• Teaching & Learning FEATURED TOPICS
• AI and Digital Learning
• Student Writing Ability
• Coaching and Professional Development
• Maths-related
• Assessment
• Science
This issue explores how educators are reimagining teaching, learning, and professional growth through innovation, reflective practice, and research.
Transforming Educational Landscapes
Preparing our Students for the Rapidly Progressive Digital World Through Effective Teaching and Learning.
James Crawford
Channelling AI for Change in the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Microsoft Reading Progress on Y5 Students
Can AI Tools Enhance the Learning Outcomes of Gifted KS2 Students?
Kieran Birrell, Educational Technology Lead, Deira International School
Bridging the Gap: Effective Multiple Choice Assessment Strategies
Nadia Jouied, Universal American School
The Impact of Actionable Feedback on Student Performance and Engagement in Visual Arts
Alina Nistor & Domanie Denniston, Universal American School
How does Giving Autonomy and Implementing a Coaching Approach to Quality Assurance Influence Teaching and Learning Outcomes and Teachers Perceptions of QA?
Sarah Smith, Deira International School
How Can the IB Learner Profile be Utilised as a Catalyst for Fostering Transformational Culture and Organisational Cohesion with Administrative Staff in a School Setting?
From Prescriptive Targets to Coaching, a Case Study on the Shift in Performance Management
Ashley Jade Creedon , Safa Community School
Reimagining Professional Development: The Impact of Removing Lesson Drop-Ins on Teacher Growth, Confidence, and Wellbeing in a HighPerforming School
Gaynor Dale, Head of Primary, Deira International School, Dubai
The Impact of Child-Led Learning on Teacher Satisfaction and Professional Growth in KS1.
Jemma Stanton, South View School
Scaffolding Science for English Language Learners: An Action Research Study
Roua Alhalawani, Hartland International School
Metacognitive Self-Awareness and Task Quantity: Effects on Student Learning Quality in Physics Education
Jemma Stanton, South View School
Solving Equations, Unlocking Confidence: The Impact of Pre-Teaching on Year 10 SEND Learners in Mathematics
Making Mixed Ability Mathematics Meaningful: Adaptive Teaching to Accelerate Progress
Chloe Warren, Hartland International School
Reducing Maths Anxiety and Enhancing Problem-Solving Skills Through Goal Free Problems
Tyler Barnett, Safa British School
Can Peer Collaboration Improve Mathematical Engagement and Attainment in Year 4?
Yvonne Ward, Hartland International School
Gross Motor Interventions to Improve Handwriting in Early Years Classrooms
Claire Heylin, Deira International School, Dubai
The Impact of Peer and SelfAssessment on Writing Progress in a Primary School Classroom
Daniel Thomas
Children as Writers: Does Choice Impact Motivation in Year 6 Writing?
Alice Bidder, Hartland International School
How does the removal of 3 differentiated chilli challenges impact children's motivation and confidence with their learning?
Thomas Fitt
Implementing Metacognitive Strategies to Improve Long-Term Retention in Foundation Subjects
Katie Glendening, Kings’ School Al Barsha
Note-Taking: What Do International Students Report About Their Experiences with Cornell Notes and Its Impact in Lessons?
Justine L. Elamatha,Universal American School, Dubai,
Author name: James Crawford
Introduction
Institutional Affiliation: Safa British School
Since the publication of the 2014 national curriculum for Computing in England, the digital world has undergone a transformation of seismic proportions. In less than a decade, the rise of cloud computing, the explosion of app-based ecosystems, and the mainstream integration of artificial intelligence have reshaped how we live, work, and learn. Virtual assistants, machine learning algorithms, and collaborative digital platforms that were once experimental or niche are now part of everyday life. Meanwhile, the workplace has rapidly digitised, demanding ever-more sophisticated technological fluency from the next generation.
This technological shift was brought into even sharper focus during the COVID-19 pandemic. Practically overnight, schools across the country were thrust into a remote learning environment, relying on digital tools to maintain educational continuity.
For many, it exposed a digital skills gap—not only among students, but also among staff—who found themselves navigating unfamiliar platforms, juggling file sharing, virtual classrooms, and online feedback systems. While the experience accelerated digital adoption in some areas, it also revealed the lack of preparedness within the system and highlighted just how far curriculum content and classroom practice lag behind the realities of a connected world.
Yet despite this transformation, the national curriculum has remained largely static. While it was a bold step forward at the time of its release—placing emphasis on computational thinking and programming—it now feels outdated and vague when viewed against the backdrop of current and emerging technologies. Crucially, it offers limited direction on areas such as digital collaboration, data literacy, cybersecurity awareness, and ethical Artificial Intelligence (AI) use—skills that are essential for navigating the modern world.
This disconnect is further exacerbated by the widespread adoption of tablets in primary classrooms. While their portability and intuitive design have improved access to learning, they often reduce opportunities for pupils to develop more advanced digital skills. Keyboard proficiency, file organisation, document formatting, and efficient web navigation are often sidelined. As a result, pupils may reach secondary school lacking foundational competencies that underpin both academic success and future employability.
If we are to prepare our students not just to consume technology, but to shape and lead with it, then digital learning must be reimagined with urgency and purpose.
The United Kingdom’s (UK) national curriculum for Computing, introduced in 2014, is increasingly unfit for purpose in today’s digital landscape. While it marked an early shift toward computational thinking, it offers limited guidance on key areas such as artificial intelligence, data literacy, and collaborative digital tools (Ingoldmells Academy, n.d.).
The COVID-19 pandemic brought these gaps into sharp focus. Schools were forced into remote learning with limited preparation, exposing inequalities in access to technology and highlighting a widespread lack of digital confidence among both students and teachers (Cambridge Assessment, 2021). These challenges underscored the urgency of embedding digital skills more systematically into the curriculum.
Another concern is the dominance of tablet use in primary schools, which—while user-friendly—often limits opportunities for pupils to develop essential skills such as typing, file organisation, and multitasking across applications (Department for Education, 2022).
Without this foundation, students enter secondary education underprepared for increasingly tech-driven expectations.
The digital divide remains a significant issue. Pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds face barriers in accessing devices and consistent internet connectivity, which affects engagement and long-term attainment (Education Policy Institute, 2021). Compounding this is the variability in teacher confidence, with many educators citing a lack of digital training and support (Lenovo, 2020).
Collectively, the literature makes a compelling case for modernising digital education—ensuring all pupils are equipped with the skills, confidence, and tools needed to thrive in a fast-moving, AI-augmented world.
As a result of this current digital climate, this topic was chosen to investigate how we can significantly improve student’s confidence and ability with more advanced digital tools. Through adaptation of the action research model, these parameters can be monitored in real time to assess the impact and identify further areas to support and develop.
1. What tools do students need to adapt to the ever-changing digital world?
2. How can we develop their confidence and ability within lessons?
3. Can we integrate the lesson in an effective cross-curricular way? In response to the growing disconnect between the national curriculum for Computing and the realities of modern digital life, our school has adopted a more deliberate and structured approach to digital education. For the first time this academic year, Digital Learning has been introduced as a dedicated, standalone subject across upper Key Stage 2 (KS2).
This represents a significant shift away from the previous model, where computing skills were embedded more passively within broader curriculum areas.
The rationale behind this change was twofold. Firstly, we aimed to significantly improve students’ confidence and proficiency when working with laptops—devices that many pupils had limited experience using due to the predominance of tablet-based learning. Secondly, we sought to give students meaningful, guided exposure to software and digital tools that mirror real-world applications. To that end, the programme has centred on purposeful use of the Microsoft 365 suite— including Word, PowerPoint, Teams and Excel—with a strong emphasis on transferable, work-ready skills such as formatting, saving, presenting and collaborating digitally. Alongside these applications, a key strand of the curriculum has been the introduction of coding as a language for problem solving and creative expression. Using platforms such as Scratch, students have been supported to plan, build and refine their own interactive games, incorporating elements of logic, sequencing, variables and user input. Although the integration of AI tools into the curriculum remains an emerging and less developed area, early steps have been taken to introduce students to responsible use of generative technologies. This includes class discussions around data privacy and ethics, as well as limited, teacher-guided exploration of AI-assisted features such as predictive text, image generation and editing tools.
This strategic shift—from incidental exposure to structured, skills-based instruction—has enabled us to provide greater consistency, progression and depth in digital learning. Lessons are timetabled weekly, with clear objectives, assessment opportunities and cross curricular links that encourage pupils to apply their skills in meaningful contexts.
In upper KS2 (Y5 & Y6) we have 287 students on roll and of that group, 91 students were selected in Y6 to complete tasks throughout the academic year to gather data across several different aspects of the research project.
A range of methods were used to collect our data, combining: 1. Surveys at the beginning and end of the academic year to measure the confidence levels of students.
2. Moderated assessment tasks to measure academic progress.
3. Pupil interviews.
Quantitative data has been analysed to provide statistics and numerical data whereas pupil interviews and teacher judgements provide more qualitative data to ensure we cover all areas of the study in a clear, triangulated approach.
At the beginning of the academic year, baseline data showed that students’ confidence in using a laptop was relatively low, with an average rating of 5.02 out of 10.
A significant number of students rated themselves at level 4 or below, indicating limited familiarity and comfort with laptopbased tasks. In contrast, end-of-year results demonstrate a marked improvement, with the average confidence level rising to 8.49 (see Figure 1).
Over 70% of students now rate their confidence between levels 8 and 10, reflecting the positive impact of the dedicated Digital Learning programme in building competence, independence and assurance in working with laptops. Figure 1 shows the clear rise in confidence levels as a result of the digital learning sessions.
A key strand of our Digital Learning provision this year has
focused on developing students’ confidence and competence in block-based coding using Scratch. A class in Year 6 was selected to be the focus of this task and the results of their teacher assessment for the objectives within the topic can be seen in Table 1.
At the outset of the unit, baseline assessments revealed that the majority of students were working below the expected standard, with 73.91% of pupils assessed as Emerging+, and no pupils exceeding age-related expectations. Only 26.09% of students were meeting expectations at the start of the topic.
By the end of the unit, the impact of structured, skillsbased teaching was evident. 91.30% of students were working at or above the expected standard, with 26.09% achieving Exceeding+ and a further 13.04% assessed as Exceeding.
The number of pupils below expectation reduced significantly, with just two students remaining within the Emerging+ category and none assessed as Emerging (see Figure 2).
The learning sequence focused on building foundational programming skills through a game design project inspired by Flappy Bird. Pupils progressed through key competencies including sprite customisation, use of variables, application of loops and clones, broadcast messaging, and peer assessment. This structured and practical approach enabled students to embed computational thinking and articulate their ideas through creative design.
Overall, the cohort's KHDA grading improved from ‘Weak’ at the beginning of the topic to ‘Very Good’ by the end, clearly reflecting the effectiveness of the standalone Digital Learning curriculum in raising attainment and deepening understanding in coding.
A small number of responses included humorous or unconventional phrasing, which, while not directly contributing to the sentiment analysis, still reflected an overall sense of enthusiasm and comfort with the subject. Only one response indicated a negative feeling (“anxious”), highlighting the inclusive and supportive nature of the digital learning environment.
An analysis of 91 anonymised pupil responses reveals an overwhelmingly positive perception of digital learning. The most frequently cited word was “confident”, directly or indirectly expressed by over 25 students, indicating a strong sense of self-assurance in their digital abilities following the programme (see Figure 3).
In addition to confidence, many pupils described their experience using uplifting terms such as “amazing”, “great”, “fun”, “excited”, and “intelligent”. These responses suggest that students not only felt they had developed their skills, but also genuinely enjoyed the process of learning through digital tools.
Overall, the feedback points to a significant shift not only in competence, but also in student confidence and engagement. The structured, standalone approach to digital learning has clearly contributed to improved attitudes and a positive classroom culture around the use of technology.
Pupil responses to the question “On a scale of 1–10, how prepared do you feel for Secondary with your learning from digital learning sessions?” reflect a strong sense of readiness. The average score across all students was 8.12, with the majority of responses falling between Level 7 and Level 10 (Figure 4). Specifically, 26 students rated themselves at Level 8, 20 at Level 9, and 15 at Level 10—suggesting that over 70% of students feel highly confident in their digital preparedness for the next stage of education. Only a very small number of students (2) rated themselves at Level 5 or below.
This data highlights the significant role digital learning has played in supporting transition readiness. With secondary education placing increasing demands on independent learning, digital organisation, collaboration through platforms like Microsoft Teams, and confident use of applications such as Word and PowerPoint, it is critical that students enter this next phase with not just exposure, but proficiency.
By embedding these skills through structured, progressive teaching, the digital learning curriculum has empowered students to feel equipped and independent—two key traits needed to succeed in a more self-directed, digitally integrated secondary environment.
Conclusion
This study set out to address the growing gap between the digital demands of modern life and the outdated, ambiguous framework provided by the current national curriculum for Computing. By introducing digital learning as a standalone subject, we aimed to create a more structured and impactful pathway to build students’ confidence, digital fluency, and readiness for the future.
The results have been compelling. Across the academic year, students demonstrated significant growth in their confidence using laptops, their ability to apply real-world tools such as Microsoft 365, and their understanding of fundamental coding concepts.
Quantitative data shows a clear upward trend in both selfreported confidence levels and academic attainment, while qualitative feedback highlights students’ increased enjoyment, engagement, and sense of empowerment in digital contexts.
Importantly, the programme has also made a tangible impact on students’ readiness for secondary education. With an average self-assessed preparedness rating of 8.12 out of 10, the majority of students now feel equipped with the tools, platforms, and digital mindset required for success in the next stage of their learning journey.
While the integration of artificial intelligence remains in its early stages, this area presents a rich opportunity for further curriculum development. Future work should focus on embedding safe, age-appropriate exposure to AI tools and data ethics, ensuring students are not only competent users of digital technology, but also critical and informed participants in an AI-driven world.
Overall, this research confirms the value of a deliberately structured and skills-focused approach to digital education. As technology continues to evolve, our curriculum and pedagogy must do the same - ensuring that all students are empowered to thrive in the digital age, not just as consumers, but as creators and leaders of the future.
Cambridge Assessment. (2021). Digital divide in UK education during COVID-19 pandemic: Literature review. https://www. cambridgeassessment.org.uk/Images/628843-digital-dividein-uk-education-during-covid-19-pandemic-literature-review. pdf
Department for Education. (2022). Technology in schools: Survey 2022 to 2023. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ media/655f8b823d7741000d420114/Technology_in_schools_ survey__2022_to_2023.pdf
Education Policy Institute. (2021). Education in England: Annual report 2021. https://epi.org.uk/publications-andresearch/education-in-england-annual-report-2021/
Ingoldmells Academy. (n.d.). Computing. https://www. ingoldmellsacademy.org/page/?pid=1250&title=Computing
Lenovo. (2020). Technology in schools: Whitepaper. https:// techtoday.lenovo.com/origind8/sites/default/ files/2020-01/Technology-in-schools-whitepaper.pdf
Background
This study analysed the impact of Microsoft Reading Progress, a reading fluency tool powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI), in supporting Year 5 students in a primary British Curriculum School in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The use of artificial intelligence is developing at an incredible rate in all fields, not just educational settings (Tahiru, 2021). It is therefore critical to assess which AI tools deliver on their promise of impact. As a primary classroom teacher, anecdotal observations and experience have suggested that much of the current application of AI in schools focuses on workload reduction, such as planning and assessment. There have been some studies on AI as a direct teaching tool, for example Alqahtani (2020) and Jamshidifarsani et al. (2019) highlighted that technology-assisted interventions significantly boost oral reading fluency through activities like repeated reading, error correction, and modelling. However, the research remains in its infancy, and little exists specifically on Microsoft Reading Progress. This study aims to add to this growing pool.
1. What is the impact of Microsoft Reading Progress on reading test outcomes as per the New Group Reading Test (NGRT) scores?
2. How does it affect reading fluency, including words per minute (WPM) and accuracy?
This intervention was conducted during Islamic sessions (when approximately half the class leave for Islamic, whilst the remaining children stay behind to go back over previously taught material or receive interventions for gaps in attainment). This meant it was not possible to trial the tool with the whole class. This limitation raises a valid ethical question: should pioneering educational technology be available to all pupils, or is it reasonable to limit it to a small group?
The educational issue addressed here is reading fluency. Ideally, every child would read daily with an adult in school and at home, however this is not feasible in a typical Year 5 classroom. As a result, children who still struggle with fluency at this point often fall behind and it can be difficult to close this particular gap. Microsoft Reading Fluency, therefore, appears to an ideal tool to remedy this; a teacher and pupil-friendly tool providing personalised feedback and increasing fluency.
3. Does improvement in AI-tracked reading fluency correlate with improved comprehension scores?
4. What are the benefits and limitations of implementing AI in everyday classroom teaching?
The intervention took place over three terms and focused on students who did not attend Islamic sessions. This was a sample group of mixed-ability reading children according to their NGRT scores. Children engaged with Microsoft Reading Progress two times per week during Islamic lessons. NGRT data and AI-derived fluency metrics were collected at three points: Term 1 (baseline), Term 2 (midpoint), and Term 3 (endline).
Microsoft Reading Progress was used independently by children to record themselves reading selected texts. Data from these sessions were then analysed for words per minute, accuracy, and other fluency metrics. NGRT standardised scores were used to measure reading comprehension.
Student/
Student 1
Overall, the group’s average NGRT scores showed a slight fluctuation across terms, with a mean of 114.3 in Term 1, a minor decrease to 113.5 in Term 2, followed by an increase to 118.7 in Term 3. In contrast, average words per minute (WPM) demonstrated more consistent growth over time, rising from a mean of 103.8 in Term 1 to 119.6 in Term 2, and further increasing to 128.5 in Term 3. Accuracy, measured as the percentage of correct words, also improved steadily, starting at 79.5% in Term 1, increasing to 85.9% in Term 2, and reaching 90.1% in Term 3 (see Table 1).
This indicates a steady and significant increase in fluency over time.
Notably, the increase in NGRT scores was more modest, suggesting that while fluency improved substantially, this did not always directly translate into progress in comprehension.
Over time, overall group data shows a consistent increase in both WPM and accuracy. The average NGRT scores also improved but with more variability. For example:
• Student 1’s NGRT score increased marginally (93 → 97 → 94), while his accuracy jumped from 59% to 81%, and WPM increased by 35.
• Student 4 made dramatic progress in accuracy (50% → 88%) and WPM (67 → 110), with a more modest NGRT increase (103 → 109).
• Student 2, however, improved in NGRT from 84 to 107, but his WPM fluctuated and slightly decreased by Term 3. This highlights that while fluency often improved, comprehension progress was not guaranteed and depended on broader literacy development.
Changes in WPM throughout Terms 1-3 compared to changes in NGRT scores suggests a slight positive relationship. Students who gained more in fluency also tended to gain in comprehension, though there were some anomalies to this. This could suggest that, despite some outliers, improvement in reading fluency using Microsoft Reading Progress is associated with improved reading test outcomes.
Most students showed improvement in at least two of the three measures (NGRT, WPM, accuracy) over the three-term intervention. For example:
• Student 13 made the most progress in accuracy (43% → 78%) and showed corresponding growth in NGRT (112 → 110).
• Student 5 slightly declined in NGRT (117 → 108) despite high accuracy and WPM gains, highlighting the complex relationship between fluency and comprehension.
Compared to expected Year 5 progress benchmarks (usually 6–9 NGRT points annually), over half of the students exceeded or met this expectation. However, a formal control group to validate this was lacking.
The findings suggest that Microsoft Reading Progress has a positive impact on fluency. However, the tool is not a magic bullet. Although, in many cases, it can be seen to also support reading comprehension (as evidenced in improvements in NGRT scores), its efficacy in this area is limited. Whilst it can support one-to-one reading practice when adult time is constrained, it does not in any way substitute guided discussions, or comprehension strategies led by teachers and its vocabulary instruction is limited.
Some limitations of the study included:
• Small sample size: The study was limited to 13 pupils due to timetable constraints.
• Access issues: Not all students had consistent access to iPads or a quiet environment, impacting the frequency and quality of usage.
• Variability in texts: Reading Progress does not always allow for curriculum-linked texts, limiting contextual learning.
Despite these constraints, the research demonstrated that Microsoft Reading Progress is a worthwhile supplementary tool. The key is that it is delivered in partnership with quality classroom teaching and parental support at home. Its value could be increased if linked explicitly to class texts, vocabulary lists, and phonics/ spelling patterns, which in this study, it was not.
This project significantly altered how I view AI in the classroom.
Previously, I considered AI largely as a tool for reducing teacher workload, primarily used in planning and assessment. However, this study demonstrated that AI could serve as an active pedagogical aid, significantly supporting teachers to manage differentiation and engage pupils.
The tool’s suitability for Guided Reading sessions was a particular strength. It provided a clear, purposeful task for pupils working independently whilst the teacher focused on small-group instruction. If refined, such tools could significantly support the issue of reading inequality in classrooms with limited time and staffing.
Alqahtani, A. Y., & Rajkhan, A. A. (2020). E-learning critical success factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comprehensive analysis of e-learning managerial perspectives. Educa-tion Sciences, 10(9), 216. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci10090216
Jamshidifarsani, H., Garbaya, S., Lim, T., & Blazevic, P. (2018). Technology-based reading intervention programs for elementary grades: An analytical review. Computers & Education, 128, 427–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2018.10.003
Tahiru, F. (2021). AI in education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cases on Infor-mation Technology, 23(1), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.4018/JCIT.2021010102
In the ever-evolving landscape of education, the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer a futuristic dream; it is a present-day imperative. Schools across the globe are being challenged to rethink traditional pedagogies and adopt innovative technologies that can personalise learning, deepen understanding, and promote independence. At the heart of this transformation lies one fundamental question:
CAN AI MEANINGFULLY ENHANCE THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR MOST ABLE STUDENTS?
This action research project, conducted at Deira International School in Dubai, explored that question with a specific focus on gifted Key Stage 2 (KS2) students. Our aim was to investigate how AI tools could enhance their learning outcomes in core academic subjects: Mathematics, English, and Science. With the rapid advancement of tools like Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT)-powered chatbots and platforms such as Century Tech, we asked: can AI act as more than just a support tool? Can it become a co-pilot in the learning journey?
As Holmes, Bialik, and Fadel (2019) assert in Artificial Intelligence in Education, "AI has the potential to transform education, not just through automation, but by changing how we teach, how students learn, and how learning is assessed" (p. 23).
This project set out to explore that transformative potential firsthand
Our investigation focused on a carefully selected cohort of gifted Year 5 and Year 6 students, identified using Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT4) data, teacher assessments, and internal grading. The programme was structured around three terms, each highlighting a different core subject: Term 1 (Mathematics), Term 2 (English), and Term 3 (Science).
AI tools were embedded strategically, not as content delivery mechanisms, but as scaffolding systems that encouraged independent thought. Century Tech was used diagnostically; custom AI chatbots guided inquiry; and platforms like BriskTeaching and Magic School enabled students to explore beyond the curriculum.
Fitzpatrick et al. (2023) emphasize that AI's real value in education is its capacity to tailor learning, stimulate critical thinking, and transform students into active, engaged problemsolvers - a philosophy that underpinned our entire approach (see Figure 1).
• Setting: Deira International School, Dubai
• Participants: A focused cohort of 10–12 gifted students selected from Year 5 and Year 6, each demonstrating high potential in core subjects through a combination of data and teacher judgment.
• Subjects Covered: A term-based progression designed to mirror academic year cycles… Mathematics (Term 1), English (Term 2), and Science (Term 3).
• Tools Deployed: A diverse suite of AI-driven tools including Century Tech (diagnostic and adaptive learning), Magic School (creativity support), EdCafe (student-led inquiry), BriskTeaching (task scaffolding), Google Notebook LM (knowledge organisation), and bespoke GPT-powered chatbots created specifically to align with curriculum objectives.
Term 1 and 2 used pre- and post-assessments to quantify academic impact and growth.
Term 3 employed a qualitative methodology, emphasising student dialogue, open-ended reflections, and creative science exploration.
Throughout, tasks were crafted to provoke thinking and foster independence, deliberately steering away from rote content delivery.
Identification of students was robust and triangulated, combining CAT4 cognitive ability scores, internal grading, and teacher referrals. This ensured a balanced representation of high-ability learners with diverse learning profiles. AI tools were introduced not as digital tutors, but as interactive partners, guiding student inquiry, prompting critical thought, and personalising content pathways.
"The real power of AI lies in helping teachers shift from information dispensers to architects of learning experiences" (Miller, 2023).
This research model embodied that philosophy, placing educators in a facilitative role while empowering students to engage deeply and independently with AI support.
Students began the term with a baseline average of 65% in a diagnostic assessment. By the end of the intervention, this rose to 77% - a 12% improvement. More importantly, student reflections indicated a greater willingness to take on challenging problems and self-correct using AI guidance.
AI’s role here was not to answer questions but to provoke them. Chatbots provided hints and scaffolds, encouraging students to rethink strategies and verify solutions independently.
In his book, Brave New Words, Khan (2023) "When AI is used to extend a student’s zone of proximal development, it doesn’t replace struggle; it makes the struggle productive." Our findings validated this claim. (see Figure 2)
This term presented unexpected complexity. Students initially scored 73% but concluded the term with a post-assessment average of 68%a 5% dip. This result could be interpreted as regression, but upon deeper reflection, it symbolised cognitive growth. Students were pushed into more abstract, metaphorrich texts and asked to write using advanced literary devices.
Failure became a tool, not a verdict. "Creativity flourishes when learners are allowed to get messy. Standardisation is the enemy of discovery." (Fredericks, 2023). Students wrestled with language, explored new structures, and built resilience through discomfort (see Figure 3).
This term marked a shift in assessment philosophy. Pre/ post testing was removed entirely. Students engaged in Key Stage 3-level content, using AI to navigate scientific theories, perform analogical reasoning, and explain concepts in their own words. Engagement soared.
As Sawyer (2012) suggests "Innovation emerges from guided freedom. When learners are trusted with autonomy, they become authors of their own discovery." This was exactly what we observed, students using AI as a cognitive companion, not a content crutch (see Figure 4).
3. Assessment Liberation: When testing was removed in science, curiosity flourished, and learning felt authentic and joyful.
4. Educator Partnership: AI worked best when integrated purposefully by educators, not simply deployed as a plugand-play tool.
As Bowen and Watson (2023) assert, "AI isn’t a replacement for teachers, it’s a partner that extends their reach and deepens their impact."
Authentic feedback from students revealed the emotional and cognitive depth of their experience:
"USING AI WAS LIKE HAVING A CLEVER FRIEND WHO NEVER GOT BORED OF MY QUESTIONS."
"I STILL HAD TO WRITE MY STORY MYSELF, BUT THE CHATBOT GAVE ME IDEAS I HADN’T THOUGHT OF."
"IT FELT LIKE SOLVING PUZZLES—NOT JUST DOING WORK."
These reflections echo Miller’s (2023) observation: "AI can unlock engagement by making students feel seen, heard, and individually supported." In our project, AI supported curiosity without compromising challenge (see Figure 5).
1. Prompting Over Providing: AI chatbots that asked better questions, rather than offering answers, empowered students to think critically.
2. Failure as Feedback: English outcomes declined numerically but increased cognitively, discomfort signalled deep engagement.
The sample size (n=12) and inconsistent attendance due to scheduling constraints limit the generalisability of our findings. Term 3 lacked formal assessment data, making results more observational than statistical. However, the qualitative gains were unmistakable.
Our next steps include:
• Expanding to KS3 and inclusion students
• Implementing more robust tracking tools
• Embedding AI practices school-wide across subjects
Kaska Porayska-Pomsta et al. (2022) caution "We must adopt AI mindfully, balancing innovation with equity, creativity with control." Our roadmap honours this balance (see Figure 7).
Ultimately, this was not just a technological endeavour, it was a cultural one. We shifted from content delivery to content co-creation. We empowered students not just to answer questions, but to ask better ones.
Robinson (2006) reminds us, "We are educating people out of their creative capacities." This project aimed to reverse that trend, releasing gifted students from the constraints of standardisation and reigniting their innate curiosity.
The outcome? A new vision for gifted education. One where AI scaffolds, teachers guide, and students soar.
Bowen, J. A., & Watson, C. E. (2023). Teaching with AI: A practical guide to a new era of human learning. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Burgos, D. (Ed.). (2021). Creative applications of artificial intelligence in education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978981-16-2327-1
Fitzpatrick, D., Fox, A., & Weinstein, B. (2023). The AI classroom: The ultimate guide to artificial intelligence in education. DBC.
Fredericks, A. D. (2023, August 15). Standardised testing and creativity. Psychology Today. https://www. psychologytoday.com/us/blog/creativity-theoryand-action/202308/standardized-testing-andcreativity
Hofstadter, D. R. (1995)
Fluid concepts and creative analogies: Computer models of the fundamental mechanisms of thought. Basic Books.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign. https:// curriculumredesign.org/wp-content/uploads/AI-inEducation-Promises-and-Implications_CCR.pdf
Khan, S. (2023). Brave new words: How AI will revolutionise education (and why that's a good thing). Penguin.
Miller, M. (2023). AI for educators: Learning strategies, teacher efficiencies, and a vision for an artificial intelligence future. Ditch That Textbook.
Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holmes, W., & Nemorin, S. (2022). The ethics of AI in education. UNESCO. https://unesdoc. unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381988
Robinson, K. (2006). Do schools kill creativity? [Video]. TED Conferences. https://www. ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_do_schools_kill_ creativity
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.) Oxford University Press.
Nadia Jouied, Universal American School
This action research investigates the alignment between internal assessment results and external standardized test scores, focusing on the effectiveness of multiple-choice questions. A current issue identified, is the discrepancy between students' strong performance in internal assessments and their lower scores on standardized tests. This difference in alignment makes me wonder how well internal measures can predict how well students will really do in school. Addressing this problem is crucial, as it affects instructional decisions and student support. If internal assessments do not reflect external expectations, students may be underprepared, and teachers may miss critical learning gaps. Evidence from recent assessment cycles shows this pattern, prompting a closer look at assessment design. The study's goal is to make internal exams more accurate at predicting the future by improving the way multiple-choice questions are used. A better connection will help make sure that internal data better guides teaching and shows how ready students are for external tests.
Research highlights that effective multiple-choice questions (MCQs) can improve assessment accuracy when paired with strong cognitive strategies.
The study was carried out a Universal American School in Grade 1 classes, where internal assessments are used regularly to track progress. However, many students who perform well on these assessments often struggle with standardized tests, revealing a gap between internal and external results. This issue has been ongoing and is becoming more urgent as standardized data increasingly guides teaching and school evaluation. If nothing changes, students may be underprepared, and teachers could make decisions based on inaccurate data. By improving multiple-choice question design, we can better align assessments, leading to more accurate predictions of student performance and more effective instruction.
Flavell’s Metacognition Theory (1979) emphasizes the value of students thinking about their thinking. Teaching strategies such as reading all answer choices, identifying distractors, and reflecting before selecting an answer can improve student performance. Kahneman’s Dual Process Theory (2011) also offers insight, noting that students often rely on quick, intuitive thinking (System 1). Encouraging slower, more analytical thinking (System 2) by having students justify their answers can enhance accuracy and deepen understanding. While these strategies show promise, there is still limited research on how best to apply them in early primary classrooms. More investigation is needed to adapt these approaches for younger learners.
Action research is the most suitable approach for this study because it allows me to investigate and improve my own classroom practice in real time. It is a practical, classroombased method that supports ongoing reflection, testing, and adjustment. This approach helps address the gap between internal and external assessments by allowing me to trial strategies, gather evidence, and make informed changes based on student responses.
How can effective multiple-choice questioning help align internal and external assessment data?
• Improve internal assessment design.
• Support students in answering MCQs more effectively.
• Strengthen the link between internal and standardized results.
To address the gap between internal and external assessment results, I will focus on refining the design of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) in internal assessments. The goal is to make these questions more aligned with the structure and cognitive demands of standardized tests, encouraging deeper student engagement and more accurate measurement of learning.
The participants in this study were approximately 23 students from a Grade 1 class, consisting of a mix of boys and girls with varying abilities. Feedback was collected from the students in small groups to ensure more focused and manageable discussions. These students provided insights on the revised multiple-choice questions and their performance on both internal assessments and standardized tests.
Data for this study was collected through a combination of student feedback, observations, and performance analysis. After each assessment cycle, I gathered feedback from students in small focus groups, asking them about their experiences with the revised multiple-choice questions. I also observed their strategies and thought processes as they worked through the questions. I finally analyzed student performance on both internal assessments and standardized tests to measure the effectiveness of the changes made to the MCQs. This provided a clear comparison of how the revised assessments impacted their scores and overall readiness for external tests.
To analyze the data, I used both qualitative and quantitative methods. Student feedback was analyzed with Braun & Clarke’s Thematic Analysis (2006), coding focus group responses to identify themes around engagement, question clarity, and strategies for answering MCQs. I also compared performance data from internal assessments and standardized tests, tracking correlations between internal assessment improvements and standardized test results. Graphs were used to display trends over time.
The outcomes of the action research clearly addressed the research questions outlined in the Methods section, which explored how revised MCQs influenced student understanding and performance. Figure 1 illustrates the effect of these improvements on the alignment between internal assessment scores and standardized test results. Before the revision, internal assessment scores were consistently higher than standardized test scores. After the revision, standardized test scores increased, narrowing the gap and enhancing consistency across assessment types. These findings indicate that welldesigned MCQs contributed to greater predictive accuracy between internal and external assessments.
The results showed that clearer, better designed MCQs improved student understanding and helped align internal assessments with standardized test scores, supporting the original hypothesis and existing research on assessment design. This research led me to adjust my practice in many keyways: increasing practice frequency, simplifying question language, integrating visual supports, reviewing assessment alignment regularly, allowing extended response times, and focusing more on grade appropriate vocabulary. These changes have improved student confidence and performance and offer practical strategies that can benefit colleagues and other action researchers aiming to enhance assessment quality.
This action research found that clearer, better-aligned multiple-choice questions improved student understanding and narrowed the gap between internal and standardized assessments. Student feedback supported these changes, noting improved clarity and confidence. Key outcomes include simplifying language, using visual supports, increasing practice, aligning assessments regularly, and focusing on vocabulary. These strategies can be applied more widely to enhance assessment quality. Further research could explore their impact across subjects, year levels, or with diverse learners.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.34.10.906
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Effective feedback plays a critical role in enhancing student learning, particularly in creative disciplines like Visual Arts. Black and Wiliam (1998) emphasize that formative assessment, when integrated into instruction, can significantly raise achievement by guiding rather than merely measuring learning. Hattie and Timperley (2007) highlight that feedback has one of the strongest effects on learning outcomes, especially when it clearly identifies the gap between current and desired performance and includes steps to close that gap.
At Universal American School, as Visual Arts teachers we observed that students often received feedback but did not consistently revise or reflect on their work. Despite frequent teacher comments, student growth appeared limited, and engagement was uneven. To address this issue, a structured feedback framework was developed and implemented in one class (Group A), while another class (Group B) continued with traditional feedback methods. This study was conducted over a six-week period to determine whether actionable feedback could lead to measurable improvements in student outcomes. Research shows that feedback has the greatest impact on learning when it is clear, purposeful, and prompts students to take action toward improvement (Hattie, 2009). Additionally, for feedback to be effective, students must be active participants in the process, engaging in self-assessment and reflection (Boud, 2000).
• Group A received structured actionable feedback three times per week, setting personal artistic goals after each session.
• Group B continued with traditional feedback methods that did not mandate revision.
Brookhart (2008) adds that effective feedback should be timely, specific, and task-focused. This helps students improve their work without feeling personally criticized an important distinction in subjects involving personal expression. Sadler (1989) outlines three key elements of formative feedback: students must know the expected standard, compare their current work against it, and take action to improve. This structured process supports growth in the arts, where creativity must still meet assessment criteria.
Shute (2008) echoes this, noting that feedback is most useful when it is clear, non-judgmental, and offers concrete suggestions. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) extend the idea by arguing that good feedback fosters self-regulation— enabling students to internalize criteria and monitor their own progress. Boud and Molloy (2013) further suggest that sustainable feedback develops students’ long-term capacity to seek, interpret, and use feedback effectively.
Together, these theories show that feedback is most effective when it is actionable, reflective, and student-centered key qualities that foster meaningful artistic development and independence in Visual Arts education.
In a Grade 10 Visual Arts class, students submitted sketches for a portrait unit. Instead of general comments, We teachers provided specific, actionable feedback: “Use lighter crosshatching to create smoother transitions on the cheek.”
Students then compared their work to a success criterion rubric, revised their pieces, and reflected on changes in a journal. Over time, students demonstrated clearer tonal control and became more self-directed aligning with Sadler’s (1989) and Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick’s (2006) feedback principles.
1. What is the impact of structured, actionable feedback on student performance in Visual Arts?
2. How does acting on feedback influence students' motivation and engagement with their artwork?
3. How do students perceive the value of feedback when they are required to respond to it?
The intervention introduced a structured feedback cycle for Group A, in which students received targeted feedback three times per week. Each session required students to set specific, short-term action goals based on the feedback received. In contrast, Group B continued to receive general feedback without structured follow-up or goal-setting. To monitor progress, teachers used assessment rubrics, maintained student portfolios, and collected self-reflection logs, allowing for a comprehensive evaluation of both individual growth and engagement over time (see Table 1).
Two middle/high school Visual Arts classes participated in the study. Each group had a similar number of students with comparable skill levels at the start of the research period.
• Group A received structured actionable feedback.
• Group B continued with traditional feedback.
Detailed rubric-based assessment identifying specific areas for improvement.
Students set short-term, actionable goals in response to feedback.
Students revise work based on targeted feedback and document their process in self-assessment logs.
Feedback provided three times per week with ongoing tracking of progress.
High students engage in active reflection and track their improvement.
Facilitator and coach, guiding students through continuous improvement.
Broad comments such as “good job” or “needs improvement,” often without referencing specific criteria or standards.
No formal goal-setting; students may receive verbal prompts like “try to improve shading” without follow-up.
Limited or no revision required; students may or may not revisit their work after initial feedback.
Feedback given occasionally, typically after task completion, with no systematic frequency.
Low feedback is passively received with little opportunity for reflection or self-direction.
Evaluator feedback is one-way, focused on correction rather than development.
Data Collection
- Data collection included:
- Rubric-based assessments of student artwork
- Student selfreflections and action plans
- Observational notes on classroom engagement and student-teacher interactions
- Pre- and postsurveys measuring perceptions of feedback
- Comparison of student portfolios at the beginning and end of the cycle
Quantitative data from rubric scores were analyzed for percentage improvement. Qualitative data - student reflections and survey responses - were coded for recurring themes, including: “ownership,” “clarity,” “motivation,” and “resistance to feedback.”
Group A (Actionable Feedback Group) demonstrated a notable improvement, with an average rubric score increase of 22% (see Table 2). Students in this group exhibited greater artistic risk-taking and refinement in their work (see Figure 1). Their reflections evolved to become more strategic and detailed, accompanied by heightened classroom engagement and participation. Additionally, students showed stronger ownership of the creative process. One student captured this experience, stating:
“At first, I felt a bit nervous—like, ‘Am I doing it wrong?’ But the feedback is not just about pointing out mistakes. It actually helps me see how to fix things and what to try next.” (A.B.)
In contrast, Group B (Traditional Feedback Group) showed a more modest average rubric score improvement of 10%. Students in this group engaged in little to no revision unless explicitly prompted, and their reflections tended to be superficial. Engagement levels remained steady but lacked inspiration or significant growth (see Figure 2).
Table 2
One student described this shift: "Instead of guessing what the teacher wants, I know what I need to improve and how to do it. It feels like the teacher is working with me, not just judging me." (T.T.)
As practitioner-researchers, we experienced a transformation in how feedback was perceived and delivered. Shifting from evaluative comments to feedback-as-dialogue required more time and planning but led to more authentic student growth. This model of feedback could be adapted across disciplines to support independent learning and metacognitive development.
Teachers implementing actionable feedback should consider:
• Allowing students to co-construct feedback criteria to deepen engagement.
• Using self-reflection logs to strengthen metacognitive skills.
• Encouraging structured revisions, rather than leaving feedback open-ended.
Students who engaged with actionable feedback developed not only their skills but also a stronger connection to their creative process. One student noted:
"The feedback pushes me to think more about my choices and try new things. Over time, I feel more confident and proud of my work because I can see the progress, and I know it came from my own effort and reflection." (A.R.)
This action research demonstrates that integrating structured, actionable feedback into the Visual Arts classroom leads to significant improvements in student engagement, skill development, and reflective practice. When feedback is specific and targeted - and paired with opportunities for students to set short-term goals and evaluate their progress - it fosters greater ownership of learning and encourages a more deliberate, thoughtful approach to artistic development.
The research clearly indicates that structured, actionable feedback fosters greater improvement in both the quality of student artwork and student engagement. Group A students not only improved more significantly but also demonstrated deeper self-reflection and motivation. These results are consistent with literature emphasizing the power of formative, action-oriented feedback.
Traditional feedback methods, often limited to general comments without structured follow-up, can leave students uncertain about how to improve. In contrast, the implementation of a consistent feedback cycle clarifies expectations, provides a concrete path forward, and reduces the ambiguity often associated with assessing creative work. This approach not only enhances technical skills but also cultivates self-regulation, persistence, and a growth mindset.
Importantly, the findings suggest that such a feedback model supports a diverse range of learners by making success criteria transparent and accessible. As students begin to recognize their own progress and understand how to improve, their confidence and intrinsic motivation increase accordingly.
Future research may explore how actionable feedback frameworks can be adapted across disciplines, educational levels, and cultural contexts. Additionally, investigating the long-term effects on student creativity, academic resilience, and sustained motivation would provide deeper insight into the broader impact of formative feedback. Overall, this study advocates for a shift in classroom assessment practices - toward feedback that is intentional, student-centered, and designed to support continuous growth.
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148
Boud, D., and Molloy E., (Eds.) (2013). Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding It and Doing It Well Routledge.
Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. ASCD. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203074344
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi. org/10.3102/003465430298487
Nicol, D. J., and Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi. org/10.3102/0034654307313795
Figure 1. Artistic Progress Over Time for Group A and Group B
Figure 2. Student Engagement Levels: Group A vs Group B
Sarah Smith, Deira International School
Quality assurance has always been an integral part of school operations, serving as a mechanism for maintaining standards and driving improvement. However, it is often perceived by teachers as a process that prioritises evaluation over meaningful growth, leading to apprehension and disengagement. This study seeks to reframe quality assurance as a collaborative and empowering practice, one that fosters teacher autonomy, encourages reflective dialogue, and promotes a purposeful approach to quality assurance for all stakeholders. By integrating coaching within quality assurance cycles, this research explores how schools can transform perceptions of oversight into opportunities for agency, engagement and continuous learning, ultimately cultivating a more positive and impactful experience for all stakeholders.
This study is conducted at Deira International School, where coaching is already embedded as a professional growth and reflection tool. The school has created a coaching culture, actively fostering a learning environment where educators engage in meaningful dialogue and self reflection. Through this lens, this study explores the impact of coaching as part of quality assurance cycles on teachers perceptions and teaching and learning outcomes. This
research aims to contribute to ongoing conversations surrounding sustainable and impactful quality assurance models.
Educational leaders play a pivotal role in shaping quality assurance processes. Rarasati et al (2023) highlights the significance of leaders in facilitating new systems, identifying that leaders should inspire and support teachers rather than exert control. This shift from managerial oversight to empowerment cultivates a professional culture of continuous improvement. Similarly, Arcia et al. (2011) recognises that quality assurance models respecting teacher autonomy enhance accountability and investment, fostering more effective educational outcomes.
A growing body of research supports teacher autonomy as a catalyst for innovation and pedagogical growth. Bergmark (2020) found that allowing teachers to identify areas of improvement based on their own experiences expanded their reflective practices, fostering a deeper understanding of their pedagogical approaches. Furthermore, teachers who plan their own improvement exhibit higher levels of curiosity, learning engagement, and experimentation, reinforcing the intrinsic motivation necessary for professional development.
While autonomy is essential, structured quality assurance measures must coexist to provide necessary guidance and prevent stagnation.
Nehrbass et al. (2022) highlights the delicate balance between freedom and accountability, arguing that quality assurance frameworks should provide support without stifling creativity. Coaching methodologies offer a structured yet empowering approach to professional growth. Davis (2022) supports the idea that giving teachers ownership of identifying their next steps fosters creativity and innovation, enabling collaborative problem-solving beyond prescribed best practices. Coaching, therefore, serves as a bridge between autonomy and structured improvement, ensuring teachers feel supported while maintaining agency in their growth journey.
All leaders conducting quality assurance received targeted coaching training, equipping them with the necessary skills to facilitate constructive and meaningful discussions. To support the quality assurance process, questions were developed for each area of focus for the learning walks. At the start of the academic year, the questions were shared with staff, fostering a sense of transparency. Learning walks were conducted based on these criteria. Following each learning walk, a reflective coaching conversation was held, where in coachees analysed their teaching approaches against the quality assurance questions, identifying both areas of strength and opportunities for further development. A follow-up visit was conducted a few weeks later, reinforcing the cyclical nature of the process. The subsequent coaching conversation centered exclusively on the identified area for improvement, thereby cultivating a cycle of professional learning and targeted growth.
Results:
This study used a mix method approach to collecting data, with a questionnaire that was completed by 40 members of staff and the analysis of quality assurance data based on 60 members of staff. The questionnaire utilised scaled score and Net Promoter Score methodologies to gather the teachers views on the adapted approach to quality assurance (see Figure 5). These questionnaires were completed by a diverse group of educators, including class teachers, specialist teachers, inclusion teachers, and middle leaders, ensuring varied perspectives were captured. The quality assurance analysis measured the percentage of improvement of a teaching and learning focus area within the cycle, this was compared to the previous year where a different approach to quality assurance was implemented. The collected data was systematically analysed to measure the impact of the quality assurance approach, providing insight into the effectiveness of coaching as a tool to support quality assurance.
Figure 1
Percentage of teachers receiving coaching to support quality assurance process.
Figure 2
Scaled score analysis of the effectiveness of coaching as a support to quality assurance in giving more autonomy.
Figure 3
Scaled score analysis of the effectiveness of coaching as a support to quality assurance in further developing their practice.
Figure 4
Whether Teachers perceptions of quality assurance have changed.
Figure 5
Net promotor score for the adapted approach to quality assurance.
The results indicate positive feedback from teachers regarding the use of coaching to support quality assurance (Figure 1), with many identifying that the process enhances their autonomy and contributes to the improvement of their teaching practice (Figure 2). Coaching conversations have facilitated critical reflection, enabling teachers to refine their teaching strategies and engage in continuous professional growth (Figure 3). While the majority of teachers have reported a shift in their perception of quality assurance (Figure 4), there remains inconsistency in the application of coaching within the quality assurance process. Notably, those who have not yet received coaching as part of their quality assurance experience responded less positively in the questionnaire, highlighting the need for broader implementation to ensure equitable impact. Initial analysis suggests a positive trend in quality assurance data, including increased embedding of highly effective teaching strategies; however, the current dataset remains insufficient to establish definitive conclusions (see Table 1). Continued assessment and a more comprehensive dataset will be essential in further substantiating the impact of coaching as a tool to support quality assurance.
The literature suggests the relationship between quality assurance, teacher autonomy, and coaching presents a transformative approach to educational development. Leaders must prioritise support over control, enabling teachers to take ownership of their improvement processes.
Increase in teaching and learning data for learning walk focus areas across 2 years.
Frameworks must uphold structured support mechanisms that foster accountability while nurturing creativity and continuous reflection to ensure that autonomy does not lead to stagnation but instead fuels meaningful, progressive change within teaching and learning.
The findings of this study support Bergmark’s (2020) and Davis’s (2022) perspective on the positive role of coaching in enhancing teacher autonomy and shaping perceptions of quality assurance. Teachers reported that the approach facilitated reflective practice and contributed to professional growth, reinforcing its impact on teaching effectiveness.
However, while initial trends suggest a favorable shift in teaching and learning outcomes, additional data would be required to align the results with the conclusions of Arcia (2011) and Rarasati (2023).
Furthermore, the study’s scope was limited to learning walks as a quality assurance measure, leaving room for further exploration of its broader impact. A key challenge remains the inconsistency in coaching styles, which can affect the uniformity of implementation and outcomes.
Future research should consider a more extensive dataset and an expanded range of quality assurance measures to establish a clearer link between coaching and sustained improvements in teaching and learning.
Arcia, G., Macdonald, K., Patrinos, H. A., & Porta, E. (2011). School autonomy and accountability (Report No. 21546). World Bank Publications. https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/ publication/3508ec26-222e-50e4-b0ca122fdf6bd302
Bergmark, U. (2020). Teachers’ professional learning when building a research-based education: Contextspecific, collaborative and teacher-driven professional development. Professional Development in Education, 1-15. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1827 011
Davis, J.P. (2022). Next steps. Next Practice, 125 -128.https://doi. org/10.4324/1978100328694-17
Nehrbass, K., Murray, T., & Morris, E. A. (2022). Flexibility within structure: factors contributing to faculty perceptions of autonomy and standardization in course design and delivery. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.59668/378.10316
Rarasati, N., Putri, P., & Pramana, N. (2023). Giving schools and teachers autonomy in teacher professional development under a medium-capability education system. RISE Programme. https://riseprogramme.org/sites/default/ files/2023-01/Giving%20Schools%20 and%20Teachers%20Autonomy%20 in%20Teacher%20Professional%20 Development%20Under%20a%20 Medium-Capability%20Education%20 System.pdf
van Nieuwerburgh, C., Barr, M., Munro, C., Noon, H., & Arifin, D. (2020). Experiences of aspiring school principals receiving coaching as part of a leadership development programme. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 9(3), 291-306. https://doi. org/10.1108/IJMCE-12-2019-0131
This research explores how the IB Learner Profile can be utilised as a catalyst for fostering transformational culture and organisational cohesion specifically within administrative staff in a school setting. At Deira International School coaching is already well established among teaching staff and has played a significant role in shifting the culture towards one that is more reflective, values-driven, and development-focused. This project builds on that foundation, extending the same principles to our administrative team—an often overlooked group in school improvement work.
The initiative uses the IB Learner Profile not only as a framework for student development but as a shared professional language that can unite all staff in their personal and professional growth. Through the introduction of structured coaching conversations, grounded in the ten attributes of the Learner Profile, administrative staff are encouraged to reflect on their roles, values, and impact within the school community.
A mixed-methods approach was
Early responses indicate that administrative staff have welcomed the opportunity for personal development and meaningful dialogue, recognising the relevance of the Learner Profile to their own context. The process has begun to break down silos between teaching and non-teaching roles, helping to build a more cohesive and transformational school culture.
This research offers a practical model for how schools can engage all staff—not just educators—in a values-led approach to organisational development, using the IB Learner Profile as a foundation for reflection, connection, and cultural change.
This research explores how the IB Learner Profile can be used to foster transformational culture and organisational cohesion among administrative staff in a school setting. Coaching is already well embedded with our teaching staff and has played a key role in shifting the culture from transactional to reflective and valuesdriven. The aim of this study is to build on that success by extending coaching to administrative staff, using the IB Learner Profile as a shared framework traditionally seen as a studentfocused tool, the Learner Profile offers a common language that can unify all members of the school
By embedding it within structured coaching conversations, the project seeks to support reflective practice, increase job satisfaction, and strengthen a sense of shared purpose across staff roles. This research examines the impact of this approach and its potential to drive whole-school cultural transformation through inclusive, values-based professional development.
The IB Learner Profile is widely recognised as a framework that supports student development and helps build reflective, values-led school cultures. While much of the existing research focuses on its application within teaching and learning, this review explores how the Learner Profile can also inform leadership practices and support the development of all staff— particularly administrative teams.
Poole (2017) highlights how teachers adapt the Learner Profile to fit their own philosophies, emphasising the importance of personal interpretation. This flexibility is key when working with non-teaching staff, who may initially see the framework as more student-focused. Similarly, Keser et al. (2022) identify the attribute of being an “inquirer” as central to effective IB practice and propose a conceptual model that supports both student and teacher development— offering useful guidance for broader professional growth.
Gardner-McTaggart (2018) notes that IB school leaders often engage inconsistently with the Learner Profile, tending instead to promote global citizenship based on personal values. His findings suggest a need for more deliberate and embedded use of the Profile in leadership culture.
Walker et al. (2014) reinforce this by showing that successful implementation relies on strategic planning and withinprogramme coherence.
Calnin et al. (2018) propose seven leadership intelligences that align closely with the Learner Profile and can support wider school development. These ideas provide a foundation for designing a coaching framework for administrative staff—one that is personalised, values-driven, and contextually responsive. Collectively, these studies highlight the potential of the Learner Profile to unify and strengthen whole-school culture.
Key Elements for Coaching Administrative Staff:
• Personalisation and Flexibility: Adapt the Learner Profile to fit unique contexts.
• Systematic Implementation: Ensure consistent use in leadership practices.
• Valuable Attributes: Focus on inquiry and other key attributes.
• Cultural Awareness: Enhance understanding of diverse environments.
• Professional Development: Develop targeted programs to build leadership capabilities.
By integrating these elements, schools can leverage the IB Learner Profile to enhance the effectiveness of administrative staff, fostering a cohesive and transformational culture.
A pilot group of ten administrative team members was selected to participate in the study. These individuals were chosen based on their interest in professional growth and their willingness to engage in a reflective process.
Participants received bespoke coaching training designed to introduce key concepts of coaching and align them with the values embedded within the IB Learner Profile. Crucially, the pilot group also played an active role in shaping the process by co-creating the coaching questions used during the sessions. This collaborative approach helped ensure the relevance and contextual appropriateness of the coaching content.
Each participant engaged in two structured coaching sessions over a six-month period. These sessions aimed to promote self-reflection, increase awareness of individual contributions to the school community, and build a greater sense of professional identity.
A mixed-methods approach was adopted to evaluate the impact of the initiative. Quantitative data was collected via pre- and post-intervention surveys measuring participants' perceptions of coaching, self-efficacy, and perceived impact on their roles. In parallel, qualitative data was gathered through focus group interviews, offering deeper insight into individual experiences and the emerging cultural shifts.
The introduction of a structured coaching cycle for administrative staff marked a meaningful shift from taskfocused conversations to reflective, developmental dialogue. Historically, admin staff had limited opportunities to explore their personal and professional growth. This initiative aimed to address that gap—and did so with considerable success.
Survey data showed that before coaching began, only 38% of staff felt they had space for meaningful reflection. After the cycle, this rose to 89%, indicating a significant cultural shift. Staff valued the dedicated time to pause and think. As one participant put it:
“Just having someone ask the right question helped me realise things I hadn’t considered before—it made me stop and think in a way I usually don’t get time for.”
The coaching wheel offered helpful structure and clarity, enabling participants to prepare thoughtfully for each session and reflect on areas for growth. Many reported increased confidence, improved communication, and a renewed sense of purpose (see Figure 1). One staff member reflected,
“I stopped thinking of myself as just an admin. I’m part of the bigger picture now.”
While the overall response was highly positive, a few challenges were noted. Some participants felt their coach lacked insight into their daily responsibilities, and others suggested that feedback from line managers could complement the coaching process.
Looking ahead, improvements such as clearer introductions, flexible scheduling, and peer coaching could help embed this reflective culture even further.
Ultimately, the project empowered admin staff and helped create a more inclusive, growth-oriented community (see Figure 2).
This project set out to explore whether the IB Learner Profile could serve as a meaningful framework for professional development among administrative staff—and in doing so, contribute to a more cohesive, reflective, and transformational school culture. The results suggest that it can.
Calnin, G., Waterson, M., Richards, S., & Fisher, D. (2018). Developing leaders for International Baccalaureate World Schools. Journal of Research in International Education, 17(2), 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240918781371
Gardner-McTaggart, A. (2018). Leadership of international schools and the International Baccalaureate learner profile. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47(5), 766–784. https://doi org/10.1177/17411 43218764174
Keser, Ö., Altan, S., & Lane, J. F. (2022). Learner profile attributes in IB teaching: Insights from a continuum school in Turkey. Journal of Research in International Education, 21(3), 256–272. https://doiorg /10.1177/14752409221 129076
By embedding coaching conversations within the language and values of the Learner Profile, we were able to provide administrative colleagues with time, space, and structure to reflect on their roles and professional identity.
The initiative has shown that the Learner Profile is not just relevant to students and teachers but can serve as a unifying language for the entire school community. As administrative staff began to see themselves as active contributors to the school’s mission, rather than simply as operational support, a stronger sense of connection and shared purpose started to emerge.
Future work will focus on refining the model, expanding access, and building the capacity of staff to coach one another. In doing so, we hope to continue strengthening the sense of community, agency, and alignment that characterises transformational schools.
Poole, A. (2017). Interpreting and implementing the IB learner profile in an internationalised school in China: A shift of focus from the ‘Profile as text’ to the ‘lived Profile’. Journal of Research in International Education, 16(3), 248–264. https://doi org/10.1177/1475240917742020
Walker, A., Bryant, D., & Lee, M. (2014). The International Baccalaureate continuum: Student, teacher and school outcomes. International Baccalaureate Organization.
Performance management in schools has long been a topic of both strategic significance and practical tension. Initially designed to ensure accountability and continuous improvement, traditional models of performance management in education have frequently relied on quantitative metrics, such as student attainment data and fixed objectives (Department for Education, 2012). These systems, rooted in New Public Management ideology, have often emphasised compliance, standardisation, and outcomes over professional growth (Ball, 2003). While such approaches aimed to improve standards, they have also been criticised for fostering a culture of fear, reducing teacher autonomy, and undermining intrinsic motivation (Torrance, 2017).
More recently, literature has highlighted the limitations of target driven models. Research has shown that rigid goal setting can result in performativity, where teachers focus on "doing well" according to inspection frameworks, rather than developing as professionals (Ball, 2003). This performativity can contribute to teacher stress, lower job satisfaction, and attrition (Worth & Van den Brande, 2020). Furthermore, evaluation systems that overly depend on student outcomes may fail to capture the full spectrum of a teacher’s contribution, particularly in holistic and inclusive school contexts.
Research by Lofthouse and Hall (2014) argues that coaching provides a powerful alternative to traditional models by encouraging self-efficacy and collaborative reflection. International evidence supports this shift. Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan (2018) conducted a metaanalysis of teacher coaching programmes in the US and found consistent positive effects on instructional practice and student achievement. In the UK, case studies of coaching based performance development, such as those conducted by the Teacher Development Trust (2021), have reported increases in staff wellbeing, professional agency,
In response to these limitations, there has been growing advocacy for more formative, developmental approaches to staff development. Most notably, coaching. Coaching in education refers to a confidential,non-judgemental professional dialogue that empowers staff to set goals, reflect on practice, and take ownership of their development (van Nieuwerburgh, 2012).
In the Middle Eastern context, however, research remains limited. While there is growing interest in coaching within international schools, particularly those following the British curriculum, few empirical studies explore how these models are adapted culturally or
Given the region’s diverse educational landscape often characterised by high staff turnover, accountability pressures, and multicultural leadership, the implementation of coaching as a performance model requires contextual understanding.
This study aims to address that gap by investigating how the shift from prescriptive, target driven performance management to a coaching based approach has impacted staff development, confidence, wellbeing and productivity within a UAE international school setting.By focusing on a case study of three departments, the research seeks to explore the lived experiences of staff and provide insights that can inform broader leadership practices across similar educational contexts.
This research employed a mixed methods design, integrating both qualitative and quantitative data to evaluate the impact of a significant shift in performance management at a UK international secondary school. During the 2024–2025 academic year, the school transitioned from a data driven, target focused model of performance management to a coaching based approach. This new model empowered staff to identify and direct their own areas of professional development, promoting autonomy, agency, and reflective practice.
The research was structured as a case study focusing on the early implementation of this model, with particular attention paid to staff experience, professional dialogue, wellbeing, and departmental performance.
As part of the new model’s rollout, I conducted weekly coaching meetings with two departmental heads across the academic year. These sessions were grounded in non-directive coaching principles and focused on collaborative goal setting, reflective dialogue, and solution-oriented discussions.
Wellbeing check-ins were also embedded as a regular component of these meetings to monitor the holistic impact of the change on staff morale and stress levels.
Midway through Term 3, I expanded the inquiry by inviting three academic departments to participate in a broader evaluation of the coaching-based performance management model.
Data was gathered via an online questionnaire, developed specifically for this research. The instrument included:
• Closed Likert-style questions to measure perceptions of professional growth, teacher autonomy, and wellbeing.
• Open-ended questions to elicit rich, narrative responses regarding staff experiences, perceived impact, and suggestions for improvement. This dual format design enabled the triangulation of data to ensure validity and a deeper understanding of the coaching model’s effects.
The closed-question responses were analysed using descriptive statistics, including measures of central tendency (mean and mode) to identify overall trends. These findings were visually represented through bar charts to illustrate perceptions around professional growth and autonomy under the new coaching model.
Open-ended responses underwent thematic analysis using a best fit framework approach. Initially, inductive coding was applied to identify emergent themes. These were then aligned to key research focuses: professional dialogue, staff confidence, wellbeing, productivity, classroom practice, and implementation challenges. Illustrative quotes were extracted to provide authentic staff voice and to deepen the interpretation of quantitative findings. The integration of both data sets allowed for complementary insights; for instance, high ratings of agency and wellbeing were further substantiated by qualitative statements highlighting increased trust, empowerment, and reduced performance anxiety.
Data collected from departmental heads across a UK international secondary school reveals a predominantly positive reception to the shift from a prescriptive, target driven performance management approach to a coaching
based model.
As seen in Figure 1, respondents largely rated the new coaching model as highly supportive of professional growth, with the majority assigning it a score of 4 out of 5. A similar trend is observed in Figure 2, where most respondents also rated agency and autonomy as a 4 or 5, indicating strong perceptions of increased professional independence. These ratings suggest that, in terms of perceived impact, the coaching model is successfully fostering greater trust, ownership, and developmental opportunities among staff.
Respondents noted a marked improvement in the quality and frequency of reflective conversations. One commented:
“There is more space for dialogue than in the previous model... though the depth and impact of those conversations can be limited when they aren’t focused on coaching through specific challenges.”
This suggests that while structural space for dialogue has improved, the depth and coaching expertise still require development.
There was a mixed perception of staff confidence:
“Yes, increased ownership of professional development and a sense of empowerment.”
“I haven’t noticed a change... any increases in confidence seem to stem more from collaboration or individual efforts than the coaching model itself.”
This highlights that while confidence may be increasing, it is not always directly attributed to the coaching model, indicating a gap between intention and execution.
A recurring theme was that removing numerical targets has positively impacted staff morale:
“Not having academic targets which they must meet, but having time to coach and discuss weekly performance, has helped wellbeing.”
Yet, performance impact varied: “Enhanced autonomy and problem solving, taking initiative.”
“The coaching does not currently feel like a driving force for change or improvement.”
This indicates that implementation fidelity and leadership engagement may vary across departments, affecting consistency of outcomes.
A key theme emerging from the data was the identification of persistent barriers to the effective implementation of a coaching model in performance management.
The three most common obstacles were time constraints, a lack of formal coaching training, and the risk of coaching becoming a procedural, box-ticking exercise.
As one respondent highlighted, “Without proper coaching skills and a shift in focus, these conversations risk becoming just another accountability task.” This concern underscores the need to protect the integrity of coaching by ensuring it remains developmental rather than performative.
To maximise the impact of coaching in schools, staff made several informed recommendations. These included the allocation of dedicated coaching time within the timetable, investment in the development of coaching competencies, and the provision of greater autonomy for staff in setting personalised goals. One particularly compelling suggestion was the use of reflective resources to enhance coaching practice. As one participant remarked, “A book like The Magic Happens in the Silence is an excellent starting point to explore listening and questioning in coaching.” This indicates a clear appetite for deeper engagement with the core principles of effective coaching.
This research concludes that the shift from a target driven to a coaching based performance management model has positively influenced staff development, wellbeing, and autonomy across the school. Quantitative data indicate strong support for the model, while qualitative responses emphasise increased professional dialogue, ownership, and morale. However, the findings also highlight key challenges, including the need for dedicated time and more in-depth coaching training to ensure conversations are consistently developmental rather than procedural. Overall, the study supports the value of coaching as a more empowering and human centred approach to performance management, provided it is implemented with clarity, consistency, and a genuine commitment to staff growth.
Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228. https://doiorg/10.1080/026809302200 0043065
Department for Education (DfE). (2012). Teacher appraisal and capability: A model policy for schools. https://assets. publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_ data/file/377480/teacher_appraisal_ and_capability_reviewed_october_14. pdf
Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The effectiveness of teacher coaching: A meta-analysis of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588. https://doi org/10.3102/0034654318759268
Lofthouse, R., & Hall, E. (2014). Developing practices in teachers’ professional dialogue in England: Using coaching dimensions as an analytical framework. Professional Development in Education, 40(5), 758–778. https://doi. org/10.1080/19415257.2014.886283
Teacher Development Trust (2021). Coaching for Professional Growth. TDT. https://tdtrust.org/coaching-forprofessional-growth/
Torrance, H. (2017). Blaming the victim: Assessment, examinations, and the responsibilisation of students and teachers in neo-liberal governance. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 38(1), 83–96. https://doi. org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1104854
van Nieuwerburgh, C. (2012). Coaching in education: Getting better results for students,educators and parents. Karnac Books.
By Gaynor Dale, Head of Primary, Deira International School, Dubai
Inrecent years, the educational community has increasingly examined the tension between performance monitoring and professional growth. In highperforming schools, where academic excellence is a given, the question arises: how can we ensure continued teacher development without undermining autonomy, trust, and wellbeing?
This article explores the outcomes my action research project conducted at Deira International School in Dubai. The study investigated the impact of removing lesson drop-ins; a widely used quality assurance strategy on teacher professional development, selfconfidence, and wellbeing. The findings challenge traditional assumptions about observation-based QA and offer a compelling case for a shift toward coaching-led, trust-based models.
Lesson drop-ins have been a staple of QA practices in British schools since the 1990s, often serving dual purposes of feedback and accountability. Although modern iterations are typically framed as supportive and developmental, their effectiveness and impact on teacher morale have come under renewed scrutiny.
Initial surveys at Deira International School revealed that staff overwhelmingly preferred coaching conversations to lesson drop-ins when it came to professional growth. Teachers reported that while drop-ins provided visibility and feedback, they also carried connotations of surveillance and performance judgment. This prompted a deeper investigation into alternative, less intrusive forms of teacher development.
This research was grounded in several well-established educational theories:
• Instructional Leadership Theory (Hallinger & Murphy, 1985): Suggests that regular classroom visits enable leaders to drive instructional improvement. However, when used as compliance tools rather than developmental dialogue, they risk becoming counterproductive.
• Self-Efficacy Theory (Bandura, 1997): Highlights that teachers who feel competent and confident are more effective. Affirming feedback, more likely in trusting coaching environments, boosts selfefficacy.
• Surveillance Theory (Foucault, 1977): Warns that constant observation may create anxiety, reduce innovation, and erode professional trust.
• Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988): Notes that unexpected drop-ins can increase cognitive and emotional stress, hindering teaching performance.
• Organizational Learning Theory (Argyris & Schön, 1978): Emphasises that schools improve when cultures of transparency and adaptive feedback are in place; something achievable through coaching rather than surveillance.
• None felt their professional progress had been hindered by the lack of drop-ins.
• 100% reported that the experience reshaped how they viewed quality assurance and professional growth.
• All teachers rated their overall professional wellbeing 7/10 or higher, with 50% noting an improvement from the previous year.
Teachers described the new approach as “authentic,” “empowering,” and “relaxed,” fostering professional risk-taking, increased collaboration, and deeper self-reflection. One teacher commented that the absence of drop-ins “created a space for more honest conversations and less performative teaching.”
These theoretical insights shaped both the design and analysis of the research project.
The study focused on four experienced teachers and followed a mixed-methods approach over one academic year. It began with a baseline professional development survey and the setting of individual growth goals.
Teachers participated in more frequent, regular coaching conversations and selfdirected professional learning, with no formal lesson drop-ins or unscheduled observations.
Instead, evidence of progress was gathered through open invitations to observe teaching, reflective dialogue through regular coaching sessions, and a final impact survey. The approach emphasized autonomy, trust, and a shift from performance monitoring to developmental mentoring.
The results of this pilot project were compelling:
• 100% of teachers met their professional development goals with clear evidence.
• 100% believed the absence of drop-ins was a positive change for the school.
The research supports the argument that the removal of lesson drop-ins can enhance—not hinder; teacher development, provided the right conditions are in place. These include:
• A coaching culture that promotes reflection and goal setting
• Trust-based relationships between leaders and teachers
• Access to self-directed and collaborative PD opportunities
• Clear communication and mutual accountability
Significantly, the findings highlight that experienced teachers thrive when trusted to lead their own development. They also point to the importance of moving from QA systems that focus on monitoring to ones that prioritize support and growth.
This was a small-scale study involving four established teachers. While the results are promising, they may not be generalizable across all contexts; particularly for less experienced teachers who may still benefit from structured observation and guided feedback.
Future iterations of this research will need to:
• Include a more diverse group of teachers at different stages of their careers
• Examine how to personalise support for those who require more targeted developmental feedback
• Explore hybrid models that integrate coaching with optional, non-evaluative observations
Nevertheless, the findings offer a meaningful step toward rethinking how QA and PD can be approached in high-performing schools.
The removal of lesson drop-ins at Deira International School showed to have a positive impact on teacher development, confidence, and wellbeing.
The research suggests that fostering professional growth does not require constant observation, but rather, thoughtful structures that empower teachers through trust, collaboration, and meaningful dialogue.
As schools globally grapple with retaining great teachers and promoting sustainable development models, the insights from this study provide a compelling case for letting go of legacy systems in favour of those that truly serve educators’
In high-performing schools, it may be time to ask: Do we really need to look over someone’s to help them grow and for what purpose would we need to visit lessons to verify a tick list of strategies?
This article was prepared in support of the Centre for Action Research at Deira International School, Dubai.
For further inquiries, contact: Gaynor Dale, Head of Primary.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Pantheon Books. (Original work published 1975)
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing instructional leadership in schools: A conceptual framework. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 21(3), 34–64. https://doi. org/10.1177/0013161X85021003004
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https:// doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Education has come alive with discussions around child-led learning, particularly in Early Years and Key Stage 1. The impact of child-led learning on the child is well known; enhanced motivation, deeper engagement; however what is lacking is the acknowledgement of the impact it has on teachers.
Teacher wellbeing has become an increasingly urgent topic in recent years with a record number of educators leaving the profession due to reasons including mounting pressures, growing workloads and increased burnout.
This research project aims to bring these two themes together to investigate an area overlooked by literature and practice. This research will consider how a change in approach might affect those who implement it and challenges the notion that development takes place outside of the classroom, and explores the idea that change can happen from within.
The transition from a play based Early Years environment to a more formal Year 1 setting can often feel misaligned with the development needs of the children. After spending a lot of time on the transition between the phases, a review of the curriculum was the natural next step in the process.
While the benefits of child-led learning for pupils have been widely documented, there is little exploration of how this pedagogical shift affects the professionals facilitating it. To support this research I have drawn on three key theoretical frameworks –Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO), Rose and Rogers’ (2012) concept of the ‘plural practitioner’, and Ryan and Deci’s (1985) Self Determination Theory.
Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of the MKO emphasises the role of the adult in scaffolding learning through interactions. In child-led learning the teacher must take on a flexible and adaptive role, stepping in and out of instruction and planning based on the child’s needs and interests. This challenges traditional notions of teaching as direct instruction and instead positions the teacher as an observer and facilitator, therefore potentially transforming a teacher’s professional identity.
This is supported by Rose and Roger’s (2012) idea of the ‘plural practitioner’, a professional who wears multiple hats and is consistently reflecting practice. Their model supports the idea that teaching is not one dimensional.
Child-led learning requires pluralism, as teachers must be responsive, creative and facilitative. Engaging in this style of pedagogy not only enriches learning for children, but also offers teachers greater satisfaction through autonomy and reflection.
Finally, Ryan and Deci’s Self Determination Theory (1985) provides insight into the conditions that support intrinsic motivation. The theory identifies three core needs – autonomy, competence and relatedness. Child-led learning fosters these for children, but also has the potential to do the same for teachers. When teachers are trusted to respond to children’s interests by making decisions in the moment they are more likely to feel empowered and competent, therefore encouraging sustained motivation and professional wellbeing.
Together these theories offer a way in which to examine the teacher’s experience in a child-led classroom. In the absence of literature directly addressing this connection, they provide a strong foundation for understanding how this pedagogical approach might support not only student outcomes, but teacher growth and satisfaction, too.
As a classroom based teacher seeking to better understand and improve my own practice, action research offered a structure that allowed me to examine real time experiences while remaining embedded in a teaching and learning environment.
Rather than researching from a distance this approach positioned me as an active participant, allowing for responsive adjustments, reflection and collaboration with colleagues.
It also provided me with the flexibility to explore not just the outcomes of a new pedagogical approach, but the lived experience of implementing it,
gathering experience based insights that could inform personal and professional growth. The intention was not only to understand how child-led learning affected colleagues and I, but also to offer relevant and practical findings that could benefit others considering similar shifts in approach.
1)How do teachers perceive the shift in their role when embedding child-led learning, and how does this affect their motivation and engagement?
2)How does implementing child-led learning influence teacher wellbeing and job satisfaction in Key Stage 1?
3)In what way does child-led learning impact teachers’ professional growth?
This research was conducted across five Year 1 classrooms with a focus on shifting towards a more child-led approach across continuous provision and core subjects. It followed a qualitative, reflective model grounded in professional inquiry and followed Kemmis and Targett’s (1988) Action Research Spiral, of which there were three cycles.
Cycle 1: Action: introducing child-led topics.
Data: teacher reflections and observations.
Insight: increased student engagement.
Cycle 2: Action: professional dialogues and peer observations.
Data: reflections and meeting notes. Insight: staff gaining confidence in stepping back.
Cycle 3: Action: weekly reflections and planning meetings.
Data: staff questionnaires and interviews.
Insight: increased teacher satisfaction, more collaborative planning, enhanced professional autonomy.
Five Year 1 teachers, including myself, reflected on the impact of child-led learning within the classroom. The other four teachers also participated in questionnaires.
Although the children were not formally studied, five classes of twenty-six children were observed to inform and guide the research process.
Quantitative data was collected through a combination of reflective journalling and informal discussions in meetings. Formal questionnaires were also distributed to four teachers to gather structured feedback on the research process.
Data was analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six phase model of thematic analysis. This allowed me to identify patterns and draw meaningful conclusions.
1)Familiarisation – reading collected responses to immerse myself in my data.
2)Initial Coding – manually coding data by identifying key words, phrases and ideas related to teacher motivation, wellbeing and professional identity.
3)Themes – codes were grouped into broader categories. Phrases such as ‘less pressure’, ‘freedom’ and ‘joy in teaching’ were grouped under one theme of ‘renewed professional purpose’.
4)Reviewing themes – triangulating responses from all sources to ensure they were accurately represented.
5)Defining themes – final themes were defined and linked back to research questions and literature.
6)Report – the themes were then used to structure the research findings, supported by quotes and examples.
Using this method makes the study easily replicable and practitioners in similar settings can follow the same steps to compare a shift in their own teaching experience.
1)How do teachers perceive the shift in their role when embedding child-led learning, and how does this affect their motivation and engagement?
Teacher 2: “I feel more empowered and confident as a teacher.”
Teacher 4: “Renewed my passion for teaching with a more personalised and energised approach.”
Teacher 5: “I am more engaged in what I am doing.”
2)How does implementing child-led learning influence teacher wellbeing and job satisfaction in Key Stage 1?
3)In what way does child-led learning impact teachers’ professional growth?
Teacher 2: “I feel more empowered to innovate, experiment with new strategies and reflect on what works best for each child.”
Teacher 3: “I feel it has improved my practices as a teacher and made teaching more enjoyable.”
Teacher 5: “I feel more engaged and inspired, it has helped me grow as a more adaptable and responsive teacher.”
This action research has highlighted the powerful impact of child-led learning. As teachers shifted from a directive role to that of a facilitator, they reported renewed energy, increased autonomy and greater professional fulfillment. These outcomes align with Ryan and Deci’s (1985) Self Determination Theory, which emphasises autonomy, competence and relatedness as key drives of intrinsic motivation. Collaborative planning and reflection also mirrored the reflective model advocated by Rose and Rogers (2012), allowing teachers to evolve their practice through ongoing dialogue and observation.
Importantly, this study addresses the gap in the literature by focusing on the impact of child-led learning on teachers rather than just the learners, contributing new insights in the field. These findings suggest that embedding child-led learning approaches not only benefits learners but also supports teacher wellbeing and long term development.
This research has shifted both practice and perspective. I’ve come to see the teacher’s role less as a deliverer and more as a facilitator. This shift has reduced feelings of pressure and workload, dispelling common myths that such approaches add to teacher demands. The team now sees child-led learning as a framework that enables purposeful, joyful teaching, and not as an additional task.
This research demonstrates that child-led learning benefits teachers as much as children by promoting wellbeing and increasing motivation, and it offers an encouraging perspective for schools aiming to embed child-led principles across all phases without overburdening staff.
This action research highlights that implementing a child-led learning approach in Key Stage 1 does not increase workload but instead fosters a sense of autonomy, reduces planning pressure, and renews professional purpose. This study provides a practical framework for educators seeking to embrace child-led learning without added workload.
The findings have sparked wider conversations within our team, contributing to ongoing curriculum reviews and shaping how we design the academic year ahead to be more responsive, purposeful and child-led.
The outcomes of this project suggest that schools aiming to embed child-led learning should prioritise teacher autonomy and collaboration, and further research could explore how these positive impacts extend into later primary phases and larger teams.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Kemmis, S., & Targett, R. (1988). The action research reader (3rd ed.). Deakin University Press.
Rose, J., & Rogers, S. (2012). The role of the adult in early years settings. McGrawHill Education.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and selfdetermination in human behavior. Plenum.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
In today’s increasingly diverse and multilingual classrooms, students bring a wide range of cultural and linguistic backgrounds that enrich the learning environment. Among them, English Language Learners (ELLs) demonstrate remarkable resilience and determination as they navigate a curriculum that is both academically and linguistically demanding, striving to access and excel in content taught entirely in English. At the early or developing stages of their language acquisition, they rise to the dual challenge of mastering English and using it as the vehicle for understanding academic content. This article explores an action research study conducted at Hartland International School, aiming to improve ELLs’ engagement, comprehension, and academic language proficiency through scaffolded instructional materials in secondary chemistry lessons.
Cummins (1979) offers a foundational distinction between Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP), noting that while ELLs may quickly develop conversational fluency (BICS), academic language proficiency (CALP), essential for success in content-heavy subjects like science, requires years of explicit instruction and targeted support. This gap between social and academic language underscores the importance of scaffolding as a pedagogical approach. Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) illustrates
how learners can achieve higher levels of understanding when guided through challenging tasks by more knowledgeable others. Building on this, Gibbons (2002) emphasises the necessity of embedding language learning within authentic academic contexts, allowing students to develop disciplinary language as they engage with meaningful content. Based on Crisfield’s (2022) observations, appropriate scaffolding helps reduce ELLs’ stress and frustration by building confidence and supporting learner autonomy. Therefore, teachers play a pivotal role in advancing both language and content development. Kinsella (2005) states that intentional scaffolding, through structured tasks and language support, enables students to build both linguistic competence and conceptual understanding. This includes the strategic use of sentence frames, visual representations, and tiered academic vocabulary to help learners access and articulate complex scientific concepts. Lemke (1990) and Schleppegrell (2004) further highlight that fluency in science entails more than knowing terminology; it involves learning how to “talk science”, mastering the specific discourse patterns, argument structures, and modes of explanation unique to the discipline.
and implement a modified chemistry booklet specifically tailored to support ELLs.
The teacher initially provided the original chemistry booklet they typically strategies that focused on both grammar and vocabulary development.
The modifications aimed to make complex scientific content more accessible through a range of guided language practise tasks, which included:
Simplified vocabulary to reduce language barriers while maintaining key scientific concepts Image-label matching activities to build visual connections with
Multiple choice and true/false questions to encourage active recall and comprehension
Cloze exercises designed to reinforce language structures within content
Sentence sequencing tasks supported by starter prompts to aid in constructing scientific explanations
Word banks to provide ready access to essential academic vocabulary Text-based questions that required students to engage critically with the content and language
Qualitative data were collected through a semi-structured interview with the chemistry teacher following the implementation of the modified booklet. The interview employed open-ended questions to gather in-depth insights into the perceived impact of the scaffolding materials on student engagement, comprehension of chemistry content, and academic language development.
The teacher interview revealed several notable positive outcomes associated with the use of the scaffolded chemistry booklet for ELLs.
One of the most significant impacts observed was a marked increase in student engagement, which was reflected in greater motivation and initiative. ELLs began taking more detailed notes, both in English and in their native language and showed a growing curiosity that extended beyond the classroom, signalling a deeper investment in their learning.
In terms of academic understanding, the teacher noted that students demonstrated a stronger grasp of key chemistry concepts. They were not only better able to comprehend the material but also showed improvement in structuring responses to original exam questions, suggesting that the scaffolded tasks helped them internalise both content and academic language conventions. The booklet’s explicit focus on academic vocabulary and exam expectations was instrumental in clarifying complex terms and requirements, allowing students to articulate scientific ideas with increased confidence and clarity. Importantly, students were given the choice to work from both the original booklet and the scaffolded ELL version. The chemistry teacher stated that offering this choice proved valuable, as it empowered students to engage with the material at their own level of readiness, promoting autonomy and ensuring meaningful access to learning.
Additionally, the booklet appeared to positively influence classroom dynamics. Several ELLs became more active participants in class discussions, using scientific terminology more accurately and confidently, which enriched peer interactions. The teacher also highlighted the booklet’s value as an effective revision tool. Many students used it independently, allowing them to consolidate their understanding outside of formal lessons, including during ELL sessions.
However, the interview also highlighted certain limitations of the study. First, the small sample size and focus on one subject and year group reduce the generalisability of the findings.
Second, time constraints in mixed-ability classrooms made it challenging to integrate scaffolded materials seamlessly into regular instruction. The detailed, language-intensive nature of the booklet occasionally caused a misalignment with the pace of mainstream instruction.
This action research highlights the powerful role that scaffolded instructional materials can play in advancing English Language Learners’ academic success. By integrating targeted language support into subject-specific content, the adapted chemistry booklet significantly improved students’ academic language proficiency, conceptual understanding, and confidence in the classroom.
Its most significant impact was observed when used as a consolidation and revision tool, effectively helping students overcome the challenging transition between language acquisition and mastery of subject content.
Moving forward, it is essential to continue developing crosscurricular scaffolding strategies that support and celebrate the rich linguistic and cognitive diversity ELL students bring, turning challenge into opportunity and diversity into strength.
Crisfield, E. (2022, May). From monolingual mindset to multilingual success [Conference presentation]. 1st Annual Dubai Multilingual TESOL Conference, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121–129.
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom. Heinemann.
Kinsella, K. (2005). Scaffolding for English language learners: A practical guide for teaching science. Science Scope.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Pub. Corp.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Adrian J. Waddicor , Deira International School
This action research investigates the relationship between students' metacognitive self-awareness and learning quality when presented with varying quantities of physics tasks. Despite Deira International School's recognition for outstanding science progress, Year 10 students demonstrated limited ability to study independently and apply physics concepts in unfamiliar contexts. This deficit in metacognitive awareness threatens both immediate academic performance and long-term success in STEM fields.
Drawing upon SelfDetermination Theory (Ryan, 2000) and Universal Design for Learning principles (Rose, 2002), this study examines how varying task choices influences learning outcomes for students with different levels of metacognitive awareness.
Review
Self-Determination Theory posits that optimal learning occurs when three psychological needs are met: competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Reeve (Reeve, 2012) demonstrated that when students perceive greater autonomy, they exhibit higher engagement and achievement—particularly relevant for physics education, where conceptual understanding requires sustained engagement with complex material.
Universal Design for Learning provides a framework for designing flexible learning environments that accommodate individual differences (Rose, 2002). While Schwartz et al.
2010) demonstrated that appropriate choice levels can enhance motivation and task persistence.
The intersection of metacognitive awareness and task design remains underexplored in physics education research.
González and Paoloni (González, 2015) found that students' perceptions of autonomy predicted both metacognitive strategy use and academic performance but didn't directly examine how varying task numbers might influence these
This mixed-methods study examined two research questions:
1.How does students' metacognitive self-awareness correlate with learning quality when presented with different quantities of physics tasks?
2.To what extent does varying available task quantities affect students' engagement with metacognitive strategies?
Prior to implementation, students completed the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) developed by Schraw and Dennison (Schunk, 2011). Students then completed three tasks during a Year 10 Radioactivity unit:
Binary Choice Task: Students selected either creating an infographic or developing an interactive quiz about ionizing radiation properties.
• No Choice Task: All students created a timeline of atomic model development.
• Multiple Choice Task: Students selected from seven different options for demonstrating understanding of radiation applications.
Data collection included MAI scores, content analysis using an 18-point standardized rubric, and structured observations of metacognitive behaviours.
Due to attrition challenges, the final sample included five students representing varying levels of metacognitive awareness and academic performance.
The findings revealed complex relationships between metacognitive awareness, task performance, and learning behaviors:
• Student A (MAI: 21/52): Binary choice task (8/18), Multiple choice (6/18). Demonstrated
• Student B (MAI: 52/52): No choice task (6/18), Multiple choice (8/18). Despite highest metacognitive score, performance was moderate. Displayed numerous metacognitive behaviors.
• Student C (MAI: 5/52): Consistent performance (6/18) across all conditions. Showed no metacognitive behaviors.
• Student D (MAI: 34/52): Binary choice (9/18), No choice (6/18), Multiple choice (12/18). Demonstrated moderate-high metacognitive behaviors with widest performance variation.
• Student E (MAI: 31/52): No choice (15/18), Multiple choice (10/18). Approach appeared performance-oriented rather than learning-focused.
1.Students with moderate-high metacognitive awareness showed greater performance variation across task conditions.
2.Three of five students performed better on multiple-choice tasks
The results challenge simplistic assumptions about differentiation through choice. While SelfDetermination Theory suggests increased autonomy enhances motivation, the relationship depends heavily on students' existing metacognitive capabilities and task perception.
Students with moderate-high metacognitive awareness demonstrated greater responsiveness to task choice variation, while the student with lowest awareness performed identically across conditions. This aligns with cognitive load theory (Paas, 2010), suggesting that decision-making processes consume cognitive resources that might otherwise be dedicated to content learning for students lacking established metacognitive strategies.
The disconnect between observable metacognitive behaviors and performance outcomes was striking. Student B demonstrated high metacognitive awareness but achieved only moderate performance, while Student E attained the highest score despite limited metacognitive engagement.
correlate with highest performance.
observable metacognitive strategies, use of success criteria, orientation, and task perception varied significantly among students.
This suggests metacognitive awareness alone is insufficient; students must apply these skills effectively within specific contexts.
These findings prompted significant changes to teaching practice:
1.Providing a wider range of learning activities addressing different preferences and strengths.
2.Explicitly sharing reasoning for selecting instructional methods, modeling metacognitive decisionmaking.
3.Incorporating structured engagement with success criteria throughout the learning process.
4.Developing strategies to help students view tasks as meaningful learning opportunities rather than items to complete.
This research reveals that students with different metacognitive awareness levels respond uniquely to varying task choices. High metacognitive awareness scores don't automatically translate to superior learning outcomes, and students' perception of tasks significantly impacts engagement.
CAST. (2018). The UDL Guidelines, 2.2. Retrieved May 3, 2025, from The UDL Guidelines: https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
Dignath, C. &. (2018). eachers' direct and indirect promotion of self-regulated learning in primary and secondary school mathematics classes – insights from video-based classroom observations and teacher interviews. Metacognition and Learning, 13(2), 127-157.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
González, A. &. (2015). Perceived autonomy-support, expectancy, value, metacognitive strategies and performance in chemistry: a structural equation model in undergraduates. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(3), 640-653.
Paas, F. v. (2010). Cognitive load theory: New conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 115-121.
Patall, E. A. (2010). The effectiveness and relative importance of choice in the classroom. Journal of educational psychology,, 102(4), 896.
Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In A. L. S. L. Christenson, Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149-172). Springer.
Rose, D. H. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. In E. R. Center, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development,. Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
Schraw, G. &. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness.
Effective differentiation involves more than providing choices; it requires developing students' capacity to make meaningful learning decisions while supporting growing metacognitive awareness. Developing metacognitive capabilities alongside content knowledge is essential for helping students become independent learners capable of applying physics concepts across varied contexts—crucial for both academic success and future engagement with STEM disciplines.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
Schunk, D. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. Taylor & Francis.
Schwartz, B. W. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of personality and social psychology, 83(5), 1178.
Sperling, R. A. (2002). Measures of children's knowledge and regulation of cognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 51-79.
Taasoobshirazi, G. &. (2013). Construct validation of the physics metacognition inventory. International Journal of Science Education, 35(3), 447-459.
Thomas, G. P. (2013). Eliciting metacognitive experiences and reflection in a year 11 chemistry classroom: An activity theory perspective. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(3), 300-313.
Zohar, A. &. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science education, 49(2), 121-169.
Abstract
This research examines the impact of a structured pre-teaching intervention on the mathematical confidence, engagement, and concept knowledge of Year 10 students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND). A qualitative case study in a British international school in Dubai which spanned eight weeks, involved two SEND learners who were pre-taught before their classroom lessons. The research is underpinned by Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and Sweller’s (1988) Cognitive Load Theory (CLT), integrated with dual coding and retrieval strategies. Information was obtained from interviews, queries, and confidence rating cards. Results indicate significant gains in learner confidence, task initiation and classroom participation. Additionally, affective gains were seen, including decreases in maths anxiety and increase in student self- image. Although the research is small in scale and duration, the findings provide implications for scalable and low-cost inclusive teaching practices. Ethical considerations and researcher reflexivity are imbedded into study design and add to the credibility of the study.
Pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) may experience many difficulties in relation to accessing and engaging with mainstream mathematics teaching. Mathematics, with its seemingly abstract requirements and accumulatory recursive structure, is a subject which can easily "get on top" of a pupil who needs time, varied input and moral support.
In this way, anticipatory techniques— such as pre-teaching—can hold the potential to overcome cognitive and affective barriers to learning. Pre-teaching is presenting important concepts, terms, and skills to students before they receive instructio1l in the classroom. This method is thought to alleviate anxiety, promote preparedness, and promote understanding through the activation of prior knowledge and structured supports (Frederick, 2020; Gore & Thomas, 2022).
Although pre-teaching has been shown to be effective in intervention studies at primary level, its use at secondary level, particularly with older SEND students preparing for high stakes exams, has been relatively unexplored. It is to this gap that this research aims to contribute, by exploring how a structured pre-teaching approach could impact the confidence, engagement and conceptual understanding for Year 10 SEND learners in a mathematics classroom.
The idea of scaffolding learners in their ZPD is a core principle in a range of inclusive pedagogies. Vygotsky’s ZPD is a way to think about moving students from what they can do alone to what they can do collaboratively and scaffolding that support. Within SEND education the concept of pre-teaching is a scaffold that closes the gap caused by this development difficulty.
Introducing ideas before whole class instruction begins enables students with cognitive, emotional, or language-focused challenges to be more successful in learning new material with their classmates. This line of reasoning is consistent with Sweller’s CLT which assumes that students are better able to process information when extraneous load on working memory is reduced. Pre-teaching lightens this by manipulating the information being given in smaller bites of knowledge, thus avoiding an overload and encouraging construction of schema. The use of visual and verbal representations to enhance understanding, a primary feature of this intervention, is consistent with Paivio’s (1990) dual coding theory. It was a British international school in Dubai which follows the UK National Curriculum alongside a SEND department. It is consistent with the UAE National Policy for Inclusive Education (2017), which prescribes differentiated instruction for all learners. This nexus of British pedagogy and UAE policy renders the case-study of the school a powerful site to try out some low-cost, scalable ways of inclusive education.
The study is built upon the strong theoretical underpinnings of sociocultural, cognitive and pedagogical perspectives. ZPD is crucial in SEND education, and it highlights the significance of mediation, and its’ contribution with respect to learning. Without engagement with pre-teaching, through favourable social learning environment, marginalised learners, whose prior knowledge is often equally or more limited than their mainstream peers’, have diminished access (Walton, Carrington & Saggers, 2022peers’, have diminished access (Walton, Carrington & Saggers, 2022). Also, Sweller’s (1988) Cognitive Load
Theory has great bearing on MIE since in many MIE settings learners must sequence steps, apply rules and remember formulas in time pressure (Banerjee and Gautam, 2024). Banerjee and Gautam, 2024, emphasises that minimising extraneous load is crucial for SEND students to construct strong mathematical schemas. According to Paivio (1990) and Black and Wiliam (1998), learning with dual coding and retrieval practices provide additional support for the effectiveness of combining visual aids, verbal explanations, and retrieval-based recall as strategies that can promote both memory and understanding. These theories both underpin the justification for pre-teaching and drive the applied construction of the intervention.
At the national level, UAE has also taken huge strides in walking the path of inclusive education by introducing, Federal Law No. 29 and the National Policy for Inclusive Education of 2017. These approaches demand that schools take proactive, differentiated action to support students with disabilities. British curriculum schools, such as this case study, located in Dubai are evaluated for their capacity to meet such requirements.
Keys to this were the school’s inclusive philosophy membership and SEND population and provision. Globally, the Graduated Approach is advocated in the UK’s SEND Code of Practice (Department for Education, 2015), where preventive instruction, such as pre-teaching, is an endorsed intervention. In Australia, Walton et al. (2022) found pre-teaching beneficial in maths contexts with individuals who had processing and language impairments. Meanwhile in the Scandinavian school systems, we see no stand-alone approaches, but a more inclusive approach in Norwegian school education systems and inclusive exploitation of these methods within universal classroom education (Bjørnsrud & Nilsen, 2011).
These international similarities indicate that the pre-teaching concept can be widely applied, while applying it does not transfer directly but is culturally and situationally specific.
This research is meant to test the effect of structured pre-teaching on a group of SEND Year 10 student learning experience in mathematics. More specifically, it is an inquiry into how pre-emptive pedagogy will affect student confidence, understanding, and participation in the classroom over the space of eight weeks. The research questions form the basis of the study:
1. Does pre-teaching enhance children’s math self-confidence?
2. Does it increase comprehension and retention of these mathematical concepts?
3. It then follows that how to the student' s experiences of pre-teaching compare with that of mainstream class participation?
This study used the qualitative case study method in an eight-week period at a British international secondary school in Dubai. Two Year 10 students with identified SEND profiles were also purposefully chosen along with the school’s SEND department. The research was informed by constructivist beliefs about listening to students' voices and genuine observation. The pre-teaching intervention was 3 × 20-min sessions per week before normal maths lesson. These sessions were of various types including explainer videos, retrieval practice (whiteboard retrieval task), scaffolding questions, flashcards and visual recap. Every week, students encountered information in material that was to be covered later in class, giving them a cognitive and emotional ahead start.
Three primary data collection methods were employed: (1) pre- and post-intervention semi-structured interviews; (2) weekly classroom observations captured through researcher structured field notes; and (3) a self-assessment confidence rating scale ranging from 1 (low confidence) to 5 (high confidence). The phenomenon of triangulation was used to achieve strong interpretation of trends. Moral considerations were strictly observed and researcher reflexivity was incorporated to recognise positionality and impacts on the outcomes.
As the researcher, my conflicting roles as a (HLTA) and a researcher may have brought biases to the research. I had pre-existing relationships with each participant which built trust and openness but may have demotivated each guest's willingness to express feelings of discomfort or failure. To serve this purpose, I maintained a reflexive journal to record assumptions, impressions, and personal experiences as they surfaced during the study. I also worked to interpret data judiciously and triangulate it with observable behaviour and student comments. Although this closeness enabled greater understanding of the students’ learning to develop, it required self-critique and transparency at every stage of the research.
Ethical clearance for the research was granted by the school head, Yet the school is not formally collaborating with the university which offers the degree programme at which this project originated; nor were the university ethics committee involved in the student intervention of which the study reported here forms a part. Written informed consents were obtained from the parents of both students and assents from the subjects. Anonymity was maintained by means of pseudonyms.
in their routine maths lessons. …it’s like I already know what’s going on when I walk in… This supports the concept of anticipatory schema activation (Nebesniak, 2007).
Observational data were consistent with these reports, with both students beginning tasks more quickly and being more actively involved in classroom conversational interactions in the fourth week of the intervention.
There was also a significant decrease in mathematics anxiety among students. Although both learners were not initially willing to share and ask questions, they started to exhibit risk-taking behaviour, for example, doing more challenging questions or asking for clarification.
Teachers observed an increase in eye contact, length of attention, and peer interaction. These findings support those found throughout literature regarding the affective rewards of pre-teaching for SEND students (Glazzard, 2024; Frederick, 2020). Crucially, the students took ownership of their own learning as demonstrated by their keen participation with the use of flash cards and check-in processes during the last few weeks.
All information was kept on password-protected devices and deleted following analysis. Participants were advised that they had a right to withdraw without academic consequence at any time. All communication was done in school as part of normal safety procedures. No individual identifying information was included, and results were volunteered respectfully and anonymously.
The intervention has demonstrated benefits in confidence, engagement, and perceived understanding. The confidence of both students increased from 2 to 4 on the self-assessment scale. They reported feeling more prepared and less anxious
The results of the study indicate that pre-teaching is beneficial for the academic readiness of the learners and it has a beneficial impact on the emotional welfare of SEND learners. The key was that entering content on a no-pressure basis effectively 'zone of-proximal' the students and gave them the necessary cognitive and affective tools to participate more fully in mainstream classes. The results are largely in agreement with Vygotsky’s theoretical model, in that the pre-¬teaching acts as scaffolding to assist learners with respect to their proximal development zone. Further, relevant to that were stages where information was chunked and simplified, decreasing the load on WM and encouraging deeper involvement.
But some caveats need to be noted. There is likely to be limitations to generalisation of the findings due to the small sample size and close relationship between researchers and subjects. Second, the confidence rating scale was based on subjective self-report and might not fully represent longterm benefits of increasing mathematical understanding. Limitations and future research A larger mode sample alongside random control trials, and mixed methods would add to the internal and external validity.
However, even if these samples cannot be representative, the results correspond with national and international studies that argue the need for proactive, differentiated work on inclusion (Walton et al., 2022; Bjørnsrud & Nilsen, 2011).
The successful outcome of this intervention provides evidence that, through the application of a theoretical framework and integrated within curriculum planning, pre-teaching can be used as a lever to change outcomes for SEND learners.
The findings in the present study strongly suggest that pre-teaching can bolster both the cognitive and affective preparedness of SEND mathematics students. This encouraged students to feel more comfortable, participate more eagerly, and tackle previous fears they might have had about the course material. The implications of this study support the use of pre-teaching as an inclusive pedagogical strategy, particularly in potentially diverse educational contexts such as British international schools in the UAE.
Banerjee, T., & Gautam, M. K. (2024). Inclusive mathematics classroom practices for children with diverse learning needs from the perspective of cognitive load theory. EPRA International Journal of Research and Development (IJRD), 10(3), 548–555. https://doi.org/10.36713/epra16279
Bjørnsrud, H., & Nilsen, S. (2011). The development of inclusive practices through organisational learning. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(5), 685–701.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
Department for Education (DfE). (2015). Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years. https://www.gov.uk/government/ publications/send-code-of-practice0-to-25
Frederick, K. D. (2020). The outcomes of pre-teaching math lessons to students who struggle in math: A single-subject design approach
[Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
The results advocate that pre-teaching is a successful, costeffective and disseminable intervention within mainstream education. It is recommended that teachers and school administrators consider using structured anticipation instruction as an element of differentiated classroom practice. It is also recommended that professional development should offer training on promoting the use of scaffolding techniques and visual supports that are grounded in theories of information processing. Long-term retention of pre-teaching should be the subject of further study, as well as its applicability to different subjects and age groups.
Glazzard, J. (2020). Supporting learners with SEND in inclusive classrooms. In S. Powell (Ed.), Special educational needs: A guide for inclusive practice (3rd ed., pp. 34–48). SAGE.
Gore, J. M., & Thomas, K. (2022). Reconceptualising inclusive pedagogy for teacher education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(2), 154–169.
Gulliford, A., Daniels, H., & Topping, K. (2012). Psychology for inclusive education: New directions in theory and practice (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Jasien, L., & Hayes, J. (2022). Inclusion and intervention: Understanding “disability” in the mathematics classroom. NCSM Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 22(2), 37–45.
Nebesniak, A. L. (2007). Using cooperative learning to promote a problem-solving classroom. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13(2), 130–137.
Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
UAE Government. (2006). Federal Law No. 29 of 2006 concerning the rights of people with special needs. https://uaelegislation.gov.ae/en/ legislations/1172/download
UAE Ministry of Education. (2017). National policy for inclusive education. United Arab Emirates: Ministry of Education.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Walton, E., Carrington, S., & Saggers, B. (2022). What matters in learning communities for inclusive education: A cross-case analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(4), 450–465.
Williams, H. (2019). What’s the same and what’s different: The use of the Mathematics Mastery programme in a special school for pupils with moderate learning difficulties. Support for Learning, 34(2), 152–166.
Chloe Warren, Hartland International School
This action research investigates how adaptive teaching strategies can impact pupil progress in a mixed-ability Year 4 mathematics class. At the start of the year, our school adopted mixedability groupings in line with the High Performance Learning (HPL) initiative and the national emphasis on inclusive, high-quality teaching (Department for Education, 2021), following two years of set-based teaching. This change brought challenges in planning, delivery and meeting diverse learning needs.
Whole-class teaching can promote equity and shared mathematical thinking (Askew et al., 1997). However, children’s gaps in prior knowledge or the variety of attainment levels can suggest that pupils may not be appropriately supported or challenged (Sherrington, 2017). In my class, the difference in attainment levels, including English language learners (ELL), highlighted the need for more responsive teaching. Therefore, I sought out to trial various adaptations using specific start points, vertical tasks and purposeful Assessment for Learning (AfL) tasks to support the needs of my class.
At Hartland International School, whole-class mathematics was reintroduced as part of the HPL initiative. Having previously taught top-set maths, I quickly saw the challenge of supporting the diverse needs of my mixed-ability Year 4 class of 26 pupils. Due to the wide range of needs in my class, I felt like I lacked the
tools needed to support and adapt the learning for the needs of my class.
Early in the year, AfL and core tasks did not meet all pupils’ needs. Lower attainers struggled to access the content, and higher attainers were not sufficiently stretched. Core tasks offered limited reasoning opportunities for all.
In response, I began trialling adaptive strategies, creating vertically challenged core tasks, purposeful AfL and offering varied starting points. I aimed to support progress and independence, not just in my focus group, but across the class.
Whole-class teaching in mathematics is associated with a more inclusive, equitable environment, where all pupils can access shared dialogue and problem-solving opportunities (Askew et al., 1997). It promotes high expectations and allows learners to benefit from modelling and discussion with peers (Sherrington, 2017), aligning with our school’s HPL approach. Eyre (2016) highlighted that within HPL, we must advocate for consistent challenge and deeper thinking for all pupils.
However, whole-class teaching alone may not meet or support the needs of all pupils unless carefully adapted (Sherrington, 2017).
Tomlinson (2014) further states that meaningful adaptations allow all pupils to engage with content at an appropriate level, especially in mixed-ability classrooms. Boaler (2016) highlights
the importance of open-ended mathematical tasks that create access points for all learners. I have applied these ideas by designing tasks with varied depth and multiple entry points.
Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development emphasises the need for support just beyond current understanding. Bruner (1978) builds on this with his theory of scaffolding, stressing the gradual release of support as pupils gain independence.
Despite these frameworks, there is limited research exploring how such strategies are embedded in everyday mathematics lessons. This study aims to explore how adaptive teaching can support a range of learners in a mixed-ability setting by addressing the following questions:
1. Which adaptive strategies support my whole-class teaching?
2. Can adaptive strategies help children make more progress?
3. Which strategies are most effective for Lower Ability (LA), Middle Ability (MA), Higher Ability (HA), and ELL pupils?
This research focused on how adapting my mathematics teaching could better meet the diverse needs of my mixedability Year 4 class. Over two terms, I trialled three key strategies:
1. scaffolded core sheets to support lower attainers,
2. vertical task design to stretch all learners, and
3. targeted entry questions linking to the AfL.
The research followed a two-cycle model. In Cycle One (Autumn term), I used the initial planned fluency-based tasks and tracked the progression of work completed in a lesson to establish a baseline.
In Cycle Two (Spring–Summer), I embedded various adaptive strategies and monitored their impact on pupil outcomes. Most lessons included vertical tasks and purposeful AfL questions. I also made a personal journal of which strategies I felt worked best for my class.
I collaborated with my year group and members of the senior leadership team (SLT). Joint planning sessions supported reflection and refinement of strategies, allowing me to reflect critically on my teaching.
The participants in this study included six Year 4 pupils: two Lower Ability (LA), two Middle Ability (MA) (including one ELL), and two Higher Ability (HA). Using 3 girls and 3 boys, 1 for each group.
Data was gathered through work sampling, focusing on task completion and reflective notes about my adaptive practices. The sampling was organised into 20% increments based on task completion. With further challenges introduced in lessons, this increased from 60% in Autumn to 100% during the Spring and Summer terms. Two graphs (see Figures 1 and 2) tracked and visualised pupil development in lessons. I also maintained a personal journal of trialled strategies to reflect on what worked and what did not for my class.
Data was analysed by comparing a baseline in Autumn and postadaptations in the Spring–Summer terms. The analysis tracked the work completed by 6 children in the lessons. This data was then made into graphs. Figure 1: Autumn data Figure 1: Spring–Summer data
To evaluate adaptive strategies' impact, I combined quantitative analysis of task progression with qualitative reflection. In Figure 1, Autumn data shows maximum completion was capped at 60% due to task structure: a core task, a 'going deeper' activity and one challenge. In Figure 2, Spring–Summer data shows the scale was extended to 100% as task design developed: core, going deeper, going deeper challenge 1, going deeper challenge 2, and a discussion question.
Figure 1 displays data from the Autumn term, where tasks lacked vertical challenge and pupils typically reached the highest, they could at this time, which was 60%. The data shows the Higher Attainers consistently reaching that top percentage, capping their ability to delve deeper into their learning.
Figure 2 shows some improvement, with pupils progressing beyond the core 20% to access reasoning and problem-solving tasks. Most of the group reached between 40–80%, with pupils, at times, accessing the full sequence of tasks. The task structure allowed for greater differentiation and more visible learning progression. In addition, I recorded qualitative reflective notes to monitor engagement and identify emerging themes such as pupil independence, reasoning ability, and the effectiveness of each strategy implemented. While I did not use a formal coding system (such as Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis), themes were developed through repeated observation, application and analysis of completed work to see which adaptation was most effective.
The data clearly shows an improvement in pupil progression following the implementation of adaptive teaching strategies. In the Autumn term (see Figure 1), most pupils reached only 20–40% of the lesson tasks.
By the Spring–Summer term (see Figure 2), task completion rates had improved. Most pupils progressed to 40–100% of the leswson, with middle and higher attainers regularly reaching the further challenges in the lesson. However, lower attainers rarely progressed passed the core at 20%.
Various starting points in the core provided valuable insight into pupils’ conceptual understanding and allowed me to plan more responsively. The data suggest that adaptive teaching strategies not only improved pupil access to learning but also supported more progress within the lesson.
Adaptive teaching has led to more responsive and inclusive mathematics lessons. In every lesson I plan, I include vertical challenges and purposeful AfL tasks, providing various starting points and hinge points. I found, within my notes, that pupils are more engaged and independent. The data shows that higher-attaining pupils receive more consistent stretch due to having more challenges to reach. Meanwhile, lower-attaining pupils showed some improvement, but were less likely to access further challenges. This could be linked to the increase in challenge in the core due to it now being a vertical task.
This project made me consider how I pitch and structure tasks. It also highlighted the need for further adaptation to help lower attainers reach their full potential. I want to continue implementing visual support, entry steps and stretch in all planning, which has also influenced other teachers. Colleagues in my planning team have also seen the benefits of these adaptive practices and have implemented them into their lessons.
This project deepened my understanding of action research as a professional learning tool. Development in my pedagogy was most effective when paired with reflection and classroom application. Extending this work across more classes and over a longer period could offer useful insight into its long-term impact
Adaptive teaching positively impacted progress and engagement in my mixed-ability mathematics class. The consistent use of various entry points, vertical tasks and purposeful AfL developed a more inclusive and supportive learning environment. My next steps could be to explore how these strategies can support larger sample groups or analyse the impact over a longer period to better understand their long-term influence. Fundamentally, this research shows that adaptive planning, when purposeful and embedded consistently, can make mixed-ability teaching more equitable and effective for all children.
Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Johnson, D., & Wiliam, D. (1997). Effective teachers of numeracy. King's College London, School of Education.
Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Bruner, J. S. (1978). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
Department for Education. (2021). Teachers’ standards: Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies. Crown Publishing. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teachers-standards
Eyre, D. (2016). High performance learning: How to become a world class school. Routledge.
Sherrington, T. (2017). The learning rainforest: Great teaching in real classrooms. John Catt Educational.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Maths anxiety continues to undermine pupils’ confidence, progress, and enjoyment – an issue that becomes particularly evident in Year 6, a time marked not only by academic pressure and high-stakes assessments but also by significant life transitions, such as preparing for secondary school. Research indicates that girls often experience higher levels of maths anxiety than boys, which can negatively impact their engagement and performance (Devine et al., 2012). Alongside this, developing mathematical problem-solving skills is a key educational goal. One pedagogical approach gaining traction is the use of goal-free problems, which aim to reduce cognitive overload and allow students to explore problems, think more deeply, and develop mathematical strategies - all without the pressure of reaching a single ‘correct’ answer. This study investigates the effectiveness of goal-free problems in reducing maths anxiety and promoting problem-solving confidence in Year 6 pupils, highlighting gender differences.
The study was conducted across Year 6 pupils at Safa British Safa School. The Year 6 teachers observed several pupils, especially girls, showing visible stress or avoidance behaviours during structured maths problems. These behaviours included reluctance to start tasks, needing frequent reassurance, or lack of resilience to complete tasks.
This has been a consistent issue across academic years, resulting in lower attainment in girls than boys (particularly in Term 1 of the school year). If left unaddressed, this anxiety can damage long-term attitudes towards mathematics, as well as academic performance. By implementing goal-free problems, a low-pressure environment is created which encourages deeper thinking and greater confidence. In turn, this should help to improve academic performance, as well as reduce the gender-gap in attainment.
Maths anxiety is a well-researched and widely recognised barrier to learning, defined by Ashcraft and Krause (2007) as “a feeling of tension that interferes with the manipulation of numbers and the solving of mathematical problems in various life and academic situations.” It can reduce working memory capacity, leading to avoidance, low confidence, and underachievement (Ashcraft and Ridley, 2005).
One effective strategy for reducing this mathematical anxiety is the use of goalfree problems, introduced by Sweller (1988) to reduce cognitive load, thereby improving conceptual understanding. Devine et al. (2012) highlighted the imbalance of maths anxiety, noting that girls often report higher anxiety levels despite equal ability.
In addition, several studies suggest that open-ended tasks like goal-free problems enhance pupils’ metacognitive awareness and reasoning skills (Kazemi and Stipek, 2001).
Boaler (2016) advocates for problemsolving tasks that allow for exploration and risk-taking, aligning with the goal-free approach. These types of problems allow learners to develop flexible problem-solving strategies. The interconnectedness of maths anxiety, gender dynamics, and the need to develop problem-solving skills indicates a significant opportunity for targeted strategies such as goal-free problems to make a meaningful difference.
This action research utilised a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the impact of goal-free problems on maths anxiety and problem-solving skills across a Year 6 cohort. The research questions were:
• Do goal-free problems reduce maths anxiety among Year 6 pupils?
• Are there gender-based differences in response to goalfree problems?
• Do goal-free problems support the development of problem-solving strategies?
The sample of this research study consisted of 69 Year 6 pupils who participated in topic-based goal free problems lessons across the academic year (13 in total). Lessons were designed to be low-pressure, with collaborative group work encouraged. Pupils were given mathematical prompts (see Figure 1) without specific instructions, where they answered open-ended questions such as “What do you already know?” or “What questions could you ask?” Subsequently, data was collected via pre- and post-topic assessment scores, a post-implementation of goal-free problems survey, teacher observations, and pupil reflections.
69 Year 6 pupils participated (39 girls, 30 boys) from six classes across the year group at Safa British School, with all pupils from mixed-ability groupings. The five other Year 6 teachers also participated in a post-implementation of goal-free problems interview.
The methodology of this research incorporated both quantitative and qualitative data, in the form of online surveys for pupils to complete, teacher observations and interviews post-implementation of goal-free problem lessons, and analysis of summative data.
These were used to not only assess the impact on the pupil’s anxiety levels and increased problem-solving skills, but also to gain a deeper insight into the teachers and pupils’ perceptions on the strategy.
The data was analysed using descriptive statistics to identify key trends across pupil responses, with a central component being pupil voice to indicate the effectiveness of goal-free problems on their own perceptions of maths anxiety and problem-solving skills. Summative data was collected from pre- and post-topic tests to analyse the impact of the implementation of goal-free problems on the academic achievement of pupils. This approach allowed triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data.
With regards to pupil voice, an overwhelming majority of 90% of participants stated that they felt less worried, or ‘a bit’ less worried in goal free problems, rather than ‘normal’ maths lessons (see Figure 2), suggesting pupils’ anxieties surrounding maths were significantly reduced during goal-free problems lessons over the course of the year.
A significant 98% of participants found goal-free problems to support their problem-solving skills, indicating an improvement in pupils’ overall confidence in their critical thinking skills to tackle more complex problems within mathematics (see Figure 3).
From analysing the internal summative data for the Year 6 Baseline and End of Year Data (see Figure 4), it is evident that pupils’ academic achievement increased substantially from the start to the end of the year. At the start of the year, only 25% of pupils were performing above expectations, while by the end of Year 6, this rose to 83%.
Figure 4: Internal mathematics data for Year 6 (baseline to end of year)
This significant improvement suggests that the introduction of goal-free problems positively impacted pupil outcomes. The rise in ‘exceeding’ scores indicates that cognitive load and anxiety helped more pupils access higherlevel reasoning and problem-solving questions – reflecting pupil feedback about increased confidence, reduced worry, and deeper thinking.
Teacher feedback echoed the trends seen in pupil responses. Notably it was evident that staff observed similar benefits in their classrooms.
“A real benefit to having such student-led, open-ended opportunities is that the pupils’ problem-solving skills and resilience have developed in ways that I have not seen before.” – Year 6 Teacher A
“The fact there is not right or wrong has prevented enormous amounts of anxiety, particularly in my female pupils.” - Year 6 Teacher N
The impact of goal-free problems on pupils’ maths anxiety and problemsolving skills was overwhelmingly positive.
90% of participants stated that they felt less worried during goal-free problems lessons (see Figure 2). Of these, 80% were female, suggetsing a greater reduction in maths anxiety among girls. Figure 3 shows that 98% of pupils reported an improvement in their problem-solving skills, while 80% expressed a desire for more goal-free lessons in the future (see Figure 5).
In terms of emotional engagement, 54% of pupils reported feeling ‘happy’ or ‘excited’ and a further 38% of pupils described themselves as ‘curious’ during these lessons (see Figure 6), indicating consistently high levels of engagement and enjoyment. Additionally, Figure 7, the word cloud of open-ended responses, highlights recurring themes such as ‘fun’, ‘interesting’, and ‘deep reasoning’, reinforcing the positive pupil experience.
Interpretation:
The findings suggest that goal-free problems reduce maths anxiety and increase engagement, especially for pupils who may find traditional tasks intimidating. The high rates of curiosity, reduced worry, and increased criticalthinking skills reinforce Sweller’s (1988) theory of reduced cognitive load. The positive emotional engagement, seen in the data from pupils, supports
Boaler’s (2016) idea that exploratory, non-intimidating environments enhance conceptual understanding.
Colleagues at Safa British School have expressed interest in adapting this approach, particularly after seeing the improvement in pupil confidence and engagement. Sharing this in continuous professional development has inspired a more inclusive approach to the teaching of mathematics at Safa British School, as well as trialing this approach in other subject areas.
This action research confirms that goalfree problems enhance problem-solving skills and reduce maths anxiety among pupils. The combination of quantitative results and qualitative pupil voice makes a compelling case for integrating goal-free problems regularly at all ages in primary maths lessons. A further study may delve deeper into the impact of goal-free problems on long-term attainment across a range of ages.
Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 243–248. https://doi. org/10.3758/BF03194093
Ashcraft, M. H., & Ridley, K. S. (2005). Math anxiety and its cognitive consequences: A tutorial review. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical cognition (pp. 315–325). Psychology Press.
Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students' potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Devine, A., Fawcett, K., Szücs, D., & Dowker, A. (2012). Gender differences in mathematics anxiety and the
relation to mathematics performance while controlling for test anxiety. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 8(1), Article 33. https://doi. org/10.1186/1744-9081-8-33
Kazemi, E., & Stipek, D. (2001). Promoting conceptual thinking in four upper-elementary mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 102(1), 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1086/499693
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi. org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
This article explores how structured peer collaboration can improve engagement and attainment in a mixed-ability mathematics class in Year 4. This year, our school moved away from grouping students into ability sets, prompting the need for more adaptive strategies that support and challenge all learners. Early in Term 1, I observed that student engagement was inconsistent, especially among lower and middle attainers. Mathematical discussions lacked depth and students often relied on teacher input to progress. The problem, therefore, was twofold: limited mathematical discourse and disengagement, particularly during independent and problemsolving activities. Research suggests that peer collaboration, when scaffolded effectively can foster deeper understanding, shared accountability and inclusive learning environments (Siller & Ahmad, 2024; Alegre et al., 2020). This approach offered a practical, efficient strategy. When students are explicitly taught how to collaborate through structured roles, sentence stems and feedback routines they become more reflective, independent and motivated. Over the three terms I introduced structured collaboration across three terms to investigate whether this approach could raise engagement, confidence and attainment in mathematics for all learners in my class.
This academic year, the decision was made to move to mixed-ability groups for mathematics classes. This new approach presented some challenges.
Lower and middle attainers were often not progressing to challenge tasks and required a lot of teacher input and support. High attainers were missing out on opportunities to extend their thinking as teacher input was being prioritised for those who required support. Mathematical dialogue was dominated by high-attainers with little input from middle or lower attainers. This limited the progress of less confident students. Equally, there were missed opportunities for high attainers to develop their reasoning
during problem-solving activities. I was left with the question of how I could empower all pupils to participate actively and learn from one another.
By implementing peer collaboration strategies, I hoped to create a classroom culture in which every student voice could be heard and encouraged, creating opportunities for students to take risks and engage more confidently in mathematical dialogue in a safe space. At the same time, the introduction of the ‘Clarifier’ role challenged high attainers to developing their ability to ask questions and break down problems for others. As a High-PerformanceLearning school, this approach also supported the development of empathy, communication and self-regulation.
Research strongly supports the idea that structured peer collaboration can improve outcomes in mathematics. Alegre et al. (2020) found that peer tutoring was especially effective in primary settings when clearly defined roles were introduced.
Similarly, Siller and Ahmad (2024) found that scaffolded peer interactions, when supported with teacher modelling, led to increased confidence, engagement and performance in mathematics. Their study highlighted that structured peer dialogue not only improved problem-solving outcomes but also enhanced learner’s willingness to take
This sentiment was echoed by Gallagher et al. (2020) who found flexible grouping, peer support and differentiated strategies allowed all students to access learning while maintaining high standards.
From these studies, I decided to review my use of peer support and look at ways to introduce more structure to collaborative routines. My study sought to examine if these strategies would lead to improved academic outcomes but also engagement and learner agency.
This led me to the following research questions:
1. How does peer collaboration influence the use of mathematical language and problem-solving skills?
2. What impact does peer collaboration have on mathematical understanding, engagement and attainment?
Methodology
Action research was chosen as the methodology for this study because it is practitioner-led, classroom-based and focuses on improving specific aspects of practice in real time. It allows for reflection and responsive adjustment. As both the researcher and class teacher, I could closely monitor pupil responses, evaluate strategies and make informed changes as the year progressed.
The overall research objective was to investigate the effectiveness of structured peer collaboration as an adaptive teaching strategy in a mixed-ability mathematics setting.
The following two research questions were developed:
1. How does peer collaboration influence the use of mathematical language and problem-solving skills?
2. What impact does peer collaboration have on mathematical understanding, engagement and attainment?
Methodology
This small-scale action research project was designed to evaluate the impact of structured peer collaboration on mathematical engagement, dialogue and attainment in a mixed-ability Year 4 classroom.
The research was conducted over three terms and involved three action cycles.
Cycle 1 (Term 1):
• Peer assessment introduced at the end of every mathematics lesson.
• Student survey on Mathematics (Appendix 1)
Cycle 2 (Term 2)
• Lesson on constructive feedback.
• Modelling good and bad feedback.
• Use of rubrics to reflect on feedback.
• Student survey on Mathematics
• Focus group with 3 children identified through results
Cycle 3 (Term 3)
• Introduction of sentence stems bookmarks
• Introduction of clarifier role (Appendix 2)
• Mini-lesson on role of clarifier (Appendix 2)
• Student survey on Mathematics
Participants
The study took place in a Year 4 classroom at Hartland International School, comprising 22 students. The participants represented a range of attainment levels:
• Working towards expectations - 2
• Meeting expectations - 8
• Working above expectations - 12
A mixed-methods approach was used to gather quantitative and qualitative data. The following tools and strategies were used:
Pupil surveys: Administered at the end of each term to gauge student attitudes towards collaboration and mathematics (Likert scale and open-response format).
Observations & Photographs: Student interactions and the quality of mathematical dialogue.
Work samples: Annotated student work was analysed to track evidence of mathematical reasoning and vocabulary development.
Attainment data: End of unit White Rose assessment scores were compared to measure progress in problem-solving and arithmetic strands.
Reflection rubrics: Students completed self-assessments using simplified HPL collaboration rubrics. (see Figure1)
This study employed a mixed-methods approach to analyse both quantitative and qualitative data collected through pupil surveys, attainment data, and classroom observations. The aim was to identify trends in student engagement, collaborative behaviours and mathematical attainment resulting from structured peer collaboration.
1. White Rose & Attainment Data
Mathematics attainment scores from Term 1 and Term 3 were compared using percentage performance in arithmetic and problem-solving strands. Students’ results were grouped into three broad attainment bands: Lower (below 60%), Middle (60–79%), and Higher (80% and above).
2. Survey Data (Likert Scales)
Pre and post intervention surveys included Likert scale questions such as “I enjoy solving maths problems with a partner” and “I feel confident explaining my maths thinking to a peer.” The number of students agreeing or strongly agreeing was tallied and compared across the two points.
3. Visual Observational Evidence
Teacher observations confirmed a marked increase in risktaking and mathematical dialogue from these students. Their participation in group work became more consistent, and their responses during lessons grew in length and depth. They were more willing to attempt challenge tasks and increasingly used sentence stems to articulate their thinking. (see Figure 2)
Figure 2: Students using sentence starters and question prompts to scaffold peer feedback during a problem-solving task.
By integrating trends across assessment scores, pupil voice and classroom behaviours, the study ensured triangulation and reduced researcher bias.
Table 1 – Attainment scores in end of unit Problem Solving assessments in Term 1 & 3
Table 1 shows the problem-solving percentage scores for five students across Term 1 and Term 3, highlighting improvements made during the intervention period, showing measurable improvement in student performance.
Whole-class survey data revealed a rise in the number of students reporting that collaboration made them feel more confident in problem-solving (see Figure 3). Student reflections also echoed an increased confidence: “Sometimes I don’t get it, but when my partner shows me their way, I feel like I can try it too.”
Another student shared: “I feel better when someone helps me instead of just the teacher, because they talk like me.” While another added: “I like talking about the answers now, not just writing them.”
The introduction of the Clarifier role encouraged deeper questioning, improved listening and prompted high attainers to explain their methods clearly. This not only supported their peers but also strengthened their own understanding.
Figure 3 Confidence levels in problem-solving.
Survey results indicated that collaborative work was their most valued support strategy in mathematics. Visual data collected in Figure 4 further illustrate this shift in mindset, showing a notable increase in student preference for peer-led support.
The most significant shift was in pupil mindset. Students moved from working in isolation to viewing mistakes as part of the learning process. Peer dialogue became more purposeful, and feedback was received more constructively.
The three students tracked most closely began the year hesitant and disengaged but finished as more confident, active contributors in mathematics lessons. Structured routines and peer roles provided clarity and confidence. The use of sentence stems and purple-pen feedback reinforced key mathematical vocabulary and encouraged thoughtful responses.
As a teacher I became more deliberate in planning time for talk, not just task completion. My role evolved from instructor to facilitator, observing and supporting dialogue rather than directing learning. This allowed me to offer more targeted intervention, particularly for small groups needing support.
The Clarifier role helped challenge high attainers, developing their communication and leadership skills. This promoted greater equity and helped build a culture of shared success.
Overall, the project showed that peer collaboration, when explicitly taught and consistently embedded, can transform classroom culture, support inclusive progress and improve mathematical engagement for all learners.
This action research project demonstrated that structured peer collaboration has the potential to significantly enhance engagement, confidence and attainment in primary mathematics. By embedding routines, modelling roles and valuing student voice, the classroom became a more inclusive, language-rich environment where all learners could thrive.
Alegre, F., Moliner, L., Maroto, A., & Lorenzo-Valentín, G. (2020). Academic achievement and peer tutoring in mathematics: A comparison between primary and secondary education. SAGE Open, 10(2), 1–9. https://doi. org/10.1177/2158244020929295
Gallagher, S., Hume, D., & Du Preez, J. (2020). Adaptive teaching in mixed-ability classrooms. Education Today, 15(3), 45–58.
Siller, L., & Ahmad, R. (2024). Structuring peer talk for success in primary mathematics. Journal of Learning and Teaching, 31(1), 22–37.
Handwriting is a fundamental skill in early education, but many young children struggle due to underdeveloped motor control. Legible writing requires coordination of the whole body, not just finger dexterity. Inadequate gross motor development can make letter formation challenging for young learners. In a Foundation Stage Two classroom, many students produced uneven letters, mixed-up stroke order, and inconsistent spacing of letters. These issues can hinder literacy progress, writing enjoyment and confidence. Research suggests that physical activities supporting posture and body awareness can enhance writing skills (Akin, 2019; Wawrzyniak et al., 2021). To explore this, daily gross motor activities consisting of short movement breaks, dance, yoga, and active transitions were embedded into the classroom before writing tasks. This project aimed to investigate: How does daily gross motor activity impact handwriting in an early years classroom?
Traditional handwriting instruction in early years classrooms typically involves fine motor tasks like repetitive tracing of letters albeit in multisensory ways. Despite this, many children continued to show poor writing control. Common issues included reversed letters, difficulty crossing the midline and uneven letter sizing. These challenges pointed to underdeveloped postural control and bilateral coordination. Left unaddressed, such difficulties can persist beyond early years and affect writing
fluency, motivation, and confidence. Rather than adding more fine motor practice, this project explored whether improving gross motor skills could better prepare the body for writing.
A growing body of research supports the link between physical development and handwriting ability. Akin (2019) found that grade 1 students participating in physical education-based motor interventions made significant improvements in writing quality and interest. The activities focused on core strength, bilateral integration, and coordination, which translated into improved pencil control and posture. Similarly, Wawrzyniak et al. (2021) found that integrating physical and academic skills through the Eduball programme significantly enhanced graphomotor performance in primary students. Despite this, many early years classrooms still rely on static fine motor practice. There is limited research on whether short, daily gross motor routines integrated into classroom life can yield similar benefits. This project sought to explore that possibility in an early years context.
This study followed an action research model to investigate whether daily gross motor activity could improve early handwriting outcomes. Action research was chosen for its flexibility and relevance to classroom-based practice. The core question guiding this enquiry was: How does daily gross motor activity impact handwriting in an early years classroom?
The intervention took place over three months (January–March) in a class of 17 students aged 4–5. A variety of gross motor activities were used including music and movement breaks, yoga sequences, and active transitions between lessons. These were delivered daily before writing and at other intervals throughout the day. No additional fine motor training was provided. Progress was tracked through regular classroom writing activities, with samples reviewed before and after the intervention period.
The sample consisted of 17 mixedgender Foundation Stage 2 students in an international early years setting. All children participated in the intervention and their handwriting progress was included in the review. No additional supports or exclusions applied during the project.
Handwriting progress was monitored using a simple handwriting checklist and comparison of students’ writing books. Pre- and post-intervention samples were reviewed using a teacherdesigned rubric, focusing on letter formation, spatial layout, and baseline alignment. Informally, the rubric included attention to stroke direction, size consistency and placement of letters. This provided a consistent lens for evaluating visible changes across the class.
Samples were analysed through visual comparison guided by the checklist and rubric criteria. The focus was on qualitative shifts in letter clarity, consistency, and presentation. While the rubric was not used for numerical scoring, patterns of improvement were evident across the cohort.
The following improvements were observed across the group:
Letter formation: A greater number of students demonstrated accurate, consistently shaped letters. There were
Unlike fine motor drills, this whole-body approach supported postural control, bilateral integration, and sensory processing which are all key elements of early writing success.
This project demonstrated that handwriting development should be seen not just as a fine motor skill but as a wholebody task. A shift towards a more holistic view of early years pedagogy that includes movement as part of literacy may benefit a broader range of learners. The strategies trialled were simple, required no specialist equipment, and were easily integrated into the daily routine.
Incorporating gross motor activities into daily routines enhanced early handwriting performance in this classroom. Improvements in letter formation, spacing, and general presentation were evident across the class. These outcomes suggest that supporting physical development skills can contribute meaningfully to progress in early writing.
However, this was a small-scale study in a single classroom setting. Future research may benefit from expanded data sets, structured assessments, or long-term tracking.
Nonetheless, the strategy proved practical, easy to adopt and enjoyable for students. It positions handwriting as both a physical and academic process whilst simultaneously highlighting the value of movement for learning.
Akin, S. (2019). Fine motor skills, writing skills and physical education-based assistive intervention program in children at grade 1. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 5(4), 518–525. https://doi. org/10.20448/journal.522.2019.54.518.525
Wawrzyniak, S., Cichy, I., Matias, A. R., Pawlik, D., Kruszwicka, A., Klichowski, M., & Rokita, A. (2021). Physical activity with Eduball stimulates graphomotor skills in primary Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 614138. https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.614138
Written by Daniel Thomas
Abstract
This study investigates how embedding peer and self-assessment strategies into daily classroom routines enhances pupils' progress in writing within a Year 6 setting. Drawing on academic research and pupil reflections, this article demonstrates how these practices improve self-regulation, collaboration, and critical thinking. Findings suggest that, when systematically implemented, peer and self-assessment contribute significantly to the development of independent learners, with benefits extending across the wider curriculum.
Introduction
Fostering independence and reflective thinking is a cornerstone of effective primary education. In writing, peer and self-assessment have been recognised as key mechanisms for increasing pupil engagement and driving progress. While improvements in attainment cannot be attributed solely to these strategies, the value they add to the learning process is substantial. This article explores the effects of systematically embedding peer and self-assessment into a Year 6 writing curriculum, drawing upon academic
A growing body of research supports the positive impact of peer and self-assessment on deeper learning. Andrade and Du (2007) argue that self-assessment encourages students to reflect on the quality of their work and to think metacognitively about the strategies they use—skills vital to the development of independent writers. In practical terms, pupils were supported in this through structured sentence stems such as “I have included…” and “Next time I will…” to frame their reflections.
Topping (2009) similarly highlights the value of peer assessment in increasing pupils’ ability to apply success criteria and take greater ownership over their learning. In our context, this involved pupils referring directly to a rubric to identify specific features of effective writing in their own and others’ work. The role of dialogue is also central to effective peer assessment. Black and Wiliam (2009) emphasise that opportunities for peer dialogue about work standards support deeper learning than teacher feedback alone. This aligns with the classroom culture established in our setting, where collaborative discussion was modelled and expected they develop critical thinking skills and consolidate their own understanding through the process of justification
This principle underpinned the decision to treat peer and self-assessment not as evaluative endpoints, but as integral, developmental steps within each writing lesson.
Peer and self-assessment strategies were embedded into daily writing lessons over the course of this academic year Pupils evaluated writing using success criteria presented in a clear, curriculumaligned table (see Appendix 1 and 2). Strengths were marked with a star (★), while next steps were identified with a ladder symbol. Reflections were completed using purple pens, enabling pupils to make visible improvements within their books.
Each assessed piece was annotated with ‘PA’ (Peer Assessed) or ‘SA’ (Self Assessed) (see Appendix 3), allowing for clear tracking and enabling the teaching team to monitor patterns of reflection. Quality and consistency were supported through regular teacher modelling, scaffolded sentence stems, and class discussions around sample texts.
As Harris and Brown (2013) observe, “collaborative assessment practices allow learners to internalise success criteria and make meaningful improvements to their own work.” This evidence supported the decision to embed such practices consistently into classroom routines.
Pupil responses indicated high levels of engagement and ownership when using peer and self-assessment.
One pupil noted, “Peer marking helps me spot what I need to do better next time and also helps my friends.” Another remarked, “When we look at our work together, I understand the success criteria much more clearly.” These reflections highlight how assessment became not just a judgemental task but a learning tool.
The process of articulating feedback aloud was particularly powerful. One pupil commented, “It’s helpful because you can actually see how much you’re improving each lesson.” This reinforces Falchikov’s (2005) view that explanation and justification strengthen conceptual understanding.
The implementation of a clear, visual system significantly increased pupil independence. With consistent routines and familiar tools, pupils were able to identify strengths and areas for development without relying solely on adult intervention. Teacher workload was also reduced, as pupils became more autonomous and confident in editing and improving their own work.
The most notable transformation was the shift in classroom dynamics. With pupils trained in constructive feedback techniques, the classroom environment became highly collaborative. Pupils coached, supported, and challenged one another meaningfully. This freed up the teacher and support staff to work with target groups, deepening personalisation of learning and enabling more focused interventions.
As Wiliam (2011) states, “The most effective classrooms are those where the students are as much involved in their own learning as the teacher.” The classroom culture developed over the course of this study aligns closely with this vision.
Crucially, the impact extended beyond writing. Pupils naturally transferred assessment techniques to other subjects, including Maths, Science, and Reading. Reflection evolved from a teacher-scaffolded process into an independent, habitual part of pupils’ learning behaviour.
To ensure the long-term success of peer and self-assessment practices, lesson planning included purposeful opportunities for reflection. These included:
• Dedicated editing sessions using purple pens
• Starter activities revisiting prior targets
• Mid-draft checkpoints during extended writing tasks
Pupils reported that these opportunities helped them “visibly see the progress” they were making, reinforcing motivation and confidence.
Healthy competition also contributed to the impact. The use of differentiated challenge levels encouraged pupils to push themselves further against the success criteria within a supportive and aspirational environment.
A key component of this approach was the emphasis on oracy. Pupils were encouraged to verbalise their targets and assessments before recording them in writing. This coaching model enabled even less confident writers to engage in meaningful reflection and receive peer feedback that supported improvement.
Embedding peer and self-assessment into daily classroom practice had a demonstrable impact on pupils’ writing progress, independence, and engagement. Supported by educational research and corroborated by pupil voice, these strategies empowered learners to take responsibility for their development and to engage critically with their own and others’ work.
While writing progress is influenced by many factors, the systematic implementation of these assessment strategies proved to be a powerful catalyst for improvement. With the right structures, language, and culture in place, pupils flourished—not just as writers, but as reflective, collaborative, and independent learners across the curriculum.
Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria‐referenced self‐assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181. https://doi. org/10.1080/02602930600801928
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-0089068-5
Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. RoutledgeFalmer.
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers’ implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.008
Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569 Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.
Appendix 1
Model Success Criteria
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Children as Writers: Does choice impact motivation in Year 6 writing?
How many times have you needed to write a diary from the perspective of an evacuee or a non-chronological report on the Vikings in your life? Most probably, never. However, how often do we need to write a letter to bring about change or engage in writing that explains a process or discusses difficult issues. This action research project aims to measure the impact of choice on writing motivation in Year 6.
At Hartland, we felt we needed to remodel our writing curriculum to give the children a clear purpose for writing. Too often we were receiving 26 copies of the same narrative that has been ‘innovated’ from a model text. It lacked creativity and children were not motivated to write. Therefore, we began the journey to improve attitudes to writing through Ross Young and Felicity Ferguson’s ‘Writing for Pleasure’ framework (Young and Ferguson, 2020). It has long been a challenge to engage children in writing at length in Year 6 and so liberating the element of choice was introduced to combat this. The Writing for Pleasure centre have created a framework for primary writing that puts children’s choice at the heart of the curriculum. New to the role of English lead for the academic year 2024-25, it was a school-wide priority to give both students and teachers alike the opportunity to make changes to their attitudes towards writing.
The National Literacy Trust: Children and young people’s writing in 2024 (Clark et al 2024), reported on worrying statistics for the state of children’s motivation for writing. In a survey of 76,131 children and young people, fewer than 3 in 10 children (28.7%) reported that they choose to write in their free time. Furthermore, 44.0% of children and young people aged 8 to 18 struggled with deciding what to write, and 1 in 3 (36.8%) admitted that they only wrote when they had to. This further highlights the need to consider curriculum choices when delivering writing lessons to pupils. As teachers, we have a duty to inspire children’s writing ideas and provide support with this process when needed.
In the academic year 2023/24, 72% of children met the standard for writing in teacher assessments (Department for Education, 2025). This is a decline of 6% since before the pandemic in 2020. Additionally, students achieving greater depth remained at 13%. Another decrease, down from 20% before the pandemic. These statistics demonstrate the rapid decline in outcomes for writing in the United Kingdom. Curriculum design over the last decade has been catered towards ‘cross-curricular learning’. Often, history and geography content is taught through English lessons and so writing instruction can be secondary to exploring texts that are didactic to the curriculum topics.
The action research approach to measure the impact of choice in writing was necessary as it is important to review practice regularly and make changes to achieve maximum impact. It is also important to reflect and review each action research cycle to understand what methods are not providing impact and so should be revised before the next cycle. In this research, this took the form of a new writing project every 6-8 weeks. At each milestone, outcomes for writing were assessed and where students had been successful, their wiriting choices were analysed to depict why this was. The study aimed to answer three questions: Does choice impact enjoyment for writing, does choice improve agency and therefore, does choice improve writer identity?
The research began with a ‘Children As Writers’ survey (Young and Ferguson, 2021). All children completed the survey of 19 questions, each written to measure one of the affective domains of writing (see Table 1). This was then reviewed in May 2025 with a final measure of the affective domains (see Table 2). Student interviews were conducted in May 2025 to further understand a small percentage of the outcomes.
The sample included 22 students. 13 boys and 9 girls from a Year 6 class in an International, British Curriculum school in Dubai.
22 students completed a survey in September 2024 and then repeated the same survey in May 2025. 1 student interview was conducted in May 2025.
In September 2024, children, as a collective, reported ‘mild low’ enjoyment, ‘mildly negative’ motivation and ‘mild low’ agency (see Table 1). This showed that children did not have a positive outlook on writing, were not motivated to write and felt that they did not have ownership over their writing. As Year 6 children, aged 10-11, attitudes towards writing are often challenging to change as they have spent six years at primary school and have the most experience with the subject. Therefore, the results of the survey were not surprising at this stage.
The aim of the survey was to focus on enjoyment, motivation and writer-identity. These domains were chosen as the cognitive load of writing is immense and through improving enjoyment this helps to lighten the load. Attainment outcomes in writing for the class conclude at 79% meeting the standard and 71% achieving above the standard. Whilst this is significantly above outcomes reported in the United Kingdom, the assessment framework used was not the same criteria. The Knowledge and Human Development Association (KHDA) is the governing body for Dubai and the assessment framework used reflects the demands of the country. However, it is possible to compare the 79% meeting the standard as a reflection of the success of the writing curriculum as this is above the 72% meeting the standard in the United Kingdom.
Although the aim of the study was not to measure attainment in writing, it is important to note the outcomes do not drop when giving children choice over their writing topic.
When the survey was replicated in May 2025, results showed a positive increase in all affective domains. Significantly, enjoyment and motivation. Whilst the domain of, writeridentity has increased from ‘negative’ it remains ‘mildly negative’ from student’s final responses. When questioned about this, children reported ‘real writers are published authors, not children’. Therefore, this will continue as a priority next academic year.
Teachers should strive to work on children’s opinion of themselves as writers and engage with ‘real’ authors to demonstrate that the writing process is the same for them as it is for the children.
Table 2: Outcomes of the ‘Children As Writers’ survey in May 2025.
On an individual basis, the survey also reported an overall attitude to writing based on a five level scale: negative, mild negative, mild positive, postive and very positive (see Table 3). In the initial survey, 1 student had a positive attitude towards writing. 10 were midly positive and 11 were midly negative. This culminated in a 50% negative outlook and 50% positive. After a year of using the ‘Writing for Pleasure’ framework and giving children choice in their writing lessons, 6 children reported a positive attitude (23% increase), 15 were midly positive (23% increase) and 1 remained mildly negative (45% decrease).
Table 3: Individual outcomes of the survey with difference shown.
Research question 1:
Does choice improve motivation for writing? Yes, in the context of the children in the sample.
Research question 2:
Does choice improve enjoyment of writing? Yes, in the context of the children in the sample.
Research question 3:
Does choice improve writer-identity? Not to a positive level, yet.
When comparing the findings of the study to the literature available, it can be said that giving children choice improves the motivation, enjoyment and agency of young writers. This is an issue that is being felt in the international school systems as well as in the United Kingdom. A simple change in teacher’s practice should be to involve children in the ideas generation stage of a writing project. If children are being dicated to about the topic they should write about, we cannot hope for improved motivation for writing both in and outside of the classroom. Teachers should reflect on how weighted the English curriculum is towards other subjects being supplemented due to timetable pressures if they want to improve outcomes and attitudes in writing lessons.
On a personal level, my practice has improved as I have reflected on each writing cycle to continually take children’s voices into account when planning a unit. The lessons in the ideas generation part of the sequence have improved in each iteration as I have had to reflect on the successful pieces of writing and ask children what could have been done differently. When planning lessons to support children with coming up with their own ideas, I started quite open and free as I thought this would be the best approach. However, when I was met with a sea of blank faces and a chorus of ‘I don’t know’, I knew the planning of activities and support given to students could not be as ‘free’. We developed the lessons from Young and Fergusons’ framework to explore ‘I am an expert in’ (see Appendix 1) and ‘Let’s have an ideas party’ (see Appendix 2). It was important to engage with the advice with the authors of the framework that stated, ‘giving children choice doesn’t mean you can’t give advice or direction’.
This statement is further support by additional adivce for staff: ‘teachers can be direct and tell children to choose something else - as long as they can explain to the child why’. This highlights the important role that the teacher has at this stage to ensure ideas are fully developed and beneficial to the child’s progress. We must provide children with the confidence that their ideas matter and other people will be interested in reading their writing.
The introduction of ‘faction’, a blend of facts and fiction, has been an important element to our lessons and curriculum. This teaches children that writing lessons are not about regurgitating facts and curriculum content but about teaching them the skills to become great writers. It does not matter if the facts in their writing are true. The beauty of ‘Writing for Pleasure’ is that children get to invent their own facts whilst focusing on the objectives of the writing curriculum and
All teachers at Hartland have followed this approach for the academic year. This will continue indefinitely as we feel across the school, impact on children’s motivation has greatly improved. Next year, teachers in all year groups will carry about the ‘Children As Writers’ survey with their class at the beginning and end of the year. In it’s initial phase, this will give teachers and understanding of their classes’ current attitude and give them clear next steps on which domains need to be addressed.
In conclusion, choice has an impact on motivation and enjoyment of writing. Teachers should reflect on their current writing curriculum and aim to involve children in the process. Their ideas should be at the heart of their writing and teachers should focus on teaching writing skills rather than delivery content for other subjects. It must be carefully planned and choice does not mean lack of
Clark, C., Picton, I., Cole, A., & Bonafede, F. (2024). Children and young people’s writing in 2024. National Literacy Trust. Department for Education. (2025). Key Stage 2 attainment: Academic year 2023/24. Department for Education.
Young, R., & Ferguson, F. (2020a). Real world writers: A handbook for teaching writing with 7–11 year olds. Taylor & Francis.
Written by Thomas Fitt
At ABS, children are provided with chilli challenge questions in all subjects. In Year 4, children choose independent tasks based on their confidence level. Whilst this approach differentiates tasks, it can cap what children produce and limit their potential. In my class, some have developed a fixed mindset, especially in maths and pupils now view themselves as a “warm student” as opposed to a student who just chooses a warm activity for a certain lesson. My belief is that children should all complete the same activity, however receive scaffolded support to achieve that learning objective based on their own individual needs. This would not only ensure that I am better able to facilitate their needs within a given lesson, but it would also allow for the Kagan Seating Plan (mixed attaining table pairs) to operate as effectively as possible.
Research does suggest that differentiation can be timeconsuming and challenging to plan and execute effectively (Hall, Strangman & Meyer, 2003). Although planning is routine, its impact must be scrutinised if it becomes timeintensive. Research also indicates that poor implementation of differentiation may widen achievement gaps, especially if some students are given “easier” tasks without appropriate challenge (William, 2011).
Prior to planning two weeks of scaffolded activities, I completed a survey with two different classes in Year 4 to better understand their views on the differentiated tasks which they are currently completing in lessons.
Looking at this survey data carefully, 90% of children admitted that they at least sometimes choose an easier independent task due to tiredness. Willis (2010) on BrainBased Learning highlights the role of mental energy in decision-making, noting that tired students may struggle with selecting appropriately challenging tasks. Therefore, while adding an easier option to children’s learning might provide lower attaining children with activities they can more easily access, children could simply choose an easier option when tired and be working inside their own comfort zone.
In the two lessons of scaffolded activities in science, children were working on the topic of electricity (first lesson testing out insulators and conductors and the second lesson on different types of appliances). In some classes, all students completed a shared task with scaffolded support. Some of the questions were as follows:
• What were the constants/variables in our experiment?
• What happened when we inserted conductors/insulators into our experiment? (Include the words “open”/“incomplete”).
For the independent task, Miss Murden and I asked an adult to observe three children in each class. All children were provided with sentence starters to help formulate their sentences and so they were only focusing on their conclusions rather than the grammatical structure of the sentences. According to Steve Graham’s research on Cognitive Load and Executive Function (2006), providing sentence starters is a highly effective instructional strategy because it supports students in managing the multiple demands of writing.
Higher attainers received a word bank of key vocabulary to use. Everyone in the class then had a “deep” question to complete, without anyone knowing it was a “deep” (challenging) extension question, but with peer support I believed all children could access this learning. Gillies (2016) identified cooperative learning as a highly important way for children to learn. She emphasised that cooperative learning involves students working collaboratively.
Phase 1: Demonstrate Fluency
Phase 3: Reflection and Metacognition
After the activity, coaches and peers reflected on their findings:
a.Coaches may say: “Helping others made me realise how materials behave differently with electricity.”
b.Peers may use: “I understand that plastic is an insulator because…”
Why it worked: Despite time restraints preventing a survey, children were more motivated to support others’ learning.
Approach: Provided structured talk frames for all children to develop scientific language to explain their reasoning.
During the group discussions the following stem sentences were used:
• Prediction stem:
“I think ___ will be a conductor/insulator because ___.”
Example: “I think the spoon will be a conductor because it is made of metal.”
Pupils tested a range of materials to determine if they are conductors or insulators. Higher attainers who confidently completed the testing table with accurate results and reasoning moved to a coaching role.
Phase 2: Peer Coaching Deployment
These pupils were assigned to groups needing support.
Their roles:
a.Model scientific reasoning using sentence stems like: i.“I think this is a conductor because it lets the electricity through.”
ii.“This didn’t work, so I believe it’s an insulator.”
b.Prompt peers to use structured talk frames rather than supplying answers.
i.“What did you notice when we tested the metal spoon?”
ii.“Can you explain your thinking using ‘because’?”
Evaluation/Reasoning stem: “I believe ___ is the best material for a wire because ___.”
Example: “I believe copper is the best material for a wire because it conducts electricity.”
Why it worked: It worked because it improved the following: Vocabulary Development: Reinforced key terms such as conductor, insulator and electricity.
2. Language Scaffolding: Especially supported ELL and lower attainers to express their understanding.
3. Deeper Reasoning: Encouraged higher attainers to justify choices and engage in scientific discourse.
Approach: Presented the same core task, but asked questions that vary in depth to scaffold or stretch understanding.
Classroom Example (Science - Y4 Electricity): “What do these objects tell us about how electricity works?” was the base question.
Scaffolds:
• Support: “What is this object? Does it conduct electricity?”
• Core: “What does this object tell us about materials that conduct electricity?”
• Extension: “Why might our understanding of whether a material conducts electricity change over time?”
Why it worked: Everyone was being taught the same content, but there was scope for deeper thinking through questioning.
Table Class 404 Observation
Table Class 402 with Differentation
Table Class 402 with Scaffolding
This evidence suggests that scaffolding provides a structured, supportive environment that promotes focus, independence, collaboration and a willingness to attempt challenging tasks. While it works effectively for most students, it should be carefully adjusted for lower-attaining learners who may still struggle with confidence and perseverance. Overall, scaffolding appears to be a more effective strategy than differentiation alone for fostering positive learning behaviours.
1. We then completed a survey with these classes and here were their results. The majority of students said: “It felt good because we were all working together.”
Pupils responded positively to the unified, scaffolded approach, which fostered a sense of togetherness. Shared tasks helped them feel more connected and valued. This supports Vygotsky’s (1978) theory that social interaction within the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) enhances learning.
2. More students reported feeling “more confident” and “more comfortable” under a scaffolded approach, with only two feeling less confident.
Uniform scaffolding reduced pressure and anxiety, as pupils were not singled out or labelled by level. This equal access encouraged all learners to progress together. Bandura’s (1997) theory highlights the benefits of observing peers, modelling strategies and receiving encouragement – key elements in building confident and selfefficacy.
3. Most students said the scaffolded work was “just right,” with only five finding it “too easy” and three “too hard”. Scaffolding achieved a balance – challenging yet accessible –avoiding issues seen with rigid differentiation. Tasks matched learners’ ZPD, supporting guided progress without being overwhelming or overly simple.
In Class:
1. Embed Regular Collaborative Learning Opportunities:
• Why: Students thrived when working together, as it promoted a sense of unity and peer-supported learning.
• How: Plan weekly partner or small group tasks with scaffolded roles (e.g. "explainer," "recorder," "checker") to build interdependence and reinforce key skills.
2. Use Ongoing Formative Assessment to Adjust Scaffolds:
• Why: Most students felt the challenge level was “just right,” suggesting well-matched scaffolding supports.
• How: Incorporate quick checks (e.g. exit tickets, mini whiteboards, peer review) to tailor scaffolds dynamically. Adjust prompts, visuals, or sentence stems based on live feedback.
1. Develop a Shared Scaffolded Planning Framework Across Year Groups:
• Why: Consistency in approach led to greater student confidence and reduced anxiety.
• How: Create a simple planning proforma folder (modelled examples, sentence starters, one “stretch & master” extension task instead of “basic, deep & advancing”) to ensure equity and continuity across classrooms and shared ideas.
2. Deliver CPD on Effective Scaffolding Strategies:
• Why: Staff should be confident in designing and adjusting scaffolds to meet varied learner needs with questioning, scaffolded talk and collaborative coaching.
• How: Provide practical workshops on peer-led sessions that model real examples of scaffolded lessons and include time for teachers to co-plan and share resources.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Developments in research and practice. Nova Science Publishers.
Graham, S. (2006). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Alliance for Excellent Education.
Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2003). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation. National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1978)
William, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.
Willis, J. (2010). Learning to love math: Teaching strategies that change student attitudes and get results. ASCD.
Yes, I felt more confident.
No, my confidence stayed the same.
No, I felt less confident.
Yes, I felt like the teacher could help more.
No, I didn't notice a difference.
No, I felt like I got less help.
r ta b l e a s k i n g fo r h e l p f ro m yo u r te a c h e r
o r f r i e n d s d u r i n g t h e p ro j e c t ?
Yes, I felt more comfortable.
No, I felt the same as before.
No, I felt less comfortable.
Wo u l d yo u l i ke to co nt i n u e wo r k i n g t h i s way, w h e re e ve r yo n e d o e s t h e s a m e
ta s k w i t h ex t ra s u p p o r t o r
c h a l l e n g e s i f n e e d e d ?
Yes, I would like that.
No, I would rather choose my own challenge level.
D i d yo u f i n d t h e wo r k to o e a sy, to o h a rd , o r j u st r i g ht ?
It was too easy. It was too hard. It was just right.
Introduction:
In international British schools, particularly within the British Schools in the Middle East (BSME) network, teachers face unique challenges: condensed curriculum delivery, culturally diverse classrooms and the need to deliver deep, meaningful learning within tight timeframes. These constraints are particularly apparent when teaching foundation subjects such as History, Geography, and Design Technology, which are often taught under cross-curricular umbrellas due to time limitations.
At the heart of a concept curriculum lies the integration of subject components under broad, transferable ideas. For instance, within a recent unit themed around Risk vs Reward, students explored this concept within: Historical, Geographical, Social, and Financial dimensions. From Boudica’s revolt against Roman rule to volcanic risk zones and from civil rights activism to personal finance and resilience during outdoor expeditions, teaching in this way enables pupils to form composite, multi-faceted understandings, rather than isolated knowledge fragments (See Table 1).
Table 1
Literature review:
However, ensuring that this knowledge is retained, transferred, and applied effectively requires intentional strategy. This is where metacognitive tools become transformative. Metacognition, defined as the awareness and regulation of one’s own thinking (Metcalfe & Shimamura, 1996), supports students in developing their ability to plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning. In practice, this includes teaching pupils to predict outcomes, reflect on their understanding and selfassess their progress.
In primary education, research shows that teaching metacognitive strategies can significantly improve outcomes, especially in reading, problem-solving, and independent learning (Education Endowment Fund, 2018; Veenman et al., 2006).
The Education Endowment Foundation highlights metacognition as one of the most effective and low-cost strategies, offering up to eight months of additional progress per year. Even young children can benefit when teachers explicitly model strategies and encourage reflection (Whitebread et al., 2009).
Risk Vs Reward Thematic Unit
Pupils in two parallel classes studying the same concept curriculum were compared. One class had regular exposure to metacognitive tools (group A), while the other followed a more traditional instructional model (Group B). A triangulation approach was used to strengthen the validity of the findings by incorporating three data collection methods: pupil voice, teacher questionnaires and an assessment task.
The assessment focused on key concept words identified across subjects taught during a thematic unit on Risk vs Reward. Pupils were asked to recall (either verbally or in writing) as many relevant terms as they could remember. In the group taught using metacognitive strategies (Group A), the average number of keywords recalled was 15 out of a possible 21. In contrast, pupils in the non-metacognitive group (Group B) recalled an average of only 4 words.
Teacher questionnaires further supported this difference; teachers in Group A reported higher levels of pupil engagement, with 20 out of 24 pupils actively contributing (on average over the unit) through questions and responses, compared to just 9 out of 24 in Group B.
The pupil voice responses highlight significant differences between Group A and Group B, particularly in their understanding, engagement, and approaches to learning within concept lessons.
Pupils in Group B largely identified geography as the only subject in concept learning, with some confusion evident. One pupil described history content as geography, suggesting a limited or unclear understanding of how different subjects connect. In contrast, pupils in Group A confidently listed geography, history, computing, and design technology as part of their concept learning. This indicates a clearer and more integrated understanding of interdisciplinary topics, likely supported by the use of metacognitive strategies that help pupils organise and connect ideas.
Group B pupils gave mixed responses about their enjoyment of concept lessons. Some described the lessons as boring or involving too much work, and their enjoyment often focused on the social aspects, such as group work. In contrast, all pupils in Group A expressed enjoyment. They valued the variety of topics, hands-on activities, the opportunity to try new things, and the collaborative nature of the lessons. This suggests that metacognitive strategies may enhance pupil autonomy and motivation by making learning more engaging and purposeful.
Both groups found it challenging to remember facts and content. However, Group A pupils demonstrated more metacognitive awareness, describing specific difficulties such as recalling key vocabulary or applying knowledge in writing. Group B responses were more general and less reflective, with pupils mentioning challenges like working independently or sharing ideas, indicating a less developed understanding of their own learning processes.
Pupils in Group B mostly relied on external support, such as asking teachers for help. In contrast, Group A pupils described a range of independent strategies, including referring to a glossary and applying learning techniques. This shows greater self-regulation and ownership over their learning.
Group A pupils recalled specific and detailed content, such as historical figures, migration, and food systems. Group B pupils gave limited responses like "culture" or "where countries are," suggesting lower levels of engagement and understanding. Overall, pupils in Group A showed greater conceptual clarity, deeper engagement, stronger recall, and more developed independent learning strategies. These findings suggest that metacognitive strategies can significantly enhance primary pupils’ understanding, motivation and ability to manage their own learning effectively.
These combined methods provide compelling evidence for the positive impact of metacognitive strategies on both engagement and conceptual understanding. The metacognitive group demonstrated improved attainment in end-point tasks that required them to draw connections across subject disciplines. These pupils also showed higher engagement and wellbeing, evidenced by their willingness to ask deeper questions, initiate discussions, and conduct follow-up research at home. Teachers noted a visible difference in pupil engagement and willingness to participate in lessons.
Most notably, pupils became more attuned to their own learning processes. They could articulate what they understood, where their gaps were, and how they might address them, which are all core elements of Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD). When learners are empowered to evaluate their own progress, they develop resilience and intrinsic motivation, which supports not only academic outcomes but also behavioral regulation and mental wellbeing (McGill, 2024).
The future implications of embedding metacognitive strategies into concept-based curricula are significant. Metacognitive sensitivity - students’ ability to align confidence with actual performance - is increasingly recognised as a predictor of long-term academic success, self-discipline and even emotional health (Vaccaro & Fleming, 2018). In the high-paced, diverse context of BSME schools, this matters more than ever. It provides pupils from varied educational backgrounds a common language for thinking and learning, allowing them to make sense of their experiences, reflect with purpose, and build lasting understanding.
However, effective implementation depends on teacher confidence and training. Dignath and Büttner (2008) argue that sustained professional development is key to embedding these strategies across subjects. In a large multi-form entry school, establishing a community of practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991) offers a sustainable model for professional development. By bringing staff together to reflect, share, and
refine their approaches, this collaborative structure enables both new and experienced teachers to deepen their understanding of metacognitive teaching and monitor its impact consistently across the school.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, supporting teachers in implementing metacognitive strategies in foundation subjects, fosters deeper learning by enabling pupils to connect discrete knowledge into coherent wholes. As concept-based teaching continues to grow in international contexts, prioritising metacognitive development will not only improve retention and achievement, but it will also cultivate lifelong learners equipped to think critically, self-regulate effectively, and thrive within and beyond the classroom.
Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students: A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 231–264. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11409-008-9029-x
Education Endowment Foundation (EEF). (2018). Metacognition and self-regulated learning: Guidance report. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/educationevidence/guidance-reports/metacognition
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate
peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. McGill, B. (2024). The impact of metacognitive sensitivity on learning and wellbeing. Unpublished manuscript.
Metcalfe, J., & Shimamura, A. P. (Eds.). (1996). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. MIT Press.
Teacher Toolkit. (2025, April 24). Metacognition in action. https://www.teachertoolkit.co.uk/2025/04/24/metacognitionin-action/
Vaccaro, A. G., & Fleming, S. M. (2018). Thinking about thinking: A coordinate-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies of metacognitive judgements. Brain and Neuroscience Advances, 2, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2398212818810591
Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-0066893-0
Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pasternak, D. P., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S., Almeqdad, Q., & Demetriou, D. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 63–85. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11409-008-9033-1
In the 21st century, students learn in increasingly sophisticated digital environments while facing high academic expectations. Despite the growing digital dependence, educators continue to require effective note-taking. However, students are rarely explicitly taught how to take notes, what to record, or how to use those records for self-guided learning. This is especially true in international schools where learners navigate varied curricula and work with teachers from diverse global backgrounds. Often, teachers themselves never received formal note-taking instruction, developing their methods independently. The Cornell Notes system— with its clear division of the page into key sections—offers a versatile framework that suits almost every learner, whether using pen and paper or digital tablets.
Universal American School (UAS) is a private international school in Dubai offering IB/American curricula to roughly 1300 students from PreK to Grade 12. Although some teachers had experience with various note-taking systems embedded in their lessons, there was no consistent, school-wide approach to recording lesson content or research findings. Amid a holistic school-improvement program, the whole-school librarian identified an opportunity to introduce a systematic note-taking strategy using Cornell Notes. In collaboration with school leadership, the librarian spearheaded a plan to provide upper-elementary and secondary students with adaptable, transdisciplinary, lifelong note-taking skills.
Research dating back to the 1980s shows that note-taking greatly benefits content retention, revision, test performance, and synthesis of learning. While technological advancements have introduced new ways of recording information, studies (Fried, 2008; Schneider, 2018) confirm that the physical act of writing remains a powerful learning tool. The Cornell Notes method, developed in the 1950s, divides the page into specific sections that help learners record main ideas, identify cues, and craft summaries. Hendel (2024) and Pauk & Owens (2014) note that this active-learning strategy strengthens the synthesis of information by organizing content effectively.
Further, research has demonstrated that structured note-taking benefits learners of all abilities, with significant cognitive gains—better memory, improved retention, and enhanced test performance—compared to passive study methods (Jean E. Faber et al., 2000; Stacy & Cain, 2015). Several studies (Donohoo, 2010; Chang & Ku, 2014) indicate that students who struggle academically benefit most from explicit note-taking instruction. In providing a framework that clearly delineates what to record, note-taking helps learners focus on essential information (Kobayashi, 2006). However, while the literature overwhelmingly supports note-taking, most studies target specific student groups or use meta-analytical designs rather than address the unique challenges of international schools. International learners are often plurilingual, multinational, and exposed to multiple curricula, yet few studies document the systematic rollout of note-taking practices in such environments. This gap highlights the necessity of action research in international school settings.
An action research project was conducted to evaluate student perceptions and usage of the Cornell Notes system across different grade levels. The research focused on answering three primary questions:
1.Do students know how to take notes?
2.Do students know what to write down?
3.Can students independently apply note-taking skills across various subjects?
The librarian designed three differentiated lessons on the Cornell Notes system tailored to different grade levels. These lessons were first delivered to students in grades 4 – 8 during the first two months of the academic year as part of IB PYP units or within a middle school academic support class.
In February, similar lessons were adapted and delivered to IB and AP students in grades 11 – 12. For middle and high school, an adapted Cornell Notes graphic organizer was printed in all exercise books to support note-taking in every subject, while elementary students were taught how to draw the organizer in their notebooks.
Between 248 and 322 students (ages 917) participated in the study. Data were gathered using qualitative Likert-scale questionnaires administered twice: once before any formal note-taking instruction and again six months later to measure changes in perceived note-taking ability, confidence, and understanding of key content. Questions focused on what students recorded and how effectively they used Cornell Notes across subjects.
A comparative before/after analysis was conducted using self-reported student data. Although data collection was ongoing at the time of analysis, the initial findings provided a benchmark for students’ note-taking competencies and guided further refinement of the system. See Appendix for further details.
The self-reported data revealed measurable improvements in student attitudes and behaviours regarding notetaking:
• Note-Taking Competency: Prior to the intervention, students’ self-assessed competence was moderate (see Figure 1). Six months later, overall competency increased by approximately (4%), and their confidence in notetaking rose by about (7%) (see Figure 2), Additionally, fewer students expressed uncertainty about how to take notes.
• Content Selection: Students initially experienced difficulties determining what to record during lectures (see Figure 3).
Post-instruction, there was a (6%) improvement in students knowing what to write down (see Figure 4), with a (9%) boost in those feeling highly confident about their note-taking decisions (see Figure 5). Anecdotally, increased in-class participation—a rise in note-based questions—was observed, which helped students capture lesson details more accurately.
• Cross-Subject Application: Despite overall gains, many students reported using Cornell Notes “most of the time” rather than consistently across all subjects (see Figure 6). Some learners admitted that they struggled to apply the method in fast-paced classes and in subjects such as Math and Physical Education. While the system’s structured approach improved organization and recall, many reported that they deployed the technique in only about half of their classes.
The Cornell Notes approach provided a clear framework, enabling students to organize key words, main ideas, and summaries effectively. Many students expressed that the layout enhanced their ability to review and recall content, resulting in improved participation and independent use across subjects. The structured format not only boosted confidence but also contributed to better class engagement and focus.
Nevertheless, some challenges emerged:
• Time Constraints: Several students found the method too timeconsuming, particularly in classes where the pace was rapid.
• Rigid Format: The structure was difficult to adapt in subjects like Math and Physical Education.
• Graphic Organizer Issues: A misprint in the graphic organizer inadvertently shifted the “summary” section into the “cue” area, reducing available space for synthesizing information.
• Vocabulary Emphasis: In a push to improve vocabulary, the cue section was adapted to include lesson-specific terms, which may have diminished its original activelearning function.
An unexpected observation was that academically weaker students showed less improvement than anticipated.
While literature (e.g., Donohoo, 2010) often suggests that lower-performing students benefit the most from structured note-taking, this study revealed a discrepancy that warrants further investigation into the correlation between academic achievement and note-taking efficacy.
Castelló, M., & Monereo, C. (2005). Students’ Note-Taking as a KnowledgeConstruction Tool. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 5(3), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10674-005-8557-4
Chang, W.-C., & Ku, Y.-M. (2014). The Effects of Note-Taking Skills Instruction on Elementary Students’ Reading. The Journal of Educational Research, 108(4), 278–291. https://doi. org/10.1080/00220671.2014.886175
Donohoo, J. (2010). Learning How to Learn: Cornell Notes as an Example. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(3), 224–227. https://doi. org/10.1598/jaal.54.3.9
Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2006.09.006
Hancock, J. (2022). Ebbinghaus’s Forgetting Curve. Www.mindtools.com. https://www.mindtools.com/a9wjrjw/ ebbinghauss-forgetting-curve
Hendel, R. J. (2024). Using the Cornell Note Taking Method for Instruction.
The systematic implementation of the Cornell Notes system at UAS was a strategic component of a broader school-improvement initiative aimed at enhancing academic support skills. The action research project demonstrated that a consistent note-taking method can yield measurable benefits, including improved organization, increased notetaking confidence, and enhanced content retention across multiple subjects. Though the majority of students reported positive outcomes, challenges such as time constraints, difficulties in adapting the format to certain subjects, and errors in the organizing tool indicate that further refinement is necessary.
Future research should focus on how to better tailor the Cornell Notes system to accommodate rapid-paced subjects and the needs of academically struggling students. Adjustments to the graphic organizer—ensuring ample space for summaries and maintaining the activelearning role of the cue section—are recommended.
Overall, the findings support the extensive literature on the benefits of structured note-taking. They also highlight the need for adaptability in teaching note-taking strategies, especially in dynamic environments like international schools where students' backgrounds and experiences are diverse.
Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 22(5), 7–13. https://doi. org/10.54808/jsci.22.05.7
Jean E. Faber, John D. Morris, Mary. (2000). THE EFFECT OF NOTE TAKING ON NINTH GRADE STUDENTS’ COMPREHENSION. Reading Psychology, 21(3), 257–270. https://doi. org/10.1080/02702710050144377
Kiewra, K. A. (1987). Notetaking and review: The research and its implications. Instructional Science, 16(3), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00120252
Kobayashi, K. (2006). Combined Effects of Note‐Taking/‐Reviewing on Learning and the Enhancement through Interventions: A meta‐analytic review. Educational Psychology, 26(3), 459–477. https://doi. org/10.1080/01443410500342070
Pauk, W., & Owens, R. J. Q. (2014). How to study in college. Boston, Mass. Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Ravizza, S. M., Uitvlugt, M. G., & Fenn, K. M. (2016). Logged In and Zoned Out: How Laptop Internet Use Relates
to Classroom Learning. Psychological Science, 28(2), 171–180. https://doi. org/10.1177/0956797616677314
Saran, M., Krentz Gober, M., & McCarty, E. B. (2022). An introduction to the Cornell Note system. Ear, Nose & Throat Journal, 101(9), 014556132211464. https://doi. org/10.1177/01455613221146457
Schneider, D. (2018). Unstructured Personal Technology Use in the Classroom and College Student Learning: A Literature Review. https://home. schoolcraft.edu/cce/24.2.10-20.pdf
Stacy, E. M., & Cain, J. (2015). Notetaking and Handouts in The Digital Age. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 79(7), 107. https://doi. org/10.5688/ajpe797107
Voyer, D., Ronis, S. T., & Byers, N. (2022). The Effect of Notetaking Method on Academic performance: a Systematic Review and meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 68(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cedpsych.2021.102025
Figure 1: October Benchmark for studentreported note-taking competency:
October Benchmark: I know how to take notes
Figure 2: May update for studentreported note-taking competency:
Figure 3: October Benchmark: Students’ self-reporting of knowing what they should write down.
October Benchmark:
When I'm learning or researching, I know what I should write down.
Figure 4: May Update for students’ self-reporting of knowing what they should write down.
I
Figure 5: Students’ May selfreporting on their note-taking improvement.
skills...
Figure 6: Students’ May self-reporting on their use of Cornell Notes in class.
Journal of Education Action Research in the UAE