1 of 27

2 of 27

Empowering Teachers in the Implementation of the revised

Victorian Curriculum 2.0�

3 of 27

Turn and Talk

What have you been doing at your school to become familiar with 2.0?�
Have you experienced success with your approach?

4 of 27

Our problem of practice

As school leaders how do we foster meaningful engagement in the Victorian Curriculum 2.0?

How do we develop a process where teachers walk away with a better understanding of 2.0?

5 of 27

Background - Best Lesson

At Mount Waverley Primary School we have an instructional model that we refer to as the best lesson. As a school we discussed all the core components of what a really great lesson looks like and created this graphic that’s on the wall in every classroom.

We regard our model as tightly flexible in the sense that it incorporates explicit instruction but also emphasizes constructivist approaches like Visible Thinking Routines and Number Talks.

As a school we have a demographic of students who have strong background knowledge that we aim to value and give voice to in each classroom. Our view is that students aren’t passive receivers of knowledge and that they need to be active participants.

If we look at the Introduction phase of our best lesson you’ll see LISC off which all lessons start with a clear direction for learning. From there we might have a Visible Thinking Routine, a Number Talk or the Launch of a Challenging Task.

In the explore phase our students are engaging with activities that are directly connected to the LISC of the lesson. We also incorporate what we call the catch of lesson whereby a student’s work might be spotlighted or a think aloud might take place to break up the learning and re-focus attention.

In the reflection phase students reflect upon their level of success, identify a grow and glow for the lesson and an exit slip might be obtained by the teacher as formative assessment.

6 of 27

Learning Intentions and Success Criteria

“If you don't know where you're going, you'll never get there”

Dylan Wiliam

At Mount Waverley, where we place our Learning Intention within our Introduction Phase is flexible

It might be straight away at the very start (explicit instruction)
It might be launched after a VTR as to not lead students

…But where do they come from and how are we creating them?

7 of 27

Learning Intentions and Success Criteria

Turn and talk

Do you use LISC?
How are you creating LISC?
Where do they come from?
What are your current challenges in creating LISC?

8 of 27

As leaders it is vital to create structures that surround teachers that lead to impact.

- Campbell McKay

9 of 27

Knowing and Understanding Learners (KUL document)

It is used to…

Track our implementation of the Victorian Curriculum (now 2.0)
Target the point of need for our learners via the analysis of Common Learning Tasks (CLTs)
Create success criteria in common planning
Foster and value the curriculum as a landscape
Future: Foster Agentic Learning

10 of 27

Background

- At Mount Waverley our PLC Common Planning is entirely point of need.

We co-design planners together during our common planning time from scratch based off student data

Our creation of LISC is derived from our KUL document of which is a broken-down version of the Victorian Curriculum 2.0

11 of 27

Our process to foster staff engagement

Engage teachers in reading 2.0

Teaching teams create ‘I can’ statements

Update KUL document

Use KULs in CP

Simultaneously

12 of 27

Our Process

Content description

- our focus�

- makes up our Learning Intentions & SC

Elaborations

- Explore Phase

- WHAT STUDENTS ARE DOING?

- Possible ideas for mini lesson and common planning in general

13 of 27

How to Breakdown a Content Descriptor

14 of 27

Your Turn

Turn and Talk�

What are the action verbs in this content descriptor?

15 of 27

Your Turn

16 of 27

Your Turn

17 of 27

Your Turn

18 of 27

How does it look in our documentation?

Grade 3

Grade 2

Grade 4

Grade 3 KUL Snapshot

In our F-6 KUL documents we have a span of three-years that teachers can observe, one year below and one year above.

If we tune into our descriptors from level 2 we can see that our ‘I can’ statements are broken into their three actions.

The reasoning behind the separation is because one lesson might be focused on ordering and another might be focused on representing. Does this mean multiple ‘I cans’ can’t be used at once? No. Does this mean we can’t use the whole descriptor? No.

Sometimes a lesson might incorporate all three actions. The separation in our experiences makes it more palatable for teachers to comprehend.

The KUL document is used as a guide for teachers. Later on we’ll be talking about our incorporation of SOLOs taxonomy and co-created success criteria

19 of 27

Your Turn

Rewrite the content descriptor as an ‘I can’ statement

20 of 27

How does it look in our documentation?

LI: I am learning about whole numbers

SC: I am successful if…

21 of 27

Creating LISC

We use our KUL document to identify what our success criteria will look like
Through our work with CT-ed Partners we now have Learning Intentions that are broad and de-contextualized (big picture, blue sky)
Our success criteria are the specifics of what it means to be successful and the ‘look-fors’ in our lessons

22 of 27

Solo’s �Taxonomy

23 of 27

24 of 27

Benefits to Teachers

Teachers are actively engaged in looking at what actions (verbs) students need to take to be successful in a lesson

Teachers familiarize themselves with the 2.0 Curriculum as a landscape, knowing what comes before and after their year level

Promotes discussion within teaching teams about the curriculum

Promotes discussion within teaching teams about Mathematical Content Knowledge (MCK)

25 of 27

Questions?

26 of 27

Event App

27 of 27

Be in it to WIN!