# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the years I've recommended that teachers 'teach to the top' on too many occasions to count. For the most part, I've caveated this by included the need to 'scaffold down,' but, honestly, I've come to believe that the phrase 'teaching to the top' has the capacity to do more harm than good.

I spoke at a conference recently where I asked participants to discuss what they understood by the term. After a brief chat, I asked them to respond on their mini whiteboards to the following question:

What is the best definition of the term 'teaching to the top'?

A) Pitching lessons to the most able

B) Ensuring all students achieve the highest outcomes

C) Differentiating lessons to ensure all students are appropriately challenged

D) Challenging the most able whilst ensuring the least able don't fall behind

When everyone held up their MWB, most had gone for D or C (although I was startled to see a number of As) and almost no one had gone for B.

As it happens, B is my preferred definition.

'Teaching to the top' only works if 'the top' refers to outcomes rather than children. If we mean teaching to the top of the ability range then we will inevitably leave many students behind. But, if we teach all students, regardless of their prior attainment, to achieve the highest possible standards then maybe all[1] will find it possible to achieve excellence. Getting the most advantaged, the most able, the highest prior attainers to be successful is relatively straightforward. All too often these students are successful despite rather than because of what we do in the classroom. If the least advantaged, the least able, the lowest prior attainers are to be successful it will only be because of our efforts.

Easy to say, but what does this actually mean?

As I've explained before, experiencing success is essential for students to be willing to commit doing anything difficult. For some students this will inevitably require a huge amount of support. The five teaching strategies which underpin the implementation of OAT's English curriculum are all aligned with this ambition. For instance, the focus on reading fluency ensures, through repetition, that all students achieve perfect prosody. C25K writing, with its relentless focus on mastering individual sentence structures, attempts to guarantee that every student can smash out perfect sentences. Structured discussion, with its emphasis on repetition of high quality language, means that all students have the experience of speaking well-crafted academic language. Because the curriculum specifies small steps repeated over and over, all students have the opportunity to be successful. Obviously, despite this emphasis on mastery, some students will still be more successful than others, but because all students see and feel that they are able to produce something impressive, they come to believe that maybe, just maybe, they might be able to sustain this standard with increasing independence.

The fact that all this is ridiculously optimistic is part of the point. Inevitably, there are still students who, despite every effort, fall through the gaps. But, if we're really serious about all students achieving the highest standards, we need to believe that gapless instruction is possible.

In the past, when children failed to achieve the highest standards, I'd assume they just weren't up to it, that the fault was theirs. Instead, our default response should be to take responsibility for these inevitable failures and assume that if students haven't been successful, it must be because we've left a gap in our instruction. Whilst it might not always be true - there may be some students who, no matter how hard we try, we can't reach - it's probably a useful fiction. Useful because there's very little percentage in blaming kids. By taking responsibility and assuming we've inadvertently left gaps we will look more closely at the content and sequencing of our curriculum and reflect more deeply on our teaching. And, if we look carefully and closely enough, we're likely to find areas where we can improve.

Because 'teaching to the top' is widely misunderstood and so blandly meaningless, I've stopped recommending teachers do it. I've increasingly come to suggest the idea that we should endeavour to achieve gapless instruction.

[1] Whenever I say 'all' please be aware I'm referring to children within the normal ability range of mainstream schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gapless instruction vs 'teaching to the top'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the years I've recommended that teachers 'teach to the top' on too many occasions to count. For the most part, I've caveated this by included the need to 'scaffold down,' but, honestly, I've come to believe that the phrase 'teaching to the top' has the capacity to do more harm than good.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why challenge and teaching to the top matter for equity in education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When we talk about equity in education, we often think in terms of closing gaps, breaking cycles and ‘levelling the playing field’.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Whenever a practice becomes mandated there seems to be a tendency for it to lethally mutate. When I first started writing about retrieval practice (or the testing effect as we used to call it) many people were surprised by the finding that attempting to dredge something up from memory was a more effective way to learn it than simply restudying it. Today, this has become something new teachers are routinely told as part of their initial training and has been accepted as incontestable.

The result is that teachers are told that lessons must contain retrieval practice and schools often specify when and how such practice must be enacted. The depressing but wholly unsurprising consequence is that a great deal of what is referred to as retrieval practice is a either time wasted or, in the worst cases, actively unhelpful to students. Over time, this has hardened into various strange orthodoxies. One of the most common is that lessons must begin with five questions, drawn from different topics, deliberately disconnected from the lesson about to be taught.

In his post, The Anatomy of a Perfect 'Do Now,'Dario Emanuele offers a clear and carefully reasoned version of this approach. He opens up his planning and shares a five-question framework for selecting Do Now content. Each slot has a defined purpose. The first two questions are time-lagged recalls designed to build confidence and gently raise challenge. The third checks homework integrity. The fourth targets a high-leverage weakness identified in recent assessment. The fifth stretches the strongest students through novelty or synthesis. Crucially, these questions are intentionally disconnected from the content and objective of the lesson to follow. Prerequisite knowledge, the argument goes, is better checked later using mini whiteboards, allowing the Do Now to focus on long-term retention without derailing lesson timing. It is systematic, defensible, and clearly grounded in experience.

Anyone interested in the flexibility and durability of students' knowledge needs a strategy for dealing with forgetting. We have unambiguous evidence that memory decays at broadly predictable rates, and that this decay can be slowed. 1 Spacing, the deliberate revisiting of knowledge after increasing intervals of time, and interleaving, the practice of mixing different topics or problem types rather than teaching them in blocks, allow us to resist the natural drift towards forgetting. Used well, they help stabilise knowledge, keep it accessible, and reduce the steady cognitive entropy that would otherwise undo much of what we teach. 2

The problem is the assumption that the Do Now is the best place to pursue disconnected interleaving. The opening minutes of a lesson are doing a very particular kind of cognitive work, and using them to retrieve knowledge that will not be used shortly afterwards is - in my view - a missed opportunity. Why would you deliberately start a lesson by asking questions disconnected from the lesson you're about to teach? Whatever the benefits of interleaving might be, the Do Now is possibly not the best place to try to harness them.

Instead, recall starters should seek to activate prior knowledge that will be utilised in the lesson to come in order to capitalise on the effects of retrieval. Retrieval is not a generic good. It works because it increases the accessibility of knowledge at the point it is needed. When retrieved knowledge is immediately applied, it strengthens performance in the moment as well as memory over time. When it is not, we risk generating effort without instructional return.

Too often, teachers are told retrieval practice is a Good Thing, without having the underlying theory explained. It used to be believed that when we stopped using information it gradually disappeared from our memories over time. In 1992, Bob and Elizabeth Bjork suggested a New Theory of Disuse: information didn't disappear, we just couldn't remember it. This might sound like splitting hairs - if you can't remember something what's the difference? - but, when you think about it, the difference is pretty important: not being able to recall something that's 'in there somewhere' is very different to not being able to recall something that is not there. If it's in there somewhere, they may be a way to access it. 3

The Bjork's posited that each item in long-term memory has both a storage strength and a retrieval strength. Storage strength is our ability to recall something right now; retrieval strength is our ability to recall something elsewhere and later.

This led to the counterintuitive finding that attempting to improve retrieval strength in the here and now can actually reduce storage strength elsewhere and later, whereas practice that attempts to improve storage strength also results in better retrieval strength in the longer term. Many still find this confusing.

Essentially, teaching that focuses on students 'demonstrating progress' over the course of a lesson is much less effective than teaching that focusses on regularly trying to recall previously taught content. This explains why students can produce a slick performance at the end of a lesson by recalling what they have just been taught only to have forgotten it all next lesson. The struggle involved in dredging something up from long-term memory strengthens our ability to fluently recall that information again in the future.

This is what Bob Bjork called ' desirable difficulty'. A desirable difficulty is a task that requires effort without tipping into failure. It slows performance in the short term, but strengthens retention and transfer over time. Crucially, it is not a single hard task but a sequence of carefully calibrated challenges, supported by feedback, that gradually raise the level of demand. The emphasis in the phrase matters. The difficulty must be desirable. That means it is pitched so success is possible, even if effortful. While harder tasks often feel less fluent and can give the impression that learning is slower, the long-term gains are typically greater than those produced by easier work. Once difficulty becomes overwhelming, however, it stops being desirable and starts to work against learning. So, for a difficulty to be desirable it must result in success. 4

This is where a lot of so-called retrieval practice goes wrong: students are asked a question which they fail to answer. In lesson after lesson, students write down 'do now' questions from the board, wait for teachers to reveal the answers and then write down the answer. There is no struggle and no success, just a meaningless time wasting exercise.

When questions are too hard, students guess or disengage. When success rates are low, retrieval weakens confidence and entrenches error. When content is disconnected from subsequent learning, retrieval becomes a ritual rather than a lever. A common mistake is to treat difficulty as the goal, rather than successful remembering. What strengthens memory is not struggle for its own sake, but effortful success.

What do students learn from this? All too often, what they learn is a) that recall tasks are a piece of mindless box ticking admin at the start of lessons that they simply have to suffer through or, worse, b) that, right at the start of a lesson, they have - yet again - failed. These failures compound, often resulting in the belief that students are 'rubbish' at the subject. Needless to say, this is no one's interest.

That is why I argue that recall starters should aim for near-universal success. Not because challenge is unimportant, but because failure at the start of a lesson is corrosive. If students cannot retrieve what they have previously been taught, that is not an inconvenience to be worked around. It should be the focus of the lesson. The purpose of retrieval at this point is diagnostic and preparatory, not selective.

My advice for effective recall starters is therefore simple. Questions should conform to three simple rules:

1. They should be answered correctly by 100% of students, with prompts given until retrieval is successful

2. They should be useful, and ideally immediately used.

3. They should then be repeated regularly so that fluency builds and confidence stabilises.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Three rules for effective retrieval practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Attention, meaning and mastery: The questions every teacher needs to answer every lesson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After a loooong hiatus from blogging I’ve decided to give substack a try. You can subscribe here. For the next few blogs I’ll also post here on the Learning Spy site but, depending on how things go, I’m intending to eventually port everything over. I hope you’ll come with me.
***
Training

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Questions are an integral part of classroom life and essential to every teacher's pedagogical repertoire. Questioning serves many purposes: it engages students in the learning process and provides opportunities for students to ask questions themselves. It challenges levels of thinking and informs whether students are ready to progress with their learning. Questions that probe for deeper meaning foster critical thinking skills, as well as higher-order capabilities such as problem-solving. Paramore (Paramore, 2017) identifies an imbalance of questions often found in teaching, saying there is a dominance of teacher talk and an over-reliance on closed questions, providing only limited Known as AfL for short, and also known as formative assessme... Assessment for Learning (also known as formative assessment)... assessment for learning More ( More ) information for a teacher. The issue then is how classroom questioning strategies can become more effective.

What the research says

The value of classroom questioning is well documented. Research tends to focus on the relationship between teachers' questions and student achievement. Here are some of the important messages:

Types of questions used

Too often, questions from teachers are organisational, such as 'What do we always put at the top of our page to begin with?' or instructional in nature, such as 'Who can tell me what an adjective is?'. Wragg's early study (Wragg, 1993) found teachers commonly use three types of question:

1. Management-related, e.g.'Has everyone finished this piece of work now?'

2. Information recall-related, e.g.'How many sides does a quadrilateral have?'

3. Higher-order questions, e.g.'What evidence do you have for saying that?'

In Wragg's study, 57 per cent of questions were management-related, 37 per cent required information recall and only eight per cent challenged higher-order thinking.

Closed or convergent questions have low cognitive involvement and result in limited answers such as 'Yes' or 'No'. Open or divergent questions encourage greater expansion in answers and promote better classroom dialogue (Tofade et al., 2013). Closed questions are still important, however, and help assist in knowledge retrieval; but proceed with caution here, as the inevitable one-word student answers limit classroom dialogue. In order to maximise AfL in lessons, use different types of questions but limit the procedural and emphasise questions that centre on learning.

Timing

Student wait time (giving a brief period of time for students to think or reflect before answering) has a positive effect on learning. Brooks and Brooks (Brooks and Brooks, 2001) found that a rapid-fire questioning approach fails to provide teachers with accurate information about student understanding. Typically, the time between asking a question and a student's response is about one second. Cohen et al. (Cohen et al., 2004) recommend wait times of three to five seconds for closed questions and up to 15 seconds for open-ended questions.

Cognitive levels

Complex questions promote complex thinking, argue researchers Degener and Berne (Degener and Berne, 2016). But is it really that simple? Samson et al. (Samson et al., 1987) found that higher cognitive questioning strategies have a positive effect on learning, but this was not as large as has been previously suggested. Low-level questioning aimed at recall and fundamental-level comprehension is vital, but can plateau classroom learning. Higher-level questions can produce deeper learning and thinking, but a balance needs to be struck. Both have a place and a mixture of questions is recommended.

Effective approaches

Over the years, classification taxonomies have been developed to guide teacher questioning. Perhaps the most well-known questioning framework is Bloom's cognitive taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), later revised by Anderson and Krathwohl (Anderson et al., 2001). This framework covers six different types of question, which will all have uses in the classroom at different points and for different purposes:

Knowledge, 'Can you remember...?'

Comprehension, 'Tell me how this works...'

Application, 'Where else have you seen this pattern?'

Analysis, 'Explain to me what is happening here.'

Synthesis, 'What conclusions can you draw from this?'

Evaluation, 'Can you measure how effective this is?'

Trigger words are an effective way to formulate questions, as shown in Table 1.

Ideas to try in the classroom

There are many questioning tactics to choose from to promote learning:

1. No hands up. Anyone can answer, which avoids the same few students answering questions.

2. In the hot seat. Students take it in turns to sit in the 'hot seat' and answer questions.

3. Ask the expert. The teacher puts questions to a student on a given topic, extending this to encourage other students to ask questions.

4. Ask the classroom. The teacher displays a number of written questions to stimulate thinking about pictures or objects in the classroom.

5. Think-pair-share. This allows time to share ideas with a partner and respond to a posed question.

6. Phone a friend. This is a useful strategy in which a student nominates another to answer the teacher's question. The first student also provides an answer.

7. Eavesdropping. When groups are working, the teacher circulates around the classroom and poses questions to groups based on what is heard in their discussions.

8. Question box. An actual box has a series of questions in it devised by the teacher. Time is set aside at the end of a week to choose some to discuss as a class.

9. Here is the answer, what is the question? This is deliberately back to front to encourage out-of-the-box thinking.

10. More than me. The teacher asks a student a question and deliberately cuts short the answer to involve another student to build on this answer.

Shirley Clarke's website has a wide range of practical resources on proven questioning strategies.

Things to take into account

Using a variety of question types can transform your classroom into a 'questioning classroom'. A classroom ethos and organisation with enquiry at its heart is an effective one, where purposeful talk dominates and teachers ask fewer questions. Dialogic teaching (Alexander, 2017) uses skilled questions to extend thinking, where answers to teachers' questions are built on rather than merely received.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Is my classroom a 'questioning classroom'?

What types of questions and how many questions do I typically ask in my teaching?

Do some questions I ask target higher-order thinking and raise the cognitive stakes? Is this true of my teaching across all subjects?

Stephen Lockyer's book Hands Up: Questions to Ignite Thinking in the Classroom is full of practical tips.

References

Alexander R (2017) Towards The effective use of talk for teaching and learning, involvi... Dialogic Teaching More : Rethinking Classroom Talk. 5th ed. Cambridge: Dialogos.

Anderson L, Krathwohl D, Airasian P, et al. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.

Bloom B (ed.) (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc.

Brooks J and Brooks M (2001) Becoming a Constructive Teachers. Costa A (ed.). Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking. Alexandria, VA: Ass.

Cohen L, Manion L and Morrison K (2004) A Guide to Teaching Practice. London: Routledge.

Degener S and Berne J (2016) Complex questions promote complex thinking. The Reading Teacher, International Literacy Association 70(5): 595-599.

Paramore J (2017) Questioning to stimulate dialogue. In: Paige R, Lambert S, and Geeson R (eds) Building Skills for Effective Primary Teaching. London: Learning Matters, pp. 125-142.

Samson G, Strykowski B, Weinstein T, et al. (1987) The effects of teacher questioning levels on student achievement. The Journal of Educational Research 80(5): 290-295.

Tofade T, Elsner J and Haines S (2013) Best practice strategies for effective use of questions as a teaching tool. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 77(7): 155.

Wragg E (1993) Questioning in the Primary Classroom. London: Routledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Skilful questioning: The beating heart of good pedagogy : My College

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Questions are an integral part of classroom life and essential to every teacher's pedagogical repertoire. Questioning serves many purposes: it engages students in the learning process and provides opportunities for students to ask questions themselves. It challenges levels of thinking and informs whether students are ready to progress with their learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Using the Assessment for Learning framework to guide instruction is a game-changer in the educational landscape. Assessment for Learning (AfL) flips the script on traditional evaluation methods. Instead of just grading what students know after teaching, it helps you adjust your instruction while students are still learning. Think of it as a GPS constantly recalculating your route based on traffic conditions, rather than discovering you've taken a wrong turn after reaching your destination.

Research shows that when done right, using Assessment for Learning to guide instruction dramatically improves student achievement-especially for those who struggle the most. Let's explore practical techniques, innovative ways to use assessment data, and how to create a classroom where continuous improvement becomes second nature.

Understanding the Assessment for Learning framework

Assessment for Learning weaves evaluation directly into teaching, creating a responsive cycle: assess, analyze, adjust, implement. This dynamic approach lets you fine-tune your teaching methods on the fly, effectively guiding instruction.

As Dylan Wiliam, a formative assessment expert, says, "The best formative assessment is a conversation." AfL isn't just about gathering data-it's about implementing effective assessment practices that engage students in understanding where they are, where they need to go, and how to get there.

Research from the Assessment Reform Group defines AfL as "the process of seeking and interpreting evidence for use by learners and their teachers to decide where the learners are in their learning, where they need to go, and how best to get there." Unlike traditional testing, which offers feedback after the fact, Assessment for Learning personalizes instruction in real time.

Types of student assessments that drive instruction

The best AfL tools provide quick, actionable insights that help you pivot before misconceptions become permanent fixtures in students' understanding.

Quick-win assessment strategies

Simple techniques like exit tickets, think-pair-share, and innovative assessment tools offer immediate feedback on student comprehension. Exit tickets quickly reveal which concepts need clarification, while think-pair-share activities let you spot knowledge gaps during student discussions. Digital response systems generate instant data that helps you shift teaching strategies on the spot.

Subject-specific assessment approaches

Different subjects call for different assessment tools. Math might benefit from short quizzes testing procedural skills, while literature classes might use written reflections to gauge analysis depth. Regardless of subject, student self-assessments prove invaluable.

When students reflect on their progress, they develop critical thinking about their learning process while giving you insight into their perceived strengths and challenges.

Connecting assessment to standards

To be truly useful, assessments must align with learning objectives and content standards. This connection ensures that weaknesses are caught early and addressed before they become learning chasms.

From data to decisions: Analysis framework

Collecting data is just the beginning. The real race begins when you analyze the results to spot patterns and gaps that will shape your next teaching moves.

Identifying patterns and gaps

Look for common stumbling blocks across student responses. If many students struggle with division, determine whether the issue lies in conceptual understanding or calculation skills, and then target your instruction accordingly.

Creating flexible groups

Group students with similar learning needs to provide tailored support. Flexible grouping allows you to address specific difficulties while offering enrichment opportunities for others who are ready to advance.

Using decision frameworks

Decision trees and similar tools help map out next steps based on assessment results. These frameworks ensure you provide just-right support to students when they need it most.

Differentiation strategies based on assessment results

Assessment for Learning data provides a detailed map of each student's learning journey, enabling you to customize instruction across multiple dimensions.

Multiple dimensions of differentiation

Assessment results help you differentiate content, process, and products. You might offer reading materials at various complexity levels, provide different ways for students to demonstrate knowledge (writing, presenting, creating), or adjust the learning environment to suit different preferences.

Data-driven goal setting

Assessment data creates the perfect foundation for personalized student goals. When students review their own results, they can use tools like SchoolAI's SMART Goal Generator to set specific, measurable objectives, taking greater ownership of their learning journey. This personal approach works better than vague targets like "get better at reading."

Leveraging digital tools for differentiation

Digital platforms can enhance differentiation with adaptive systems that adjust task difficulty based on student performance. These tools provide immediate feedback, allowing students to progress at their own pace while staying appropriately challenged.

Building a culture of assessment for learning

Creating a classroom that embraces Assessment for Learning means overcoming challenges like time constraints, data overload, and student resistance. The key? Make assessment part of your everyday routine.

Embedding regular assessments

Weave brief assessments like exit tickets into daily activities to gather ongoing data without overwhelming anyone. These quick checks provide valuable insights without requiring extensive planning or testing time.

Promoting a growth mindset

Frame assessments as tools for growth, fostering a growth mindset rather than judgments of ability. Talk with students and parents about how these assessments help identify areas for improvement. Encourage self-reflection after assessments to foster ownership and motivation.

Measuring the impact of assessment-guided instruction

Consider both numbers and stories to evaluate the effectiveness of using Assessment for Learning to guide instruction and improve learning outcomes. Test scores and completion rates provide concrete evidence, while changes in student motivation and engagement reveal deeper impacts.

Real-world evidence of impact

Case studies show that AfL works. At Utica University, faculty used regular assessments to track student progress and adjust teaching methods, improving student outcomes. Similarly, CamEd Business School integrated formative assessments into their curriculum to monitor performance against learning goals, creating more personalized education.

Continuous improvement strategies

Review your assessment practices regularly to ensure they align with learning objectives and identify areas for refinement. Collaborating with colleagues in professional learning communities (PLCs) helps you share effective strategies and solve common challenges.

Maximizing student outcomes with Assessment for Learning

Using Assessment for Learning to guide instruction works like a compass that keeps teaching pointed toward student success. It creates a feedback loop that ensures your instruction responds to students' changing needs. Making AfL part of your daily practice builds a classroom where every student can thrive.

Ready to try it? Start small-add one quick formative assessment to your routine this week. Over time, you'll create a classroom where assessment drives learning instead of just measuring it.

Want to take your teaching to the next level? Try SchoolAI for free and see how SchoolAI can support your expertise and enhance your assessment toolkit, freeing you up to focus on what matters most-connecting with your students.

Key takeaways

Assessment for Learning (AfL) uses ongoing, real-time data to guide teaching and adapt instruction based on student progress.

Quick-win AfL strategies like exit tickets and digital tools give immediate feedback to catch misconceptions early.

Data analysis from assessments helps identify patterns, adjust teaching approaches, and personalize learning.

Building a growth mindset through AfL reduces anxiety and encourages students to take ownership of their learning journey.

Using Assessment for Learning to guide instruction creates personalized learning experiences that foster continuous improvement through targeted, data-driven decisions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to use Assessment for Learning (AfL) to guide instruction | SchoolAI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn how Assessment for Learning transforms teaching by using real-time data to personalize instruction, foster growth mindsets, and dramatically improve student outcomes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Download free, high-quality science teaching resources to engage your students and enhance your classroom lessons. Get access to worksheets, activities, and materials that make learning science fun and effective!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you teach for long enough you'll see many ideas and acronyms come and go, and for the most part with good reason. Anyone who had the misfortune of having to experience APP will be relieved that particular concept ca...