Supporting students with revision

Thinking about when I have needed to revise for exams in the past, I am aware of various behaviours I exhibit that get in the way of any actual revision. I agonise over which parts I should be revising first. I take time to get everything in the right order, even if that means spending 10 minutes looking for my favourite pencil. If there are gaps I swoop off to fill them, then get distracted reading about something new and probably unconnected. I spend too long reading and not enough time testing.  I waste time deciding the best method to distill my notes: flashcards or mind maps?

In an attempt to help my students overcome these and other potential tools of procrastination, I’ve started to provide them with revision planners. Year 11 had one in September that broke their year 10 content down into weekly chunks, each with an accompanying task. We backed this up with a weekly quiz on the content students should have revised in the previous week, keeping scores and providing a leaderboard. If followed, this enabled them to revise all the content before the mocks and then a second time by February half term. I then provided a fresh planner to structure their revision of the year 11 content, which was helpful when we set a paper 2 mock the week before Easter.


In large part, the point of these planners is to help students get out of their own way, but they have the added benefit of showing that revision needs to be an ongoing process, no matter how far off the exams seem to be. With that in mind, I have now written one for year 10 to help them recap their unit 1 knowledge before the end of the school year. This is less detailed than my year 11 version, with just one task suggested for all the content, to encourage a methodical, consistent approach. I have included it for download at the end of this post.


The planners are given to students in hard copy, placed on their Google Classrooms for download and sent home to parents. They sit alongside any homework we set. We refer to them regularly in class but don’t check up: the burden of revision needs to be on the student, not the teacher. They take a little time to write but, as with so many things like this, once made, they’re reusable.

In case anybody hasn’t realised, nobody has sat the new GCSE yet so I can’t speak about impact. However, these are modelled on a planner I made for year 12 some years ago: that was the first year students performed better on my unit than they did on my HoD’s, so I am feeling quite positive about their efficacy.

Other things I am doing for year 11:

I’ve been meeting with underachieving students on a one-to-one basis in the intervention slot each week. We work through the PLCs, talk about where they’re feeling confident and where they need to do some more work, discuss how, when and where they will revise etc. I read some research about tackling the disadvantage gap that said these conversations can have an impact, so I’ve been trying to have them with all my students this year.

I’m offering a 25 minute revision slot before school, once a week. All our students, Y7-13, stay at school for an extra 30 minutes Mon-Thurs (hence our earlier finish for the summer) so they will willingly come at the end of the day but that doesn’t mean they will willingly work. Putting revision on during a time when their attendance isn’t compulsory ensures I get only those who are really motivated and want the extra help.

I’ll offer a 30 minute grade 8-9 revision slot in our assigned after-school intervention session in the coming term. We never have to barter with other subjects for these students.

We’ve created a question-a-day calendar for year 11 to cover the next 8 weeks. It covers all the question types from all three papers, multiple times. Again, these will go home and be shared online. I might assign them on the Google Classroom so they can be submitted online for easy marking and feedback.

Y10 Revision planner

Posted in History, Planning, revision | Tagged | Leave a comment

#youreallyshouldteach…Interpretations of Abolition

With the new A-level came a new coursework topic. I now offer my year 12s the option of writing their essay about the Transatlantic Slave Trade, which is particularly pertinent to the school’s context. Much reading ensued. Most of the students are writing about the reasons for abolition, so we have researched interpretations together.

I’ve been teaching a short sequence of lessons on abolition to year 8 for several years now, as part of their study of changes in Britain 1750-1900. It allows for a recap on the Transatlantic Slave Trade unit that I teach in year 7. We use my old favourite Peace and War textbook, which has an excellent four page sequence on different reasons for abolition. The extra reading for the A-level put this into context and I have now started teaching my students about the history of the history, as well as the history. I find it to be a very accessible way of introducing the idea that history changes over time.

The two historians we look at are Reginald Coupland and Eric Williams. Coupland was a professor of Empire history, born in 1884, who promoted the moral and religious motivations of the abolitionists as the main reason for the success of their movement. A biographer of William Wilberforce, Coupland held up the abolitionist movement as an example of Britain leading the world in a moral crusade. He seems to have been nostalgic for the Empire, sitting in an office funded by Cecil Rhodes’s money and buying up abolitionist literature. In my fertile imagination, he finds himself disappointed that something considered so glorious when he was a child has become so rapidly discredited and is looking for silver linings (I’m really projecting here: I haven’t done enough reading to be able to say that, really). Coupland represents the whiggish interpretation of history, that humankind is on a journey to being more civilised.

On the other side, Williams was born in Trinidad in 1911. He studied history at Oxford, where he experienced quite a lot of prejudice. He went on the become the first Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, overseeing its transition from colony to independence. In 1944, he published his work Capitalism and Slavery, in which he claimed that the moral crusade was incidental to the real reason for abolition, which was that the monopoly held by the Caribbean plantations was no longer in the best interests of the British public. Cheaper sugar was available from other (slave-worked) colonies, such as Cuba; abolishing the slave trade and, eventually, slavery was a way of breaking the monopoly held by a bunch of rich men with strong political representation. Williams doesn’t entirely discount the impact of the anti-slavery campaigns, but he places them among other factors, including slave rebellions, that are lesser to the idea that slavery was abolished because it was holding capitalism back.

There are plenty of other points of view, of course. In Hull they’ll tell you it was all down to Wilberforce. Hochschild makes a good case for the tireless campaigning by the Quakers and individuals such as Clarkson in Bury the Chains. I’ve got Fryer’s Staying Power for a Marxist take on it and Olusoga’s Black and British, but I need to wrestle those back off my year 13s before I can summarise what they think.

For year 8, however, these two provide the perfect start. Not too much and not too complicated. Once the background to each interpretation has been explained, students find it quite straightforward to match the historian to his tale. Just two pictures of the historians on the board elicited the first inference: “He’s white, so he wants his people to look good. He’s black, and he doesn’t care about making them look good.” You mean, their backgrounds have something to do with the story they’re telling? Quite. So, let’s go from there.

Some further reading:

1900-2007: The Legacies of Slavery and Anti-Slavery, Richard Huzzey

British historians and Capitalism and Slavery, O.H.Folarin – on JSTOR – you have to register but it’s free to read. It’s a 1970s review of the topic so it provides a nice interpretation in itself as well as outlining the main arguments.

Update: here’s a simple worksheet that I used to help my students select evidence to support each point of view. Students had previously completed a large information-gathering chart looking at reasons for abolition, using the Hodder Peace and War textbook.

Abolitionist historians

Posted in History, Planning | Tagged | 1 Comment

WLFS takeaways

As usual, I have spent some time today reflecting on what I can change about my practice following the WLFS conference.

I can plan some short thematics for KS3

Elizabeth Carr’s reminder of Michael Riley’s development study, Toilets through Time, had made me think about where I can put shorter development studies into my KS3 programme of study, potentially replacing some of the chunkier ones. I love development studies at KS3 (that’s my workshop for SHP this summer) but they take a long time and it is easy to lose the thread on one hour of lessons a week. A shorter, snappier version would achieve the same chronology recap and focus on change and continuity and, cleverly considered, could underpin our study of Medicine at GCSE.

I can do multiple choice quizzing to help build student confidence at A-level

Paula Lobo shared how she provides four statements analysing a source, from which the students have to pick the correct one. At the end, she works the correct statements into model answers. This modelling has helped her students to do what comes naturally to those of us who have been doing it for years. I’ve been puzzling over how to better help my students summarise the message of an interpretation for their A-level paper, and I think this will work really well.

I can pair knowledge quizzes with source analyses

Also from Paula – providing a knowledge quiz first forces students to see the link between contextual knowledge and unpicking historical sources. My colleague has been focusing on student skills in this area lately so I am going to pass this on to him to look at. What I really liked about Paula’s quizzes is that the questions were so massively long: they gave an enormous information to go along with the answer students gave. Sneaky, like extra veggies in a bolognese.

I can improve my year 12 mini-NEA project

At the start of the year I wrote that my year 12s would be writing short NEAs on each Henry this year. They have completed their Henry VII essays (more on that at a later date). I was chatting about it with Sally Wilson who said she thought she could do the same, but would ask them to also include sources, to give them even more prep for the NEA. I am going to do the same with the Henry VIII essay.

I can better prepare my students for their NEA by setting clever summer work

After Jim Carroll’s session, I decided that by setting a research task into the context of authors of some key interpretations about their NEA topic over the summer, I can clarify the process they need to go through when they are choosing their own interpretations. We offer two topics to one class at sixth form so this may take some careful planning, but I’ve got time.

I could be reading more

To be fair, this isn’t news, but still.

Christine Counsell’s consideration of our responsibility as a profession chimed true. I spend Sunday mornings reading blogs and catching up; I’m going to make sure I include more history teaching blogs in that, and at least one Teaching History article. I’m going to shame-facedly admit that my last three issues are sitting pristine next to my armchair, having only been subjected to a cursory flick, scan of the Cunning Plans and read of Mummy Mummy. I can do better than this.

Posted in Reflections, wlfs | 1 Comment

WLFS History conference: workshop 3

Jim Carroll on interpretations at y13. His work is based on the NEA, which requires students to do independent research of at least 5 academic historians’ arguments, explaining why they reached different interps and their relative persuasiveness. Jim’s questions focus on Nazi popularity and Oliver Cromwell; students will choose one, depending on the rest of their A-level.

Guidance from the exam board recommended a 6 hour short course to teach the content required for context (optional). There wasn’t a recommendation to teach the contextual background of the interpretations at this point. There was then a recommendation to follow a skills-based course to support students in their historical research and writing.

Jim doesn’t agree that disciplinary knowledge and skills are the same thing, and language matters here because it shapes how we view certain concepts.

Substantive knowledge covers knowledge of the sub-domain, eg specific dates, along with substantive concepts like state and empire. Meanwhile, disciplinary knowledge includes how info is structured into historical knowledge, along with the method of historical enquiry.

Reducing history to content Vs skills might lead to:

  • A lack of emphasis of the importance of substantive content.
  • Idea that substantive knowledge is free floating, disconnected.
  • Failure to appreciate that substantive knowledge is important for further study.

To exemplify this, we look at a reading from Kershaw. We discuss what knowledge he has drawn on to be able to explain why historians have interpreted the Nazi regime as they have: political context of the post-war era; the process of writing history, eg the opening up of archives/availability of new evidence; the effect of collective memory, which is uniquely pronounced in the study of the Nazis, where there was a kind of collective amnesia. Then what makes the Nazis unique: it is politically charged – there’s intrinsic moral outrage and a tacit idea that writing this history should be part of the way we seek to prevent it from repeating.

Other problems:

  • Historical and generic might become conflated
  • It might help SLT to jettison history, eg “Other subjects do note taking and essay writing so why should we keep History?”

(Reminds me of a sixth former who wanted to start A-level history in February of y12 because he studied other essay based subjects and would therefore not be disadvantaged by missing the first six months of the course. Imagine my face.)

  • Students might think that practising skills will lead to improvement.
  • Students think they can rely on trotting out trite pre-prepared phrases, eg “He is biased”

Two more that I missed.

Rather than stick with the exam board guidance, Jim decided instead to engage with previous history teacher curriculum theorisation, history education researchers and academic scholarship, especially overviews of Nazi historiography.

Once students have spent some time looking at some scholarship on the Nazis,

Interesting point that students struggle to understand the idea that historians set their own questions, which will inevitably shape the direction of their research.

Historians make choices that go on to affect how they interpret a point of history. Once they returned from the summer holidays, they had a good idea of 3 historians to focus on, which was followed up by a series of lessons on the time period in which the interpretations were written.

Students are given some background into the events of 1945-now that provides background to their interpretations, in the form of 5 chunks, and complete a diagram to show how interpretations of the topic might have changed over time.

We look at some examples from prior students, considering how they have looked at both the context of the historian and the methodological choices the historian has made.

Don’t feel like I have blogged this session satisfactorily…too busy thinking about it! Thanks Jim.

Posted in wlfs | Leave a comment

WLFS History conference: workshop 2

Paula Lobo speaking about sources, who have been thinking about the challenge that we have to bring people to life in words. We discuss this briefly.

When students are making inferences from sources, it is really tricky to judge what is a valid inference. We read the literature review of this topic and discuss the problem of language in written sources – does it reflect reality? – and can comprehension and evaluation be divorced?

We look at a range of sources on Churchill, that Paula used with y9 and now at A-level. Students pull out some of the words and discuss whether they are positive or negative, by placing it on a continuum and discussing whether the meaning of the word might have changed over time (eg the word dictator might not have been such a negative one at the start of the 20th century).

Once students have played around with the words on a continuum, they can start thinking about who might use those words to describe Churchill and why. Using Wiltshire’s language of uncertainty, students can use the sources to write about what people thought of Churchill at the time.

Tudors. We look at Paula’s inspiring work on using multiple choice questions to help students assess sources which you can read here: – this would be an excellent way of helping students to summarise the message of an interpretation, I think, which my lost struggle with for far longer than they should.

Paula has applied this to visual sources in year 9. She gives students statements that forces them to look back at the caption, consider the purpose etc – things they will need to do automatically as they move through their history education.

She also uses knowledge testing alongside source evaluation: in this test demo, the knowledge they need to answer the questions on the first page is required to help them analyse the source on the second page.

This very clearly spells out the importance of contextual knowledge when analysing historical sources.

Lots of really helpful things to think about here!

Posted in wlfs | Leave a comment

WLFS History conference: workshop 1

Elizabeth Carr talking on planting perennials in the history garden: extending KS3 into GCSE.

A year 7 starter activity to start! And one on toilets…

Concerns about the new GCSE have encouraged Presdales history department to think about their KS3 and rethink what their students needed to know to provide the context for GCSE. Should they start teaching GCSE question types? Should they move to a three year KS4? Will students retain it? Will there be transferability in terms of ‘question skills’?

Firstly, they made careful choices about what content to include: putting it all into GCSE would lead to repetition and potential boredom. Better to plant ideas at KS3 that are revisited across the three years to interleave topics and reinforce memory and understanding of them.

The department decided on these for their focus:
Sense of time, place and period.
Big ideas – substantive concepts. Disciplinary knowledge.

A sense of time

Timeline tests, especially at enquiry transitions. Helps students to recall relevant key features for context. Timeline test at start of post is intended as a diagnostic to work out what students know when they arrive in year 7: students match the pictures to a list of time periods on the board and then organise chronologically. This comes up as a starter activity for recap, regularly.

Development study: when did toilets really change? This adds another layer to their understanding of sense of time. Elizabeth also talks about protest/rebellion over time.

Overviews. Offered at key transition points to help students.

Comparative timelines. Spain as compared to Britain: gives students the opportunity to highlight similarity/difference, eg did England have a dark age while Spain had a golden age?

Zoom out and see the bigger picture: compare knowledge of British Empire to knowledge of Britain. We have a go at this and discuss the idea of asking students to predict. Obviously this can go really badly, but seems to be a good diagnostic tool to be able to see what background knowledge students have retained.

A sense of place

I strongly agree with Elizabeth when she says that it is much easier to teach students when they know where places are. The location of Britain in relation to the rest of Europe is useful for the Norman conquest, but also for many other topics. Elizabeth shows a core knowledge sheet for her Cordoba unit that includes a small map to indicate Byzantium in relation to the rest of Europe.

Another example: the geography of the Reformation.

Nice bit of geography here: colouring the map to show points of conflict (wouldn’t this count as 50% of a geography GCSE?)

Similarly: mapping the locations of the major battles of the First World War.

Sense of period

Dual coding: using images that resonate is important because students need to remember the image in order to be prompted by it. Build knowledge at KS3 that will resonate visually at KS4: what a monastery looks like, Henry VIII’s face etc. If they see the same image that they have looked at lower down the school, perhaps they will remember more at GCSE.

Big ideas – substantive concepts

Mapping KS3 concepts that will be needed at KS4 prepares students better for their GCSE studies. This is a bit more than straightforward knowledge.

This helps with that perennial history teacher whinge: ‘I love teaching this but the kids find it really difficult’ – eg Cold War. Laying the foundation concepts in year 9 has helped students to grasp the GCSE content more quickly.

Disciplinary knowledge

Elizabeth talks through some ways that students ‘bump into’ some of the things they will be expected to do at GCSE throughout KS3, eg summarising interpretations and using knowledge to contextualise and critique, working with source material – ‘sources sitting inside their context’ (what a lovely turn of phrase). Elizabeth references her Cunning Plan, recently published in Teaching History, about teaching the Industrial Revolution.

Sorry this last picture is not the right way up!

Posted in wlfs | Leave a comment

GCSE reading

If I ever thought that history teacher Twitter was a bubble, history teacher Facebook reconfirms it every day. These groups are exceptionally helpful for sharing ideas, tips, resources and advice given by exam boards, but I must admit that I find them quite draining at times. People complain a lot (I get it: people are worried) and unlike Twitter, I can’t just unfollow people. I don’t go on social media to be angry and depressed (though I fully support anybody else’s desire to). I have a strict rule instead, that I don’t engage apart from to add positively, with a resource or a question for discussion.

After reading a couple of comments about the content of the new GCSE, I hopped onto Twitter to find out what people were reading to prep for it. With A-level, I’ve found that the more I read, the quicker and more efficiently I can get through the topics, but traditionally I’ve found that teachers don’t do a great deal of reading around the GCSE.

Although this was reflected in a couple of replies, I was surprised by how many people got back to me to share what they’d been reading. Here is almost everything that almost everyone recommended to me. It has been quite difficult to put all these into one post, so I have attempted to categorise. I haven’t read a fraction of them, so can’t vouch personally – do leave a comment if you can, or if I’ve missed something you love.

Thematic studies

Ian Mortimer’s Time Travellers series and Ten Centuries of Change both got a lot of praise. The former covers Medicine and Crime in varying levels of depth and are accessible enough to use with students as well. I heard Ian Mortimer speak at the BBC History festival in October and he was superb – he did an A-Z of Restoration England and he had exceptionally detailed subject knowledge for someone speaking with what seemed to be no notes.

Roy Porter also got a lot of love for Medicine reading.


Derek Reynolds’s Limits of Liberty and Hugh Brogan’s Penguin History of the USA were both mentioned a few times. I used these extensively for A-level and Brogan was good for the early stuff as well as the 20th century. Dee Reynolds’ American West and Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee were also popular for American West. Leuchtenburg got a mention: I really liked his Perils of Prosperity when I was teaching A-level Boom and Bust. The Story of Us was also recommended as a documentary series.


Deep breath for this one – Richard Kerridge recommended, “Marc Morris and David Bates for basic Normans. Lanfranc by McDonald. Leach’s the Schools of Medieval England. Morillo ‘Battle of Hastings’, Gillingham’s William ii. William the Conqueror by Maurice Ashley.” These are all completely unknown to me, although Marc Morris got a few mentions from other people. Kerridge must never sleep!


I’d never thought of looking up podcasts to brush up my subject knowledge but these are also very popular. The BBC’s In Our Time series was recommended by a couple of people.

People shared some book pictures with me, too. My favourite kind of picture.

wider reading tweet 2wider reading tweet 3wider reading tweet

I came away from this discussion much buoyed and reminded that, for the most part, history teachers love history. Many thanks to the following for engaging with my question:


Posted in History, Reading | Leave a comment

#youreallyshouldteach…Emma of Normandy

Last year, one of my favourite year 11s approached me at the end of the lesson and asked me if I’d ever heard of Emma of Normandy. Her gran has asked for a reading recommendation, she explained. I had not, but set about doing a bit of research and was aided by the helpful and knowledgeable Helen Snelson, who sent me a few links. Now that we are in the midst of an Anglo-Saxons and Normans revival, Emma is somebody worth getting to know, if only because she provides the blood link between Edward the Confessor and William the Conqueror.

Emma was an 11th century noblewoman, the sister of Richard II of Normandy, and she ended up marrying two kings of England and giving birth to two more. She became the second wife of Aethelred in 1002, adopting the name Aelfgifu upon her arrival in England, and had two sons, Edward (ie, the Confessor) and Alfred. After he died, she took her sons to Normandy, but was soon back as the second wife of Cnut. Whether she consented to this or not is a bit obscure, but certainly she seems to have been held in much higher esteem by Cnut than by Aethelred. Apparently lots of the records of the time mention them together. Aww.

Unfortunately, after Cnut’s death, things got quite messy. Emma supported the claim of her son, Harthacnut, over the claim of Cnut’s son by his first marriage, Harold Harefoot. Although she was initially supported by the powerful Earl Godwine, after he defected she was forced to ask for help from her older sons, Alfred and Edward. Things went badly for both of them, though considerably worse for Alfred.

She eventually returned to England with Harthacnut when Harold died, at that point commissioning a lavish biography of herself, the Encomium Emmae Reginae, from a Flanders monk to try to raise her profile and win favour for the Harthacnut regime. This possibly was not very successful, though, because when Harthacnut died in 1042 and Edward the Confessor ascended the throne, Emma was deftly chastised for perceived poor behaviour towards Edward in the past and was never as powerful again. I suppose this could have been Edward separating himself from an unpopular noblewoman, but apparently she might also have been overly close to the Bishop of Winchester around this time, so perhaps this was the problem. She did deny the latter, and successfully undertook the ordeal of the ploughshare to prove the rumour false. I had to look up ordeal by ploughshare. It’s akin to walking over red hot coals.

So, you really should teach about Emma of Normandy. She was politically important for around 50 years, at a time when women don’t seem to have been, and as well as having two kings as husbands (and a priest as a lover, allegedly) she was the mother of two more and the great auntie of William the Conqueror. I like to think Eleanor of Aquitaine read about her and drew some inspiration.

This blog is brought to you, with some discomfort on my part, using only one source, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. I’m not a medievalist. But I think she’s a great character.


Posted in History, Planning | Leave a comment

TLT17: Plenary

Lisa Jane Ashes asks, why are we still here? She is a self-confessed geek, but spent a year away from school as a child because nobody could tell her the point of going. After spending her first year as an adult in school sitting in a cupboard and observing the same mistakes being made with children like her, she was inspired to try to solve them. 

Lisa encourages newbies to come to the front for an activity. They have to make a paper aeroplane and get it as far as possible up the hall. Thirty seconds of strategizing followed by 30 seconds of making and throwing. 

To these, Lisa would add comparison, which can stop you in your tracks and create fear. Haters do too. They stop us from putting stuff out that we want to put out, but the only way to avoid crticisim is to do nothing at all.

Your ideas don’t have to be massive, world-changing ideas. They can be little. But, take them forward and share them with others. Look at what’s going right and what’s going wrong, and do something about it. 

Posted in TLT17 | Leave a comment

TLT17: Session 4

Owen Carter and Mike Slavinsky on knowing your impact. Some context: The Brilliant Club. PhD researchers are recruited to go to work with small groups of high potential students through the Scholars Programme; its twin, Researchers in Schools, places PhD grads as trainee teachers in schools. 

This session outlines ways to reliably and realistically evaluate interventions, intervention being anything that happens in addition to classroom teaching: mentoring, external provision etc. 

When you’re looking at effect sizes, it’s important to look beyond the average. Feedback surveys, for example, show that 38% of studies showed a negative impact – so you have a 1 in 3 chance of doing more harm than good. (“Mark less!” I can hear Matt Pinkett instructing). 

As well as looking at long term outcomes, it’s also important to consider intermediate outcomes, so it can be measured part way through, as opposed to waiting until the intervention is over to find out that it has failed. The Brilliant Club starts working with pupils in year 5, with a long term goal of entry into a highly selective university – so the intermediate outcome is really important. 

(So, if my long term goal is to have more A-level students studying history at university, my intermediate goal is…)

Confidence, test scores, use of meta-cognition strategies might all be good intermediate outcomes. We discuss what we are using as intermediate outcomes, but we all seem a bit stumped tbh. Luckily, we move on to discuss valid and reliable tools to help with this.

We do a short questionnaire to show us how to measure confidence. We look at the Marvel app, which helps with the building of these questionnaires and analyse the results, and discuss how this might be used. We then discuss what sort of intervention we do and how we assess its impact. 

Historical control groups can counter the ethical issue of not intervening with a group to give you a control group. Using outcomes of similar groups of pupils at similar schools can give you a good idea of what happens without the intervention you’re planning. 

Case study. In an intervention – low stakes quizzing – aimed at improved GCSE performance, the intermediate outcomes identified were better achievement at exam questions and better meta-cognition, motivation and extraversion. In these, students did increase their ability to deploy cognitive strategies; lower attaining students became better at judging their own progress. Look out for this in Teaching History in the future. 

Good point: if an intervention doesn’t work, it could potentially save the school a lot of money, so negative outcomes are not to be ashamed of. They’re also useful for refining approaches. 

Posted in TLT17 | Leave a comment