Michaela Results

[RueDeWakening]

The Michaela free school has got its first set of GCSE results - I know the school's approach gets mixed views, but the results are amazing.

#MichaelaResults on Twitter is just lovely, I'm really pleased for them. Which is ridiculous really, we live nowhere near the school and have no connection to it :o

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/22/britains-strictest-schools-first-gcse-results-four-times-better/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw

18% of results at grade 9 (vs 4.5% nationally)
54% grades 7-9 in all exams
85% grades 4-9 in English and Maths

I don't know Michaela, but there's a much lauded school near us which uses similar methods. That school's hugely oversubscribed, but having seen how they do it, we didn't fancy it for ours. For example there, there's a huge churn of pupils in the lower years - so basically if a child doesn't behave well, or is deemed disruptive, they're 'encouraged' to transfer to another school. Lots of parents want their kids to go there and get the high grades, so there's always a waiting list. A friend's son got a place in year 8. He started in the spring term. On his first day, he was one of 8 new kids. So that means 8 children must have left at the end of the Autumn term. Far more leave in year 7 than 8 apparently, as the regime is a shock for them. It's clever if you think about it, as by the end of year 8, the school have basically got rid of all the kids that they don't want and brought in ones that they do, which gives them a cohort who are prepared to do the slog needed to get those high grades. Obviously that helps the results massively! It would be interesting to know if that's similar with Michaela. I genuinely have no idea if it is or not, but I wouldn't be surprised.

The actual achievement figures are somewhat meaningless until we see the performance management figures. If the performance figure is 1.8 as has been suggested then it is very difficult to argue against the fact that they are getting the teaching and learning in the school right. That would be an excellent set of figures.
Whether the behaviour mantra they adopt is the direct reason for the results is difficult to prove one way or the other but it must have some positive effect if it is only in the consequence of each lesson starting on time and there being no interruptions.

I doubt Michaela would argue that their behaviour policy is the main reason for these results. Their curriculum and teaching methods have been carefully developed as well, based on what cognitive scientists say about learning, with an emphasis on lots of reading of texts in class, explicit instruction from the front, paired work rather than group work, self-drilling of factual knowledge by students as homework throughout the year, rather than just at the end, and more. They emphasise the importance of having a wide range of knowledge, rather than focusing on trying to teach "skills" like reading comprehension, based on research showing that comprehension comes primarily from background knowledge. Their method of teaching French is also very unusual, and apparently very effective judging by these results.

I’d imagine you need the confidence interval to be able to judge the P8 score properly.

I don’t know if you could separate out all the different strands of what they do to find a main reason. There’s probably a hundred different things that go together to make the ‘Michaela ethos’ a tangible thing and any one of those would probably improve results for either most pupils or groups of pupils.

I’d love to know whether 5 years worth of self-quizzing/low stakes testing reduced the stress and revision burden in yr 11. Unfortunately, that’s not something you can get from the data.

Yeah, I agree Rafal. But I think a lot of people have only heard about the behaviour policies, not about the teaching approaches, so I think it's important to point those out as well.

I’d love to know whether 5 years worth of self-quizzing/low stakes testing reduced the stress and revision burden in yr 11. Unfortunately, that’s not something you can get from the data.

No, but if you read Dan Willingham and other cognitive scientists, it makes sense that it would. Anecdotal, I know, but having seen two DDs through the GCSE revision process, I feel pretty strongly about the subject!

And of course it isn't just a question of reducing the revision burden, it's actually that spaced practice over time is more likely to securely embed knowledge long-term, rather than forgetting shortly after the exam. And having that knowledge secure into the future is something that will also help pupils with A levels, uni and future life.

I understand the cognitive science. And my gut feeling is that it should do. I’m just curious whether there’s any evidence that pressure in the immediate run up to GCSEs was lowered at all. At the very least I assume it might change the focus of revision from trying to learn facts/dates etc to spending more time using that knowledge to answer practice questions.

I have visited a Michaela style school. Spoon feeding is not an adequate enough description of the teaching I saw, to be honest. They ask no questions , there is no inference (this is both teachers and students)

So... they come across a word they don't know . The teacher doesn't say 'Does anyone know what this word means? Can anyone work it out?'. Rather they say ' Underline this word. This word means...'

It didn't sit right with me .No curiosity. The students were silent. Throughout the lessons including at the beginning and end and , famously , in the corridors, and upon arrival. Not as bad as it sounds but a little draining, in a strange way. the teachers whispered to each other. Even form time was silent learning.

They are opening a 'branch' in Stevenage. Now, that will be interesting!

@noblegiraffe my DD’s school collaborates with Michaela and a few other schools around the UK who are doing amazing things. DD’s School has just reported their best set of results yet, despite being in an area considered deprived. DD really loves her school and bullying is low.

Something they do is working well and is transferrable to other schools with collaboration.

I am certain it's possible to do a 'strict' school badly, just as it's possible to do any style of school badly. So I think it's probably a mistake to go to one such school and assume all the others are just the same. For example, according to blogs I have read about Michaela, form time is filled by the teacher reading aloud from a good quality fiction book to the pupils, not in silent study.

So... they come across a word they don't know . The teacher doesn't say 'Does anyone know what this word means? Can anyone work it out?'. Rather they say ' Underline this word. This word means...'

Now I teach adults rather than kids but that style of teaching goes against all the pedagogy I was taught, that people do better as active learners rather than using such didactic teaching methods.

However the results are obviously amazing.

I wonder how they'd do in the leafy wealthy areas...

One thing that Michaela have done is really thought about their curriculum. I guess if you’re starting a school from scratch then you have the luxury of being able to spend loads of time thinking about what you’re teaching because you’ve only got a couple of Y7 classes and when you’re not teaching you’re not having to do data analysis or Y11 mock marking or Y9 options evenings.

This first cohort, the teachers must know them inside out. If we’re looking at reasons for the results, then as well as the behaviour policy and the teaching methods, the amount of time and attention that has been afforded these kids in a mostly empty school also has to be taken into account.

that people do better as active learners rather than using such didactic teaching methods.

I don’t think the evidence shows this. Project Follow Through showed Direct Instruction is a very effective teaching method?

It makes sense to me if you’re coming up to a word they might not know if you say ‘does anyone know what this word means?’ You get a bunch of wrong answers then someone is close but you have to correct them to make sure the class gets the correct definition.

Why would it not be more efficient to just tell them the correct definition? You also don’t risk them remembering one of the incorrect ones their mate offered.

These are great results and they are right to be very proud of them. It’s clear that the school cares deeply for the children and is immensely committed to their achievement. What I can’t go along with is the belief that their particular ethos is necessary or desirable in all schools. The school where I’m a governor gets excellent results with a rigorous but less formal approach.The Michaela method works for them, but it’s not for everyone.

Can't agree with you on that noble! The whole point is supposed to be about knowledge. Using knowledge to work out what words mean is a powerful thing.

@noblegiraffe - It can help intelligent guessing. Eg definition of circumvent, hypnotic, hyper/hypobaric (mainly Latin-/Greek- derivations). In small groups I can see Dialectic teaching working well, but would be harder in class of 30.

Direct instruction has its place. But what I saw was stultifying. It assumes no child has any knowledge.

I guess it depends on the word. If you could tease the meaning out through questioning that’s different to asking the class ‘does anyone know the meaning of ‘hypotenuse’?’

The word was in a passage so there was both prior knowledge and context.

Guess it’s different in maths to English where the words we teach don’t tend to come with much context!

Exactly. That said, if you are introducing the term hypotenuse and labelling it on a right angled triangle would surely pretty quickly get the kids working out what it meant?? But it is, indeed, quicker to tell them.

I feel education at the moment is becoming utilitarian. Right is right and wrong is wrong. No room for discovery, experimentation or the confidence to guess or share what you know. You would have to have seen it in action to get what I mean, I think.But I do get frustrated by clever students (often the girls) not knowing things and the saying ' well, why would I know that?'. It's an anti knowledge culture. The trad types say they are fixing this with knowledge curriculum. But what I saw in practice didn't bear that out, sadly. I think this is because they treat all students the same and assume they are all blank slates. I would have found that so frustrating as a child.

I posted this on the AIBU thread too: www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/education-49430077/it-s-good-to-have-rules-children-know-where-they-stand

I have to say that the rolling numbers maths teacher makes me cringe inside out. I could 100% absolutely not do that in my classroom. I find call and response stuff really weird and hope that it doesn’t become a fad!

That is one of their big things.

A lot of it makes me a bit uncomfortable, much as I admire Ms Birbalsingh's energy.

Wow more energy than I expected - and nowhere near as silent either!

Call and response is definitely more suitable for primary age children, IMO. But one of the problems secondary schools have, especially in disadvantaged areas, is that so many children arrive lacking very basic maths fluency and automaticity, as well as unable to read properly.

They need to get those children caught up quickly, if they are going to be able to access the secondary curriculum, and call and response is one technique for doing it. I know Michaela also emphasises lots of practice on e.g. Times Tables Rock Stars (???) at home.