Solo taxonomy: It is very clear how as a teacher how we can help the students to progress and achieve each level by connecting them.

• Must have a platform that is sustainable and can continuously be used to provide feedback to students

• Feedback must be useful for both teachers and students (Clear and Effective )

• Students must have an active role in the feedback loop

AFI- A better platform for us to consider the global awareness. Going beyond Singapore.

AFI- As mentioned previously, to improve the feedup the process.

AFI - include peer assessments / comments

• Clarity about feedback

• Clarity in direction (How we want to leverage on Feedback literacy)

• Achieved First Milestone (Applied it on Oracy)

AFI:

• Wanted to apply our experience this year to other aspects of EL (Writing, Listening etc.) -- Develop next year

• Consistency in application - Everybody could have different priorities and feedback practices

  -- Time being a factor that needs to be considered when applying these feedback practices

• Student motivation -- Focused on task level feedback so how can we bring students on board this feedback loop (Clarity and Seeing the value of feedback)

• How we can use SOLO Taxonomy

Some practical applications:

• Giving parallel tasks

With targeted feedback, it serves to motivate students and provides the impetus for students to take ownership of their own learning.

Differentiated Instruction remains a key pedagogical tool in order to give good quality feedback to students.

- More time so more peer assessment. Self-assessment can exist more.

Lower Sec: provide samples of different students works so that students can envisage what grades they can get based on the quality of work submit

• We also need to start with Sec 1s moving forward - oral, comprehension and essay.

For the area of improvement, we are only able to obtain qualitative data due to a small sample size. We hope to be able to collect different types of data (e.g. quantitative, lesson observation) to strengthen our study.

• We are still trying to find ways to feed forward to students.

• Most students are still at the uni- structural and multi-structural stage when doing SOLO assessment

• SOLO taxonomy can be used for various components in language teaching eg. oral, comprehension, writing, sentence structure

2) Growths/Strengths:

• We have simplified the rubrics for the students to understand and allow easier facilitation of peer feedback

Area of improvement

• Lack of student reflection in monitoring their own progress

• Time constraints

• Feed forward

3) Adapt and apply

• Bio: Using exemplars and rubric according to the readiness of the students to balance out the skill set of the students

• CPA: Using Google Forms as a form of checklist and a resource bank such as videos so that students are able to be more self-directed in their learning and monitor their respective progress. This can be implemented in HBL - integrating and strengthen the use of grammar and sentence structure

• Timeliness of feedback

• Involve students in the feeding up process

• Clear articulation of success criteria to students so that they could do peer evaluation/feedback

• Differentiate the classroom activities for students so that they could be self-directed

• Collaborative effort as a department

Challenge #2: Student motivation

• Set high expectations for students right at the start, then provide scaffolds for students to develop confidence

  
  

• Feed up and feed back

Areas of improvement:

• Feed forward

• How can we incorporate Sample Marking with some checklist to aid the Lower Sec students in their Writing (Sections B and C)

• Break it up in segments -- Intro paragraph and highlight what is good / not so good about the paragraph

SOLO Taxonomy:

• Portion to try out one practice and reassess and retry the practice

• Students have to articulate reasons why they end up on that level

• Danger of conflating development of rubrics as feedback entirely --> We have to move one step forward and think about how can this rubrics be useful in informing us and the students about how to improve

  -- A lot of rubrics still at task level (How can we push it further to reach higher levels -- Self Regulation)

• Observed LO is very clear on what they need to do to reach the next level but there is a possibility to include learner strategy - Self Regulation --> Can we tap on students experiences and get them to tell us their learning strategy rather than we tell them what to do?

  What kind of strategies can help you to improve from this level to the next level?

• Annotated Marking should kick in --> Why that point is credited and how can we fit this in SOLO Tax? (Lit)

Writing (Argumentative - MT and SS/HY):

• Sustainability -- How do we sustain this throughout the year? How can we start it from the beginning of the year and see the difference at the end of they year?

• SS/HY: Peer feedback (Quality not there -- Only done once off so students require training)

MT Writing / Oral:

• SLS as a tool -- may need to explore and consider

  Objectives (Intention and Usefulness)

• Before and After: Highlight where the elaboration is after writing again (Revisiting their work)

  -- Students to identify within their own writing

PE:

• Target Setting - Needing more quantitative data as it is easier to process by the students

  Easier for them to see where they stand and how they can improve

• Does it meet syllabus outcomes?

• If not very aligned, are students aware of the students' understanding of the expected outcomes?

• Do the rubrics we design have clarity for students to follow through as they try to complete the task.

• Are we able to use tech to simply / deepen the process for students in terms of assessment?

2. Do students understand our rubrics / checklist / success criteria?

   • Are the pointers written in simple language accessible to students?

   • Can we have a dept-wide success criteria for each of the core skills (essay, inference, comparison, reliability, utility, etc.)?

3. Different subjects are using similar ways of thinking!

   • Do we know what other departments are doing enough?

   • Are we helping students see connections across subjects?

   • Why are students able to self-assess in other subjects but not ours? Lack of clarity? Insufficient practice or exemplars?

   • Could it be because we are all doing it at a small scale? In disjointed ways such that it limits students' ability to apply in differing contexts?

4. Are we doing it sufficiently from Sec 1 to Sec 4

   • Can we tier it from lower to upper sec and deepen it later at Sec 3 and 4?

5. Content is the basis of doing well in the Humanities so with the lack of confidence in that, it might inhibit their grasp of the skills later on.

   • Maybe we have to use SOLO on teaching and learning of content first? On IBL as an approach?

6. Humanities knowledge and skills seem to fall onto relation level on the SOLO taxonomy.

   • How do we

7. For whole-school efforts / initiatives, would students get bored?

   • Kahoot, Padlet,

   • Can we have unique pedagogies that work best for each set of disciplines? Would that make the student experience more novel?

   • Is there a way we can consolidate the process / framework for groups of subjects maybe so students can make such connections and thus, it becomes more meaningful?