].

Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006) Why Minimal Guidance During

Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist,

Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching.

Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Mariage, T.V., Englert, C.S., & Garmon, M.A. (2000) The teacher as" more

knowledgeable other" in assisting literacy learning with special needs

students. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 16(4), 299-336.

Mccrea, P. (2017) Memorable Teaching [eBook].


22

Moon, J. (2008) A handbook of reflective and experiential learning. Abingdon:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Oates, T. (2018) Skills versus Knowledge: A curriculum debate that matters –

and one which we need to reject. Impact, September 2018 [Online]. Available

at: https://impact.chartered.college/article/skills-versus-knowledge-curriculum-

debate-matters-one-need-reject/ [Accessed 05/01/2020].

Pajares, M.F. (1992) Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a

messy construct. Review of educational research, 62(3), 307-332.

Riches, A. (2019) Why reading along can cause cognitive overload. Tes, 21

June [Online]. Available at: https://www.tes.com/magazine/article/why-reading-

along-can-cause-cognitive-overload [Accessed 05/01/2020].

Rosenshine, B. (2012) Principles of Instruction: Research-Based Strategies

That All Teachers Should Know. American Educator, 36(1), 6-11.

Schaffer, R. (1996). Social development. Oxford: Blackwell.

Schommer, M. (1990) Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on

comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498-504.

Schommer, M. (1993) Comparisons of beliefs about the nature of knowledge

and learning among postsecondary students. Research in higher education,

34(3), 355-370.

Starr, F., Ciclitira, K., Marzano, L., Brunswick, N., & Costa, A. (2013) Comfort

and challenge: A thematic analysis of female clinicians’ experiences of


23

supervision. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and

Practice, 86(3), 334-351.

Stevenson, J. (2007) The Complete Idiot’s Guide to English Literature.

Indianapolis, Indiana: Alpha Books.

Stockard, J., Wood, T.W., Coughlin, C., & Rasplica Khoury, C. (2018) The

effectiveness of direct instruction curricula: A meta-analysis of a half century of

research. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 479-507.

Svinicki, M.D. (1999) New Directions in Learning and Motivation. New

Directions for Teaching and Learning, 8 (Winter 1999), 5-27.

Sweller, J. (1988) Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on

learning. Cognitive science, 12(2), 257-285.

Tillema, H.H. (1995) Changing the professional knowledge and beliefs of

teachers: A training study. Learning and instruction, 5(4), 291-318.

Watson, A., & Myhill, D. (2019) Creating a language-rich classroom. In Capel,

S., Leask, M., & Younie, S. (eds) Learning to Teach in the Secondary School: A

Companion to School Experience. Abingdon: Routledge, 396-408.

Webb, J. (2019) How to Teach English Literature: Overcoming cultural poverty.

Woodbridge: John Catt Education Ltd.

Willis, S. (2010) Becoming a reflective practitioner: frameworks for the

prehospital professional. Journal of Paramedic Practice, 2(5), 212-216.

Paul Hopkins

47380000000000538

Which edition?


24

Wong, Y. L. (2008) Epistemology and Education. In Tan, C. (ed), Philosophical

Reflections for Educators. Singapore: Cengage Learning, 155-165.

i have been working as a trainee teacher in an english

Documents