Visible Learning and the Enacted Curriculum in Singapore

Abstract

In this chapter we assess the intellectual quality of the enacted curriculum in Secondary 3 Mathematics and English in a large representative sample of schools in Singapore using criteria and standards identified in part by John Hattie in Visible Learning. In doing so, however, we have expanded Hattie’s particular model of visible learning to include a range of instructional practices that we believe are critical to enhancing instructional transparency and student learning. In particular, we focus on a range of standards that have the potential to ensure greater epistemic clarity with respect to the nature and cognitive demands of the knowledge work involved in the design and implementation of instructional (and assessment) tasks.

Appendix: Core 2 Research Program: Indicators of Visible Learning Panels 2 and 3 Data

Scale	Specification
Communicating lesson goals and assessment standards
Communicating lesson topics	Teacher’s announcement of the lesson topic, the mode of articulation and the stated rationale for learning the topic
Communicating learning objectives	Teacher’s announcement of the learning objectives for the lesson, the mode of articulation, the level of detail provided for the objectives and the stated rationale for these objectives
Recapitulation of learning goals	Teacher’s recapitulation of learning objectives, the mode of articulation and the level of detail when recapitulating
Communicating performance standards	Teacher’s explicit mention of performance standards and criteria for the task, activity, student work or goals
Exemplars of performances of understanding	Teacher’s explicit reference and explication of exemplars of performance, which can be successful, unsuccessful or incorrect exemplars. Important is the degree of explanation that follows the exemplar so that students know what to achieve, or avoid, when performing that task, activity or goal
Whole class performances of understanding	Teacher’s demonstration and performance of particular goals, criteria, standards
Epistemic clarity: task structure
Epistemic (knowledge) focus	Epistemic focus of the knowledge work that teachers are engaged in, or teachers ask students to engage in: factual, procedural, conceptual (a focus on meaning and making connections), epistemic (denoting the criteria and standards for establishing the epistemic warrant of knowledge claims), metacognitive, rhetorical (a focus on knowledge of grammar and syntax in EL), hermeneutical (a focus on principles of textual interpretation), aesthetic and moral and civic
Domain specific activities, tasks and practices	Focus on the instructional activities that teachers ask students to engage in. Domain specific in nature, the scales are hierarchical and assume increasing disciplinary and cognitive complexity
Mathematics tasks	Remembering tasks, routine procedural tasks, review tasks, revision tasks, comprehension/knowledge manipulation tasks, procedural tasks with connections, and “Doing Mathematics”
Domain-specific knowledge practices: mathematics	Knowledge communication (Syntax), knowledge representation, knowledge generation, knowledge deliberation, knowledge justification, knowledge communication (Presentation)
English language activities/tasks	Coding, comprehension, interpretation and meaning making, analysis, description, conveying, expressing, explaining, persuading
Cognitive demand/complexity/operations	Focus on the cognitive demands of instructional activities that teachers ask students to engage in. Activities are coded according to the cognitive operations required by students to achieve the activity goal
Locus of epistemic authority	Focus on the source of epistemic authority and the nature of epistemic authority (positional, procedural or artifactual). Scale is also coded when teacher explicitly appeals to domain-specific knowledge
Epistemic pluralism and deliberation	Focus on the openness of knowledge work which draws on multiple perspectives. Epistemic claims are deliberated, compared, debated, justified and accountable to specific epistemic authorities
Epistemic clarity: classroom talk
Factual talk	Talk that focuses on propositional or factual knowledge (dates, events, facts, names, equations, definitions, algorithms, and etc.). It often involves descriptive talk – descriptions of a state of affairs
Procedural talk	Talk that focuses on how students complete a process or task specific to a discipline, subject or area of study. This is talk around genres, rules, procedures, resources, tools involved in solving a problem or doing knowledge work
Clarifying talk	Talk that focuses on clarifying questions or elaborations that invites the teacher or students to clarify what is meant in an earlier exchange or statement
Connecting talk	Talk that focuses on helping students to make meaning by establishing connections between prior knowledge or personal experiences to related concepts or topics, from previous to current lessons, between examples, between forms of disciplinary knowledge and language. Such connections aim to deepen conceptual understanding and build knowledge
Temporal connections	Talk that focuses on helping students make explicit, relevant, connections to earlier discussions in the current lesson, or to previous lessons or units, or to lessons or units that will come after the current lesson
Conceptual connections	Talk that focuses on explicit conceptual connections where the teacher asks students to make, or students initiate making, connections between concepts, representations, examples, analogies, out-of-school matter and curriculum content
Framing talk	Talk that focuses on taking a step back from an ongoing exchange to frame, interpret, situate the talk to a broader, conceptual, procedural or epistemic context. The connection is therefore between talk and context
Reframing talk	Talk that focuses on moving between vernacular talk and more abstract, technical, domain-specific disciplinary talk. The focus is between two distinct types of talk or grammars (vernacular and technical)
Explanatory talk	Talk that focuses on teacher or students giving reasons or explanation in response to initial statements made
Epistemic justification talk	Talk that focuses on teacher or students identifying and discussing domain specific epistemic norms (criteria and standards) to be used to establish the truth value, rigor, validity, reliability, authenticity, or reasonableness of a knowledge claim
Reflexive talk	Talk that focuses on meta-cognition and self-regulation – how students learn, or can learn, to manage their own learning more effectively
Structure of classroom interaction
Teacher talk	Focus on the nature of teacher questions (open-ended or closed) directed at the whole class, individuals or groups, as well as the length of the teacher responses when addressing the class, individuals or groups. Short responses are typically a few words, medium responses are one or two sentences, extended responses are three sentences or more
Student talk	Focus on the nature of student questions (open-ended or closed) directed to the teacher in a whole class context, as well as the length of the student responses to the teacher. The responses can be made in a whole class setting, when the student is in a group, or when the student is interacting with the teacher individually. Short responses are typically a few words, medium responses are one or two sentences, extended responses are three sentences or more
Instructional strategies
Checking on prior learning	Focus on the teacher checking on student’s prior activities, concepts, topics, content knowledge, and specific knowledge from previous lessons
Monitoring	Focus on how the teacher monitors student learning. Monitoring may be supervisory where the teacher monitors whether students are complying with instructions provided or it may be formative where the teacher seeks to establish the level of understanding or skill that a student has for a given task. Monitoring may be directed at individuals or groups
Feedback	Focuses on the nature of feedback provided by the teacher to the student. Feedback may be evaluative or formative, or it may be a prescriptive reformulation of a student’s incorrect response or a detailed correction of a student’s response. The scale also captures the audience of the teacher’s feedback – individuals, students, whole class, and in some cases when students provide feedback to other students
Learning support	Focus on the nature of support provided to students to complete an activity or to achieve understanding. Learning support may be planned and fixed whereby the teacher has decided in advance the kind of support needed by the students, or it may be contextual and flexible whereby the teacher provides timely support to enable their content mastery or task completion. The nature of the learning support may be logistical when guidance is provided on the use of tools or resources, procedural when guidance is provided on steps or procedures to complete a task, or strategic when explicit guidance on alternative strategies or options are provided to aid students to complete a task or achieve understanding
Self-directed learning	Focus on the extent to which the teacher offers opportunities for students to exercise autonomy over their own learning. The scale checks if students are able to establish, negotiate or modify classroom norms, learning goals, learning activities, topics, lesson structure, task design, assessment criteria and standards, or resources. It also checks if students are able to perform self-assessment or have opportunities to discuss alternative viewpoints or explanations that may contradict the teacher’s
Structure and clarity scale (P2)	Asks if the teacher states the lesson objectives, gives clear directions and explanations for student tasks, organises information and explains difficult ideas
Flexible teaching (P2)	Asks if the teacher tries different teaching methods or allows students to get help from peers
Focus on understanding (P2)	Asks if the teacher’s explanations, course materials, or homework tasks help students understand the topic
Quality of questioning (P2)	Asks if the teacher provides time to answer questions, asks quality questions, and rephrases the questions if students are unable to respond correctly
Teacher review (P2)	Asks if the teacher checks that students understand the lesson, and reviews the lesson before starting a new topic
Focus on practice	Asks if the teacher ensures that students focus on the lesson, pays attention, concentrates during class work and that they complete their work
Traditional instruction (P2)	Teaching that focuses on spending a significant amount of time on drill and practice using textbooks
Direct instruction (P2)	Teaching that focuses on structure and clarity of the lesson content and objectives, provides students with reviews of the content, and ensures that students are focused and are able to complete their work
Teaching for understanding (P2)	Flexible teaching that focuses on depth of understanding, engages in quality questions, engages students’ curiosity and interest, provides scaffolding during group work, monitors student learning, provides personal and collective feedback
Co-regulated learning (P2)	Teaching that encourages students to practice self-directed learning through setting their own goals, identifying strategies to achieve them, and to conduct frequent checks on their own work
Knowledge building
Lesson purposefulness	The lesson exhibited evidence that the teacher had planned thoughtfully, designed or selected learning tasks, selected instructional activities and steered classroom talk with specific educational goals in view
Direction/Progression over the course of the lesson	The lesson shows evidence of coherent development, execution and closure in terms of the objectives set for the lesson
Clarity of task/Activity structure	The lesson showed evidence of a clear sequence of tasks/activities that built on each other in an effective and appropriate manner
Backward mapping/Framing/Integration/Closure	The lesson showed evidence that the teacher recapitulated learning goals and summarized the learning from the unit of work
Time	There is evidence that the teacher gave the students sufficient time to complete the task
Instructional flexibility/Pedagogical judgment	Teacher showed evidence of flexibility and ‘pedagogical agility’ to take advantage of ‘teachable moments’
Focus on knowledge building	There is evidence of ‘knowledge building’ through developing active engagement in knowledge practices that permitted them to develop conceptual and procedural understanding and skills
Focus on metacognitive self-regulation	There is evidence that the teacher tried to help students develop metacognitive knowledge and skills