|
The classroom
evaluation is an in-depth appraisal of how the product performed in the
classroom. It covers the ways the product was used during the evaluation, the
perceived benefits and issues involved in its use, the students’ response and
the opportunities for learning, differentiation and assessment it provided.
|
| |
|
| Evaluation subject |
English |
| |
|
| Evaluation key stage |
keystage 2 |
| |
|
| Evaluated on: |
PC Processor
speed:400MHZ/700MHZ and 1100 MHZ Connection speed:Broadband RAM:between 64k and 256K Additional hardware:Multimedia projector |
| |
|
| How product was used: |
Whole class teaching with projector, followed up by small groups and individual teaching. Individual and paired work for consolidation. |
| |
|
| Students: |
Key stage 2. Used with 30 pupils across two year groups and several classes. Year 6 children working at year 4, 5, 6 and 7 expected levels. Year 5 children working at year 5 levels. |
| |
|
| Special Needs: |
No special modifications had to be made for gifted and talented students or those with special needs |
| |
|
| Period of use: |
Lunchtimes for 15 to 20 minutes depending on the activity. Also whole class teaching for 20 minutes, individual access for up to twenty minutes after whole class teaching. The site was accessed by one or more users for the above periods approximately 10 times, in addition to the whole class teaching |
| |
|
| Schemes of work: |
|
| |
Various activities across the NLS. Majority of material accessed was year 6 level.
|
| |
|
| Topics: |
Plurals construction, text level work on biography/autobiography, word level work on word origins, sentence level work on active and passive construction.
|
| |
|
| Context: |
The year 6 pupils were working at ability levels ranging from year 4 to year 7. Some users accessed the material in ability pairs. Pupils also attempted material that was above their expected level for their age.Teaching assistant supervised on a few occasions. |
| |
|
| Technical information: |
The product is web-based. Occasionally children expressed some annoyance at the speed of transition between areas as they worked through activities. It was unclear if this was due to the broadband connection speed or site complexity. Macromedia flash is required and a link is provided for download. Half an hour training is offered free. There is also an information pack sent out to schools. |
| |
|
| Design & navigation: |
Pupils initially seemed excited. Colour and fonts were appropriate. As they went through the literacy lessons, pupils became a little frustrated with the navigation, and the speed at which the site functioned, especially in J-World. Users may prefer to jump straight to the activity section. Sound and speech can be controlled during activities. Characters were appropriate. |
| |
|
| Content: |
Language was appropriate. The characters used and the variety of voices helped sustain interest.The pupils found the word and sentence levels activities rather time-consuming. Normally short sessions in class needed longer when using the site to teach them. Children often wanted to bypass the introductory statements to get directly to the practice. The quiz sections relate to terms rather than key objectives. |
| |
|
| |
Curriculum coverage: |
| |
The content of the site covered all of the objectives that I wanted to teach. Juniors.net claims to have activities to match all of the literacy objectives across KS2. The content to revise and consolidate was more useful than the material to introduce topics. The pupils especially liked the quizzes, often seeking practice there rather than the teaching units when unguided. |
| |
|
| |
Learning outcomes: |
| |
Objectives relating to word level work, in particular spelling units with year 5 and 6, led to the most successful outcomes. Sentence level work led to some good outcomes, but the text level sometimes failed to interest pupils. One pupil suggested that the activity on biography/autobiography was unhelpful. |
| |
|
| Classroom use: |
The pupils found the idea of J-World very motivating, but were very disappointed not to be able to have their own robot, only contribute to the class robot. Unfortunately pupils were unwilling to wait the length of time for the challenges to be received from another class. It was unclear whether robots could battle the same day. The quizzes provided accurate testing of explorer and guided material, focusing on whole terms rather than individual learning objectives. Pupils were happy to progress through the activities at their own pace as they sometimes wanted to pass across certain pages before they were finished. The quizzes provided 3 levels of differentiation per year group. The site encourages independence throughout. |
| |
|
| ICT: |
The site supported the ICT policy to incorporate ICT into subject teaching of the core subjects. The site does not support any of the national curriculum objectives specific to ICT. |
| |
|
| Student response: |
Pupils were mostly motivated by the site’s colourful and comfortable feel. The literacy activities were mostly engaging and rewarding however, the pupils felt the introductions in both the explorer and guided units of work unnecessarily lengthy. Pupils remained engaged while the site had novelty factor, but quickly became less interested when using J-world. On the shorter activities such as spelling and word derivations, pupils could discuss with me how they got on. They were very interested when looking through the feedback facilities at the end of units of work. The points system encouraged high attainment. |
| |
|
| Summary: |
The juniors.net website aims to facilitate the teaching of all aspects of KS2 literacy without tying the teacher to a scheme or timeframe. It offers very good facilities to plan, allocate and review pupils’ work done. Activities are closely related to the NLS and support the teacher with their depth of coverage. Children enjoyed winning certificates and time in J-world, but were frustrated that this was limited to one class user at a time. Schools without broadband may find the time taken to download relatively complicated graphics is an issue. Content has long introductions and teachers may find it faster and more effective to teach these traditionally. The teacher needs to assess carefully whether the outcomes can be achieved more quickly and easily in other ways to ensure that pupils meet the required objectives. In this evaluation pupils who used the activities for consolidation gained the most from the site. |
| |
|