Tuesday, 30 September 2014

Trying to get traction with my change project on HOTS

I have found that in my action research for this project, that often times I am coming back to what feels like square one with my project, rather than majestically changing the educational experience of a whole host of students. I feel as though trying to get traction for the ideas and changes I am bringing is difficult. One of the things that stuck with me from the seminar days with Emerging Leaders was that as soon as you are not leading a change, you can have no control over it.

I feel that whilst I can effectively control what happens in my classroom, I am getting stuck trying to develop this change for other teachers. I feel that these teachers are weighed down by the expectations placed on them, and that adding more to their plates, no matter how much they think it is a good idea, is not possible.

Juxtaposed against this feeling of failure is the sense that I am changing and developing both as an educator and a leader. I feel that in my classroom, everything, from the language I use with my students (including describing the types of knowledge), the time I give students to attempt challenging tasks that require thinking, and my expectations that they do think (often), is developing through my project.

My personal development is gratifying, and I see the results in my students and how they respond to the learning environment in a positive way, as a success. Where I struggle is to know how to adequately translate my wins into wins for the other Year 11 science teachers, as per my goals with my project.

There is not a lot of time left!

Friday, 26 September 2014

Do you have the HOTS for science? Part 2

So what are higher order thinking skills?
Defining higher order thinking skills in the context of science education was a relatively tricky. Whilst much of the literature refers to higher order skills, it is not always clearly defined. We know from Bloom's taxonomy that more complex thinking skills include: evaluation, synthesis and creation or in the revised taxonomy: creating, evaluating, analysing. Yet what do these mean necessarily, in the science classroom? What do they look like? If we are to assess them, what is the standard against which we are assessing?

Key Higher Order Thinking Skills
With these questions in mind, I went through the relevant curricula for my state, for the VCE (Victoria Certificate of Education) and pulled out the key skills they focused on, for the areas of physics, chemistry, biology and psychology.

These are the terms I collected (I have highlighted key terms):

analyse and interpret data, and draw conclusions consistent with the research question
evaluate the validity and reliability of research investigations including potential confounding variables and sources of error and bias
apply understandings to both familiar and new contexts
evaluate the validity and reliability of psychology-related information and opinions presented in the public domain

evaluate experimental procedures and reliability of data
collect, process and record information systematically; analyse and synthesise data; draw conclusions consistent with the question under investigation and the evidence obtained
apply understandings to familiar and new contexts; make connections between concepts; solve problems
analyse and evaluate the reliability of information and opinions presented in the public domain

collecting, processing, recording, analysing, synthesising and evaluating qualitative and quantitative data
draw conclusions consistent with the question under investigation and the information collected, identifying errors and evaluating investigative procedures and reliability and accuracy of data
select first-hand and second-hand data and evidence to demonstrate how physics concepts, theories and models have developed and been modified over time

draw conclusions consistent with the question under investigation and the information collected; evaluate procedures and reliability of data
identify and address possible sources of uncertainty
make connections between concepts; process information; apply understandings to familiar and new contexts

use first and second-hand data and evidence to demonstrate how chemical concepts and theories have developed and been modified over time

An emerging picture
The common theme that emerges from these curricula is that students need to be taught the higher order thinking skills of analysing and interpreting scientific information to draw logical, valid conclusions; synthesising and processing data in a sensical way; and applying understanding to both familiar and new contexts.

What has become apparent to me over the course of this change project, is that it is not necessarily clear to teachers how they are to set about teaching and assessing such skills in their students. We do not have a coherent, regular process to incorporate the formal teaching of these skills to students. Part of this, in my opinion, stems from teachers not having these skills clearly defined. That is now a major focus of this project, to enable teaching and learning. The conversations with my peers about these skills have been useful professional development. Just by reflecting on how we teach and assess higher order thinking, we are starting to make our actions align with our intentions.

That we do not have a formal plan for teaching these skills reminds me of this blog post by Grant Wiggins, author of Understanding by Design (UbD). He refers to inferencing, a higher order skill, of drawing reasoned conclusions from evidence, with a quote that suggests that it cannot be taught, when of course it can. This is a particular skill that needs to be taught in the science classroom. The other skills mentioned above also need to be taught.

I have attached a table below - that begins to define what these higher order skills are, and how they can be taught and assessed. Let me know what you think!

Teaching activities
Analysing  and interpreting information
Students being exposed to quantitative data and being asked to draw conclusions

Students being exposed to qualitative data and being asked to draw conclusions

Students drawing valid, logical, reasoned conclusions
Students regular handling data; from practice questions and from experiments

Students being asked to observe patterns or trends in quantitative data

Students practicing drawing rational conclusions

Students being provided with explicit examples of illogical and irrational conclusions and having these explained
Test questions that provide scenarios for students to interpret

Students being given experimental results where errors have been made during the experiment and they have to interpret the effect on the outcome

Students being asked about a range of possible conclusions drawn about an experiment and needing to describe them as valid/invalid and provide a rational explanation

Thursday, 4 September 2014

Do you have the HOTS for science? Part 1

Do your students have the higher order thinking skills required for success in science?

What are such skills?

Do you teach these skills regularly and actively?

Do you assess these skills regularly and validly?

I am currently investigating all of these questions in an ongoing project at my school. I am trying to change what happens in terms of the teaching and learning at senior school science to allow for development of higher order thinking skills in students. I believe that they will experience more success in this way as they are able to tackle more advanced problems.

What I have found through surveying staff attitudes at my school is that teachers do not feel as though higher-order thinking skills is something that is appropriately and regularly taught at our school. In particular, they feel as though their assessments lack demanding, unfamiliar contexts; open-ended or complex tasks and instead seem to focus on basic testing of surface level understanding or knowledge. They also felt that students lacked sufficient higher-order thinking skills for success in science, but that this was something they were grappling with, or trying to achieve.

Survey questions regarding HOTs 
Does the schools approach to assessment encourage students to apply knowledge in demanding, unfamiliar situations?Does the school’s approach to assessment give students sound opportunities to complete complex, open ended, multifaceted tasks?Does the school’s approach to assessment allow students to be rewarded for demonstrating higher order thinking skills?In terms of assessing higher order thinking in science, describe how you think the school does this:In terms of assessing higher order thinking in science, describe how you think the school could do this better:Provide an example of how you recently assessed higher order thinking skills in science:Do you feel your students have sufficient higher order thinking skills?Do you feel that your explicitly teach students how to develop these thinking skills?

My ambition is to change how:

We define higher order thinking skills
We assess higher order thinking skills
We teach higher order thinking skills

In doing this, I feel that more students will find success in their science education. Lower level ability students will be able to tackle more difficult problem solving, and higher ability students will be able to be challenged by rigorous and unfamiliar content. I want my science teachers to feel that they know how to adequately plan for and teach these skills too.


I was lucky enough to take some students from my school to our sister school to attend a regional constitutional convention today. The students were focused on examining the question 

"Are the disadvantaged being left behind by Australia's social and economic policies?".

It was really powerful to have students invoked in learning outside of their normal environments. Students who are not always active and contributing in class were heavily involved in discussions around politics, economics and social justice. They were presented to by two guest speakers, Dr Jonathan Welch and James Merlino (our local MP) who had differing interpretations of the topic.

What really struck me was how much the students already knew about aspects of this issue, and how they were willing to put their ideas forward and make suggestions as to policy decisions. It was also clear that not many of the students had a clear understanding of what disadvantage was, and this raised valid discussions itself. One of my students said to me after that the day had really opened his eyes to how much goes on in Australia - I was genuinely surprised by this, but happy that it had done so.

Taking the students out of their normal environment was really powerful. Obviously we need to have regular learning environments for students to develop most successfully, but clearly, there is also an important need to occasionally challenge the status quo and do something different. Pushing the students into disequilibrium with a completely novel experience allows the students to experience a different perspective, particularly in terms of how they view themselves.