Breakfast Clubs, Lunchtime Clubs, After School Clubs, Weekend Clubs, School Holiday Clubs, South East, 17.01.05
What were your original aims?
To investigate what benefits might arise from using the ancient oriental board game of 'Go' as a way of teaching Thinking Skills at a Pupil Referral Unit, viz., The Wycombe Grange (TWG). The longevity of Go, as well as its culturally significant place – for example as the national game of Japan – in many cultures, has led to a very large body of Go proverbs. I wanted to discover how some of the most important proverbs could be applied both to learning and to real-life situations as well as on the Go board. In this respect, particularly through the Philosophy For Children (P4C) aspect of the project, I intended to evaluate how far the teaching of thinking, through learning to play Go, could improve the self-esteem of a student(s) – and consequently their behaviour – and, thereby, whether this would measurably affect overall academic performance.
In what ways did you refine your aims?
I decided to incorporate Go in the curriculum at both sites of The Wycombe Grange where I am Head of English; this would enable me to have discrete time to further my research. At CVG, Chess Valley Grange, our KS3 site, I started with a group of three boys. This was not successful as the interaction between the three of them was already problematic. After two or three sessions, I concentrated on just one (I have called him "Arthur" elsewhere) – who became the focal point of most of my research – and the other two were timetabled with a colleague on other activities. At our KS4 site, I taught individual students as well as small groups then arranged for them to play against each other. I also decided to establish a Go club at both sites so that Go could be played voluntarily outside timetabled lessons. This would help provide feedback from colleagues as to whether Go would help motivate disaffected students. I attended training courses on Thinking Skills in order to help refine my objectives and increase my knowledge and expertise, as well as to link my research to published outcomes. I also attended a course on Unit Awards in order to enable me to write awards for Go. To date I have written the first of three awards; this has been validated by the examination board, AQA. I also read current research and bought books by acknowledged experts in the field to support my understanding of the whole area of Thinking Skills. This resulted in my using some of the strategies which have been developed, including:
Mind Mapping Six Hats Lateral Thinking Odd One Out Mysteries (using Go problems)
As part of the dissemination process, I decided to find a 'volunteer' school where I could investigate what large-scale benefits might arise from using the ancient oriental board game of 'Go' as a way of teaching Thinking Skills at a whole-school level. The headteacher at Covingham Park Junior School in Swindon was keen to assist. CPJS was an appropriate school partly because the head had already introduced 'Brain Gym' as part of normal classroom activity and was highly receptive to my proposal of developing and raising the profile of Thinking Skills (through the game of Go) in his school. I spent six Fridays there and taught the whole school – staff as well as pupils – to play Go and adapt their learning to Thinking Skills strategies which could be used elsewhere, including in the curriculum and P4C. The school set up its own, thriving, Go club. Also, as part of this whole-school project, I decided to facilitate CPJS taking part in a national Go tournament, the UK Go Challenge 2004, which they did most successfully; a large number of the children qualified for the national finals. Finally, I decided to take my most committed students to at least one national tournament as well as the British Youth Championships.
Which research processes did you find helpful?
The most helpful research process was the recording of lessons and their outcomes coupled with a review of each lesson. My 'focal point' student, Arthur, kept a diary in the form of a short report that he would write for me at the end of each session. We would first discuss the 'lesson', though it was more often a collaborative investigation, then he would write down his comments. In particular, in our 'debrief', we often touched on metacognition, how he thought about what was happening on the Go board. I encouraged him to be completely honest in his views (which he was!) and to include where appropriate: what he had learnt, how he had learnt it, how valuable that piece of learning was, how he could reinforce it and how he could use the 'new learning' in other areas, both in the game of Go and in life. He also gave a mark out of ten for how much he had enjoyed the lesson and/or a mark out of ten for how effective his teacher (me) was in helping him gain new learning. He was quick to see the application, particularly of Go proverbs, to life in general and to his own life in particular. I would then add my own evaluation of what he had learnt, how he had presented during the lesson, what TS skills he had used and what to concentrate on in the following lesson. I also discussed with Arthur what he particularly enjoyed in that session and what aspect of the game he would like to investigate with me in the next session. As Arthur (and others) got used to the format and became more and more involved, both in assessing his own learning (and my 'teaching'!) and in actively helping to plan his future learning, he got likewise more and more motivated to learn and his self-esteem – as observed by others – became markedly healthier. Quite quickly, the marks out of ten approached ten. It was satisfying to note that high marks were always linked to his excitement about learning something new. Another helpful research process was formal observation and report-back. The first was by a colleague as part of a 'T2T' (Teacher-to-Teacher) exercise, which itself was part of a TS course run by the NUT. This was recorded on tape so that I could evaluate Arthur's responses. The second observation was by a senior adviser as part of an LEA inspection. In both cases, Arthur showed me the first 33 moves of a game which I had asked him to memorise. I asked him to explain and justify each move – including the first one! I also got him to consider alternative moves and make hypothetical judgements as to their relative value in comparison to the actual moves made in the game. The senior adviser's report in partially quoted in section 6, below.
Which research processes did your pupils find helpful?
I used different processes for different students. As I taught Arthur in a regular timetabled session, it was possible to use a diary format as described in point 3, above. For other students, I did not ask them to write anything down but, where useful, made a note myself of what they had said. Instead, I asked them simply to verbalise their thoughts about each session. This was definitely more appropriate for those of our students who find it difficult to write down their views. All Go students responded very positively to being involved in assessing and evaluating their own learning and discussing, often with others, how they thought about their moves while they were playing. As there is a grading system for Go players, this had a very positive effect on all the students involved as all gained self-esteem from their grade. In particular this happened when they gained promotions; these depended on consistent good results from games played. The strongest Go players, i.e. those with the highest grades, markedly gained considerable peer esteem from other Go players.
What were the learning points you gained from undertaking the research and what were your findings?
That Go easily caters for a range of preferred learning styles, particularly those not based on reading and writing.
That 'previously measured academic ability' did not pre-determine the extent of success in Go. Rather, Go appears to reflect an individual's most fundamental intellectual capabilities and potential.
That it is possible effectively to adapt strategies designed for teaching Thinking Skills through Go successfully to single individuals, small groups, much larger groups, e.g. 60 children, and to a whole school.
Larger group sizes did not necessarily adversely affect the quality of the metacognitive discussion when I offered problems or 'mysteries' for discussion.
Students, including large groups, stayed on task for longer periods of time than 'normal' for them; they were also much more actively engaged in their learning. On one occasion, a 'non-academic' student at The Wycombe Grange engaged in a continuous two-hour session which involved both learning new concepts and playing a full game.
Because Go has very clear rules of etiquette, students developed a much more polite attitude towards others, particularly when playing Go. This included praising their opponents for good moves and / or winning. Likewise, losing was not seen as failure but as an opportunity to learn.
Kinaesthetic learners, in particular, became much better at discussing and demonstrating their response to a 'mystery' or Go problem posed; they found these challenging, often exciting, but not stressful.
According to the teachers at CPJS, it appeared that less 'academic' students were able to propose solutions to Go problems as unselfconsciously as the more academic students.
Also, less academic students often achieved more success than the more academic students. This was the case at The Wycombe Grange as well as CPJS, as shown by the results of the UK Go Challenge.
There was a marked increase in students' self-esteem, as they began to grasp the concepts of the game and to succeed in playing it, as well as a beneficial effect on peer-esteem among the Go players.
Girls did as well as, if not better than, boys, even though Go might have been perceived by some as a highly competitive game.
Children want to learn.
What evidence relates to this learning and your findings?
Evidence came from:
The 'focal point' student's diary.
My own notes appended to his diary and other notes.
My observation of their progress and increase in self esteem.
My observation of the increase in peer esteem among the Go players.
The growth in confidence of all the Go players.
Marked increase in motivation of most students.
Ability to concentrate for much longer periods.
Two observations by colleagues. One was written by a senior adviser and given to me as part of the feedback from an LEA inspection – full text available. The other was recorded on tape at the end of the observed session, part of a T2T exercise, mentioned above – also available.
Two articles, written by me, published in The Teacher magazine (N.U.T.) publication. The first ('Go for it!') was part of the Autumn 2004 'Special Schools and Services' supplement on thinking skills. The second was in the thinking skills section of the December 2004 edition of the magazine. Part of the text from the LEA inspection feedback is quoted in the first article. The second article has several quotations from the headteacher at CPJS, the school which took part in the project.
An article, written by an adult master-grade Go player who helped to run the UK Go Challenge at CPJS. The article is due to appear in a future edition of the BGJ, British Go Journal.
Much more positive attitude towards learning, particularly from previously disaffected students.
The award of 'Go Beacon School Status' given by the BGA, British Go Association, to both our sites: The Wycombe Grange and Chess Valley Grange. Covingham Park Junior School was also given this award.
Some students have begun, without any prompting from me, to teach other colleagues to play Go, indicating their much improved confidence. Some now relate to us, the 'teachers', no longer as 'pupils' but as fellow learners.
My 'focal point' student has successfully reintegrated into a (new) mainstream school and is making excellent progress in his academic subjects. He has also asked for assistance in setting up a Go club at his new school. Also, at the British Youth Go Championships this year, he won the Go problems competition, despite being one of the least experienced and least highly graded competitors.
Another student, also at the British Youth Go Championships this year, won the Youth Grand Prix Championships for the second year running (I had taught him three years ago), won the Under-16 championship last year and was runner-up this year.
What are the questions for your future practice?
The main question that arose was how to utilise and implement the considerable benefits that arise from Go, both at our own institution and in others. For example, other PRUs, both local and in other parts of the country, have expressed an interest in Go and Thinking Skills. Staff development time, a limited commodity, would need to be used in order fully to take advantage of the benefits that Go offers. Staffs would need to be supported over a period of time as part of a whole-school development plan.
What are the questions for your school?
The main issue dealt with in point 7 applies to our own institution. We would be able to introduce Thinking Skills and Go into 'client' and / or other mainstream schools but this would have to be properly supported at the LEA level.
Are there any questions for further research?
It would be useful to research the overall impact of Thinking Skills / Go on students, both in terms of their academic progress and their behavioural profile, particularly if a 'control' group could be used to measure the relative impact of TS / Go. I should also like to have more time to investigate the possibility of using De Bono's 'Six Hats' approach to formulating whole-board strategies for playing Go and to solving high-level Go problems.
How did you disseminate your findings with others, e.g. within your school, other schools, the LEA, wider?
Within my school, we have had TS / BPRS meetings, as well as staff meetings, at which discussion has taken place. I have also spent time, informally, with a few of my colleagues, and had informal 'Staff versus Students' games of Go. At other schools, I have visited CPJS (see above) and also another, local, school – in a different capacity – at which the possibility of introducing Go was discussed. A follow-up may well take place next term. At the LEA level, the senior adviser mentioned above has been very supportive, as has an EP; we hope to meet as a small group to discuss the possibility – and practicability – of disseminating my findings at a wider level. At a 'national' level, I have had two articles published in The Teacher magazine – see above. Also at a national level, I have written a Unit Award in Go (see above), which has been validated by AQA; two more are in preparation. This is now available on the AQA website, so can be used nationally.
