Gatsby Teacher Fellowships

2007-08 Final projects
Click here for more details

you are here: home> projects> 2006-2007: Design and Technology> project 86 final report

Effective implementation of assessment for learning in KS3 Design and
Technology

	School: Birkdale High School, West Yorkshire
	Fellow: Paul Anderson
	Email: paulanderson67@aol.com

Final report:

My Gatsby project was based on a simple concept – people behave according to how they are measured. This is something that we often take for granted in the classroom; if we ask a group of pupils to draw a car, most will draw cars – hopefully, few will draw an aeroplane instead. If we continually praise those who follow our instruction to take off their coats in the classroom, and apply sanctions to those who keep their coats on, very soon most of the class will be taking their coats off. That is not to say that everyone will do exactly what you want them to – there may still be some who are either not able or not inclined to comply.

In times past, how we measured a pupils progress was often summative. Assessment was mainly used at the end of a period of time to tell us which grade a pupil was working at. This provided little opportunity for pupils to routinely address their unique strengths and weaknesses, so that they could maximise the increase in their attainment when they were next measured. Modern, formative approaches to assessment are much more focussed on using assessment to provide feedback that allows the pupils to improve their performance. One of the most well-publicised approaches to formative assessment in recent years has been Assessment for Learning (AfL). Assessment for Learning (AfL) is an approach to formative assessment which is based on both the pupil and the teacher having a clear understanding of the criteria by which performance is being measured.

Where AfL has been implemented well, it has led to increased attainment by pupils, along with an improvement in pupils’ understanding of their work and how we are helping them learn. Whilst the general application of AfL has been investigated across several curriculum areas, there is limited guidance specific to the Technology curriculum. The aims of my project were, therefore, to:

	Identify and evaluate a range of approaches that can be used to implement AfL for Key Stage 3 Design and Technology.
	Develop materials to support the effective implementation of the AfL.

As a first step, I contacted over 30 schools and asked them ‘How have you implemented AfL?’. From analysing the replies, three things stood out: firstly, there was confusion about what AfL was; secondly, a high proportion of the Technology Departments contacted had not implemented AfL; thirdly, amongst those Technology Departments who had implemented AfL, there were significant differences in the interpretation of what is involved in the implementation of AfL.

With reference to the confusion about the nature of AfL, one of the most common misunderstandings expressed was that AfL is related mainly to peer assessment. Whilst self and peer assessment is almost certainly a feature of best practice in AfL, this is based on an implicit assumption that the pupils understand precisely what is required of them. This understanding is an underlying principle of AfL. A simple way of testing this is to set a group of pupils a graphic-based design task and then to get them to carry out peer assessment. In an environment where AfL implementation is weak, most of the feedback will probably relate to either the presentation or appearance of the designs. In an environment where AfL implementation is strong, the comments should mainly relate to the content or methodology (for example, you need to show how this links to the specification or include comments explaining how this will work).

In the Technology Departments that had implemented AfL, three typical approaches were identified. Varying between schools, these were applied either individually or in combination:

	A ‘cover-sheet’ approach by project. This normally took the form of a cover sheet that were attached to the front of a workbook. Often these specified the requirements by task, cross-referenced to the National Curriculum attainment levels.
	Objective Led Learning. On a lesson-by-lesson basis, specific objectives are shared with the pupils. Progress was subsequently gauged by comparison against these at the end of a task.
	An ‘assessed-task’ approach, where the product development process was broken down into chunks that related directly to the National Curriculum requirements. In some cases these tasks were further broken down such that what was required to achieve different National Curriculum levels was itemised.

The main advantage of the first two approaches was that they could easily be added to existing projects, without major revisions of supporting materials. The third approach needs to be substituted for the relevant parts of existing materials and booklets and required a little more preparation prior to the first time running it within a project. Each of these approaches had been used across all areas of Technology, although there was frequently some tailoring dependant upon the different disciplines. For example, for a production plan in Food Technology was normally re-titled as the recipe and instructions for making.

To evaluate these approaches, based on the best practices identified I developed three groups of materials, and a ‘reference control’ project, to support a range of projects spanning all the areas of technology. These were then delivered to groups spanning the full ability range at Birkdale High School, across all of Key Stage 3, by six different members of staff, ranging from an NQT to the Deputy Head. The aim of this was to eliminate learning curves associated with different approaches and different teacher styles and capabilities.

It quickly became apparent that, compared to non-AfL approaches, when applied effectively all three approaches led to some improvements in attainment. However, the ‘assessed-task’ approach led to a much higher improvement in attainment that the other two. This actually led to the integrity of the comparative results being compromised – early in the programme, some of the teachers saw that this approach was leading to such benefits in attainment for their pupils that they then started to introduce this approach in projects where the alternative materials should have been used instead!

The improvements in performance were not consistent for every pupil though. There appear to be three groupings of pupils:

	A small group who used the instructions as a recipe for success – many of these pupils exceeded their average performance over the year in this project by 2, 3 or more levels.
	The majority of the class, who referred back to and modified their work during the self-assessment – many of these pupils typically raised their performance in this project by 1 level.
	A few pupils, mainly boys, who produced work similar to their normal standard and merely noted the elements completed.

Whilst the response from the teachers was unanimously positive, when the pupils were interviewed about their preferences, it was noted that pupils with below average abilities expressed a dislike of the worksheets used in the ‘assessed-task’ approach. When probed, the common reason expressed was that ‘when we use them, we are made to think about what we need to do to get our target levels’! This is a good example where negative feedback appears to be telling us that this approach is the most effective!

During the project, the materials developed were reviewed by an LEA subject co-ordinator and a Technology AST; both subsequently took away copies to use in their own and other schools. They were also used in at least four lessons observed by HMI and Ofsted inspectors, who also took away copies to forward to other schools. Some of the additional benefits that these groups identified were that the materials for the ‘assessed-task’ approach made standardisation of levels across the department very simple; further, they provided a framework that ensured that pupils saw a consistent approach across all of the different disciplines within Technology.

Following on to the review of the trials, we have revised the ‘assessed-task’ materials used to include some further improvements recommended by the teachers and created an ‘AfL pack’. Copies of this pack have already been given to more than 10 schools and are freely available on request by e-mail.