1-3-5 Reads on effective processes

 

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to the first in what I hope will become a series of blogs.

The blog series is called 1-3-5 Reads because each individual blog provides a (roughly) 1 minute, 3 minute and 5+ minute version of the content. So if you are really pushed for time you may only read the 1 minute version where the content is summarised in bullet points. A bit more time? Perhaps the 3 minute version will be your option which explains the summarised bullet points in more depth. Or perhaps you may settle in for the full 5+ minute version which will contain more exemplification.

This first two blogs are based on the talk I gave at the 2022 ResearchEd National Conference titled 'Creating 'Feedback Classooms': systems and CPD to put feedback at the heart of every classroom'. I hope you find them useful!

The first blog discusses the underlying principles of implementing effective processes in schools. The second blog, will then detail how to effectively implement processes to create 'Feedback Classrooms'.

Jon Gilbert @JGProfDEv

1 minute read on effective processes

• The effective implementation of a process in schools is supported through precision and rigour

• Precision and rigour are created through communicating with clarity and creating consistency

• Communicating something with clarity allows for its consistent application. This in turn then contributes to its clarity.

• Once we have communicated a process with clarity and provided opportunities for it to be enacted consistently, we are able to hunt for its effective implementation

• Hunting (rather than fishing) is when we have a very clear conception of success/likely error in a given process which allows us to very intentionally monitor the extent to which success is achieved.

• Having that very clear conception then makes it easier to respond in the right way if needed if what is being hunted for is not quite what we see. Similarly, it enables us to see where our process may need amending and adjusting in order to achieve the desired outcome 

• For example, implementing the process of embedding effective questioning techniques in classrooms requires that the desired techniques are communicated with clarity and that opportunities are provided for staff to use these consistently. By having a very clear conception of what successful questioning looks like, it is easier to hunt for this and respond with the right interventions if it is not seen and/or amend the process if needs be. 

3 minute read on effective processes

The focus of my talk at the 2022 ResearchED National Conference was on creating 'Feedback Classrooms'. The creation of this kind of classroom, either in an individual classroom or on a whole-school level, is a process. As such, I began my talk by reflecting on the underlying principles of the effective implementation of any process in a school. This is outlined in the diagram below.

 

Effective implementation in a school is achieved through two things - precision and rigour. These, in turn, are achieved through a) communicating clarity and b) creating consistency. If we can communicate the goals, features and steps needed for a particular process with real clarity and provide means by which colleagues are able to consistently enact these, then we are much more likely to effectively implement that process with precision and with rigour.

There are many ways that we can communicate our thinking around a particular process with clarity. Some of these are highlighted in the diagram above. In particular, we can create real clarity about what this process should look like through the creation of both written and visual 'models of excellence' i.e. written and visual resources which explain what this process would look like were it to be done excellently.

A 'model of excellence' should provide the rationale for a process and also codify its successful implementation in granular detail. In other words, the ‘model of excellence’ defines success by providing a step-by-step methodology for completing a particular process. For example, if we take the process of embedding effective questioning techniques, then we may write a 'model of excellence' which details what effective questioning looks like, how it is done and so on using some examples. The 'model of excellence' can also be shown in a video. These could be created 'in-house' or, especially for classroom-based processes, there are a number of resources out there which do the job for us such as Steplab.

Whilst it is certainly the case that communicating something with clarity allows for consistency, it is not a given. For this, we must build in opportunities and methods to generate that consistency. For example, we take the 'models of excellence' we have created and we practise these and we coach colleagues on these. When we are doing practice and coaching, we are explicit about the 'how', not just the 'what' of the process. In other words, we practise and coach on the specific details of how the process is done, not just what the process is.

Incidentally, working hard to communicate something with clarity in the first instance, and then using that to support consistent implementation, has the added bonus of reciprocal sustainability. Communicating with clarity supports consistent application, which in turn works to reinforce the clarity and so on. Over time, what was once a new process requiring significant effort to ensure staff know what success looks like and have opportunities to practise this, just becomes part of the culture of a school – the way we do things around here

Once we have implemented something with precision and rigour through communicating with clarity and creating consistency, we are able to hunt rather than fish. Hunting not fishing is a classroom strategy (espoused by Doug Lemov) whereby the teacher, through monitoring student work, is able to target particular students with their directed questioning in order to achieve a specific purpose. As a result of their monitoring, they have seen which students to call upon (so hunting these out) rather than throwing a question at students in a class without knowledge of what their response might be and waiting to see what comes back (so fishing for answers). Incidentally, the strategy of hunting not fishing as described here, plays a crucial role in a 'Feedback Classroom'. However, I believe that it has wider implications beyond the classroom. 

The principles behind hunting not fishing as a classroom strategy, are those of precision and rigour - I have a more precise idea of what is going on in my classroom and what I am looking for, and therefore my questioning can be more rigorous. If we take this one step further, the clearer I am about what I want to see, the more rigorous my monitoring is and therefore the more effective I can be in addressing the success or error in what I am seeing. I am not leaving learning in my classroom to chance. Instead I am really clear about what I want to see and what to do if I do or don't see it.

In a similar way, we can apply this idea behind hunting not fishing in a classroom to all aspects of the day-to-day running of a school. If we have communicated with clarity what a particular process should look like, and we have provided opportunities for creating consistency in its implementation, we don't leave its success to chance. We are hunting for a particular 'model of excellence'. As such, a broader definition of hunting may suggest that when we have a very clear conception of success/likely error in a given process, we are able to very intentionally monitor the extent to which success is achieved. In other words, the success of that process is not left to chance or surprise because we are really clear what it should look like, and we go hunting for that. Having that clear conception then makes it easier to respond in the right way if needed if what is being hunted for is not quite what we see. Similarly, that clear conception of success allows us to adapt and amend our process, if needs be, in order to achieve our desired outcome.

5 minute read on creating effective processes

The focus of my talk at the 2022 ResearchED National Conference was on creating 'Feedback Classrooms'. The creation of this kind of classroom, either in an individual classroom or on a whole-school level, is a process. As such, I began my talk by reflecting on the underlying principles of the effective implementation of any process in a school. This is outlined in the diagram below.

 

 

 

Effective implementation in a school is achieved through two things - precision and rigour. These, in turn, are achieved through a) communicating clarity and b) creating consistency. If we can communicate the goals, features and steps needed for a particular process with real clarity and provide means by which colleagues are able to consistently enact these, then we are much more likely to effectively implement that process with precision and with rigour.

There are many ways that we can communicate our thinking around a particular process with clarity. Some of these are highlighted in the diagram above. For example, we should define a clear vision for a particular process - what it is for, how it will be done, why it is being done and so on. Moreover, we can create real clarity about what this process should look like through the creation of both written and visual 'models of excellence’ i.e. written and visual resources which explain what this process would look like were it to be done excellently.

So if we wanted to create a process for embedding effective questioning techniques in classrooms, we would first establish a clear vision. What are we trying to achieve through our questioning? What does the research show are the best ways to ask questions? Is this process trying to improve something that existed previously, or is this a new process because previously there wasn't one? This vision may be established in different ways. It may be set by a teaching and learning group within the school or SLT and so on.

Once that vision is clear we then need to create a 'model of excellence' for that process. This should provide the rationale for the process and also codify its successful implementation in granular detail. In other words, the ‘model of excellence’ defines success by providing a step-by-step methodology for completing a particular process.  So, again, if we take the process of embedding effective questioning techniques, then we may write a 'model of excellence' which details what effective questioning looks like, how it is done and so on using some examples. The 'model of excellence' can also be shown in a video. These could be created 'in-house' or, especially for classroom-based processes, there are a number of resources out there which do the job for us such as Steplab. At The Two Counties Trust, we use a written document called Professional Practice Sheets to codify our 'models of excellence' (which has the rationale for the process, the methodology to carry it out and possible misconceptions in its application), We then record videos which are used to demonstrate what that process looks like.

Whilst it is certainly the case that communicating something with clarity allows for consistency, it is not a given. For this, we must build in opportunities and methods to generate that consistency. For example, we take the 'models of excellence' we have created and we practise these and we coach colleagues on these. When we are doing practice and coaching, we are explicit about the 'how', not just the 'what' of the process. In other words, we practise and coach on the specific details of how the process is done, not just what the process is. If we take the previous example of embedding effective questioning techniques, we would take our codified 'model of excellence' and rehearse this in deliberate practice sessions with other staff and/or through individual coaching sessions. At the Two Counties, our Professional Practice Sheets are designed to support this because of their structure. They are laid out with sections titled See It, Name It, Do It. So there is a link embedded in the See It section to a video (or if in a practice or coaching session this may be the time the process is modelled), then in the Name It section the methodology is detail in granular steps. Finally there is a Do It section which provides scenarios to practise.

Incidentally, working hard to communicate something with clarity in the first instance, and then using that to support consistent implementation, has the added bonus of reciprocal sustainability. Communicating with clarity supports consistent application, which in turn works to reinforce the clarity and so on. Over time, what was once a new process requiring significant effort to ensure staff know what success looks like and have opportunities to practise this, just becomes part of the culture of a school – the way we do things around here.

Once we have implemented something with precision and rigour through communicating with clarity and creating consistency, we are able to hunt rather than fish. Hunting not fishing is a classroom strategy (espoused by Doug Lemov) whereby the teacher, through monitoring student work, is able to target particular students with their directed questioning in order to achieve a specific purpose. As a result of their monitoring, they have seen which students to call upon (so hunting these out) rather than throwing a question at students in a class without knowledge of what their response might be and waiting to see what comes back (so fishing for answers). Incidentally, the strategy of hunting not fishing as described here, plays a crucial role in a 'Feedback Classroom'. However, I believe that it has wider implications beyond the classroom. 

The principles behind hunting not fishing as a classroom strategy, are those of precision and rigour - I have a more precise idea of what is going on in my classroom and what I am looking for, and therefore my questioning can be more rigorous. If we take this one step further, the clearer I am about what I want to see, the more rigorous my monitoring is and therefore the more effective I can be in addressing the success or error in what I am seeing. I am not leaving learning in my classroom to chance. Instead, I am really clear about what I want to see and what to do if I do or don't see it.

In a similar way, we can apply this idea behind hunting not fishing in a classroom to all aspects of the day-to-day running of a school. If we have communicated with clarity what a particular process should look like, and we have provided opportunities for creating consistency in its implementation, we don't leave its success to chance. We are hunting for a particular 'model of excellence'. As such, a broader definition of hunting may suggest that when we have a very clear conception of success/likely error in a given process, we are able to very intentionally monitor the extent to which success is achieved. In other words, the success of that process is not left to chance or surprise because we are really clear what it should look like, and we go hunting for that. Having that clear conception then makes it easier to respond in the right way if needed if what is being hunted for is not quite what we see. Similarly, that clear conception of success allows us to adapt and amend our process, if needs be, in order to achieve our desired outcome.

As mentioned, hunting not fishing in a classroom may involve monitoring student work and directing questions at a particular student for a particular purpose (maybe so that they can share their success or their error).  Equally, a specific task may be designed to hunt for the success or error of something very specific such as the use of particular tier 3 vocabulary (I will go into more detail about this kind of hunting not fishing in my next blog specifically on ‘Feedback Classrooms’). However, the principle of hunting can apply in all aspects of the day-to-day running of a school. 

When on duty during lunchtime, a member of staff hunts for very specific conduct (or otherwise). Not leaving the conduct of students to chance, what is expected is communicated with clarity to both students and staff. This may be done with staff by modelling this, walking through it in a staff CPD session. For students, this clarity may be communicated in an assembly, using pictures to show students how to conduct themselves in different areas at lunch. Again, not leaving the conduct to chance, opportunities to support consistent desired conduct are made for staff and students. For example, staff may have some deliberate practice on how to encourage desired conduct at lunch and how to challenge students that may need reminding how to conduct themselves. Similarly for students, some practice may be done during student induction and perhaps some feedback given at the end of the first few lunch times of the year. Because clarity and consistency are created, it means that the member of staff on duty is hunting for desired conduct and is able to effectively intervene if what is being hunted for is not quite what is being seen. Similarly, that member of staff can also refer back to the clear 'model of excellence' if they need to check conduct is appropriate. Or indeed a coach can use the 'model of excellence' to support that member of staff to address student conduct at lunch time.