My Contributions to the Art of Teaching Pedagogy

INTRODUCTION:

Lee Shulman said that “If pedagogy is thought of as an art, then the job of teachers is

not to master pedagogical content knowledge, which includes how and what is taught and

understanding who it is being taught to, but rather to go on developing it.” I fully appreciate the

significance of Shulman’s thoughts: it’s not just about the knowledge and practice, but how a

teacher can use and contribute to that knowledge and practice. There are many moving parts

within a classroom, and in many ways each person can bring their own perspectives and

personal instincts to tried-and-tested pedagogical and content-driven concepts. In like fashion,

my teaching over the course of this year has seen many improvements based on (at first basic)

experimental pedagogical practices, that became progressively complex in the wake of clear

successes and (more importantly) frustrating failures. As the year continues, areas for my future

development become increasingly clear through both the study of the literature produced by

various expert educators, and the experiences I have gained while trying to implement my own

understanding of some basic pedagogical principles. These points are to be illuminated.

I propose to examine in depth three examples of pedagogical principles I have incorporated into

my everyday practice that have helped me deal with clear, indicated problems that previously

plagued my practice. In doing so, I hope to illuminate the ways these principles have improved

student learning in my class and so demonstrate the need for my constant growth as an

educator, in line with the thoughts expressed by Schulman. There are, I like to think, more areas

in which I have improved, but I believe these will be sufficient to demonstrate a clear linear

progression and improvement.

PEDAGOGICAL IMPROVEMENT 1: TIME MANAGEMENT/PLANNING

Coe, Aloisi, Higgins and Major (Coe, Aloisi, Higgins & Major, 2014, Page 3) place time

management as one of the key underpinning features of effective teaching. The management of

my class time was the first significant issue I began to address this year. Initially, my class

planning comprised a series of complex processes that would seek to balance an endless

number of semi-related activities. My classes would invariably run significantly overtime, and I

would miss huge swathes of content that I had planned to cover. Although my activities were

not necessarily bad, their usefulness was diluted to the point where students would get nothing

from my classes. I began to recognise my fault through a series of rather stern corrections from

my supervisor, as well as through my studying of various texts that dealt with teaching

pedagogy.

Barbara Gross Davis, for example, describes ways to rationally organizing content to ensure that

all students are challenged to not only learn the given material, but constructively apply the

information in a real setting (Davis, 1993, Page 12). I found her arguments concerning lesson

planning particularly helpful for my time management. Gross Davis specifies that effort,

techniques, time, and a big picture vision are required to create a quality lesson plan that can

produce a successful class (Davis, 1993, Page 100). She further states that a learning objective

should be worded in a constructive manner using adjectives to help student understanding, and

(importantly) to be realistically achievable (Davis, 1993, Page 100, 103). A good lesson plan

should also be constructed in three parts: ‘Introduction,’ ‘Development,’ and ‘Conclusion’ (Davis,

1993, Page 105). These lesson plans must be designed in a constructive and challenging format

on behalf of the student.

I find the work of Gross Davis particularly relevant to my practice as my lesson planning – which I

have stated, and also according to the reflections of my supervisors – lacks time management

and systematic progression (TLF, PDP, Week 11). I have interpreted and applied the principles

described by Gross Davis so that the ‘Introduction’ part of my lesson plans have become

routines for the students to get them on task the instant the class is set to begin – and this also

gives me time for getting activities set up or writing information on the board (TLF, PDP, Week

15). My routines to start the class frequently incorporate an opening prayer, activities for

activating prior knowledge, starter activities for the new material given in the day’s class, and an

introduction of the learning objective for the class (these routines are variously integrated to

minimize time and activity transition) (TLF, PDP, Week 16). From there my lesson planning

thought typically moves into the ‘Development’ section, and I have found that this is the

moment in which to include activities that incorporate Tomlinson’s theories of differentiation

(to be discussed further below). At times, I include technology for review videos and discussion

in this section, but only according to time and applicability to the learning objective (TLF, Self

Evaluation, Week 16). Finally, I have interpreted the ‘Conclusion’ as a time for reviewing the

students’ learning, to see if they each individually met the day’s learning objective, and I strive

to apply Lampranou and Athanasou’s theories (discussed further below). Time is also given for

students to gather their homework assignments. My lesson plans have evolved over the course

of the school year and have grown in a very constructive manner to be sure each student learns

and is challenged according to their specific capabilities, and stemming from principles such as

Gross Davis’.

Time management is essential in the minutest transitions in the lesson plan, and I have realized

that it is effective to include props such as electronic timers, which have the additional benefit

of keeping students accountable and encouraging them to monitor their own progress

according to class expectations (Lemov, 2015, Page 45). A lack of proper time management in

planning and execution limits students in what they can learn (Lemov, 2015, Page 220).

Time management and not over planning my classes have contributed to my students learning

in a variety of ways. I have learned that students need quality time and space to produce quality

work and to have effective learning. Students have even made comments that they felt rushed

to get work done and in my opinion this had a negative effect on their learning. By improving

the structure of the class and by simplifying my expectations I have allowed students to

understand the time needed to do their work well, and this has demonstrated an

extraordinary positive effect on student learning.

PEDAGOGICAL IMPROVEMENT 2: BEHAVIOUR-MANAGEMENT

The next pedagogical principle that has contributed to my practice this school year is my

behavior-management tactics. Before this year, my behavior management really did not have

much technique or routine. I relied on reasoning with the student, relating to them through my

personality, and handing out harsh penalties. These methods did not work, and in fact they

caused a lack of respect among the students to me as their teacher and they were not effective

enough to keep students focused to learn (Lemov, 2015, Page 221). This was a problem, not

only for my relationships with students, but for the school administrators who were having to

deal with a large amount of paper sanctions and complaints from students and parents. I

received a number of corrections, suggestions, and counselings in order to change this practice,

and I believe that the outcome has been quite satisfactory.

Amazingly, after improving my time management, I realized that it was possible to implement

techniques and class routines that sought to engage students with the class, and so in some

sense to distract them from their misbehavior (Lemov, 2015, Page 395). I try not to call out a

student in front of the class, but instead provide the class with a basic activity and then discuss

a problem one on one in the moment with the offending student while other students are

working. I realized that this form of intervention occurred less and less anyway as my planning

became more streamlined. Cowley (Cowley, 2010, Page 15) discusses the theory behind this,

and speculates that providing students with high expectations, an environment of academic

rigor, and a focus on positivity all significantly decrease the chances that students will

misbehave.

Routines that I have added to my practice are having a reward point system where a student

can gain points for good behavior, participation, and strong work. This system is known to my

current students as ‘Tiger Points.’ I also provide myself with occasions throughout the class for

resetting my behavior and focus expectations in a positive way. Simply calling the class to

attention and waiting for them to respond is a way to hit the reset button at moments when I

know it is likely that the lesson plan and student's behavior will have gone slightly awry (such as

after group activities and class discussions) (Lemov, 2015, Page 393). Clearly these opportunities

would not present themselves without the initial class planning.

Tomlinson expands the concept of behavioural management through content by thoroughly

exploring the pedagogical principle of differentiation. She argues that differentiation is a core

component for effective learning on behalf of the student, and that there is a purpose and

methodology that should contribute to how you integrate differentiated activities into your

lesson planning (Tomlinson, 1999, Page 11). She summarizes the mind-frame with which

teachers should approach student learning as simply helping struggling learners by accelerating

their understanding whilst ensuring “genuine understanding and meaningful application of

skills” (Tomlinson, 1999, Page 13). It was clear to me that this tailored learning would be the key

to controlling student misbehaviour.

Each student has various needs and academic abilities, so Tomlinson demonstrates that a lesson

plan must be oriented in differentiated group assignments and various tasks that will challenge

each individual student (Tomlinson, 1999, Pages 9-10). Tomlinson is not to be misunderstood

when she talks about each student having specific needs and she emphasizes the importance of

being flexible towards these needs to provide the greatest opportunity for each student to learn

(Tomlinson, 1999, Page 31).

My understanding of how best to incorporate Tomlinson’s theories of differentiation has been a

core concern for my behavioural management routines. I use differentiation in three areas

during the ‘Development’ stage of my lessons: group assignments; challenging students

according to their own needs and capabilities; and giving tasks to students that vary according

to each student, but that still meet the day's learning objective. I like to think I have experienced

what Lee Shulman talks about: I have taken the pedagogical principle of differentiation and have

incorporated it into my lesson planning each day in a way that makes it

relevant for my own practice but grows increasingly as I learn and experiment with the

principle. Furthermore, as students are led to engage more specifically and individually with the

content, they exhibit significantly less behavioural problems.

Only in the last few weeks have I finally realized the benefits of compelling students to set their

standards higher regarding each lesson’s given learning objective, and how these higher

standards can truly lead to extraordinary student accomplishments (TLF, PDP, Week 17). My

teaching practice has evolved in designing and executing my lesson plans that cater to each

specific student according to their own needs (TLF, PDP, Week 19). Techniques to achieve this

are accomplished through differentiation of tasks, student seating arrangements, team

assignments, constructive learning objectives, and challenging the students. My practice has

evolved from lesson plans that just relied on one topic or focus, to really designing each aspect

of the class and mapping out the direction it goes catering to each student’s various needs, and

this has helped every aspect of my teaching experience.

Better planning incorporating differentiated activities has led to better behavioral management,

and has contributed to my students learning and understanding what my expectations are for

their focus inside the classroom. This has helped student learning in their not losing focus in

their work, understanding instructions clearly, and having higher personal standards in their

own self-control (TLF, Self-Evaluation, Week 18). Differentiation has furthered student learning

in the classroom by improving engagement in the class and having the space, focus, and

responsibility needed to help students work towards meeting each day’s learning objective. A

focus that will improve my practice from here is researching a way to de emphasize Tiger Points,

and emphasize personal effort so that students can focus more on their learning as opposed to

simply working for a reward. Still further experimentation is required here in order to make sure

students find classes relevant to their interests and abilities.

PEDAGOGICAL IMPROVEMENT 3: LEARNING OBJECTIVES

The final pedagogical concept that has advanced my practice and is still evolving in my

teaching is my setting daily learning objectives. I have improved my learning objectives by

incorporating aspects of Bloom's Taxonomy and various constructive adjectives to accurately

describe what I want students to achieve each class (Lemov, 2015, Page 132). By being explicit

and specific with the learning objective, it has given me more of a perspective of what I want

each student to have learned by the end of each class (Lemov, 2015, Page 132). This idea of a

daily learning objective has evolved gradually along with my increasing recognition of its

importance. At the start of the year if I stipulated a learning objective I certainly did not share it

with the students, and this made the learning process more confusing for them and less linear.

Students became increasingly disengaged with the content as they could not make a rational

attachment for each component, or see their inter-relativity. When I was informally observing

another teacher, however, I was astonished by the way he used the learning objective as a

reflective tool for students to gauge what they knew already and to look for what they learnt at

the end of the class. When a teacher uses a learning objective in this way, students are made

partners in their own education, and it opens the teaching process to them so that they may

take more responsibility in their own learning. It is something very basic, but it has had an

enormous impact on the quality of education that I am able to provide, as well as the deep

learning that students take away from each class (Lemov, 2015, Page 138). Obviously this basic

yet fundamental pedagogical tactic would not have been possible without the initial planning,

and would have been totally undermined by a lack of behavioral management.

Lampranou and Athanasou, who have outlined the principles regarding the evaluation of

students, can be used to compliment this pedagogical objective of incorporating explicit

learning objectives. Lamparanou and Athanasou argue that at the end of any program, week, or

individual lesson, a teacher must be sure that the student is learning, and they therefore discuss

the ways to assess this learning through effective evaluation (Lamprianou & Athanasou, 2009,

Pages 10-11). Validation and assurance of competence is key, according to Lampranou and

Athanasou, in allowing a student the reflective time and space to draw on prior knowledge

and to have the tools to further that knowledge (Lamprianou & Athanasou, 2009, Pages 7-9). In

the end, these authors assemble a number of impressive and insightful methods for

constructively building on student knowledge, while establishing the progress students have

made by the end (Lamprianou & Athanasou, 2009, Pages 7-9).

I have interpreted the arguments of Lampranou and Athanasou, and incorporated them into my

explicit learning objective in two ways: the first is that of a ‘plenary,’ and the second is the basic

evaluation tactic of peer-to-peer or student-to-teacher rapid-response evaluation (Lamprianou

& Athanasou, 2009, Pages 32-33). The plenary is an opportunity (two or three minutes only) for

a student to reflect and demonstrate what they learned in the lesson relative to the day’s

learning objective. This takes the form of class discussions, peer-to-peer discussions, exit tickets

with two to three concrete questions, and a ‘twitter board.’ The twitter board simply

demonstrates the most relevant student reflection, recorded each class and evaluated and

reviewed each week. This helps other students track the direction of the program in terms of

progressive learning objectives and also recognizes students that model the correct forms of

engagement, so incentivizes involvement. Overall, the plenary (whenever time allows it) has

evolved to be a core component in evaluating the learning status of each student.

The development of my student learning objectives, complimented by the theories and tactics

of Lamprianou & Athanasou, have contributed to student learning in that the students have a

tangible goal each day, and a way to see if they reached it. They can therefore have a reflective

approach as to if they used their time effectively during the class in obtaining the learning

objective. This internalizes the motivation to learn and improve. My objective now is to focus

more on student-centered learning and considering how each student will be able to reach the

objective by employing aspects of all the academics I have considered here: Gross Davis will

inform how the lessons are constructed; Tomlinson will inform the ways the classes are made

relevant to the students; and Lampranou and Athanasou will provide the framework for

establishing what is working and what needs to be improved.

CONCLUSION:

My pedagogy has improved dramatically throughout this school year, and I can track

that development in a linear, logical way starting with better planning leading to better

behavioral management, and culminating in an increased ability to implement and evaluate

learning objectives. The different strategies I have used throughout this school year have

produced better results in my students through directing them to truly learn the concepts at

hand in a constructive and evaluative format. I can see the evidence of my improvement

through the new routines of behavioral management, differentiation, learning objectives, lesson

planning, and my focus on student-centered learning in each class. Students have shown clear

growth in my classes recently, and the TLF demonstrates this. I am confident that I can continue

to grow in my pedagogical practice, contributing my experience to the vast well of tried and

tested approaches, and form myself into the teacher I want to be.

Bibliography

Coe, Aloisi, Higgins & Major, RC, CA, SH, & LEM, 2014. Review of the underpinning research.

What makes great teaching? , [Online]. 3. Available at:

http://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/What-Makes-Great

Teaching-REPORT.pdf [Accessed 5 May 2017].

Cowley, SC, 2010. Getting The Buggers To Behave. 4th ed. London, United Kingdom: Continuum

International Publishing Group.

Davis, BGD, 1993. Tools for Teaching. 1st ed. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass Inc..

Dubrow & Wilkinson, HD & HW, 1984. The Art and Craft of Teaching. 1st ed. Cambridge,

Massachusetts: President and Fellows of Harvard College.

Lamprianou & Athanasou, IL & JAA, 2009. A Teacher's Guide to Educational Assessment. 2nd ed.

Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Lemov, DL, 2015. Teach Like A Champion 2.0. 1st ed. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Tomlinson, CAT, 1999. The Differentiated Classroom. 1st ed. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.