Mathematical Reasoning

Research by Nunes et al (2009) identified mathematical reasoning as the most important factor in a pupil's success in mathematics. Yet Ofsted's findings (Jones, 2015) show it is the least well-developed of the three national curriculum aims. Explore the reasons for this and how it could be addressed.

The 3 main aims of the national curriculum are: reasoning, fluency and application- this is the new mastery strategy which was implemented in 2012. It was influenced by high performing countries in east and southeast Asia such as: China, Singapore, Japan and North Korea (NCETM, 2014). The mastery approach places an emphasis on the depth of understanding as opposed to a breadth of knowledge (Morgan, 2015), this will give pupils the opportunity to fully understand a concept and begin reasoning mathematically before moving on. Furthermore, research suggests that this approach is having a positive effect on pupils using mastery- for example, data from the research program in 2012 (by the Programme for International Student Assessment [PISA]) suggests that by age 15 students from the high performing countries are on average up to three years ahead in maths compared to 15-year olds in England (2014, p4).

In this paper, I aim to explore one of the three key aims- reasoning. The national curriculum defines reasoning as: 'following a line of enquiry, conjecturing relationships and generalisations and developing an argument, justification or proof using mathematical language' (National Curriculum, 2013, p88). Nunes et al have advocated for reasoning being the most important factor for a pupil’s success in mathematics (p3). It is also regarded by academics as the aspect in mathematics which is at the 'core of the subject' (Haylock, 2014, p37-38). This is further highlighted by NRICH (2014), who suggest it is reasoning that helps children to use their mathematical skills, inviting them to gain a deeper conceptual understanding- making connections and draw inferences (Witt, 2014, p3). In short, reasoning is the 'glue' that helps to make mathematics make sense (NRICH, 2014).

However, teachers often struggle with teaching reasoning and how to use it to prove mathematical ideas and vice versa with students struggling to learn it (TESS India, no date, p3). This coincides with Ofsted's findings, that reasoning is the least 'well developed' of the three-national curriculum aims (Jones, 2015). It could be suggested that mathematical reasoning may be an element that cannot be taught with rules, however, it can be fostered, prompted and stimulated within pupils through various strategies. This, however, would be down to a teachers practice within the classroom. Therefore, within this paper, I would like to investigate the factors which may cause a lack of mathematical reasoning- and suggest how they may be overcome.

One factor (which is highlighted frequently by Ofsted and academics), is teaching children rules to tackle calculations without letting pupils explore or discuss- to play an active process in learning.

Atkinson (1992, p12) highlights that mathematical reasoning is 'based on understanding', therefore constantly verbalising the information, is suggested to give children a basic understanding- also known as an instrumental understanding. An instrumental understanding is when an individual learns the rules and applies them to particular circumstances (Fisher, 2005, p171). However, the issue with this is that rules are easily forgotten- thus it is seen as a shallow level of understanding which can place pressure on a learners memory. This is exampled by Cockcroft (1982), who investigated the mathematical competencies of  a group of adults. Finding that, adults (who left school with what was considered to be respectable test scores) 'appeared to have only one method of tackling a given problem' (p8). It can be inferred, from this research, that the subjects had an instrumental understanding of mathematics- as the adults were trying to replicate the 'proper method' shown to them to achieve the correct answer. However, had the adults gained a relational understanding (this is where the individual knows the reason behind the rules, therefore, they can think through and reconstruct the rules for themselves), they may have continued to try other methods- as it was reported subjects 'lacked the ability and confidence to attempt a different approach' (p8).

Therefore, it is important that we provide children with various opportunities to develop their reasoning skills- this could be done by planning an enquiry. As highlighted by Atkinson (1992, p13) 'maths with reason is rooted in action- learning through doing'. Children would need to decide how they would first tackle the problem and would then have to draw upon a range of mathematical skills to work at the enquiry (Cotton, 2013, p29). Academics and Ofsted (2012) frequently stress the importance of children playing an active rather than passive role in the classroom. I feel that enquiries- such as the ones supplied on NRICH would achieve this. A Strategy, which I would like to try in school, is placing an enquiry on a working wall, on it, children can place their work up. I believe this would help children to develop their reasoning skills as well as their problem solving as it allows pupils to view model examples of work. They can then refer to them when improving their own work, helping them to become succinct. The class is working as a problem solving team. This notion is further supported by the National Numeracy Strategy, a framework developed to raise standards in schools, advocating high quality learning is a 'two-way process 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' (found in Myhill and Hopper, 2005, p50).

The next factor has been suggested by an article from the National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics (2013). They highlighted that too often teachers give children a statement and we do not give them a chance to develop their mathematical reasoning to prove it. 'Proof is a peculiarly mathematical way of reasoning' (Haylock, 2014, p43). NRICH (2015) identify that children progress in their reasoning when they go through the five stages- this starts at describing and ends at proving.

A strategy that is commonly suggested (Turner and McCullouch, 2005, Chapter 3 p9) is to allow children to choose their own resources to figure out the problem- 'manipulatives can be powerful tools to support sense making, mathematical thinking and reasoning' (NRICH, 2014). Some children may prefer to see the problem visualized others may prefer to experiment with the problem using written methods- as long as the learners are trying to make sense of the mathematical concepts. As Delaney (2001, cited in Thompson, 2010, p73) states 'there is no mathematics actually in a resource' but rather 'the mathematics is brought to the resource by those who interact with it or is developed by them as they use it to support or challenge thinking'. Children need to represent their ideas and findings, therefore using manipulatives or written down formulas relating to the problem is effective to guide the children through the process and prove their understanding (Herringer, 2013). Although, according to the research by Schoenfeld (1987), even though children may be assisted in their learning of concepts by the use of manipulative apparatus, they are often unable to apply those same concepts to problem solving situations. Therefore, it is important that teachers consistently model to use of resources to children.

My final factor, is the use of questioning. As Stripp (2015) highlights, when Chinese teachers ask for answers, they always ask follow up questions such as how? and why? Requiring children to use both inductive reasoning- making conjectures and solving the problem through convincing- and deductive reasoning- justifying and proving their conjecture (Haylock, 2014, p42-43). This can be done with both peers and teachers, challenging pupils to comprehend the maths taking place, encouraging them to discuss their conjectures and underlying thoughts, helping pupils to clarify their ideas and make mathematical connections so that they can articulate their reasoning (Ge Feng et al, 2007, p382). This was apparent in schools that took part in the China-England teacher exchange program. One child is quoted saying 'I like the Chinese lessons, I need to think very hard because I know Miss Lu will ask me to explain why and I will need to have a good answer!' (Stripp, 2015). It could be suggested that the child understands the engagement and depth required in Miss Lu's class as opposed to the other which may not require as much reasoning from the pupil.

To reflect, there are a variety of ways teachers can promote reasoning within the classroom. Fortunately, whilst exploring these factors, it became apparent that whilst I have been in schools I have observed practitioners stimulate and regularly encourage reasoning from pupils. This paper has also inspired various ways in which I hope to encourage the use of reasoning within the classroom- for example the use of a working wall. Additionally another factor, which I did not discuss but that I am aware of, is the use of mixed ability groups. In Nunes et al (2009) research, they discovered that streaming groups only slightly helped the higher ability but hindered the progress of others. Therefore, I will ensure that whilst doing investigation and enquiry work the children will be mixed ability. Overall, I believe that reasoning would be the hardest aim to teach, however, as also highlighted by Nunes at al (2009), it will help children to progress in their future mathematical development.

Bibliography

Askew, M. (2016) Transforming Primary Mathematics: Understanding Classroom Tasks, Tools and Talk. London: Routledge.

Atkinson, S. (1992) Mathematics With Reason: Great Britain, Hodder and Stoughton.

Beckley, P. Compton, A. Johnston, J. Marland, H. (2010) Problem Solving, reasoning and Numeracy: London, UK, Continuum International Publishing Group.

Bottle, G. (2007) Teaching Mathematics in the Primary School. London: Continuum.

Cockcroft, W. H. (1982) Mathematics counts: report of the Committee of Inquirt into the teaching of mathematics in schools. London: HMSO. [Online] Available at: http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/Cockcroft/cockcroft1982.html

[Accessed on: 6^th December]

Cotton, T. .(2013) Understanding and Teaching Primary Mathematics 2 edn: Harlow, UK, Pearson Education LTD.

Cowan, P. (2006) Teaching Mathematics A Handbook for Primary and Secondary Teaching: Abingdon, UK, Routledge.

Davis, A. GOudling, M. Suaggate, J. (2017) Mathematical Knowledge for Primary Teachers, 5edn: Abingdon, UK, Routledge.

Fisher, R (2005) Teaching Children to Think. London: Original Illistrations

Hansen, A. (2017) Children’s Errors in Mathematics: London, UK, SAGE Publishing LTD

Haylock, D. Manning, R. (2014) Mathematics Explained for Primary Teachers, 5edn: London, UK, SAGE Publishing LTD

Haylock, D. Cockburn, A. (2013) Understanding Mathematics for Young Children 4 edn: London, UK, SAGE Publishing LTD.

Herringer, N. (2013) Making sense of mathematics through reasoning. [online] Available at: http://www3plearning.com/making-sense-mathematics-reasoning-2/

[Accessed on: 5^th December]

Jones, J. (2015) OFSTED: Mathematics mastery primary conference workshop materials [PowerPoint Presentation]. [Online] Available at http://toolkit.mathematicsmastery.org/app/webroot/js/tiny_mce/plugins/moxiemanager/data/files/Ofsted.pdf.

 [Accessed on: 30^th November]

Jones, J. (2015) Charlie's Angles - guest blog by Jane Jones HMI, Ofsted. [online] Available at: https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/46034

 [Accessed on: 3^rd December]

Morgan, D. (2015) Debbie Morgan. NCETM Director for Primary: a presentation to teachers on teaching for mastery in December 2015. [online] Available at: https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/48432

 [Accessed on: 6^th December]

Myhill, D. Jones, S. Hopper, R. (2006) Talking, Listening, Learning. Berkshire: Open University Press.

National Assiociation of Mathematical Advisers (2015) Five myths of Mastery in Mathematics. [online] Available at: http://www.nama.org.uk/Downloads/Five%20Myths%20about%20Mathematics%20Mastery.pdf

 [Accessed on 4^th December]

National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics. (2013) Maths to share- CPD for your school. [online] Available at: https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/30913

 [Accessed on 10^th December]

NRICH (2014) Reasoning: Identifying Opportunities. [online] Available at: https://nrich.maths.org/10990

 [Accessed on: 4^th December]

NRICH (2014) Reasoning: the Journey from Novice to Expert. [online] Available at: https://nrich.maths.org/11336

 [Accessed on: 5^th December]

NRICH (2015) Haringey. [online] Available at: https://nrich.maths.org/10757

 [Accessed on 7^th December]

NRICH (2013) Manipulatives in the Primary Classroom. [online] Available at: https://nrich.maths.org/10461

 [Accessed on: 7^th December]

Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Sylva, K. and Barros, R. (2009) Development of maths capabilities and confidence in primary school. [Online] Available at http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/11154/1/DCSF-RR118.pdf.

[Accessed on: 30^th November]

Ofsted (2012) Mathematics: made to measure. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/417446/Mathematics_made_to_measure.pdf

 [Accessed on: 4^th December]

Pepperell, S. Hopkins, C. Gifford, S. Tallant, P. (2009) Matqhematics in Primary School: A Sense of Pregression, 3edn: Abingdon, UK, Routledge

Programme for International Student Assessment (2014) PISA 2012 Results in Focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know. [online] Available at: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf

[Accessed on: 5^th December]

Stripp, C. (2015) Charlie’s Angles, Math, How can we meet the needs of all pupils without differentiation of lesson content? How can we record progress without levels? [online] Available at: https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/46830

[Accessed on: 3^rd December]

Stripp, C. (2015) Charlie’s Angles, Math, Mastery in mathematics: What it is and why we should be doing it. [Online] Available at: https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/45776

[Accessed on: 3^rd December]

Sangster, M (2016) Engaging Primary Children in Mathematics: London, UK, Bloomsbury Academic Publishing plc.

Stoushall, E. (2017) Yes but Why? Teaching for Understanding in Mathematics: London, UK, SAGE Publishing LTD

TESS India. Developing mathematical reasoning: mathematical proof. [online] Available at: http://www.open.edu/openlearncreate/pluginfile.php/134971/mod_resource/content/4/SM02_AIE_Final.pdf

[Accessed on: 3^rd December]

Thompson, I. (2010) Issues in Teaching Numeracy in Primary Schools. 2^nd edn. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Turner, S. (2013) Teaching Primary Children in Mathematics: London, UK, Bloomsbury SAGE Publishing LTD.

Turner, S. McCullouch, J. (2004) Making Connections in Primary Mathematics. Oxon: david Fulton Publishers

Witt, M (2014) Primary Mathematics for Trainee Teachers. London: Learning Matters 

Guided Reading

Guided reading is, potentially, a very powerful approach that teachers can use to develop students’ literacy. The extent to which that potential is reached is determined by a range of factors (some of which may be beyond an individual teacher’s control, for example, the range of texts available for use with students). Discuss Jeanne Biddulph (2002) Guided Reading Theory and Research. Wellington: Learning Media Ltd.

The traditional definition of literacy is 'the ability to read and write' (Oxford Dictionary). However, as our views on education and child development have progressed, this may be seen as a narrow description that leads to the misinterpretation that literacy has a binary outcome. Academics and practitioners are now debating that literacy actually has a broader definition. To the National Literacy Trust, 'literacy is the ability to read, write, speak and listen in a way that lets us communicate effectively and make sense of the world'. Furthermore, according to Project Literacy, 'literacy is critical to economic development as well as individual and community well being'. This concept has been widely discussed and researched. For example, The Guardian wrote an article in 2014 discussing their view on why literacy is important- highlighting literacy does not just give us knowledge, skills or facts, but it 'supplies a whole mode of thought'.

Thus, it stands to reason, if literacy is key to different aspects of our being (personal, social, emotional, spiritual) as well as helping us to become competent members of a community- we should then try to ensure that those skills are taught and acquired as early as possible. By the end of primary school, pupils are expected to have met the overall English national curriculum aim- 'to promote high standards of literacy by equipping pupils with a strong command of the written and spoken word, and to develop their love of literature through widespread reading for enjoyment.' (Department of Education, 2013, p14). There are various strategies practitioners use to help children meet this aim- one of them is guided reading. In this paper, I aim to explore how effective guided reading is as an approach to develop students’ literacy. Within this, I will explore two different factors which may impact on the extent to which it is a successful strategy.

According to Biddulph (2002) ‘Guided reading is an important approach in literacy education’ (p2), and for young children to develop their literacy skills, they need to become effective readers (Hardie, 2013, p1). Guided reading is a fairly new concept- it was first formally introduced to schools as part of the National Literacy Strategy in 1998- created by the Literacy Task Force in 1996 by David Blunkett. This was due to an Ofsted report, suggesting the way teachers helped children to read was unproductive. Therefore, the aim was to create a strategy which would substantially raise the standards of literacy in primary schools- this was guided reading. Thus, 'the ultimate goal of guided reading is to help children learn how to use independent reading strategies successfully.' (Beard, 2000, p20). Although opinions of how guided reading should be taught differ, practitioners and academics agree upon the importance of having small groups (of around six pupils) all with a similar ability (Perkins, 2017, p82) and reading texts of a 90-95% accuracy (Rog, 2003, p41).

The range of texts a teacher employs, within guided reading, will be one of the factors that determine how powerful it will be in developing pupils' literacy. Biddulph (2002) states, a teacher must 'select a text that is appropriate for a particular group of students' (p2), as well as finding 'texts...which children enjoy' (Beard, 2000, p20). This is so children see reading as a meaningful pursuit.

When finding a text, Braunger and Lewis (1997, p37) advise practitioners to consider their pupils previous experiences, knowledge and ideals which may match the ideas embedded in the text. This is because 'children bring to texts their own understandings and their awareness of themselves' (Barrs and Cork, 2016, p13). It is inferred that this may increase engagement as well as comprehension. As children are making personal links to the text, as well as drawing on existing notions- to gain understanding. Therefore, it is important teachers have an awareness of pupil’s prior knowledge which is required to read particular texts.

An issue raised is pupils may have a limited/lack of previous knowledge which may be needed to access a text. However, in these situations, teachers need to make judgments about whether the text should be used or if an alternative and more relevant book may be needed (Biddulph, 2002, pp4-5). I, however, believe that texts in which the pupils have no prior experience of, provide opportunities for practitioners to teach strategies which are needed in order to unpick the text. This may vary from the teacher introducing exploratory activities for the children- to build new knowledge and experiences which they can apply to the text. Or, the teacher may decide to use it as a teaching point and model the strategies.

Additionally, to encourage children to want to read, there must be a purpose- and ideally an enjoyable one. This notion is highlighted by Papen (2015) who states, 'reading is always about reading something that as the reader I deem worthy of my attention' (p3 of chapter 10). Therefore, if we want children to engage with a text, we need to ensure the text itself is engaging to them. Hall and Coles (1999) suggest that the 'provision of literature for children also needs to be informed by what they choose to read in their leisure time' (Cited in Fletcher-Campbell, Reid, Soler, 2009, p147). This idea is supported in the Ofsted 'Reading for Pleasure and Purpose' report (2004), as pupils had distinguished between school reading books (which they appeared to lack interest in) and their home reading books (which they 'did not regard... as learning to read'- p14).

However, educators may make the mistake of levelling the texts used. Fountas and Pinnell (2013) express that the text gradient and levelled books are the teacher's tool 'not a child's label' (p17). This may hinder a skill development. As guided reading is providing children with lifelong strategies of ways to access literature, we should encourage pupils to learn how to select books the way experienced readers do. This is by recognizing when a text is too hard- not by looking at the colour sticker on the spine.

Secondly, another factor which could impact on how powerful guided reading is, is the way the teacher organizes the pupils to read the text. The majority of academic literature suggests that when reading the text, pupils should do this silently (Biddulph, 2002, p2, for example). However, the method round robin reading [RRR], where pupils are expected to follow a text as an individual pupil reads aloud, is still practiced- this has also been confirmed by my own experiences in schools.

According to Carruba (no date, p10) RRR is still a popular approach for teachers due to its convenience. She suggests this may be because of one (or both of) two reasons: it requires little preparation time; and teachers may find behaviour management easier. Concerning preparation, a teacher could simply use a reading guide. This may supply suggested literature, lesson plans (including comprehension questions to ask pupils), work sheets to assess comprehension afterwards. Secondly, she suggests that a teacher may feel as though they have greater control over the classroom, as there is only one child speaking whist others follow along silently.

Although, a differing view on why teachers use it, according to Hoffman (1987) is that 'teachers have not been given many viable alternatives' (cited in Rasinski, 2003, p18). Neither Ofsted or the DfE have suggested which strategy is more effective in terms of developing literacy-leaving schools to decide whether they feel it is an effective approach for their pupils (Ofsted, Moving English Forwards, p30). What is apparent, is that many academics feel RRR is an 'outmoded practice'  (Harris and Hodges, 1995, Cited in McEwan, 2007, p103) and have found may flaws through their own research- for example Dowhower (1999) found it decreased comprehension (cited in Biddulph, 2002, p4), Rasinski (2003) found teachers and pupils playing a game of sorts due to a lack of engagement (p18) therefore little was learnt.

Personally, when using the RRR approach, I experienced both of these flaws as well as many others. One which appeared to frustrate pupils was the pace of the lesson. As the oral reader was slower than the silent readers who were following along, this meant some children read ahead. As the children read ahead, engaged by the text, it meant they were not focused when I asked comprehension questions. When pupils were asked not to read ahead, it seemed pupils didn't engage with the text when passively listening to the words read by their peer.

Therefore, quiet, independent reading is regarded as a more effective strategy to teach guided reading. Biddulph (2002) highlights that 'it is more authentic and relevant to real life than oral reading' (p4), which is accurate as taking in turns to read aloud does not occur much in our adult lives, instead we prefer to read silently and then engage in a discussion about what we comprehend. This ideal is what Myers and Burnett (2004) suggest- stating that we engage in active dialogue before or after the reading of the text with pupils (p63).

I appreciate that, although I have only discussed two factors, there are a variety of other factors which also impact on the effectiveness of guided reading and how it helps to develop literacy. From doing a wide amount of reading on academics and research, I have discovered new information which will inform my future practice. This is from stopping the approach of RRR, and (depending on the pupils and their needs) applying approaches such as silent or echo reading (for example). I also now have a different view on what guided reading should be and what it should promote- giving children life-long strategies they can use to access texts independently.

Bibliography

Barrs, M. Cork, V. (2016) The Reader in the Writer. London: Centre for Literacy in Primary Education

Beard, R. (2000) ‘Research and the National Literacy Strategy’ Oxford Review of Education. [Online] Available from: http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/1436/1/Beard2000ResearchandtheNational421.pdf

[Accessed on: 4^th December]

Biddulph, J. (2002) Guided Reading Theory and Research. Wellington: Learning Media Ltd

Braunger, J. Lewis, J. P. (1997) Building a Knowledge Base in Reading. [Online] Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED412524.pdf

[Accessed on: 5^th December]

Carrubba, C. (No Date) Round Robin Reading: Is there justification for its use or are there better alternatives available for oral reading instruction? Williamsburg: Elementary Education.

Copping, A. (2016) Being Creative in Primary English. London: SAGE Publications Ltd

Department for Education (2013) The National Curriculum In England: Primary Curriculum. [Online] Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/425601/PRIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf

[Accessed on 28^th November]

Department for Education and Employment (2001) Developing Early Writing. The National Literacy Strategy. [online] Available from: http://www.sassoonfont.co.uk/fonts/sas/pri_lit_dev_wrtng_005501.pdf

[Accessed on: 30^th November]

Fountas, I. C. Pinnell, G. S. (2013) ‘Guided Reading. The Romance and the Reality.’ Reading Teacher. 66(4) [online] Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a0cc/130ebf0d803236a6278c75e66c25df12bf3e.pdf

[Accessed on: 2^nd December]

Gamble, N. (2013) Exploring Children's Literature, Reading with Pleasure and Purpose. 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd

Hardie, E. M. (2013) The Role of Guided Reading on the Literacy

Development of Young Children. The College at Brockport. [Online] Available from: https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.co.uk/&httpsredir=1&article=1198&context=ehd_theses

[Accessed on: 30^th November]

Hilden, K. Jones, J. (2012) ‘A Literacy Spring Cleaning: Sweeping Round Robin Reading Out of Your Classroom’. Teaching Literacy. [Online] Available from: http://www.xenia.k12.oh.us/userfiles/251/Sweeping%20round%20robin%20reading%20out%20of%20your%20classroom.pdf

[Accessed on: 29^th November]

House of Commons Education and Skills Committee (2005) Teaching Children to Read. [Online] Available from: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmeduski/121/121.pd

[Accessed on: 3^rd December]

Kuhn, M. R. Levy, L. (2015) Developing Fluent Readers. Teaching Fluency as a Foundational Skill. New York: The Guilford Press

McEwan, E. K. (2007) 40 Ways to Support Struggling Readers in Content Classrooms Grades 6-12. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Medwell, J. Wray, D. Poulson, L. Fox, R. (1998) Effective Teachers of Literacy. [Online] Available from: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000000829.htm

[Accessed on: 5^th December]

Myers, J. Burnett, C. (2004) Teaching English 3-11. London: Continuum

National Literacy Trust. What is literacy? [Online] Available from: https://literacytrust.org.uk/information/what-is-literacy/

[Accessed on: 28^th November]

Ofsted (2004) Reading for purpose and pleasure.

Ofsted (2012) Moving English Forward.

Papen, U. (2016) Literacy and Education. Policy, Practice and Public Opinion. Oxon: Routledge

Rasinski, T. V. (2003) The Fluent Reader. New York: Scholastic Professional Books

Pearson (2013) A Practical Guide to Reading for Pleasure. [Online] Available from: http://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk/Primary/GlobalPages/Reading-for-Pleasure/Practical-Guide-to-Reading-for-Pleasure.aspx

 [Accessed on: 30^th November]

Perkins, M. (2017) Observing Primary Literacy. 2nd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd

Rog, L. J. (2003) Guided Reading Basics. Organizing, managing, and implementing a balanced literacy program in K-3. Canada: Pembroke Publishers

Project Literacy Kelowna. [Online] Available from: http://projectliteracykelowna.org/about/the-importance-of-literacy/

[Accessed on: 27^th November]

Soler, J. Fletcher-Campbell, F. Reid, G. (2009) Understanding Difficulties in Literacy Development: Issues and Concepts. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools: Standards and Quality in Education 1996/97. [Online] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ofsted-report-standards-and-quality-in-education-1996-to-1997

[Accessed on:1^st December]

The Guardian (2014) The Guardian view on the importance of literacy. [Online] Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/12/editorial-guardian-view-on-literacy

[Accessed on: 26^th November]

Waugh, D. Jolliffe, W. Allott, K. (2014) Primary English for Trainee Teachers. London: Learning Matters.

Using ICT to help develop working scientifically skills (human body-year 6).

Explore how technology can develop children's skills in working scientifically.

In this paper, I aim to explore how technology can support and develop children’s skills in working scientifically. I will outline a possible approach to teaching year six how to ‘identify and name the main parts of the human circulatory system, and explain the functions of the heart, blood vessels and blood’ (National Curriculum [NC], 2013, pp167). As the Primary Science Journal (133 Supplement, 2008) suggests using an enquiry question to provoke children to work scientifically from the onset- therefore, I created the investigation title “Why do our hearts beat?”. Whilst exploring this topic, I will integrate technology into my activities to enhance these two aspects of working scientifically: recording measurements and representing the data- as well as building on previous scientific skills such as observation (NC, pp160). I believe ICT can support pupils in working scientifically as ‘Computing can be used as an effective aid for learning in a number of ways in science’ (Osbourne and Hennessy, 2006, cited in Ward and Roden, 2016, pp181). It has the important role in making science relevant, interesting and motiving (Mork, 2005) especially as children live in a ‘technology-rich environment’ therefore it can open up a 'wealth of learning opportunities' in primary science (Porter, cited in Kelly and Stead, 2013, pp42).

According to the Department of Education [DfE] (2013), the term 'working scientifically' requires pupils to understand the 'nature, processes and methods of science' in each year group (NC, pp137). There are several skills of working scientifically highlighted in the NC. The focused skills that children are expected to meet by the end of key stage two are: to plan for scientific enquiry; record measurements and data; represent results; form predictions and generate further tests; using models to describe scientific ideas and lastly to identify scientific evidence to support or counter an argument (pp160). It is key for children to learn these skills- as it is the way in which children can learn about science and develop their understanding.

When previously teaching this module, the children believed misconceptions such as: the heart being on the far-right side of the body or that the human heart resembled a heart shape. To challenge this, I would utilise ICT to enhance pupils understanding of how each part of the circulatory system works. This would be done through the online resource of Siemens interactive human body (http://www.tenalpscommunicate.com/clients/siemens/humanbodyOnline/#pages/cvs/info-cvs-full). Siemens interactive programme is an effective tool. It breaks down each part of the circulatory system- providing detailed information alongside labelled visual representations. 

Furthermore, it also provides labelled MRI scans and animations which provide children with the opportunity to observe and understand the movements of the system in their own time through replication. Replication is a key component of ICT, as the information can be viewed and analysed for an unlimited amount of time (Kelly and Stead, 2013).

This component will be helpful for pupils when observing the heart MRI video. It will allow pupils to continuously observe, discuss and build upon further observations without being disrupted. When previously using this video with pupils, I found that observations became more detailed and their questions became more specific. For example, the children conjectured which side of the heart was pumping oxygenated blood and de-oxygenated blood, another child also pointed out that one side of the heart looked thicker than the other. Research scholar Meenakshi (2013) supports the use of video in the classroom as she believes it can help bring life to scientific concepts that may be hard to grasp.

Once children have looked at each part of the circulatory system on the Siemen’s programme, pupils will be tasked with identifying, labelling and describing the functions of the circulatory system from a diagram inside their books. iPads and book resources will be available to pupils for support. Physicist Matthew Schneps (2014) highlighted that iPads and similar tools make a difference for pupils when learning. This is because ICT pads are a light weight tool with a large capacity, allowing children to access vast amounts of information that are up to date to support conceptual understanding (when opposed to scanning through various books). By the end of the lesson, children need a basic understanding of each part of the circulatory system for their learning to progress for the following lesson.

The next part of our topic would be to explore our own heart beats. The purpose of this activity is for children work scientifically by applying their knowledge of the circulatory system. Pupils are to do this whilst using the working scientifically skill of recording measurements. To do this, children will be separated into pairs and given a heart monitor- this will record their pulse rate after each situation. Keith Ross (2008) highlights that it is important to make science personal as it can create links between their existing knowledge and their new scientific ideas, this in turn will promote curiosity as they test their own predictions and work scientifically. Therefore, with this in mind, once pupils have recorded their resting heart rate, children are to hypothesise what their heart rate may be after exercise and a cool down. Furthermore, children are to use their knowledge of the circulatory system to explain why.

By using heart monitors verses recording pulses physically, there is a reduction of inaccuracy when recording measurements. The children involved in the learning may inaccurately record the data through human error- for example, loss of count. However, through the use of this small piece of ICT, children have the opportunity to gather accurate results which will assist their scientific observations and conceptual understanding (Woodley, 2009). Additionally, using the heart monitors also provides a quicker (and easier) strategy than manually counting- this in turn speeds up the processing time of gathering data, allocating more time to analyse the information it provides. This point is further supported by Ofsted who commented in their ‘Successful Science’ (2011) report that there were very few cases of children using ICT to measure or record the outcomes of practical activities, suggesting that it improves the quality of learning.

Once pupils have collected their measurements of their heart rates, pupils will then use the iPads to access the application ‘numbers’. Number’s is a spreadsheet which allows users to turn information into visual representations- users can also include text and pictures. Although pupils could create a line graph of the results on paper- the working scientifically aim is for children to learn to read and analyse data to form ideas not to learn how to create visual representations of them. Therefore, I have decided to use ICT, as the graphs and data will be formed at a quicker speed allowing children to spend more time analysing the data and use it as evidence to support of counter an idea (Wheeler, 2005).

However, the main reason why I have chosen to use numbers (as opposed to laptops or computers with the programme excel) is due to the application ‘tellagami’. Turvey et al (2014) highlights that although applications may be relatively new to the classroom, it has the possibility to provide authentic and rich experiences for communicating, collaborating and deepening understanding in cross-curricular work. Once pupils have created their line graph of the results from the heart rate test, pupils can screen shot the spreadsheet and then use it as a background for the ‘gamis’ (a short-animated presentation). In pairs, pupils then need to simply edit their avatar and programme it (through a voice recording or text) to speak and communicate their results. They can then share these videos with the class. This will demonstrate pupil’s skills in both presenting results and communicating what they mean in relation to the scientific concept of the circulatory system. This is idea is supported by Roden and Ward (2016) who refer to the vitality of providing learners with many opportunities and styles when communicating findings. This application could also be used for pupils to explain the circulatory system and present their conceptual knowledge in this engaging format.

I have considered each of the activities potential challenges and how I could manage them. For example, although the Siemens programme provides animated clips and MRI videos, these features can be access through Youtube. Therefore, if any devices lose connection, teachers have back up videos downloaded and placed onto a flipchart alongside information and pictures. Additionally, there is a possibility that the pulse rate monitors may not work. Therefore, before any practical work it is advisable for practitioners to test all equipment and have spare equipment too. In terms of using the iPads, I recognise that they are an expensive purchase. However, according to a BBC article from 2014, seventy percent of primary and secondary schools use iPads. These devices can provide acceptable results as well as providing applications which can be downloaded for free.

I appreciate that it is important that ICT should be used in science to achieve a learning goal that could not be achieved without its use, or that its use can help to achieve that goal more effectively. In addition to this, the ICT must enable learners to meet the learning goal and not deflect or hinder a pupil from achieving it (Ward and Roden, 2016). In conclusion, I believe that these approaches will help year six pupils to develop their skills in working scientifically. I also feel I have introduced scientific activities which are enhanced with ICT. I believe they will help children to achieve the NC aim of ‘identify[ing] and name[ing] the main parts of the human circulatory system, and explain[ing] the functions of the heart, blood vessels and blood’. This has been achieved through the guidance of researchers and scholars.

Bibliography

Coughlan, S. (2014) Tablet computers in '70% of schools', BBC News. Accessed from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30216408 [Access on 19th August 2017]

Cutting, R. Kelly, O. (2015) Creative Teaching in Primary Science. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Department for Education (2013) The National Curriculum In England: Key stages 1 and 2 framework document for Science/Computing. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/425601/PRIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf  [Accessed on: 4th August 2017).

Handwerk, B. (2013) iPads Improve Classroom Learning, Study Finds. National Geographic. Available from: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131210-ipad-learning-education-space-science/ [Accessed on 17^th August 2017]

Harlen, W. Qualter, A. (2004) The Teaching of Science in Primary Schools. 4^th edn. London: David Fulton Publishers.

Kelly, L. Stead, D. (2013) Enhancing Primary Science. Developing Effective Cross-Curricular Links. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Kopp, K. (2012) The Human Body. Huntington Beach: Teacher Created Materials.

Meenakshi (2013) Importance of ICT in Education. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME) Available from: http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jrme/papers/Vol-1%20Issue-4/B0140308.pdf [Accessed on 13th August 2017]

Mork, S. M. (2006) ICT in Science Education. Exploring the Digital Learning Materials at viten.no.  Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sonja_Mork/publication/271213351_ICT_in_Science_Education_Exploring_the_Digital_Learning_Materials_at_vitenno/links/54c280b20cf2911c7a48babf/ICT-in-Science-Education-Exploring-the-Digital-Learning-Materials-at-vitenno.pdf [Accessed on 20th August 2017]

Murphey, C (2003) Future lab. Report 5. Available from: https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/FUTL73/FUTL73.pdf  [Accessed on 12th August 2017].

Murphey, M. (2009) ICT boosts hands-on practice in science lessons. The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/resource/ict-practice-science [Accessed on 13th August 2017]

Naylor, S. Association for science education (2014). Available from: https://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk/AssetsLibrary/SECTORS/PRIMARYASSETSNEW/Curriculum_Change/CurrArticles/Prim_CurricArticles_Science_Designed.pdf  [Accessed on 8th August 2017).

Ofsted, (2008) Success in Science. Available from: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8196/2/Success_in_science_(PDF_format).pdf [Accessed on 7^th August 2017]

Ofsted, (2011) Successful Science. Available from: http://www.gettingpractical.org.uk/documents/Successfulscience-1.pdf [Accessed on 5th August 2017]

Oliver, A. (2007) Creative Teaching. Science in the Early Years & Primary Classroom. Oxon: Routledge.

Osbourne, J and Hennesey, S (2003). Futurelab report. Literature review in primary science education and ICT. Available from: https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190441/document  [Accessed on 10th October 2016]

Peacock, G. Sharp, J. Johnsey, R, Wright, D. Sewell, S. (2014) Primary Science Knowledge and Understanding. 7^th edn. London: Learning Matters.

Sharp, J. Peacock, G. Smith, R. Johnsey, R. Simon, S. Cross, A. Harris, D. (2012) Primary Science. Teaching Theory and Practice. 6^th edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Primary Science Supplement. (2014) The Association for Science Education. Issue 133. May/June. Accessed from: file:///C:/Users/Elizabeth/Downloads/ps-supplement11.pdf [Accessed on 7th August 2017]

Turvey, K. Potter, J. Allen, J. Sharp, J. (2014) Primary Computing & ICT Knowledge, Understanding & Practice. 6^th edn. London: Learning Matters.

Tyler (ND) Primary Science Teaching Trust. University of Manchester. Available from: http://www.fascinate.manchester.ac.uk/media/eps/fascinate/4-sider-30.03.16.pdf  [Accessed on: 15th August 2017).

Ward, H. Roden, J. (2016) Teaching Science in the Primary Classroom. 3^rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Warwick, P. Wilson, E. Winterbottom, M. (2006) Teaching and Learning Primary Science with ICT. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Williams, J. Easingwood, N. (2003) ICT and Primary Science. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

Woodley, E. (2009) ‘Practical work in school science – why is it important?’ Getting Practical. 91(335), pp49-51.