Deborah Jones Brunel University

To consider  learning within the ZPD  developing children’s metacognition  the nature of classroom dialogue

‘ The distance between the actual developmental level (of the child) as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined by problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers’ ‘What the child is able to do in collaboration today s/he will be able to do independently tomorrow’ (Vygotsky, 1997;87)

...applies to any activity where children are in the process of developing mastery/ understanding of a topic (Wells, 1999)...is created in interaction between child and adult (Mercer & Fisher, 1992; Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2002)

…interventions extend and scaffold the child’s understanding...

 Demonstrate problem solving  Begin to solve it-ask child to finish it  Explain the principle  Ask leading questions  Analyse problem for the child  Ask child to problem solve with more competent peer (Vygotsky, 1998)

It is the process of ‘turning around and reflecting upon one’s own thoughts’ using language that enables one to see things in a new way (Vygotsky, 1978) This links to metacognition...

Metacognition:  Refers to an individuals awareness of his/her cognitive processes & strategies  Relates to self-reflection, to think about HOW you think & know  Focusses attention on what has been understood & how this relates to the process of learning  Develops thinking as implicit understanding becomes explicit

 Tacit use  Aware use  Strategic use  Reflective use

 The task must be worthy of serious thought  The thinking & reasoning of pupils must be valued  Time must be given for thinking about their thinking & articulating this

 Children need to  understand the gap between a learning goal & their current development  close up this gap (Sadler, 98)  This learning must be done by the child (Black et al, 2004)

‘ Implicit in the nature of formative assessment is the development of metacognitive awareness which is required if pupils are to assess themselves and understand how to improve. The essence of target setting and self- assessment lies in the ability to know HOW one is learning’ (Jones, 2012)

 Establishing risk free environments  Sharing learning intentions  Describing success criteria  Sharing feedback  Sharing target setting  Reflecting on processes of learning to be ‘let in’ is a crucial aspect of developing metacognitive awareness

 NLS Framework 'discursive, characterised by high quality oral work' and 'interactive, encouraging, expecting and extending pupils' contributions' (DfEE, 1998, p. 8)  NNS Framework 'high-quality direct teaching is oral, interactive and lively... in which pupils are expected to play an active part by answering questions, contributing points to discussion, and explaining and demonstrating their methods to the class' (DfEE, 1999a, p. 11)

 ‘Traditional patterns of whole class interaction have not been dramatically transformed by the Strategies... In the whole class section of literacy and numeracy lessons, teachers spent the majority of their time either explaining or using highly structured question and answer sequences. Far from encouraging and extending pupil contributions to promote high levels of interaction and cognitive engagement, most of the questions asked were of a low cognitive level designed to funnel pupils’ response towards a required answer’ (Hardman, Smith, Wroz & Wall, 2004)

 Open questions- in only10% of the questioning exchanges  15% of teachers asked none  Probing- in only11% of the questioning exchanges  Uptake questions- in only 4% of the teaching exchanges  43% of teachers asked none

 Rarely were teachers’ questions used to assist pupils to more complete or elaborated ideas  Most pupils’ exchanges were very short  Pupil answers  lasted on average 5 seconds  were limited to three words or fewer for 70% of the time

 Initiation Teacher: What’s the name of the main I character?  Response R Pupil: Tom  Feedback F Teacher: That’s right

Most…  …is unproductive amongst peers- little exploratory talk (Blatchford & Kutnick, 2003)  …is unproductive in groups

‘Many children may not know how to talk and think together effectively [but] their teachers assume they do’ (Mercer, 2008) ‘Student behaviour in small groups largely mirrors the discourse modelled by, and the expectations communicated by, their teachers’ (Webb et al., 2006)

‘English 2000–05 a review of inspection evidence identified a number of issues that this survey confirms remain relevant, including… a lack of attention to speaking and listening’ (Moving English Forward, Ofsted, 2012) In some schools the quality of dialogue is high- but in many it is low level. Quality of dialogue is subservient to pace. (Lefstein & Snell, 2014)

How do we  scaffold learning effectively?  raise the quality of classroom dialogue?  improve teacher-pupil talk?  enable pupil-pupil talk?  facilitate pupils’ metacognition?  use dialogue to promote thinking and deeper learning?

‘The recitation script, then, continues to rule, and it is on the deeper layers of teaching and learning talk, and the assumptions by which they are steered, that we most... urgently - need to work’ (Alexander, 2008)