Vertical Tutoring and its role in Deeper Personalised Learning

University Degree Education and Teaching

Vertical Tutoring and its role in

Deeper Personalised Learning

Matt Wells, February 2010

‘School Pastoral care is a systematic approach to education which seeks to value and develop the young person at every level. It implies caring for the quality of relationships between the partners in the school community. It involves the engagement of all the schools policies, processes and programmes in the development of the appropriate systematic structures, roles and resources to support the development of the emerging adult.’ (Hamblin, 1986)

My particular focus is on the Vertical Tutoring Model and how it can assist in the development of an individual pupil amongst their peers;

‘Vertical Tutoring is not just a 'pastoral reorganisation' as many schools think although this might appear to be the start. Vertical Tutoring is a better and more effective way of running schools as organisations which, if well managed, will ensure that everything improves including outcomes. It requires no extra effort or funding and serves to remind us of why we became teachers. In many ways it is a systems thinking approach to school management.’ (Barnard, 2006)

The Vertical Tutoring Model, also known as Vertical Mentoring, seems to be a relatively new design in mainstream schooling and is increasingly being introduced to schools all over the country. It seems to have been born out of or at least support by academic tutorial or ('deep learning conversation') and the creative use of data. The Specialist Schools and Academies Trust published non-statutory guidelines ‘A new shape for schooling?’ (Hargreaves, 2006), promoting Personalised Learning. It is supported by the idea of ‘the four Deeps’; Deep Learning, Deep Experience, Deep Support and Deep Leadership.

Vertical Tutoring seems to address the Deeps on a number of levels. As quoted from (Barnard, 2006), it is not just about a ‘reorganisation of the school pastoral system’, it is a change for Deep support where the form in which mentoring and coaching changes and advice a guidance can be delivered in a different manner. In my experience of Vertical Tutoring, mentoring wasn’t always coming direct from the form tutor, nor from a teacher or a member of support staff, quite often I found that the advice and guidance was coming from peers within the tutor group and not always the elder pupils either. Why is this? I can only put it down to confidence and relationships that have been built amongst their peers. I witnessed a year 10 boy from my adopted form group, consoling a year 8 boy, who had been given a detention for something he claimed to have played no part in. My thoughts on this at the time were that the year 10 lad was likely to have been in his position before, I could tell from his character. I remember so from my experiences as a pupil of probably being in the same boat, however for me to have spoken to him, I believe it would have had ill-affect as I am far removed from his school peers, someone of his own age would have only had equal or less knowledge and expertise on the subject, but a peer only a little older had that experience and has had the time to reflect, is someone that is not removed from the context and therefore was in a position to console.

This is a preview of the whole essay

This could also extend further to homework tasks. As we were a fortunate group to be located in an ICT suite with all facilities available to the group, pupils had the luxury of choosing to do their own work in form time (in self-directed study sessions). Vertical Mentoring can create a situation whereby peers can help in deep learning, ‘Students are much better at spotting mistakes or weaknesses in other pupils work than in their own and are much tougher on each other than any teacher would dare to be.’ (Wiliam, 2002) This can also have better effect as Professor Dylan Wiliam goes onto state how pupils can take and act on criticism from peers more easily than a teacher, ‘(as one student remarked: “Teachers have got a funny kind of language if you know what I mean.”)’ (Wiliam, 2002) This also brings into account the theories behind ‘pupil-speak’ and how this environment can be serve in reinforced learning, therefore a Deeper Learning as well as Deeper Support.

Having never experienced (or in fact heard of) the vertical tutoring model until earlier this academic year, I was sceptical of how it would if at all work. When sent to my first placement school, I was faced with this very model. In its debut year of implementation; it was its virgin month of practice. I must admit it could have been in place for ten years, it seemed to be working seamlessly. I am not aware of how they implemented the transition of moving from a more traditional, horizontal, year group tutoring, but it seemed to be working well, with all pupils interacting within year groups but also across year groups, with very little confusion.

However, I still remained with my previous thoughts of the system. I always thought that it would help the year 7 pupils in the transitional period (making the jump from eldest to youngest), as they would have the familiar faces of their form members, to look up to. ‘The transition from Primary to Secondary is regarded as one of the most difficult in pupils’ educational careers.’ (Zeedyk & al, 2003) Within a fairly short period of time, bonds would be made and anxieties maybe relieved by guidance from those elder peers. But I could not see how it would benefit the elder pupils themselves? After having a conversation with a fellow PGCE student, I was directed into looking into the relationship of peers teaching peers and who actually benefits from this interaction of learning?

Research carried out in the United States on Cooperative Learning Models (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, The Nuts & Bolts of Cooperative Learning, 1994) (Slavin, 2004), show evidence that the pupil offering the teaching greater benefits from doing so than that of the pupil taking on the learning. This is backed up by Dylan Wiliam, who states that the teacher is reinforcing their own understanding thus creating a deeper learning, “Most teachers I’ve spoken to say they have never understood their subject fully until they started to teach it.” (Wiliam, Meeting Dylan Wiliam, 2008). This could be further argued that; it is key element in a pupil’s social development, not only academic, through Vygotsky’s (ZPD) Zone of Proximal Development, whereby the teaching pupil becomes the MKO (More Knowledgeable Other) (Vygotsky, 1978).

Having spent the past three months in my placement, taking part with this pastoral model, I have realised that it has true potential to work. It is not a model that can be introduced and then nothing else put in place to support it. The traditional head of years are now redundant and a house system has to be introduced with heads and a supporting team. In this particular school they have kept in place the head of sixth form, this I believe is because with the vast amount of form tutors needed, they cannot all be trained and become experts in the very complex and time demanding job of university applications.

Does it really help the form tutor in their pastoral role? Do all form tutors now need to be trained at a higher level of pastoral care? Are the tutees helped or hindered by the different age ranges? What happens to those individual teachers that work better with different groups of pupils, i.e. KS3 or KS4 groups? As under this system tutors will need to be able to deal with both KS3 and KS4 members and issues alike. All year groups have very different social needs and experiences. With the year 11’s stressing (or in my experience at placement one – not) over GCSE’s, Year 13’s pressure over their UCAS applications, Year 9’s with their option choices, all very key steps in their individual lives, but none the less all as important to those individuals as the next. How could a form tutor balance all those different levels of apprehension, without making one less important than the next? Or do they use the circumstances to inform those who will experience this in future years, or give an opportunity for those before to reflect back on their own experience?

Tutors do not teach PSHE as such but seek to facilitate 'learning relationships' and increased maturity ('real citizenship' and active SEAL (The Department for Children, Schools an Families, 1997-2010) in part) by using Leadership and the 'Power of the Pack!’ Tutors are then better enabled to be responsible for the academic and pastoral needs of students. I believe that the Vertical Tutoring system can be lent to deep support as demonstrated by peer support as well as tutor support; it allows for a deeper level of leadership through the naturally authoritive figures such as sixth form members or simply the elder members of the form. It would also be an opportunity for younger members with natural leadership qualities to be able to represent and have authority over their elders, which can be a very true reality in outside of school life; this would also encourage an extended learning of opportunities such as Sports Leadership Gold, etc

The system can also allow for a louder student voice as all age groups can contribute and bounce ideas for change off of one another, this would not be the case for the vast majority to be involved in, in traditional tutoring systems. I have already touched on the idea of pupils gaining a deeper understanding in learning to learn when pupils naturally lend themselves to helping their peers, not only through homework tasks, but fun group activities that provide important developmental skills needed in life, i.e. social and citizenship skills.

I am aware on the other hand that, there are Vertical Tutoring Systems that are in place that are not as successful as the placement experience I have. This could be down to the fact that the nuts and bolts of the system have not been tweaked and set up adequately for the intended environment.

Bibliography

Barnard, P. A. (2006). Vertical Tutoring and School Improvement. Retrieved February 6, 2010, from Vertical Tutoring Organisation: http://www.verticaltutoring.org/

Best, R. (2000). Pastoral Care & Personal-Social Eductaion: A Review of UK research undertaken for the British Educational Research Association. University of Surrey Roehampton, Education. Roehampton, Surrey, UK: British Educational Research Association.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan , 80.

British Association for Counselling. (1978). Education for Personal Autonomy: An inquiry into the school's resources for furthering the personal development of pupils. (H. J. Blackham, Ed.) London: Bedford Square Press.

Cowie, H., & Hutson, N. (2005). Peer Support: A Strategy to Help Bystanders Challenge School Bullying. The Journal for Pastoral Care & Personal-Social Education , 23 (2), 40 - 44.

Ecclestone, K., & Hayes, D. (2008). Affect: Knowlegde, Communication, Creativity and Emotion. Oxford Brookes University, Education. Oxford: Beyond Current Horizons: Technology, Children and Families.

Entwistle, N. (2000). Promoting Deep Learning through Teaching and Assessment: Conceptual Frameworks and Educational Contexts. TLRP Conference. Leicester: University of Edingburgh.

Hamblin, D. (1986). A Pastoral Programme. In L. Monahan, Making School a Better Place. Oxford: Blackwell Hamblin.

Hargreaves, D. H. (2006). A New Shape for Schooling? (P. Chambers, Ed.) London, UK: Specialist Schools and Academies Trust.

Heilbronn, R., et al. (2004). The Pastoral Role Tutoring and Personal, Social and Health Education. In S. H. Capel, & S. Capel (Ed.), Starting to Teach in the Secondary School: A Companion for the Newly Qualified Teacher (Second ed., pp. 45 - 55). Abington, Oxford, UK: Routledge - Falmer.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1994). The Nuts & Bolts of Cooperative Learning. Edina, Minnesota: Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2000). Cooperative Learning. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Univeristy of Minnesota Press.

Learning-Theories.com. (2008). Social Development Theory (Vygotsky). Retrieved February 9, 2010, from Learning Theories Knowledgebase: http://www.learning-theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html

McGuiness, J. B. (1982). Planned Pastoral Care: A Guide for Teachers. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Book Company (UK) Limited.

Miller, D., & Daniel, B. (2007). Competent to Cope, Worthy of Happiness?: How the Duality of Self-Esteem Can Inform a Resilience-Based Classroom Environment. School Psychology International , 28, 605 - 622.

Slavin, R. E. (2004). When and Why does Cooperative Learning Increase Achievement? Theorectical & Empirical Perspectives. In H. Daniels, A. Edwards, H. Daniels, & A. Edwards (Eds.), The RoutledgeFalmer Reader in Psychology of Education (1st Edition ed., pp. 271-292). London & New York, UK & USA/Canada: RoutledgeFalmer.

Specialist Schools and Academies Trust. (2008, November 26-28). Leading System Redesign. (M. Allen, Ed.) SecEd NewspaperWeekly (FREE) .

The Department for Children, Schools an Families. (1997-2010). Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL): Improving behaviour, improving learning. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from The National Strategies: http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/node/87009

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between Learning and Development. In M. Cole, In Mind in Society (pp. 19-91). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Warburton, K. (2003). Deep Learning and Education for Sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education , 4 (1), 44-56.

Wiliam, D. (2002, February 5). Assessing the best method of learning - opinions of Prdoessor Dylan Wiliam. Retrieved February 9, 2010, from The Scotsman News: http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/PROFESSOR-DYLAN-WILLIAM-Assessing-the.2300218.jp

Wiliam, D. (2008, April 11th). Meeting Dylan Wiliam. (E. Morris, Interviewer) Teachers.TV.

Zeedyk, M. S., et al (2003). Negotiating the Tranistion from Primary to Secondary School: Perceptions of Pupils, Parents and Teachers. School Psychology International , 24, 67 - 79.