HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

MAY 7, 2018

HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES

A CASE STUDY

MEERA BALASUBRAMANIAN

1| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Student Name Meera Balasubramanian

Total Word Count 7939
Essay Word Count 5884

2| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4

HLP #18 – Providing oral & written feedback to students ...................................................... 5

HLP #15 - Checking student understanding during and at the conclusion of lessons ........... 9

HLP #11- Talking about a student with parents or other caregivers .................................... 14

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 19

Appendix ............................................................................................................................... 20

References ............................................................................................................................ 23

3| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Introduction

A classroom is a truly a multi-dimensional environment limited in scope by time to learn a

particular concept or a part of a concept and an outstanding teacher is one who is master at
the art of juggling. What is of paramount importance is to trust the children to make mistakes
and learn by themselves by relinquishing control rather than handholding & spoon feeding
them. For this purpose, the 19 High Leverage Teaching Practices (Ball and Forzani. 2011, p.19)
are a teacher’s essential guide to create an environment of optimal learning that is student-
centred & transfers the onus of learning on the children sans which problems are very likely
to occur.

The apprenticeship based teaching practice has given me the luxury of exploring different
styles of teaching and related practices (AfL, feedback, parental collaboration) that would
make a lasting impact on the kind of teacher I am to become. Although all the 19 practices
seamlessly integrated in the holistic approach of learning, I have chosen the following 3 HLTPs
to focus on in this case study. These shall be explored in detail and its implications on my
Philosophy of Teaching (PoT) will be scrutinized.

This case study was conducted in Gems Founder’s School (GFS), Al Barsha South (Dubai) which
is a mid-market school with a total of 3270 student from FS1 to Year 9 which commenced
functioning since September 2016. The subjects that were under study were 31 (11-girls &
20-boys) Year 1 students of a single class of which I was the student teacher. Ethnicity of the
majority of the students is from South-East Asian and North-African Arab countries.
There are 3 children with special needs and a total of 5 adults in the class (2 Learning Support
Assistants [LSA], a Teaching Assistant [TA], a student teacher & a class teacher).

This study has been carried out using ethnographic methods (Hammersley & Atkinson as
found in Sutton & Austin, 2015) of observing participants in their ‘real life’ environment. The
observations and findings were gained from the frame work of ‘Verstehen’ (Gablinske, 2014)
an experiential understanding of the observer and is a case of particularization and not
generalization (Stake, 1995). Furthermore, experienced teachers (serving their second year in
this school and with prior teaching experience) were interviewed to corroborate the insights
gained from this observation and certain illuminative cases (Gablinske, 2014) has been
brought to light enumerating the conditions for success in each HLTP.

4| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

HLP #18 – Providing oral & written feedback to students

“Feedback is not advice, praise, or evaluation. Feedback is information about how we are
doing in our efforts to reach a goal.” (Wiggins, 2012). Feedback has a positive effect on learner
achievement. In John Hattie’s seminal work on educational effectiveness, Visible Learning for
Teachers (2011), Hattie ranked feedback strategies 10th out of 150 factors that bring about
significant improvements in learner outcomes.

Since I have started my apprenticeship with Year 1 students who were between the age group
of 5.5 – 6 years, I was mildly surprised by their inability to read simple written sentences. After
a thorough immersion in the theory behind feedback, I discovered that interdependencies
amongst various factors such as: types of feedback, immediacy of feedback, relationship
between giver and receiver, processing of feedback and emotional association in creating
lasting changes and improvements which fascinated me to investigate this phenomenon in
detail inside the classroom.

Since 2017, the marking policy has been changed to prohibit the use of red ink in marking of
the student’s work due to the negative attitude created. GFS, advocates the use of green ink
for ‘changes required’ and pink ink for ‘correct’ responses. Research (Semke, 1984) shows
that students who received comments alone made more progress than those who received
corrections alone or corrections along with comments. And corrections may have a negative
effect on student attitudes. Although red ink has been replaced by green ink, I suspect that
the children will get conditioned over time (Goldman, 2012) to this new method of marking
similar to that of red ink, if the errors highlighted are not suitably supported by comments.
Since these children at the beginning of the first term are still learning to read and write, the
written comments of their work is more of an evidence for teachers for the instantaneous
oral feedback given while performing the task according to the experienced teachers of this
year group.

In the first term, core subjects (Maths & English) were taught in carousel groups (Graffam,
retrieved 2018) wherein groups of 5-6 pupils circulated among 5 different activities. Based on
the input topic, I would be based on the guided activity of that core subject. It was far easier
and feasible to provide targeted, individual and instantaneous feedback in this setting since I
had about 15-20 mins cycle time at each station compared to the second term which was a

5| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

whole class activity setting, wherein the task time lasted up to 20 minutes . In a class of 31
students, I find it unfeasible to give immediate feedback to all students within the stipulated
time. In regards to the very low correlation of delayed feedback (0.34) on progress (Hattie &
Temperley 2007), as was the case with the exercise involving diary entry, wherein the teacher
modelled self-evaluation technique after the weekend. 82% of the class could not clearly
recall the task objective or the success criteria even with prompt. I need to be mindful of
factoring feedback time into my lesson planning and decide which ability groups to start with.
Lower Ability (LA) groups require more effort as I find it beneficial when they implement the
corrections along with the teacher and the Higher Ability (HA) group requires less time and
are more independent in implementing corrections. In reflection, it would be a good strategy
to start with the LA group in this situation and progress towards the HA. From my
experimentation and acknowledgement from experienced teachers, it would be a good idea
to train and leverage the TA in the class to give task-based feedback to the LA or MA group,
sans which results from Ofstead (2008 as in Ealing council, 2011) cite a negative impact of
0.34 with untrained TAs engage with LA groups. This requires that a TA has a good
understanding of the lesson objective and the success criteria, which should be conveyed and
confirmed by the class teacher.

Based on research (Hattie & Temperley 2007), I have had the opportunity to observe the
impact of all the 3 different types of feedback (task based, effort based & process based). In
some cases of LA/HA children, I find that repetitive mistakes are avoided when they are asked
to cross out the mistakes rather than erase them, as it would seem the presence of the
mistake (especially in spellings) serves as a good reminder. This would be a good example of
effective task based feedback. For some children (4 out of 12) in the LA group, who found
writing difficult, as a teacher, I found it useful tactic to use praise (Brophy, 1981) in order to
get them to start writing and them implement task based feedback to correct the errors.
However, 60% of the experienced teachers acquiesced that though they intended to praise a
student’s work, their comments turn out as a general praise aimed at them, such as, ‘good
girl/boy’ or ‘good job’ and have advised that I have to be mindful of these errors. In an
interesting observation, I found that the HA group can quite efficiently implement process-
based feedback especially in Mathematics, where the learning involved the discovery of
efficient methods of addition & subtraction. I used directed open questions aimed to elicit a

6| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

desired response of using ‘denes & ones’ in subtraction. This helped the pupils reflect on their
current method & the question asked thereby enabling metacognition which is a higher order
is thinking skill (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). I find that in English, about 50% (4 out 8) are
able to evaluate their mistakes and implement corrective actions when they are pointed to
the success criteria of a task. I should share the success criteria with pupils before they start
the task to inculcate introspective writing. However, permanence of feedback is not observed
in cases of simple rule of grammar such as capital letter and full stops irrespective of the
repetitions. I reckon that equipping students with a self-help guide to the rules of writing
adhered to every table would help them to refer back to the success criteria of good writing
(Fig. 1 –Appendix). This seems to be prevalent among children across different ability groups.

Another interesting finding was that, contrary to some research (Ressler 2010) about the
effect of negative feedback in creating anxiety and stress, I find that some students (9 out of
30) are capable of handling disconformity feedback (Hattie & Temperley 2007) and the
challenge produced a marked improvement in their work as opposed to praise. This is a result
of the Emotional Intelligence (EQ) of student which is not directly co-related to their Academic
Intelligence (IQ).

As pointed by Hattie & Temperley (2007) and as agreed upon by experiences teachers it is
efficient for both teacher & student to switch to instruction rather than spend time on
feedback once a teacher ascertains that the student lacks basic understanding of a concept.
After exploring the types of feedback across context, I have not developed a thumb rule while
implementing feedback. However, it is clear that successful feedback in contingent on the
giver (how & when), receiver (how & what) and the context (subject, type of feedback).

Implication on my Philosophy of Teaching (PoT):

While my initial draft of PoT emphasized importance on teaching and learning styles, I had
underestimated the impact & pivotal role that feedback plays in pupil progress. A profound
implication of HLTP would be to manage instruction and task time in order to account for
feedback which is a major area of development for me. I shall always keep in mind to point
children about the ‘next steps’ which is crucial in incorporating this feedback for their
progress I shall develop a trusting atmosphere in the classroom (Spendlove 2009 as in Pollard,
2014 p.328) & work on developing pupil’s EI (Durlak & Weissberg, 2011 as quoted in Six

7| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Seconds 2018) so that they readily internalize my feedback for their progress. My unit plans
need to factor in time & type of feedback in advance. I shall also duly leverage the expertise
of the TA/LSA by training them to be independent in giving task/effort based feedback. It is
really important for me that children feel proud of their work and hence it is important to
direct praise at their work to facilitate growth mind-set in all learners as indicated by Carol
Dweck (1986 in Pollard, 2014, p.51). I shall re-phrase and ensure that all my students have
understood the task objective and success criteria well before they start.

As a progressive teacher, I need to profile my students psychologically and in terms of

academic capability so that I can implement the type of feedback that is best suited to their
needs. I would start self and peer evaluation with a simple topic that require one word
answers and then I would progressively build their ability to effectively assess descriptive
writing in the third term. In order to inculcate a growth mind-set, I shall initially reward
students using extrinsic measures, especially those afflicted with low self-confidence. I shall
display the best work of children in the classroom to serve as a model and motivators to
achieve the same output (Clegg & Billington, 1994 in Pollar 2014, p.197). Wherein possible, I
shall implement feedback with the group of children who have the same requirements based
on their task, on based on their personality to handle disconformity feedback. I would like to
focus on identifying & training children across all ability group, those who are capable of self-
regulation & evaluation of errors (Hattie, Biggs, & Purdie, 1996) on giving peer feedback so
that it extends their leaning while also helping their peers and the classroom takes on a
cohesive culture. I would encourage my students to learn from their mistakes and never be
reproachful of mistakes. . For big descriptive writing, I would give feedback on their draft work
before the final writing to enable reflection & improvement. Also, this would make the final
work easy to self-evaluate.

8| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

HLP #15 - Checking student understanding during and at the conclusion of lessons

“The teacher’s job is not to transmit knowledge, nor to facilitate learning. It is to engineer
effective learning environments for the students. The key features of effective learning
environments are that they create student engagement and allow teachers, learners, and
their peers to ensure that the learning is proceeding in the intended direction. The only way
we can do this is through assessment. That is why assessment is, indeed, the bridge between
teaching and learning.” Dylan Wiliam, Embedded Formative Assessment (2011)

My sentiments on this HLTP fully resonates with Dylan Wiliam’s statement. I chose this HLTP
because it was an area of focus for me. Although I did use different methods to check for
understanding (which I shall be referring to henceforth as ‘AfL – Assessment for Learning), I
did not incorporate these findings in my consecutive lesson plan or adjust instruction of the
ongoing lesson because of which I found, also echoed by my mentor, that my ‘teacher talk’
and the carpet input time is too lengthy and as a result of which students, especially those
who have understood the concept become restless and disengaged. In analysing this problem,
I realised that I was repeating new terminologies/concepts, especially in English more than
necessary as my objective was to ensure that the LA group have a fair understanding before
they commence their independent task.

However, after observing my mentor and another teacher in the same year group, who have
been rated as ‘Outstanding’ teachers by the senior leadership team (the vice principal) on the
GFS rating scale which is similar to that of the one used by TELLAL, I realised how they
implemented & utilized AfL in differentiating their instructions by support as illustrated by
Anthony Haynes (2010 in Pollard, 2014, p. 236) and making it a more student-centred
classroom. Their carpet sessions were optimal and did not exceed 13 minutes (including
explanation & modelling task) in the 4 times that I have observed these two teachers.

This was a target that my mentor & I set for myself to identify & implement AfL methods; to
utilize of this feedback in adjusting ‘teacher talk’ time. Because of the extended ‘teacher talk’
time, I was unable to conclude lessons with a plenary, when I realised that plenary could be
an opportunity to check for understanding of that day’s learning objective.

9| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

As observed in the strategies of ‘outstanding’ teachers, especially if the current lesson is

linked to that of previous lesson(s), they always stared out by recapping the ‘take away’ from
the previous lesson and introducing the objective of today’s learning. As I reflect on and
compare my practice, I find that I have placed emphasis on the clarifying the objective to the
students at the start of the lesson. Though the teachers that I observed used different
terminologies such as: WALT (What are we learning to); LO (Lesson objectives); etc., they
always ensured that they set a starting point by sharing the days’ objective (Brookhart &
Moss, 2009) and by explaining how they will be reaching this goal as for children at this age,
as they explain, it would be difficult to connect the WALT to the approach (University of
Cambridge, accessed on May 2018) which is a very valid argument. I have started to
implement these strategies in my practice and although I find it difficult to rephrase the
Objective and approach to their level, I am conscious to complete this step during the starter.

After a brief introduction of topic during the ‘main’ with 10 mins from the start, I have started
to question the HA students to check their understanding which will serve as a repetition for
those who have still not understood. This was a first step in the direction of reducing ‘teacher
talk’ time. Although this was a right step in reaching my goal, the carpet input time was still
over 20 minutes which was ‘unacceptable’ according to the school standards and owing to
the attention span of Year 1 students which is approximately around 11 mins (Preston, 2013).

In order to rectify this rectify this situation, I came across an interesting concept of Total
Physical Response (TPR) (Asher, 1969), a method developed to learn second languages,
wherein respondents have to show with through body actions the meaning of a certain word.
I was intrigued by the implication of TPR and the concept of kinaesthetic approach to learning
particularly appealing for young children (Griss, 1998) which was corroborated by the
students asked about the subjects that they enjoyed the most learning. 76% of the class
(22/30 students) voted PE as their most enjoyable period and 90% of the (19/21 students) of
Arabic B class (for non-Arabs) confirmed that they enjoyed Arabic classes along with PE. In my
observation of the Arabic B classes, I found that the teacher uses the precepts of TPR while
teaching the Arabic language to the children.

After my experimentation with TPR in Mathematics, while teaching children to associate the
concepts of addition and subtraction with their bodies (by raising up and going down

10| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

respectively), I was able to capture a very clear snapshot of how many children thought that
a problem involved addition or subtraction. This helped me in differentiating instruction as
those who demonstrated the correct answer were set-off on tasks and either I or the TA
would support those children who did not demonstrate the right answer with intervention
measures. Another interesting discovery for me based on the suggestion of my mentor was
that when I used children as props, there were more children participating and more
engagement. I also found that this paves way for children to clarify their misunderstandings
and rectify their mistakes amidst themselves with less interference from the teacher (myself).
In effect, the children were found to teach themselves, when one of the participants pointed
out the mistake to the other and this led to an environment of self-learning as advocated by
Dylan Wiliam (2014). Following this principle, even while using TPR, I have begun to let
children with clear understanding clarify the mistakes of their peers thereby developing a
student centred environment (McCarthy, 2015).

Though my use of questioning from the beginning has been appreciated by my mentor,
concerns were raised regarding not giving children enough time to process and answer.
Theory behind ‘wait-time’ (Rowe, 1972) & skilful utilization of ‘think time’ within the
classroom (Stahl, 1994) advocates a pause time of at least 3 seconds at various times between
teacher-student interaction. This especially applies to questioning, wherein I consciously
count to 3 seconds and then let students ‘pair-share’ within each other before picking on a
child to share with the class. I found that in clubbing the questions and ‘pair-share’ (Briggs,
2014) method I was able to follow the thoughts of more than a few students at a time. I shall
remember to enlist the services of my TA to cover that part of the class to which I am unable
to pay attention. It was found that 14% (4/30 students) were actively sharing with their peers
but refused to answer in front of the class possibly due to their introverted personalities.

Further research into higher order thinking (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2011) & post attending a
workshop on ‘thinking skills’ and examples of questions based on bloom’s taxonomy
(Dalton and Smith, 1986), in the future, I would like to give opportunity for strugglers to pose
questions using question words (what/where/when/how/why/who, etc.) while those who
are confident could answer these questions. I am determined to use differentiated
questioning tactics, according to their capacity to pose questions using appropriate question
words. This, I suspect, would increase children’s participation and self-regulation of learning.

11| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

It is my belief that in posing questions, they would have to think about the topic, thereby
exercising their (Fisher 2013 in Pollard, 2014, p.54) meta-cognition and leaning towards the
high quality teaching (James et al., 2007 in Pollard, 2014, p.54) wherein students take the
construct their own knowledge initiate and guide the direction of their learning.

In checking for understanding across subjects such as phonics and writing lead to an
important finding, a girl, categorised as HA was found to be a sight reader & does not apply
the knowledge of phonics in reading and writing (she obtained a score of 19 whereas a middle
ability child obtained a score of 23 out of 36). In light of this trend, I as a teacher grouped this
pupil into the intervention category of phonics rather than along with the peers of her ability
group. Also, I have noticed that children who perform well in mathematics do not necessarily
perform well in English. This has helped me in devising different groupings for these 2 subjects
for optimal learning.

Due to the age of these children and the high levels of energy, I also find tactics such as role
plays (teachingenglish.org.uk/article/role-play accessed May 2018) wherein they take the
role of the teacher or the role of the character of the books we are reading helps them engage
more enthusiastically. Although I am generally aware that the number of times I have had to
reproach students for being distracted had drastically reduced, however, I would like a
frequency measure of re-directing attention in different AfL techniques to authentically
indicate the best-suited method for this age group. An added benefit is that I have observed
maximal participation from students with Special Education Needs and Disability (SEND). I
would use a structured ‘At task’ observation tool to measure their engagement in different
methods of AfL.

Implication on my PoT:

Formative assessments or AfL, are feedback to the teacher about the direction of the learning
with respect to the pre-defined objectives. In this respect, it is imperative for me to introduce
the lesson objective & approach initially to the students and check for understanding at the
start of the lesson using a few AfL methods. This would help me in showing progress towards
the end of the lesson which is a requirement of the ‘best teaching practices’ as advocated by
GFS and a requirement of DSIB (Dubai School Inspection Bureau) during their school
inspections (School Inspection Supplement, 2018).

12| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Initially, I was of the opinion that Year 1 students are too young to objectively self-evaluate
using the ‘Thumbs-up/down’ (Arthur and Cremin, 2010) method as I found inconsistencies
between their self-evaluation & teacher’s evaluation of their task, wherein, frequently even
50% of HA students (3/6) would negatively evaluate their learning. Interview with an
educational consultant employed by the school revealed that this could be due to low self-
confidence. Further introspection led me to the suspicion that explicit sharing of learning
outcomes and to link self-evaluation of these pre-set outcomes would elicit a more objective
and analytical response. Instead of asking “have you understood about adjectives?’’ which is
more a lesson objective, I will phrase my questions leaning linked directly to the success
criteria “are you confident you can use appropriate words to describe a noun/character?”.

I would create a repertoire of AfL methods that appeals to my pupils such as class discussions
(Nystrand, 1997 by Pollard, 2014, p.290) of which I would play an active role, role plays,
project based learning which are good examples of situated cognition (Brown, Collins, &
Duguid, 1989) and lead to constructivist learning (Mascolo & Fischer, 2005) and change the
AfL methods at regular intervals to avoid a monotonous routine.

As an inclusive teacher, I would use different methods of AfL as a differentiating strategy

among different groups of students & ensure to create a trusting (Spendlove 2009 as in
Pollard, 2014, p.328) atmosphere in the classroom and encourage confidence in children to
express themselves and learn from mistakes as it breeds resilience in oneself (Brooks &
Goldstein, 2001). I will also endure to link the findings of AfL to lesson reflection & adjust
further instruction.

As these children are in the later stage of pre-operational stage (Piaget, 1961, as in Pollard,
2014, p. 1961), it is crucial to me that children need to know the practical relevance of their
learning to the real-life. Hence during the plenary I would assess the children on their ability
to make real-world connection of concepts such as additions/subtraction, using maps,
learning about buoyancy, facts, etc. John Dwewy (as cited in UCD-CTAG, 2018) which is a
realistic indicator of learning progressing in the right direction.

13| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

HLP #11- Talking about a student with parents or other caregivers

“At the end of the day, the most overwhelming key to a child's success is the positive

involvement of parents.”

- Jane Dee Hull, former American politician and educator (1935-to present)

John Hattie (2011) ranked ‘parental involvement’ as the 3rd influential factor in a child’s
learning as opposed to ‘home environment’ which ranks 54th out of a total of 150 factors
impacting learning. An influential literature states that (Deforges, 2003) parental engagement
matters even more than schools in shaping their children’s achievement. He concluded that
it is necessary to have meaningful conversations about subjects taught in school with children.
GFS has a very comprehensive parental engagement policy on their website, however, from
my observations, the points of interaction between teacher-parents occur only at those times
such as meetings. While teachers are considered as a Zone of Proximal Development - ZPD
(Gotsky, 1978 as in Pollard, 2014, p.39) wherein their learning is furthered by building upon
prior knowledge through interaction within a particular context, I fully believe that parents
can also simultaneously act as a child’s ZPD wherein they can reinforce or further the concepts
acquired in school. Also my curiosity regarding the impact on their progress produced by the
profoundly different relationship dynamics between parents & children to that of a rapport
between a teacher and her children. Since pattern recognition and interpersonal relationships
are my core strengths, I chose to study this HLTP in detail to identify opportunities for
collaborative venture.

As the school is still in its nascent stage, it has a large student population who come from non-
native English speaking cultures and curriculum. Only 43% of the students in my class have
been educated in NCE since the time of starting school. This leaves a big majority of the
students who hails from other curriculum such as Indian curriculum, Pakistan Board,
American Curriculum, etc. This being the case, it is my belief that it would have benefited
parents and children if the school had set up a workshop or a webinar for parents explaining
what is the approach that is followed in this school, how home learning is different from home
work and concrete examples of proactive measures that parents can take in encouraging
positive behaviour and attitudes that facilitate learning.

14| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

During the initial phonics screen test (NCE standard) done within the first 2 weeks at the start
of the school, it was noticed that 33% (10/30 students) did not the sound of single alphabets
(phonics). This was very concerning to me as this was an end of year expectation of
Foundation Stage 2 (FS2), wherein they are even taught the sounds of diagraphs such as ‘ch’
‘sh’ ‘ss’ etc. When questioned regarding the same, the experienced teachers found no cause
for alarm as they said they were waiting for children to ‘catch-up’ after a long break of 8
weeks. However, phonics progress was found among 26% of the students (8/30 students)
even after 2 months since the start. At this time, the whole year group decided to implement
phonics intervention, when parents were called for a ‘phonics workshop’ which lasted for 3
hours and the basics of phonics knowledge was discussed. Into the latter part the 1st term,
curriculum dictates that children were expected to construct sentences using capital letters
and full stops when more than 50% of the class could not decode or blend sounds to
form/write words. I, as a teacher, feel that had we engaged parents at the start of the term
and provided them resources for phonics intervention at home, at least 80% of them could
have been on par with curriculum expectations by the end of 1st term when the actual figures
were only 40%.

While teaching a mathematical concept of identifying greater and lesser numbers using
symbols, I found that 3 children in the whole class struggled with identifying the greater
numbers as I found that they lacked the pre-requisite concept of assigning value to numbers
which is also an end of year expectation of FS2. There is a student ‘I’ in this group of 3 students
who also faces difficulty with phonics. Hence, with the permission of my mentor, I embarked
on an intervention plan for this child, which was then shared with the parent (refer to
Appendix: Intervention Plan – I). This plan focused on core subjects: English & Mathematics.
I set out by analysing his performance in the initial phonics score and enlisted the sounds that
needed practice. And in mathematics, I have detailed the lack of fundamental concepts such
as counting from 0 to 100 by starting from any number, counting on/back using a number
line, using cubes to understand the incremental value of numbers. I had also suggested books
for her to read with her child every day so that eventually the child can start co-reading along
with the parent until he ready to completely read by himself.

15| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

This plan was handed as a hard copy to the parent and I spent 20 minutes on explaining this
plan. The parent was very appreciative of the targeted communication which made it very
clear for her on what to focus on and where to look for corresponding resources. By the end
of the 2nd term the child has improved by 25% on the phonics screening test (1st term – 15/40;
2nd term – 25/40). This is an illuminative case for a successful collaboration with parents. The
report was equally appreciated by the class teacher and was adopted as a sample template
to record the intervention programme of other LA children in the whole Year group.

In one particular instance wherein, I observed the class teacher talk to the parents about a
disengaged child in the second term, he invited the parents and asked them about their goals
for their daughter and shared his concerns about her behaviour in the class. He took the
inputs of the parents & asked them what they recommend he do to help the student instead
of complaining about her poor performance. As a result of this approach, parents were quickly
on board with the perception and expectation of the class teacher. Ever since this discussion,
there has been a steady improvement in her phonics ability which is clearly reflected in her
reading and writing skills. It is crucial that parents and teacher share the same goal for the
child so that their combined drive in the same direction is sure to result in student progress.
Negative feedback can be delivered in a diplomatic means that it encourages collaboration
instead of adversity (Hirsch, 2018). Although this was a very good initiative, it begs the
question as to why not have this meeting in the first term itself? It is the class teacher’s
opinion that we give an opportunity for the child to rectify his/her behaviour/attitude before
escalating the situation. This leads me to ponder, as to what is the ideal waiting time for a
teacher before she initiates parental contact in these situations.

I was also pleasantly surprised when parents of all 3 SEND children in this class agreed in
principle, to the requirement of additional support for their children within the classroom
through the presence of a Learning Support Assistant (LSA). Two of these parents hailing from
Middle East and South East Asia respectively refused the teachers recommendation for a LSA
last year for unknown reasons. This is an unequivocal example of how rapport with parents
inspires trust, that they are willing to accommodate a teacher’s recommendation even if
levies a financial strain on their economy. Based on literature review, I anticipated that based
on their cultural origin, they could refuse to recognise that their children had special needs

16| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

and thus require additional support (Palawat & May, 2012). This situation emphasizes the fact
trust in parent-teacher relationship is quintessential.

Fathers were invited to their respective child’s classroom in January 2017 to read a story book
with their child or a group of children for about 2 hours into the start of the school day. When
the day came to a close, all children in the class unanimously voted that ‘story time with dad’
was what they best enjoyed during the day. Also, the class teacher received a lot of
appreciative messages from 73% of parents (22/30) regarding this initiative and committed
to read to their children as often as possible. When followed up with the students individually
a week after this initiative, out of these 22 parents 12 (54%) were reading regularly with their
children. When I tested the effectiveness of these co-reading sessions, I questioned the
children about retelling the story and asked them a few general questions pertaining to the
story to which all of these children gave accurate answers. Contrary to literature review about
the benefit of co-reading (OCED, 2012) , 33% (4/12) children in the MA/HA group who were
not read to regularly by their parents, showed similar engagement & performance of that of
the other group in retelling a story & answering questions. This finding suggests that these
children could be highly self-regulated and intrinsically motivated (Dweck 1986, as in Pollard,
2014, p.51) which I as a teacher would aspire to instil in all my students.

Implication on my PoT:

As a student teacher, my philosophy insofar has been focused solely between the teacher &
the students. I had not realised the importance that parents play and the extent to which their
collaboration helps in the progress of students. Since there are no summative tests for Year
1, I would maintain a unit wise informal assessment to concretely communicate to parents
about concepts that need reinforcement and provide them with appropriate resources which
save them the time in searching for appropriate resources to aid planning. As I have noticed
that parents very much appreciate targeted communication supported by evidence rather
than superficial comments about their child’s performance. I would also encourage parents
to have a positive attitude to school and engage in their child’s education by asking questions
on topics they learnt, as their attitude in reflected in that of their child. A study by Quilliams
& Beran (2009), indicated that parental attitude towards school has a direct impact on the
student achievement & motivation. Due to the proportion of non-native speakers in the class,

17| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

I would strongly urge parents to invest time in developing their English reading skills since
research shows (Marian & Shook, 2012) the positive cognitive benefits of bilingualism,
especially in logic and reasoning which is directly related to Mathematics. Dealing with
parents and children of a vast cultural diversity, I shall check myself for cultural bias and be
accommodative and understanding individual towards a parent.

18| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Conclusion

In order for these 3 HLTPs to benefit learning effectively, mutual trust and respectful
relationship between teacher-students and teacher-parents in crucial. From my interaction
with teachers of Indian curriculum, my own experience with NCE, and context of the setting
of the school, it would seems to me that these 19 HLTPs seem to be applicable across cultural
and curricular contexts.

Having hailed from the Indian curriculum (CBS) that is more teacher centred, I see vast
differences in the way objectives are defined for a somewhat similar subject contents in the
NCE. In order to effectively leverage the intended benefit of the 19 HLTPs, it is essential to be
a reflective practitioner and a self-accepting individual who is not afraid to admit one’s
mistake or shortcomings and seek to remedy it in my journey of teaching practice.

To strengthen the authenticity of these findings, it would have been ideal to establish the
test-re-test reliability and inter-rater reliability of this case study which involves observation
of qualitative or quantitative data. Based on these findings, I would make informed changes
in my practice as to when, how, where and with whom can I leverage these practices for
students’ optimal progress. Although Windschtitl (2012, as in McLeskey 2015) states that all
the 19 HLTPs are fundamental, I would like to study in detail in extent of impact of all these
HLTPs for my respective classroom (lower or upper elementary) and selectively implement
strategies that is appropriate to the context.

In accordance to the UAE’s vision 2021 (https://www.vision2021.ae) to be on among the top

20 in the world’s best education system decided by TIMSS & PISA scores (Education, OECD,
2018) and to have high quality of teachers, I believe that these HLTPs will go a long way in
equipping a teacher with skills to create an environment for optimal learning and facilitate
children to access learning. In order to achieve these outcomes, as a newly qualified teacher,
I shall persevere in following and implementing these practices, however arduous I may find
it initially. I shall remember that a child’s progress is a collaborative effort of the teacher,
parent and the child itself.

19| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Appendix

Figure 1: Symbol chart for rules of writing

Home Learning Plan – Student I (Year 1C) Date: 7 Jan 2018

English:
Observation:
* He is able to do recognize most of the single sounds except ‘y/i‘ .
* Ok with only a few diagraphs such as ‘sh’ ‘ng’.
* Does not recognise diagraphs in a word while segmenting without cues from teacher.
* Faces difficulty to pronounce tricky words and to differentiate it from decodable words 3
letter words (Ex: tries to segment the word ‘the’).
* Difficulty faced while writing the phonemes/diagraphs even if he can mentally segment the
word (Ex: ‘root’)
Recommended Home Learning Plan:
* To be able to recognise the phonemes taught in the class in any given word without cues
from teacher (Teacher used to demarcate phonemes & diagraphs in a word to help students
segment & blend).
* Letter formation of sound. How to write ‘Ch’ ‘Sh’, etc. as he hears the sound in a word (Ex:
‘Chart’, ‘Shirt’)
* To blend and segment words using phonics (both oral and written).
* Hear the sounds in a word and form the letters in a writing. (c/k - phoneme; ch/ea-
Grapheme)
Focus phonemes & diagraphs:
i/y / ch/ th/ ai/ ee/igh/ oa/oo/ar/ or/ ur/ ow/ oi/ ear/ air/ ure/ er/ai/ay/ea/oy
Suggestions:
* Before writing these phonemes using a pencil. It might help to trace these in sand or using
finger painting so that Isa gets a tactile sensation of how these sounds are represented. It
could also be an engaging experience for him.

20| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

* Isa should be able to read the sounds in a word and write the sounds as he hears them.
* Reading simple and small story books with him while he follows the words with his fingers
also helps in recognition and pronunciation of words. It would be advisable to stick to the
same book for a little while until he starts to co-read the story.
* We recommend and suggest find fun and engaging ways to learn such as Education city links
provided by GFS to parents.
Maths:
Observation:
* Difficulty in counting backwards from 20 to 0 in a sequential order.
* Difficulty in assigning increasing/decreasing value to numbers from 0 to 20 in a number line
both forwards and backwards.
* Doesn’t recognise greater or smaller numbers between two non-consecutive numbers.
* Not fluent with ‘one more’ or ‘one less’ on the number line.
* Unsure of which way to move on the number line while counting on or backward from a
particular number. (Ex: when teacher says ‘counting on (forward) 4 steps from 6). He gets
confused about the starting point.
* Recognition of symbols for +/- and executing the function with resources
Recommended Home Learning Plan:
* To be confident in constructing a number line of up to 20 and to be able to count on or
backward correctly depending upon the instruction.
* Bodily movements of getting bigger or smaller (going down) when he sees the ‘+/-’ symbols
respectively.
* Learning to add & subtract using number line and blocks (fingers not recommended)
* Find engaging & fun ways (ex: draw a no. line on the floor & asking him to hop from while
moving up or down; real life examples such as: there were 6 slices of apples, you ate 4 how
many slices remain?, etc..)
Focus Concepts:
* Number line from 0 to 20 – counting forwards/backwards both in and out of sequence.
* Counting on (forward) or back from any no. on the number line. Decide the starting point
and direction of movement (towards 0 for counting back or towards 20 for counting
on/forward)
* recognize greater or smaller no. between 2 non-consecutive numbers between 0 to 20.

21| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

Incremental Value of Numbers - Line line

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

* Recognise all terminologies of addition and subtraction and the symbols and execute the
function with blocks or on a number line up to 20.
(Addition – plus, more, all together, sum, total
Subtraction – minus, take away, less,)
P.S:
* We recommend not more than 40 minutes during a school day and 2 hours during off days.
* Due to attention span of children between 5-6 years, we recommend home learning with a
break after every 20 mins.
* We suggest to stay on the same topic until the concept has been embedded concretely
before moving to the next topic as all the focus points mentioned are in a progressively order.
* Do feedback to us periodically (about once in 2 weeks) about the student’s progress,
obstacles and new approaches adopted.

22| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

References

* A Carousel Activity: Engaging the Learner on Multiple Levels of Learning, by Ben Graffam,
Ph.D
https://www.uticaschools.org/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=273&dat
aid=286&FileName=Carousel%20Activity%20Protocol.pdf (Retrieved 05 May 2018)

* Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and
Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition.
New York: Longman.

* Arthur, A., 2010. Learning to Teach in the Primary School. Routledge.

* Asher, J. J. (1969), The Total Physical Response Approach to Second Language Learning. The

Modern Language Journal, 53: 3-17. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1969.tb04552.x

* Ball, D. and Forzani, F. (2011). Building a Common Core for Learning to Teach: And

Connecting Professional Learning to Practice. American Educator, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp.17-21,

38-39.

* Brooks, R., 2001. Raising Resilient Children: Fostering Strength, Hope and Optimism in Your
Child. McGraw-Hill Contemporary.

* Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.

Educational researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

* Dalton, J. & Smith, D., (1986). Extending Children’s Special Abilities: Strategies for primary

classrooms (pp. 36-37).

* Desforges, C. 2003, The Impact of Parental Involvement, Parental Support and Family
Education on Pu,pil Achievement and Adjustment: a Literature Review Research Report, DfES
Publications, NG15 0DJ, Produced by the Department for Education and Skills

23| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

* Dubai School Inpection Bureau -

https://khda.gov.ae/Areas/Administration/Content/FileUploads/Publication/Documents/En

glish/20170716151230_20170716144744_School_Inspection_Supplement_En.pdf

* Ealing Council - Effective Deployment of Teaching Assistants - A good practice guide (2011)
(www.ealing.gov.uk)

* Education Theory/Constructivism and Social Constructivism - UCD - CTAG. 2018. Education

Theory/Constructivism and Social Constructivism - UCD - CTAG. [ONLINE] Available at:

http://www.ucdoer.ie/index.php/Education_Theory/Constructivism_and_Social_Constructi

vism. [Accessed 07 May 2018].

* Education - OECD. 2018. Education - OECD. [ONLINE] Available at:

http://www.oecd.org/education/. [Accessed 07 May 2018].

* Edutopia. 2018. Student-Centered Learning: It Starts With the Teacher | Edutopia. [ONLINE]

Available at: https://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-centered-learning-starts-with-teacher-

john-mccarthy. [Accessed 07 May 2018].

* First-Rate Education System . [ONLINE] Available at:

https://www.vision2021.ae/en/national-agenda-2021/list/first-rate-circle. [Accessed 07 May

2018].

* Gablinske, Patricia Brady, "A CASE STUDY OF STUDENT AND TEACHER RELATIONSHIPS AND
THE EFFECT ON STUDENT LEARNING" (2014). Open Access Dissertations. Paper 266.
http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/oa_diss/266

* Goldman, J. (2012). What Is Classical Conditioning? (And Why Does It Matter?). [online]
Blogs.scientificamerican.com. Available at: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-
animal/2012/01/11/what-is-classical-conditioning-and-why-does-it-matter

24| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

*Griss, S., 1998. Minds in Motion: A Kinesthetic Approach to Teaching Elementary Curriculum.

Heinemann.

* Hattie, John & Biggs, John & Purdie, Nola. (1996). Effects of Learning Skills Interventions on
Student Learning: A Meta-Analysis. Dr. Nola Purdie. 66. 10.3102/00346543066002099.

* Hattie, Timperley, J, T, 2007. The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research,

[Online]. Vol 77, Issue 1, 81 - 112. Available
at: http://rer.sagepub.com/content/77/1/81 [Accessed 18 January 2018].

* Hattie, J., 2011. Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning. 1st ed. Oxon
OX14 4RN: Routledge.

* Hirsh, J. 2018. Framing Difficult Feedback for Parents, GEORGE LUCAS EDUCATIONAL
FOUNDATION, EduTopia. Retrieved from website-
https://www.edutopia.org/article/framing-difficult-feedback-parents

* InformED. 2018. 21 Ways to Check for Student Understanding - InformED. [ONLINE]

Available at: https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/21-ways-to-check-for-

student-understanding/. [Accessed 07 May 2018].

* Marian, V., & Shook, A. (2012). The Cognitive Benefits of Being Bilingual. Cerebrum: The

Dana Forum on Brain Science, 2012, 13.

* McLeskey, J., & Brownell, M. (2015). High-leverage practices and teacher preparation in

special education (Document No. PR-1). Retrieved from University of Florida, Collaboration

for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability, and Reform Center website:

http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/best-practice-review/ [accessed 20 December 2016].

* MF Mascolo, KW Fischer, 2005, Constructivist theories, Cambridge encyclopedia of child

development, 49-63

25| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

* Moss, M., 2009. Advancing Formative Assessment in Every Classroom: A Guide for
Instructional Leaders. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
* Palawat, Manisara; May, Michael E., The Impact of Cultural Diversity on Special Education
Provision in the United States, Journal of the International Association of Special Education,
v13 n1 p58-63 Spr 2012

* OECD (2012), Let's Read Them a Story! The Parent Factor in Education, PISA, OECD
Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264176232-en

* Preston James (2013) https://www.brighthubeducation.com/teaching-middle-

school/85377-chunky-lesson-plans-and-the-new-classroom-reality/
* Pollard, A., 2014. Readings for reflective teaching. 2nd ed. London: Bloomsbury

* Quilliams, L., & Beran, T. (2009) Children at Risk for Academic Failure: A Model of Individual
and Family Factors. Exceptionality Education International, 19, 63-76. Retrieved from
https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/eei/vol19/iss2/6

* Ressler, K. J. (2010). Amygdala Activity, Fear, and Anxiety: Modulation by Stress. Biological
Psychiatry, 67(12), 1117–1119. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.04.027

* Rowe, M.B. (1972). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables: Their influence on

language, logic and fate control. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National

Association for Research on Science Teaching, Chicago.

* Semke, H. D. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), 195-202.

* Six Seconds. 2018. Social Emotional Learning, Brain Research, and Healthy Classrooms.
[ONLINE] Available at: http://www.6seconds.org/2013/05/29/healthy-classrooms-
emotional-intelligence-and-brain-research/. [Accessed 07 May 2018].

* Stahl, Robert J. 1994. Using "Think-Time" and "Wait-Time" Skillfully in the Classroom. ERIC

Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education Bloomington IN.

* Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage. Thousand Oaks, CA.

26| P a g e
 HIGH LEVERAGE TEACHING PRACTICES – A CASE STUDY

* Sutton J, Austin Z. Qualitative Research: Data Collection, Analysis, and Management. The
Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 2015;68(3):226-231.) -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4485510/

* Wiggins, G, 2012. Seven Keys to Effective Feedback. ACSD-Educational Leadership, [Online].

Vol 70, 10-16. Available at: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/sept12/vol70/num01/Seven-Keys-to-Effective-Feedback.aspx

* William, W., 2011. Embedded Formative Assessment. SOLUTION TREE LLC.

27| P a g e