I no longer plan by lesson, I plan by Learning Episode.
What is a Learning Episode?
When he appeared for the second time on my podcast, education expert Mark McCourt defined a Learning Episode as “the amount of time required to grasp a novel idea.”
A Learning Episode is a sequence of lessons. However, the key point is we have no way of knowing in advance:
- Where one lesson will end, and another will begin
- How many lessons will be required to grasp the novel idea.
Schools often interpret Learning Episodes as topic units in a scheme of work. But the danger with this approach is:
- We limit ourselves to teaching an idea in a fixed number of lessons, regardless of the rate at which students grasp the idea
- We fail to schedule the retrieval opportunities needed to ensure that idea sticks.
We can provide recommendations in our schemes of work as to how long teachers may spend on a Learning Episode, but we must be willing to flex this in either direction as we collect data about our students’ understanding.
Learning Episode 1.0
In my 2019 book, Reflect, Expect, Check, Explain, I introduced my model of a Learning Episode:
Over the last few years, based on my experiences supporting hundreds of teachers in implementing these ideas into their practice, I have made a few changes to this model’s building blocks and structure.
Learning Episode 2.0
I now consider Learning Episodes to fit one of three possible structures. The choice of structure is determined by the topic, the class, and the data collected during teaching (more on this below).
The Building Blocks of a Learning Episode
The building blocks of the Learning Episode remain the same in each structure. Each building block has its own page on this website, where I delve deep into the pedagogy. But for now, here is an overview of each building block:
Purpose
- What is the purpose? To ensure students see the point of what they are about to do
- What do the students do? Listen and contribute where appropriate
- What does the teacher do? Convery the point of what students are about to do in an engaging, concise manner.
- Read more here
Atomisation
- What is the purpose? To set students up to understand the novel idea by breaking it down into its smallest parts (atoms).
- What do the students do? Answer questions on mini-whiteboards, or by voting yes and no
- What does the teacher do? Assess students’ understanding of atoms students have met before, and teach students novel atoms
- Read more here
I Do
- What is the purpose? To give students the best chance of following a novel procedure
- What do the students do? Pay close attention
- What does the teacher do? Deliver a clear and concise explanation
- Read more here
We Do
- What is the purpose? To bridge the gap between the I Do and Consolidation practice
- What do the students do? Answer related questions on their mini-whiteboards
- What does the teacher do? Gather data from every student to see if they have followed the procedure modelled in the I Do, responding accordingly if they haven’t
- Read more here
Consolidation
- What is the purpose? To provide an opportunity to build confidence and competence with the procedure where students can work at their own pace
- What do the students do? Work hard answering questions in their books, collaborating with their partner at clearly defined moments
- What does the teacher do? Circulate and regularly check whole-class understanding
- Read more here
Purposeful practice
- What is the purpose? To provide additional consolidation with opportunities to conjecture and generalise
- What do the students do? Work hard answering questions in their books, collaborating with their partner at clearly defined moments
- What does the teacher do? Circulate and regularly check whole-class understanding
- Read more here
Problem-solving
- What is the purpose? To help students develop the resilience and the strategies to cope with non-routine applications of the procedure
- What do the students do? Work hard answering questions in their books, collaborating with their partner at clearly defined moments
- What does the teacher do? Circulate and regularly check whole-class understanding
- Read more here
Retrieval opportunities
- What is the purpose? To help students remember what they once knew
- What do the students do? To think hard and answer questions as part of the Do Now, Low-Stakes Quiz, Homework, or when concepts are interwoven
- What does the teacher do? Schedule retrieval opportunities, collect whole class data on understanding, and respond appropriately
- Read more here
Learning Episode Structure #1
This structure works best when the idea at the heart of the Learning Episode has a core procedure with little variation. Expanding single brackets is a good example.
Here, the teacher would begin by securing students’ interest in expanding single brackets, before assessing their understanding of all the atoms upon which this idea is built (setting up the grid, multiplying algebraic terms, etc). A couple of clear, concise teacher-led models, followed by several checks for understanding on mini-whiteboards, and students are ready to consolidate their understanding within their books, before moving on to more challenging applications of the procedure.
If the data gathered from students throughout each phase suggests they are following, this could be done in a single lesson, with the teacher scheduling opportunities to revisit this idea in the future.
Learning Episode Structure #2
This structure works best if there is variation in the procedure at the heart of the Learning Episode, and you feel students would benefit from an opportunity to consolidate each variation.
An example might be adding and subtracting fractions with different denominators.
Having conveyed the purpose of adding and subtracting fractions, the teacher would list the atoms relevant to the first procedure – adding proper fractions with different denominators. The teacher would assess the atoms students have met before (finding the lowest common multiple, making fractions equivalent, adding fractions with the same denominator, etc), and teach any new atoms (deciding whether fractions are in a form ready to be added).
Then the teacher delivers an I Do that brings these atoms together, showing students how to add two fractions with different denominators before checking students’ understanding in the We Do and allowing them to consolidate at their own pace with some independent practice.
The teacher then moves to the next variation: Subtracting proper fractions with different denominators.
The teacher again atomises, looking for any new atoms to teach, and any atoms from the previous procedure that need reassessing. Then follows another I Do, We Do, Consolidation.
And so it continues, with each block dealing with a different variation of the procedures:
- Adding proper fractions with different denominators
- Subtracting proper fractions with different denominators
- Adding mixed number fractions with different denominators
- Subtracting mixed number fractions with different denominators
When this is complete, the teachers introduces Purposeful Practice and Problem-Solving, incorporating all variations.
This will likely take several lessons, with each lesson picking up at the point the previous lesson finished, with a quick recap where necessary.
With some classes, we might approach adding and subtracting fractions using Structure #1. In this case, the I Do would be a carefully chosen example of adding fractions with different denominators. Then, we include the variations (subtracting fractions, mixed numbers, etc.) in the We Do or Consolidation pactice. So long as we have assessed students’ understanding of the necessary skills during Atomisation, students may be able to figure out these variations for themselves, which saves lesson time and gives them an extra sense of achievement.
Learning Episode Structure #3
This structure also works best if there is variation in the procedure at the heart of the Learning Episode. However, in this case, you may choose to do less Consolidation practice for each variation because that practice takes place during the We Do, with the teacher asking students a series of questions to answer on their mini-whiteboards instead of just one. The Consolidation phase then becomes a more extended period of independent practice where students can consolidate each variation, with the added challenge of switching between each one.
I prefer Structure #3 to Structure #2 for these reasons:
- Through a series of We Dos, I can get real-time data as to the understanding of the students, allowing me to respond accordingly.
- I can keep the pace up, using mini-whiteboards to give students more practice than they may have in transitioning from We Do to Consolidation.
- The Consolidation work that follows can be a mixture of all the ideas covered in the Atomisation-I Do-We Do blocks, thus allowing students to method-select at their own pace.
The challenge with Structure #3 is that when a class has a wide range of achievement levels, students may take a wide range of time to answer each We Do. This can result in some students becoming frustrated and wanting to move on, and other students feeling rushed and not having time to reflect on their mistakes. In this case, you might prefer Structure #2, with a shorter We Do, so students can move on to Consolidation and work at their own pace.
That is why the choice of Learning Episode structure will be based on the topic and our knowledge of our students.
Moving between structures based on data
Whilst we may plan a Learning Episode based on one of the three structures, we must also be prepared to move based on the real-time data we collect from our students in the lesson.
For example, let’s imagine we are teaching expanding single brackets. We start with Structure #1 in mind.
- Our I Do is 3(4x + 5).
- Our first We Do is 6(2x + 10). Students are okay with this.
- But when we ask a second We Do of 6x(2x + 10), we can see from our students’ mini-whiteboards that they are struggling.
So, we abandon the We Do and instead embark on some Atomisation, teaching and assessing students’ ability to multiply algebraic terms that result in squared terms in isolation. We then jump into another I Do and We Do that uses these atoms when expanding single brackets. We essentially move from Structure #1 to Structure #3.
It also works the other way around. We start with Lesson Structure #2 or #3, but in a We Do, we throw in a variation we planned to cover in a new block of I Do, We Dos. If students struggle, we stick with our original plan. However, if the data on their mini-whiteboards shows that they can cope with this variation, we can avoid having to teach it explicitly, thus saving time.
As we discussed when building our model of responsive teaching, we must ensure we gather responses from all our students where possible. Only then can we respond accordingly.
The importance of the four retrieval opportunities
Notice that each Learning Episode Structure ends the same way: a delay, followed by four retrieval opportunities: Do Now, Low-Stakes Quiz, Homework and Interweaving.
If we do not schedule opportunities to revisit the content of a Learning Episode at several points in the future, our students will forget it, no matter how expert they seem in the content during the Learning Episode itself.
You can read about the research behind these retrieval opportunities, how to get students on board, and practical tips for implementing each one here.
Students knowing the phase and purpose
When watching a lesson, I like to choose a student at random and ask them: What phase of a lesson are we in? Most students look at me like I have lost my mind.
But I think this is an important question to ask. If students don’t know what they are doing or why they are doing it, then their incentive to pay attention decreases.
So, I like to tell students about the Learning Episode model, explaining the purpose of each phase, as well as their and my role during it. Some schools make this even more explicit by including a symbol or a colour on the slides to indicate what phase we are in. Then, when I ask students: What phase of a lesson are we in?, students can say: The Atomisation phase, where we break down a new idea to give us the best chance of understanding it. Or: The We Do, so the teacher can see how much we have understood, and give us the help we need.
Maybe I am a dreamer, but it feels a worthy thing to aim for.
A note about student thinking
One of the criticisms often thrown at Direct Instruction is that students do not have an opportunity to think. Lessons are often characterised by a teacher lecturing to a roomful of passive receivers who then mimic what they have seen with no sense of why they are doing it.
Although I have seen lessons that fall into this trap, I feel this characterisation is grossly unfair. It is the same as characterising an inquiry-based approach as allowing students to struggle for hours on end, providing no help or guidance, and hoping they will discover the secrets for themselves.
Good Direct Instruction compels students to think and be active learners at all times. As you will see in the sections that follows, in each phase of my Learning Episode structures, students have to think. Where I perhaps differ from those teachers who favour a more inquiry-based approach is I control and structure the conditions more rigidly to support that thinking. I design the sequences of examples during Atomisation and the We Do, I select the example for the I Do, I provide prompts to support Turn and Talks, I select the tasks studetns will complete during Purposeful Practice and Problem-Solving. I use my experience and expertise – and the experience and expertise of others – to enable me to do this. I believe that this enables students to develop understanding more efficiently and with a greater frequency of success, than if I did not saturcutre those conditions so tightly.
However, it is more than just creating the conditions ns to enable students to think. I need evidence of their thinking. I do not rely on poor proxies for thinking, such as a roomful of silent students looking at me with concentration painted across their faces. Nor do I settle for the answer of a single student who has volunteered an answer or been chosen to respond. I want reliable evidence that all my students are thinking. Hence, in the following sections, you will notice how essential mini-whiteboards are in each phase of the Learning Episode. As I described here, I know of no better way to quickly see the responses of every student to any type of question, thus enabling me to both gain insights into all my students’ thinking, and by the very fact that they know I will be doing so regularly, compel students to keep thinking.
No student can learn by being the passive receiver of information, which is not what my Learning Episode structures promote.
FAQs
What does this look like when planning?
The unit of time for planning is the Learning Episode, not individual lessons. I use a single PowerPoint presentation as my planning tool, although some teachers prefer OneNote.
I like to use PowerPoint’s Slide Sorter view to move slides around quickly. Colour-coding slides or adding a symbol or a code can help teachers and students realise exactly where they are in the Learning Episode, hence improving buy-in.
I always advise planning follow-up questions in advance, so we will unlikely need every slide. Crucially, we must be prepared to move away from the PowerPoint if the data gathered from students suggests they need some bespoke intervention.
What does this look like in the classroom?
One lesson ends at whatever point in the Learning Episode we get to, and that is where the next lesson begins.
The Do Now remains a constant. If you have read ahead, you will know my Do Now is a spaced retrieval opportunity unrelated to the lesson’s content. Hence, it is standalone. Pitched and delivered correctly, the Do Now can help settle students down and help them feel confident so they can dive straight back into to the Learning Episode after 10 minutes.
Following the Do Now, you may choose to do a quick recap before picking up the Learning Episode where you left off.
I have no fixed end to the lesson. The purpose of Exit Tickets or formal plenaries is to get a sense of students’ understanding so we know where to pitch the next lesson. However, as we will check each student’s understanding at regular intervals in each phase of the Learning Episode, this is unnecessary. The time is better served squeezing every last minute of learning out of the lesson.
How long does a Learning Episode last?
It’s a good question, but it has a terrible answer… It depends. Specifically, it depends on the data we gather about our students’ understanding in each phase.
We may expect a Learning Episode to last four lessons, but find students are slower to grasp an idea than we imagined. So we need to take some extra time.
Likewise, the data gathered from students in the lessons shows they are getting it quicker than we thought. In this case, we can use the time saved to move on to another topic where understanding might not be as secure. Or, spend extra time in the Purposeful Practice and Problem-Solving phases to help deepen students’ understanding.
I know I sound like a broken record, but we can only make these decisions if we regularly get a snapshot of whole-class understanding. Mini-whiteboards are the key to this.
What has changed from Learning Episode 1.0 to 2.0, and why?
- I have renamed the Introduction “Purpose” as this conveys what that phase of the Learning Episode is designed to do.
- I have broken the Example-Problem Pair up into an I Do and a We Do because the pedagogy and strategies involved in each are significantly different and complex and warrant their own analysis.
- I have renamed Fluency Practice “Consolidation“, because I think it conveys its purpose more accurately.
- I typically use the principles of Intelligent Practice during the We Do phase, so that has been removed.
- I feel that Purposeful Practice is important enough to warrant its own place in the model, rather than being an option.
- I have grouped the problem-solving strategies into one block for simplicity.
