Monthly Archives: November 2012

More SOLO Stations

I haven’t blogged for a while as I have been working on the reading for my final MA module on the use of SOLO in English, which I will write a post about soon. However, the use of SOLO in lessons has continued.

We have now moved on from Wilfred Owen’s poetry to Shakespeare, Macbeth to be specific. I really want to build more independence and self-motivation in my students and wanted to see whether the impact of the SOLO stations lesson (see posts here and here), last half term, in encouraging this was just a fluke.

Planning

This time, as I already had a bank of tasks that I had used with the Owen lesson, it was much easier, and quicker to plan. I came up with two more tasks, one of which I had originally planned to use with the whole class, the others I tweaked from the Owen tasks. I allowed 3 tasks per level (Multistructural through to Extended Abstract) and had 10 copies of each task (printed onto A4, 2 tasks to a page). I think I will get these tasks copied onto coloured card and then laminated so they can easily be reused – possibly taking out specific text references on some so they can be used across the subject.

Although the lesson had worked very well last time, I wasn’t happy with the visual impact of the stations. So, this time, I covered the display board with plain (red) backing paper and pinned the tasks onto that in three vertical columns. This made it much more visually appealing and far easier for the students to see.

This time, I planned to use the lesson twice, lesson 1 for my PM observation and again, with a different group, for lesson 3. The observed group had done SOLO Stations before but it would be new to the second group.

The Lesson

I decided to have two questions on the board for the start as our key focus, for bell work. This meant the group had something to read and think about as they came in and settled. My questions were: ‘In a play about killing a king, why is the character of Banquo so important?’ and ‘What message do you think Shakespeare is trying to present to the audience?’

First, the groups evaluated their starting point for two areas  – being able to comment on character and explaining Shakespeare’s use of language – using a rubric. As we have already spent a few lessons studying the play, these focused on the Multistructural, Relational and Extended Abstract levels. There are  3 coloured pages in the student planners – red, yellow and green, so I decided to colour code the levels and ask the students to open their planner at the page or pages that indicated their starting level. This allowed me to glance around the room to see where students had placed themselves.

I recapped/introduced the protocol for SOLO Stations and asked that, as they went through the tasks, they updated their coloured planner page to indicate their progress.

The groups selected their tasks and got down to work. In both classes, students chose a variety of tasks at a variety of levels. Again, I noticed that despite having some computer based tasks, only a few students chose to use the laptops.

The lessons went well with students working alone or in small groups, as they chose, working at their own pace and moving onto new tasks as they felt ready. I was able to circulate, give 1-2-1 support and question the G&T students to draw out higher responses. It felt calm and purposeful, which I had not been entirely sure about as it was Children in Need day.

At the end of the lesson I allowed 10 minutes for the plenary. Firstly, I asked them to use the rubric to re-evaluate their SOLO level. Then, to write their level and why they thought they had achieved it onto a post-it, which was stuck onto the SOLO display. Finally, we had a brief discussion based on the two initial questions. Both groups commented on Banquo as Macbeth’s friend and that his killing was a bigger personal betrayal – I had expected this. However, they also mentioned that Banquo acted as a balance for Macbeth, a man who had been given a similar prophesy but had taken a different moral route. They linked this to religious beliefs about free-will. This discussion was very useful, but I suspect we needed to allow a little more time for it.

Student Comments

I reviewed the comments the students made about their learning on the post-its after the lesson. These are some of them:

  • I have reached Relational because I can now explain a deeper meaning to the language and the relationship between the characters
  • I think I am Multistructural because I can explain the meaning of sections of the play, but I am also Relational because I can also explain the relationship between the characters
  • After this lesson I am fully confident in completing Relational because I can easily explain why language is used and the relations bewteen characters
  • Helped me understand the language that Shakespeare uses.

The students’ comments showed that they were able to confidently reflect on and articulate their level of learning. This was a very useful task as it demonstrated the students’ confidence in using SOLO terminology to duscuss and evaluate their own learning.

The Observation

I was given a 1 (outstanding) for the lesson, which, obviously, I am really pleased with. Some of the key points from the feedback were:

“Learning is differentiated and students learning is independent. Progress is measured during the lesson…Questioning on 1-1 level is deep and provides opportunities for high level learning. Well behaved and keen. Generally self-motivated. Productive atmosphere / purposeful learning environment.”

The thing I liked the most about the lesson was that it didn’t feel rushed or like hard work. I had time to talk to students at much greater length than during a traditional lesson. It was also nice to see how quickly the group, who had not done this style of lesson before, got to grips with it. I will definitely be using SOLO Stations again.