Why I Love the Buck Institute Planning Proforma!

This blog post is a quick restoration of an accidentally  deleted previous version. I hope it remains useful. I have reposted it as I think it highlights the usefulness of the BIE form and how I used it non sequentially. 

First things first, I did not start planning the headlands project using this pro forma. It was a much messier affair, starting with a practical field investigation idea. Before I began the detailed planning I  attempted to draw out themes and content to be learned from the potential  project. In a way I  was answering the question “Is this project worthwhile doing?”. This probably stems from the criticism of any inquiry approach is that its effect size is low (Hattie). Understandable if the project starts out as just a “cool” idea or something that sounds “fun” then the academic learning will demonstrably  limited. However, if the content of what you want the students to learn is at the core of the project then it may well be a different outcome. ( Learning future as is shown here 

shttp://www.innovationunit.org/sites/default/files/Learning%20_Futures_Engaging_Schools.pdf).

This project almost did not get off the ground. The problems of designing a project for every student in a year group of nearly 400 is frankly daunting. The solution was sought in the strength of the teaching team. I sent an email with suggestion of different projects to see who wanted to develop a project of their choice, meaning that each teacher would be responsible for one project. The pro forma I am about to dissect would therefore become a model for others. We hosted a twilight session to plan as a team, a savory choice.  The result and consequent pedagogical decision was that we would be able to offer students in each cohort a choice of at least three different projects.

This dilemma  also begs the question in why you would use project or inquiry based learning in the first place. Is it solely for the acquisition of someone else knowledge, or, is it to develop the motivation, skills and attributes to make effective independent learners. It should for both, as one without the other trivialises both. I would also hope it’s more than this. I may be thinking a little too subject specifically here, but the as a Science Teacher the Scientific thinking that the students would use is a key bit of “content” knowledge. It is something that the system will be able to measure and assess.

The wider implications that project based learning offers cannot be understated. I cannot and will not be able to state it as eloquently and as exemplarily as Mark Moorhouse in his wonderful Unboxed article  . 

http://www.hightechhigh.org/unboxed/issue8/want_to_get_home_on_time/I hope Mark can forgive me in the hatchet job of my summation of his article.

How we teach, the relationships we build and maintain are essential in the formation of communities which we (should- my addition) serve. We accept that academic success is vital but so are the people that schools and teachers influence.

SO why does the B.I.E pro forma help?

It  to contextualise the project and asks for its purpose.

The first three sections focuses the teacher to plan this wider context. What is the problem? Although not specifically requested, this section requires context, after all a project on the San Diego Bay ecology, would not be relevant to the students in Cramlington.  Context is both problematic and emancipating in Project Based Leaning. The engagement of external partners is essential as part of this planning, and potentially more valuable in later stages (The farm manager at Hartley Farms not only gave me permission and directed me to a site where it would be worthwhile, but, provided a lot of insight into the issues surrounding the project.)

The driving question at this stage of planning is essential for clarity. If this task was “just” a science investigation, this would be the title I would use. It helped  frame all of the planning and student tasks from this point forward. This is the question we will keep coming back to. It can be broken down into sub divisions but this is the big picture.

How do I know it’s the right question?  Firstly, I had to ensure it would allow the students to learn what I had intended, so by plotting out the outcomes and formulating what the product could be like but, , was the study authentic?

It balances skills and content, helping you decide what needs to be taught.

Project Based Learning needs to place the content and skills at the heart of it planning. To be honest, this section was tricky, I could have added many other items, and indeed not everything that could be taught within a project based module needs to appear in the final product. The process of filtering and correlating what was important FOR the project, gave the rest of planning purpose and direction , as it would any well planned “teaching”. Although no decision was made at this point, I had already began to work out what the valuable assessments would be. I also know that the student Scientific writing skills were going to be a big part of this. Subsequently , the planning of looking at real research article and how to read scientific articles was going to be important. The LSS first and second glance strategies are invaluable for this. http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/science-society/activities-infectious-diseases-now

Assessment and therefore "rigour" is at the heart of the plan.

Which brings up neatly the issue of assessment.  You may not enjoy the nomenclature of 21^st Century Skills, but this does not matter, what’s important here is that the skills that are useful FOR the project are highlighted. The added dimension of assigning whether it is a vital part of the project ie Taught and assessed or if its something that will be useful and therefore worth looking for opportunities to exploit. This is  helpful in developing the essence of the project, how would this project run for students, what would the conversations be like?  It was at  this point that I decided that the use of data and the drawing of conclusions were to be the focus, as opposed to say the designing of an experiment to produce valid data. The earlier decision to run one project not only ensured teacher sanity but that we would be gathering a lot of data, adding value and  rigour to our study. The consequences of this are two fold.

Firstly  I must design the experiment so that the data the students get is valid and valuable. Secondly how will I actually assess this and how will I then support (diferentiate) ALL my students.

The following section on Performances, was not completed sequentially, and indeed why should it be? It remained enigmatic for  a good while with the phrases “ Journal Article” and in the individual part “different sections “. Subsequent planning and writing of a write up guide, allowed this to become concrete.

It brings feedback to the surface of your thinking before the project has begun.

I'm not claiming that the BIE performa does all the planning required but it does concentrate your mind on what matters for example what will you assess and  what feedback could you provide. Why else would you  assess?  Here lies THE contradiction, Hatties research has deified “feedback”, so how does a pedagogy that is obviously built around feedback not have an “equivalent” effect size?  I suspect it's the planning, and potential task orientated approach that may have previously been the undoing of a project based approach. This article is called Why I Love the Buck Institute Project planning proforma for a reason, consider in the plan revealed so far how much has been about the product, and how much has been about the content, the assessment and the feedback." Nuff" said,.

Thh following sections does not diminish this. In fact it make it even more manifest, requiring consideration to the format of the assessments. Asking what will be summative and what will be formative entices you link the two things together. This isn’t radical stuff here, just common sense, a well founded pedagogy.

It considers engagement.

The little section which preludes this asks for consideration to be given to the selling and the WIIFM of the project. I think these particular projects benefit from the choice element, but it also serves to give the wider context of all projects. As part of this process,  a Google maps image of Cramlington was shown to the students asking them to say how important Agriculture was to this place. It obviously is.The students were then asked to say where in the country this was, the majority of responses where Yorkshire, Durham and Scotalnd, although some students speculatively ask “ is it Cramlington?” This bring the article back full circle to Mark Moorhouses unboxed article, students need at least an opportunity to connect to where they live in a wider context, appreciate some of working of where THEY live. This helped enormously, with engagement and subsequent field visits were now relevant. The trips out of school, enhanced and enabled by our block scheduling of half day sessions for science, also benefited from what learning futures would describe as “School as base camp”;a simple trip out of school gives purpose to what you do in school, this leads to engagement.

It helps you consider how students will reflect on the content and the process.

I must confess that the reflection section has remained blank, although, I know it should not. The student reflection from the Wild about Cramlington project tells me this. Its remained blank as it needs planning, I haven’t got there yet, although, it has in some of the individual sessions.

Although after the laboratory session, identifying the invertebrates captured, the students were briefly debriefed using the above questions. I am don’t think I've yet got the balance right over completing the project work and ensuring the process is open and valued. I hope to get better at this. However the student responses have been  interesting. I am not too concern that I have again neglected the process part, more frequent short evaluations will over the duration of the process do the job of providing me ways of helping student develop their skills, attributes and learner behaviours.,

Assessment is really at the heart of this document. Asking for what the formative and summative assessments should be. Planning these at the start, helps focus the planner on what is important for the student learning in the project, making the formative assessment genuinely formative having an impact on the quality of the learning and project.

It demands that content is linked to specific activities.

The final section is my favourite, a demand to plan strategies for the content and not planning the content around the tasks. Again this is simple but effective pedagogy. Here it ensures planning FOR the project, helping to keep the “teaching”  relevant and useful. This is the section where this planning tool took on a new dimension. I would do this for my “everyday” lessons, so why would I not do it within a project.

As I made these connections this section  seemed an obvious depository to compile the resources I had, or had to create or had located elsewhere. I also found it useful to phrase the outcomes as questions so that the whole project could be a problem solving activity. This does not mean it was discovery, It is entirely valid that within a project for me to teach, as I normally would. This is a year 7 project and its there first one of this magnitude. Of course I'm going to structure it and support them at every step,and I now know where this will be needed, thanks to the Buck Institute Project Planning Proforma. You gotta to love it. 

The benefits of "teacher as designer" concept mapped

The role of the reacher at High Tech High is defined by the role "teacher as designer" so they design the curriculum and the procesese and experiences the students go through. This concept map shows some of the benefits and a few of the operational conditions required for this to flourish as it does at High Tech High.t

Why do the Students at High Tech High produce such high quality work?

The student work at High Tech High is inspiring. They do not do this by accident or simply because they are talented. A belief in hard work, real outcomes with real responsibility and well designed projects allow them to succeed.

The Process of a Project at High Tech High- a display of student work.

Love the clarity.


Love the steps.


Love the how one task informs the next.


Love the role critique plays.


Love the sharing of the process.


Love to see drafted work.


Amazed by the quality of the final work.


Love how it's cross curricular.


Love the public debrief.


Love the focus on changes made.


Love the idea of identifying difficulties.

Love the the links between hard work and success.

Befuddled by my low quality photography.

Project process hth

View more presentations from DKMead.

Critiques- feedback and learning at High tech High.

Critiques an essential element to the success the students experience at High Tech High. Critiques are basically a formalised peer and teacher assessment session, but through their regularity, intensity and genuine sense of a learning community these turn into something all together more powerful. A real learning forum, as David Perkins would put it "an opportunity to learn from the team".

The foundation of these critiques are three simple norms, which are now proudly on display and referred to in my classroom.  I like the term norm as it makes it very easy for me to say that these things are normal in successful classroom). These are:

1. Hard on content, soft on people- I always exemplify for my students, for example "When Sean explained about how the light refracts in the eye he did not use any scientific words. Would become the explanation of the how the eye refracts light did not use any scientific language". So far, my students have liked this, giving them confidence to give critical advice to classmates and friends alike. Self correcting has been evident with students rephrasing sentences to give feedback. I feel it has really helped them talk about the content more rather than the presentation.

2. Step up, Step back - Focus on the age old problem that some students will not offer suggestions and others will dominate. Dylan William's advice on no hands up rule applies double here! I like the terminology here makes it a much more student friendly than a rule. This was expertly done at HTH with students being invited to give their advice ,opinions and feedback.

3. Feedback should be kind, specific and helpful- requires no further explanation, although I was amused that the first time I held a critique in this style not one bit of positive feedback was given. I let my students go and did not correct this, as they were clearly trying to be helpful and were battling well trying to be specific. I told them at the end and they thought it was hilarious, in an embarrassed sort of way. The second time around they made sure that they had a bit of praise too. I only give this anecdote as a way of emphasising the need to give feedback on the process of critiquing as well as the content on show.

At High Tech High the Projects run for a long period of time, which naturally allows for the undertaking of what can be quite lengthy feedback sessions. The expert teachers I observed doing critiques were aware that it is hard work for students and can be monotonous, so they managed this situation with aplomb with great sensitivity to how students were responding and giving appropriate breaks and if necessary rescheduling of some group presentations to enable students to get the best feedback possible. It really mattered to everyone.

The teachers also had planned for the feedback that they wanted to be discussed. This tended to be around the content of what was being learned during the project, as well as the quality of the understanding, making this a real chance to explore misconceptions. The basic format was that each group of student in turn would present where their project was at the time, and then the class would discuss the work being guided by the questions the teacher had established. These were on display and guided the conversation as opposed to directing it, so there was plenty of scope for more explorative discussion. Every group also asked for specific advice about their own project which ranged from looking for tips and tricks on how to improve the presentation, yes/ no feedback on whether something was clear and too much more complex request about the content and context. These led to sophisticated dialogue between students, but, the art of the teacher was to interject and clarify, prompt and extend at opportune moments. The teachers role in subject content ( pedagogical content knowledge mostly) was vital, so that they did not revert to the "elementisis"(elements first) approach to teaching and learning. Instead it allows teachers to teach within the context of what the students need to know within the bounds of their projects. See David Perkins wonderful book "Making Learning Whole" for more about elementisis.

The ownership of this feedback by the students, facilitated (and sometimes) given by the teacher was one of the reasons that the quality of the student projects was so high. Due to the creative nature of (all?) the projects at HTH, I am reminded of Geoff Petty's Six phase model of the creative process:-Inspiration, Clarification, Distillation, Incubation, Perspiration and Evaluation. With these it is easy to see that you could indeed have critiques around most of these as they would match the different stages of any project. The least obvious is possibly Incubation, where you are "to leave your ideas alone", but what better way to do this than spend some time reflecting on the learning of others, which could lead to a new insight for your own learning. The notion of incubation challenges the need for "pace" within a lesson, our brains need time process and organise information. Project Based Learning does this.

Back at school, without the luxury of large projects, I have taken the chance during "create a presentation" tasks to utilise Critiques. I would normally rely on my circulation to provide feedback during these sessions, thereby taking the responsibility away from my students. I have therefore built in a mini presentation into these tasks, timed just before the half way point. These are timed, short (around 2 minutes) and focused not on the content but where they are in the development of the presentations. They also allow for discussions on improvement (or learning as you will) in subsequent presentations. I have also requested that each group has questions that they would like to ask, although this is something that they have found difficult so far. 

I have supported these by ensuring I have clear learning outcomes, so that they can assess coverage, and then questions about the content so that they can begin to assess understanding. Although this lengthens these activity substantially, I have so far been impressed by the depth of the knowledge that this time(incubation?) has allowed my students to acquire.

A great thing that High Tech High did that I am yet to emulate is having students work on similar yet distinct projects ( although one is in the pipeline!) This allows them to approach the content from different perspective and contexts. So during the Critique the students will "hit" the same information four or five times in different contexts. This would be music to Graham Nuthalls ears. Then factor in again that over a prolonged period of time you would have several critiques it is no wonder that the students at HTH learn so deeply.

Undoubtedly the high stakes nature of the projects at HTH is a huge motivational factor in offering and being willing to receive critical feedback with their peers. Although I was surprised that this did not dominate these discussions, as the content and learning of the content was central to the conversations I bore witness too. This excellent article on the Unboxed journal written by staff and students at HTH explains in more detail.

The Benefits of Teachers as Designers- Thoughts on High Tech High

This is the first post attempting to summarise the observations and thoughts from my trip to High Tech High in San Diego. I must admit to retaining very clear memories of this trip, and still have some unresolved thoughts. Obviously a powerful and motivating experience! I must take this opportunity to publicly thank the staff at HTH, but in particular, Jay Vavra, Jeff Robin, Laura McBain, Rob Riordan and Larry Rosenstock whose passion and knowledge I have found inspiring.



One of the first things to be made clear was the role of the teacher at HTH, that of designer, a notion which on the surface seems fairly familiar. But consider that the management structure is fairly non hierarchical, and therefore the trust and responsibility for a high quality experience lies at the feet of the teacher. This is a positive thing, empowering them to teach to and with their passions. Passion is word used purposefully in these parts, driving the cross curricular and real world connections of the projects that the students do. Bringing a bit of yourself is actively encouraged.

The projects are genuine Project Based not Project Orientated, as the mercurial Jeff Robin points out. So the students don't learn some stuff and then make a project, they make a project and learn deeply as they go. A key feature of the projects is how connected there are to the real world either through the audience or by the recipients of the projects. For example students who designed and built toys in an engineering project had local toy manufacturers visit their exhibition and the toys were built after interviewing students in the elementary school who were also the recipients of the toys. A biotechnology project outcome was a group of students travelling to Mozambique to train game wardens how to DNA profile bush meat samples, thereby having an impact on the conservation of endangered anaimals. A cross species learning outcome- amazing!


It wasn't just the audience that made for an authentic learning experience, it was the collaboration on the project. There was lots of outside experts involved, for example the aforementioned toy manufacturers, but it was the internal collaboration between the students that gave the learning a real world feel and context. In four days I didn't meet a single student who did not know what every other student in the class was doing and how they were doing it. This level of collaboration was awe inspiring, and I believe it has come from two sources. For me this summarises what Learning Futures mean by School as Base Camp, a wonderful notion.



Firstly, through the "Critiques" that happen through each project, where the students refine their projects through feedback from the teacher and the class. I will write a separate post on these as they are a key way that I observed where learning took place, not just about the project but the "content" too. The second was the sense of community that was made manifest in quote from a teacher, "The students understand that when they exhibit their work, that one amazing project will look poorer if displayed with many mediocre ones". I think this sums up the collaborative learning experience they receive at High Tech High, that is both within the class but greatly influenced by what is beyond it.

My favourite anecdote from my trip defines this responsibility. A student on an exhibition night was there without a finished project, amongst a whole class of projects . This void, really stood out, I asked her where her project was and was confidently told that she had been let down by her partner, but that she had everything in hand to meet the deadline later in the week to hand over the project to the recipient. As we spoke a colleague came by and interjected, " I'm sorry" he said "but where's your project" , this was followed by another colleague three minutes later asking the exact same thing. So in about 10 minutes three strangers had asked this student why she had not finished her project, this is real assessment, with real feedback, leading to real responsibility. Which prompts the question why can't our exam system embrace such approaches where the examination is actually part of the learning process. Two things struck me about this student was how confident she was in failure and how much she had learned about the content and process of completing this project, in reality she had been really rather successful.


As a side note her partner was conspicuous by his absence! One of the few restraints placed on the teachers in designing the learning experience was that they do group the students by ability and insist on mixed ability groupings. We were told that ability groups in a class "would be frowned upon". It is this conviction that allows this community to flourish and that students enjoy a rich and realistic learning experience.


These Exhibitions happen regularly throughout the year, for each of the courses that the students take. This regularity and repeat immersion in this assessment is demanding and is used to assess the students learning, determining grades and whether they graduate or not.

Ultimately it is these reasons that the students at HTH demonstrated tremendous responsibility, not only for the project but for their wider education and school community. It is completely apparent that this is why they have such a high University qualification rate ( 100%) and why their students have such positive experiences when at University. For example there students are renowned for being able to communicate confidently with adults. such as college professors.


So how do the teachers go about designing this kind of learning experience. Jeff Robin makes it clear in these two videos that teachers need to do the project first. This makes the project viable as it is assessed for feasibility, whether it is a reasonable demand and identifies the pitfalls be to aid differentiation and support of the students during the project. It turns the teacher into what seems the novel role of project manager and "sets a minimum standard for the students to better, unlike a rubric which set the ceiling, a project sets the floor!"


The teachers do not plan in isolation and are in cross curricular teams, allowing them to operate outside their comfort zones, again I consider this significant in adding to the breadth of the students learning experience, they are not just taught how their teachers were taught, it allows for teachers to take risks as they have the support of a colleague. Furthermore each project goes through a Project Tuning Protocol so that many hearts and minds get to influence the project. This is very much part of the ethos of High Tech High. It is such an important one that a post will follow dedicated to this most valuable process. As a result the quality of student projects improves greatly from middle school through to high school, where it can only be described as stunning. Examples can be found here


One of the key and most consistent cross curricular approaches which is evident throughout the school is the infusion of art. The idea that "Art communicates" is every where and is used to great effect by students to show what they have learned, another factor factor in building student responsibility. I have found it difficult to reconcile the mantra of the UK education system of "pace" with this, it is almost contest between depth and breadth of knowledge. it seems much more realistic to deal with a few concepts in great depth (as preferred at HTH) than to learn lots of surface items as we must to deal with the relentless cycle of learn and regurgitate in preparation for an one hour odd exam.


So, where is the rigour? Is it in the UK exam system or is it in learning experiences designed by educators with the real world, not in mind, but in situ?