APPENDIX GA36c

LEVEL 6 ASSESSMENT SPECIFICATION

Student name:	Liam Popham	Student ID number:	P142607
Programme:	Primary
Module:	Principles of Pedagogy
Module code:	M6X01438/C	Contribution to Overall Module Assessment (%):	100%
Lecturer:	Siân Brooks	Internal Verifier:	Siân Brooks
Assignment Title:	‘Describe a learning event which has happened during your recent school experience. Reflect upon what took place, connecting events to theories of learning and teaching. Make recommendations about how you could improve your own practice in the light of this. Produce a poster to illustrate how you would develop the elements of an effective learning environment.’	Word count (or equivalent):	5,000 or equivalent.
Submission deadline:	17/10/18 (23.59)	Return date of provisional marks & written feedback:	14/11/18
Submission method:	All written assessments, where practical and possible, must be submitted via Turnitin unless otherwise instructed by the Lecturer. (Please DO NOT put this assessment specification into Turnitin or it will match many similarities with other students’ submissions.) Alternative submission method (if applicable): Late submission of the assessment will result in a late penalty mark.  Penalties for late submission: Up to one week late, maximum mark of 40%.  Over one week late, 0%.  Only the Extenuating Circumstances Panel may approve a change to submission dates.
Academic honesty / referencing:	Academic honesty is required. In the main body of your submission you must give credit to authors on whose research and ideas your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have used, cited or quoted in order to complete this assessment.

Module Learning Outcomes

(from module syllabus)

1.   understand, synthesise and evaluate the main theories that underpinning learning, behaviour and assessment in the primary school

2.   reflect critically on how learning theories inform the planning and provision of high quality learning environments, demonstrating a clear understanding of how theory and practice are interrelated

3.   organise knowledge and learning through the use of a range of information sources, and present work appropriately.

Introduction

The purpose of this text is to recall an observation which I discovered whilst gathering classroom experience. I will be identifying what happened when I was observing, how I observed it and what I have learnt from this experience. I will be discussing what educational theory underpins what I observed and how this will influence my ideal learning environment that I will be creating prior to what I discuss in my observation. I will also compare what I have observed with a pioneering school to see how this would influence my practice moving forward. While gathering all the research for this document, I ensured I followed the BERA (2018) guidelines, and complied with the spirit and principles when it came to conducting my research. I also ensured that everyone was treated with ethical respect. The school and teacher where I gained the learning experience I have discussed, have been informed of my wish to deliberate on the matter. It has been made aware that throughout all the data collected, the school, class, teacher, teaching assistants and pupils will always be anonymous and will continually be anonymous. 

Observation

Through the course of this text, I will be retelling and evaluating an experience, which I believe will put me in good stead for the future. From this experience and through further research I am now able to see, what would have caused this incident to occur, and how it can or could have been potentially avoided in the first place. I previously worked in an Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Centre. The National Autistic Society (2018) indicate that Autism is an additional learning need that around 700,000 people in the United Kingdom live with and that Autism affects the way in which individuals perceive the world and their surroundings, also affecting how individuals communicate. I worked in this learning environment for a whole academic year, however, the experience I will be discussing was something that happened one afternoon. In the ASD Centre, there were eight students in the classroom, on occasions nine, with one teacher and three Learning Support Assistants with vast amounts of experience. Garner (2009) indicates the staffing of these educational settings depends on the needs of the children. This was my first official job within the education system and within a primary school setting. A very educational, rewarding and joyful role within a school, in my personal opinion.

The learning experience I would like to share was with a pupil in the ASD Centre. However, the child I will be discussing did not have a recognised diagnosis of Autism at the time. The child successfully gained a place in the ASD Centre as they met some of the social, emotional and behavioural criteria of the Centre. Koegel et al (1982) and Meggit (2007) comment that children with additional learning needs (ALN) are often not easily defined. The ASD centre was in a mainstream school could be seen as the best way of progress and inclusivity for the children in the centre (Roaf and Bines, 1989; Hayward, 2006).

The issue I will be discussing, can be identified as a behavioural incident or challenging behaviour from a child in the class. According to Imray (2008), challenging behaviour can be portrayed in several ways including: physical attacks, swearing, shouting and non-compliance. Briefly outlined, the child refused or showed non-compliance to do a mathematics sheet which was a job that was placed in their visual timetable. The child eventually, aggressively ripping up the worksheet, while shouting: “This is pointless. I don’t need to do it. School is a waste of time. I hate being here.” Following this, the child was then told he was unable to go on the computer. The computer was put on the child’s visual timetable as something to work for. The manner in which the child acted, seemingly fits into Imray (2008) discussion of challenging behaviour. Garner (2009) noticeably highlights the view that children with learning difficulties can be challenging for teachers and students alike. Coinciding this, OFSTED (1993) express the view that good behaviour is essential for both effective learning and teaching and HMSO (1987) indicate that there is a positive relationship between sensible behaviour of children and quality of their work. Thus suggesting that challenging behaviour, as previously mentioned, has a detrimental effect on the educational development of the leaner. However, the United Nations (1989) share a conflicting view. They suggest children have the right to express opinion and the be valued. Alongside this, Donaldson (2015) believes that educators should give children the opportunity of choice and a voice to be heard. Donaldson also is an advocator for child led learning and the holistic development of the independent and whole child. Therefore, the counter argument could be that if the child’s opinion was heard, and there was more choice for the child, in terms of what mathematic relevant question or game they would like to play or do. Then perhaps this incident could potentially have been prevented. Moving forward, the view of giving the child more freedom and choice is something I believe I could adapt for my future practice, especially with a challenging child.

To put the ASD centre into some context, the way it worked was that each child always worked towards a specific outcome. The children all had visual timetables with either three or four jobs on, depending on age and capabilities. Gray and MacBlain (2015) explain visual time tables as common practice within the classroom as a strategy, amongst many to aid behaviour. Once each job is completed, the children then place the picture or visual representation of the job on the finished part of their visual timetable. Once all three or four jobs have been finished, they are free to do what they have worked towards. An example of a visual time that was used in the ASD centre is shown below in appendix 1. The computer was put on the child’s ‘I am working for’ part of the visual timetable by the teacher.

Grigg (2015), Cohen et al (2011) and Mukherji and Albon (2015) are all in agreement that observation can be a powerful educational tool when performed effectively. They all indicate that observations are more than just looking. They believe that the purpose of observation should be to gather information and evidence for the observer. As a result of observation, the educationalists previously referenced, believe that it should improve the practitioner’s knowledge and understanding of the children in their care. In turn, inform the observers future steps to developing the child academically and holistically. My method of observation could be argued to be both an informal and narrative observation. Grigg (2015) indicates that informal observation is an astute methods of observation as it identifies a truer response in the child’s behaviours or ability. Contrary to this, Devereux and Miller (2003) argue that this method can be difficult to manage. Grigg (2015) further extends his point, suggesting that formal methods of observation can portray an unrealistic behaviour or interaction as the child is aware they are being observed. This view is also supported by Cohen et al (2011). Grigg (2015) furthermore indicates that the best observers are always making mental notes in an array of situations.

As I was working full time as an LSA in this environment, I had no intentions of making formal observations of the children without the say so from the teacher in charge. However, the situation happened to unfold when I was there and this left a memorable impression and impact on myself. Mukherji and Albon (2015) suggest this form of observation is known as a narrative observation as the child’s behaviour was observed with no prior knowledge of what to look for. After the incident occurred, I was unable to document what I had seen as I had tasks with other children to carry out. This can be viewed as a negative aspect or a limitation to my observation. OFSTED (2006) highlight the importance of keeping accurate records and Cohen et al (2011) indicate that carefully prepared recordings are more advantageous to both the observer and observed than relying on information via memory. DCELLS (2008) propose the argument that it is not necessary to record all data, however, important to make judgement on observations that have been made. Through reflection, something Hansen (2012), Reed and Canning (2010) value as a key concept for both student and teacher. I feel that I can vastly improve on this aspect of my observational technique. Furthermore, I know now that this will allow me to improve my practise in the future in light of these points.

I decided to choose this incident to discuss as it left a very memorable effect on me. Alongside this, I believe it links to an array of different literature on learning theories, especially the work of particular behaviour theorists. Predominantly when discussing behaviour theories, the two that come up are classical conditioning and operant conditioning. The following text will highlight what these theories are and identify how they have helped me to understand what when on during my observation. It could be argued my observation relates to both classical and operant conditioning. However, I believe what occurred during the observation, sways predominately to the behaviour theory known as operant conditioning.

Connect

Behaviourist learning theories indicate that learning has occurred when there has been a change in an individual’s behaviour. Woollard (2010) and Pritchard (2014) research runs linear to each other as they both agree that behaviourists are of the ideology that learning has happened when a new behaviour has been acquihired. Gray and MacBlain (2015) however, suggest that behaviour is shaped and influenced through environmental cues. There are two forerunners in regards to behaviourist theories, these are: classical and operant conditioning. Classical conditioning is a behaviour theory by Ivan Pavlov. Pavlov’s research found that, dogs would pair an unconditioned stimuli (food) with a conditioned stimuli (bell). Pavlov discovered that over time dogs would react to a conditioned stimulus the same way in which they would act with an unconditioned stimulus (Gray and McBlain, 2015). There are however criticisms with Pavlov’s work. Sparrow and Ferndale (1999) and Pitts (1971) suggest Pavlov’s classical conditioning can be interpreted incorrectly and can often be confused with the opposing behaviour theory, operant condition, thus, leading to students being confused and or mislead. Pavlov’s theory of classical conditioning was adapted by John B. Watson, who agreed with principles of Pavlov’s work and introduced them into the classroom environment. Thorndike (1913) backs up many aspect of Pavlov’s theory, however developed a contrasting opinion, suggesting that behaviour is acquihired through a trial and error process. Once the trial has reached a positive outcome, the process was repeated and a behaviour was formed.  A psychologist named B.F Skinner agreed with aspects of Thorndike’s argument. Thorndike’s work heavily influenced Skinner (Pritchard, 2014). From this, Skinner became one of the most influential men in the field of operant conditioning. I believe that the term operant conditioning, is the behaviour theory which is underpinning the behavioural incident that I observed whilst in the classroom.

B.F Skinner built on the theory of Edward Thorndike and as a result came up the what is known as operant conditioning. Operant conditioning is a behaviourist theory which is used to encourage a specific type of behaviour. Operant conditioning in brief, is a response to behaviour after an action or incident has occurred. The reason for I chose operant conditioning is because in the case I observed, the computer acted as a positive stimulus to reward positive behaviour. In theory, relating the incident I observed back to operant conditioning, the reinforcement of the computer would have meant that the child completed his work in order to gain the reward. Having the reward would furthermore positively reinforce this behaviour and theoretically increase the chance of this behaviour reoccurring. In theory. This was however not the case as the child refused to do the task and eventually ripped the work up. As a result, the reward for positive behaviour (the computer) was removed. Not being able to access the computer was to negatively reinforce or negatively punish the behaviour. Again, theoretically, according to Pritchard (2014) this negative reinforcement or punishment is used to decrease the opportunity of this behaviour reoccurring. Critically here, it is clear to see that the use of operant conditioning was underpinning the behaviour management of the child in a classroom environment. During my time at the school and not just during, my observation, the computer was a reward that the child felt extremely positive about, and if given the chance would always choose to access the computer. Arguably, giving the child free time on the computer is a positive as Potter and Darbyyshire (2005), Elston (2007) and Hayes (2008) are in agreement that computers are a valuable part of the national curriculum, and can be a valued learning experience for both the child and teacher. Donaldson (2015) also places emphasis on the role of autonomous learners. In the situation I observed, it could be suggested that the child was or was not given autonomy in regards to what they worked for.

Even though Sparrow and Ferndale (1999) and Pitts (1971) suggest classical and operant conditioning can be muddled with one another, operant conditioning does differ slightly to classical conditioning. To highlight the key concept that separates classical conditioning from operant conditioning, operant conditioning allows for positive or negative reinforcement or punishment to occur straight after the behaviour has happened. For example, if a child answers a question correctly, straight away the behaviour could be positively reinforced through praise. Contrary, if a behaviour is negative, it could be negatively reinforced or punished straight away. If a child swore at another child during playtime, as an example, their behaviour would be punished directly after the incident. These types of reinforcement are there to either strengthen or weaken the chances of the behaviour reoccurring (Pritchard, 2014). Evidently, in my observation the computer was removed from the child to negatively punish or reinforce this behaviour. Croll and Hastings (1997) also recognise the significance that praise can have on reinforcing a particular behaviour. Dweck (2010) indicates that praise has a role in effecting the mindset of a person. Croll and Hastings (1997) express that an over reliance on praise form the teacher can also have an adverse effect. Suggesting that praise in the right dosage, is a valuable tool for the teacher when used correctly.

Critically, Bouhgton (2007) suggests that operant condition can also be linked with motivation. Feather (1982) cited in Hansen (2012) argues the learner need to harbour motivation and use it as to tool to achieve success. However, it is important to note that Hayes (2008) indicates motivation of the child rarely increases through threats. In the case that I observed, the teacher had set the child a task to complete, and used the computer as a tool to motivate the child to complete the work, and to positively reinforce the behaviour when the work was completed. From the perspective of the teacher, the computer should have provided the child with enough endeavour and motivation to complete the task in hand. However, in this case, the motivation to not do the mathematics work evidently outweighed the motivation of the computer. Resulting in this outburst. In this case, the computer could be valued as an extrinsic reward or extrinsic motivator. Gary and MacBlain (2015) Pritchard (2014) and Pink (2009,2011) criticise the overuse of extrinsic motivation. They suggest that it can have a detrimental effect on intrinsic motivation alongside undermining a learning experience and furthermore teachers can become over reliant on extrinsic motivation which depreciates its value to the recipient. Something which is evident to see within my observation. They also believe that, extrinsic motivation is a good tool to use to establish a good trait in behaviour, however, the extrinsic motivation then needs to be removed in order for the child’s behaviour to come from an intrinsic motivational factor. Similar to this, Clarke (2001) suggests that often external rewards are not sustained in regards to managing behaviour. Pink (2009) echo’s this, suggesting that higher incentives lead to a deficit in performance. Pink (2009, 2011) also suggests extrinsic motivation or extrinsic motivators do not always correlate with performance. He further indicates this type of motivation, importantly, often fails to succeed and does more harm than good. Critically, rewards, or extrinsic motivation can narrow individuals thinking process thus, decreasing the opportunity to think creatively. The ability to think creatively is something Donaldson (2015) holds in high regards with creative and enterprising contributors being one of the four core purposes of the curriculum. I believe it is evident to see how the overuse of extrinsic motivation has occurred within my observation. As a result, has caused the child to act in the manner they have.

Kyriacou (1998) importantly recognises a relationship between intrinsic motivation, drive and curiosity. Kyriacou (1998) indicates that magnifying that link between intrinsic motivation, drive and curiosity will result in an increase of competence and ability. He also suggests that if, as a teacher, you use work which is of interest to the children, they will intrinsically want to do it. Pink (2009) discusses three key principles to intrinsic motivation: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Pink indicated that self-direction and autonomy are beneficial towards engagement. Autonomy over tasks people have, time it takes to do, team individuals do the task with and techniques used to do it. These all increases the likelihood of positive work. Autonomy is seen to influence performance in a positive manner. Pink (2011, 2009) and Berger (1974) suggest that intrinsic drive is more valuable to performance than extrinsic motivation, suggesting that intrinsic motivation works better as individuals want to do it, it matters to them and is important. Dearden et al (2017) expands on Pink (2009) view of engagement suggesting that engagement from children is paramount to their cognitive and holistic educational development. Children who are positively engaged are both appreciative and understanding of the power of learning. They suggest teachers can influence engagement and need to promote that effort from the learner. Also indicate teachers can improve the intrinsic motivation of pupils through a low stress high reward activities which is important as Beilock (2018), Holt (1982), (1983) and Rawson and Rose (2006) all argue that under stress children will not perform indicating that it is detrimental to their cognitive ability and development. All this suggests that there is a link between intrinsic motivation and the engagement of the child. Something I will focus my attention on during future practice.

I believe this experience will have positive implications on my future practice as a trainee teacher. Biggle (1982) suggests we are able to anticipate behaviour therefore we are able to manipulate the behaviour to what we desire. He also indicates that behaviour is influenced by the environment. Therefore, going forward, both learning from this experience, and looking at the work of Pink (2011, 2009). I would look to provide the student with more autonomy over their learning. Something Donaldson (2015) advocates. And as previously suggested, would look to improve the child’s engagement with the subject through giving tasks which were low stress high reward activities and build on their knowledge and understanding through that manner. Furthermore, these activities could be seen to build on the levels of intrinsic motivation. I would look to use this intrinsic motivation as a driver for good behaviour as it is seemingly a more sustainable manner to do so than extrinsic motivation. Learning from the experience in my observation, it looks clear that a child, especially a challenging child and one with ALN needs to feel confident I what they do. The reason for the challenging behaviour can suggestively come from the source that the child’s work was too hard for them. Recently I went into a pioneering school in Wales. Appendix 2 shows how they have implemented autonomy into the learning environment. The school has taken the six areas of learning from Donaldson (2015) and allows the children time to independently choose and complete something from the board. Not only this, they gave children the autonomy to go to a room in the school called a ‘didgy den’ and pick a mathematic game to play on the laptop. This is something I believe would have changed the outcome the day of my observation. I the child was give the autonomy over their learning, it could be argued that the incident would have been prevented. Stolk (2015) discusses that within autonomous learning you need to have choice, tools and trust. Clearly, the children in the pioneering school were given the choice in regards to what they wanted to do. They had all the tools they required to complete the task and they were given the trust to do so from the teacher. Stolk (2015) furthermore states that when children are autonomous there are extremely strong correlations between intrinsic motivation, task value, self-efficacy and creativity. This is something I will look to correlate within my ideal learning environment. Biesta (2013) however questions whether the teacher is of value in such learning environments.

Appendix 4 - Ideal learning environment

For this section I will be creating an ideal learning environment based on what I have previously discussed in the text. Conway (2012) expresses the view that the learning environment is something that is often overlooked within education, suggesting attention is usually drawn to the implementation of pedagogy rather than the environment the children are taught or learn in. He expresses the view that the environment should be all about the children not the teacher. Conway (2012) indicates there can be difficulties creating a positive learning environment but an effective learning environment is essential for academic success. He suggests a successful learning environment has a sense of belonging, arguably relating to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Also he suggests a successful learning environment has, equity and value in actions.  Again similar to Pink (2011, 2009), Conway (2012) holds value in actions in high regards, suggesting that if children see now value they disengage with activities. Conway (2012) promotes opportunity and the ability to give feedback.

Cosco (2016) values the outdoor learning environment suggesting it can be good for academic performance and relaxation. Relaxation is a valuable aspect within my learning environment as low stress activities make intrinsic motivation a more achievable means, something I will look to harness and evolve within my learning environment. Also the outdoor learning environment is very diverse, meaning more room for exploration resulting in a rise in creative opportunity. Cosco (2016) also suggests that the outdoor learning environment comes with a lot of health benefits to the child and provides children the opportunity of risk and experiential learning. The attention towards health is a key concept which is valued by Donaldson (2015). He puts healthy and confident individuals as one of the four core purposes of the curriculum. Estyn (2018) also indicate that it is good educational practice to enhance both the indoors and outdoors provisions. Something which is evident within my learning environment is the opportunity to develop a range of outdoor learning environments such as, the forest schools area, the water and sand area, farm area and field. The swimming pool would also offer a range of health benefits to promote Donaldson’s healthy and confident individuals.

Donaldson (2015) indicated that a classroom is not a sole learning environment for a child and it is not the only place where a child is able to learn. Donaldson (2015) suggests that learning can happen anywhere, at home, local communities, outdoors as well as in the classroom. Donaldson’s ethos is that you should utilise the space to develop learning. It could also be argued that the term environment is more than just what you see or have physically. Brooker (2002) links culture to the environment, she indicates benefited learning if there is a positive learning culture within the environment that the learners are present. Rogers (2011) also suggests that culture can vary from class to class and suggests culture can drive performance within the environment. Relating this to the child’s ideal learning environment, I would try and enhance and embrace this positive learning culture through the environment.  Building on the theories I have already talked about, I will look to enhance Skinner’s operant conditioning and build into it intrinsic motivation. I will incorporate Pink (2009, 2011) work into operant conditioning to develop an ideal learning environment for the pupil I have been discussing. I will look to develop the work of Pink (2009,2011) and build autonomy, mastery and purpose into the learning environment to develop while being careful to incorporate Stolk (2015) view that children need to be given the choice, tools and trust to develop learning. Within my ideal learning environment, I would look to incorporate the work Dweck (2010), who emphasises praising the effort of the children to develop their mindset into a growth mindset. Within the culture of the ideal learning environment I would encourage thinking outside the box to enhance and embed creativity within the learning environment as Donaldson (2015) and Robinson (2015) highlight the importance of creativity with our education system. My ideal learning environment would embrace the children’s autonomy and independence the same way I saw in the pioneering school I visited. I would come up with different tasks build on Donaldson (2015) six areas of learning, therefore putting a purpose behind the tasks. Ensuring I had given the learners choice. I will provide the appropriate tools with the independent learning area, tables for group work, immersive room, tech den and the outdoor learning areas, so the children have the opportunity. And finally I would give them the trust to go and do what they wanted to learn and develop that trait of mastery Pink (2011, 2009) discusses. Moon (1985) and Garner (2009) suggest diversity of curriculum is healthy and leads to innovation for both teacher and student.

The culture within my ideal learning environment would look to meet the individual need of the learner. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (appendix 3) suggests these needs, need to be met in order for children to learn. The learning environment would be somewhere they would feel safe, have a sense of belonging and promote their self-esteem in order to reach a level of self-actualization. To meet the basic need of physiological needs I would chat with parents in the morning to ensure all is well, and if not what could be done to meet the needs. Cyster et al (1979) appreciate the importance of the parental involvement in schools but acknowledge that there are barriers in existence which prevent this from occurring. In the ASD Centre where I worked previously, to ensure the basic physiological needs were being met, the children had toast and a drink first thing in the morning. It could be argued that this would drive a sense of belonging also. All contributing to the cultural ethos embedded within the ideal learning environment.

The ideal learning environment I have created would allow for both Vygotsky and Piaget theories of education to unfold. Mooney (2013) indicates Piaget was of the belief that each child is a lone scientist, whereas Vygotsky believed that children work more efficiently together. The ideal learning environment I have created is suitable for both. There are areas such as the independent learning area, reading area, role play are and the outdoor learning area where children can immerse themselves in that lone scientist role Piaget believed of them. There are also areas such as the table for group work, forest schools, floor space and the tech den where children can embrace Vygotsky’s idea of the children working collaboratively together. There is also a lot of space generally within the ideal learning environment for the children to work both independently and collaboratively. The independent learning area may also be a place where children can enhance their creativity. Robinson (2015) is known to criticise the education system, suggesting that schools educate the creativity out of children. This area is designed to enable the children to enhance their natural creativity which they possess according to Robinson. Alongside this, EYSTN (2018), indicate that giving children the ability to be both independent and creative is good educational practice. Donaldson (2015) agrees suggesting there needs to be more emphasis in creativity within the curriculum and again has enterprising and creative contributors as another of the four core purposes of the curriculum.

Digital competency is also another topic Donaldson (2015) discusses as invaluable within his work, suggesting that digital competencies are going to be a necessity within the workforce in the coming years. There are areas within my learning environment which look to capitalise on the view expressed by Donaldson. Huda et al (2018) also indicates that technology needs to be embraced and enhanced within the modern day learning environment to enhance pedagogy. There is both the tech den learning provision and the independent learning area where children can embrace the concept of digital literacy within my ideal learning environment. White (2015) identifies why it important that children have access and the opportunity to enhance their digital literacy skills, as they would in my ideal learning environment. His work suggests that the culture we are living in today has immersed itself into different types of technologies and that the education system needs to be able to complement societal demands so that children who are growing up in this generation do not get left behind.

Conclusion

To conclude, I conducted an observation while I was gathering valuable work experience before starting the course to become a trainee teacher. What I observed was a behavioural incident which as discussed a child in the ASD centre I was in refused to do a mathematics worksheet, got quite aggressive and eventually ripped the worksheet up whilst shouting. Through research, I have recognised the fact that underpinning this outburst or behavioural incident, was a behaviour theory called operant condition. Operant conditioning in this situation was seemingly use as both a motivator and reinforcement for the child to do their work. However, operant conditioning by itself in this situation could have been said to fail with arguments that the extrinsic reward of going on the computer did not motivate the child enough to carry out their work. To develop operant conditioning further, I have looked to adapt the work of Pink (2011, 2009) and looked at trying to enhance and develop intrinsic motivation rather than extrinsic motivation. From this I have created an ideal learning environment where the cultural ethos is to drive this intrinsic motivation by allowing autonomy, mastery and purpose to underpin the environment geared towards success of the learner. I have also used the work of, Stolk (2015) to ensure I have choice for the learner, the correct tools and trust in the children, whilst always being mindful to develop and enhance certain areas which Donaldson (2015) views as essential for the curriculum. The visual aid of appendix 5 will portray a visual representation and give a clear understanding of the aspects I looked to achieve within my ideal learning environment.

Word count - 5197

Appendix 1

appendix 2

Appendix 3

Appendix 5

Reference list

The National Autistic Society (2018) About Autism. Available at:https://www.autism.org.uk. [Accessed 8^th October 2018].

Beiloc, S.L. (2018) Why we choke under pressure-and how to avoid it. Available at: https://youtu.be/OrB9JBEk1ds. [Accessed 10th October 2018].

Berger, C.J. (1974) Expectancy Theory and Operant Conditioning Predictions of Performance Under Variable Ratio and Continuous Schedules of Reinforcement. Madison: The University of Wisconsin.

Biesta, G. (2013) Interrupting the Politics of Learning. Power and Education, Volume 5, November 2013. pp.4-15.

Biggle, M. L. (1982) Learning Theories for Teachers. California state University: Harper and Row.   

British Educational Research Association (2018) Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. London: BERA.

Brooker, L. (2002) Starting School – Young children learning cultures. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Bouton, M. E. (2007). Learning and behavior: A contemporary synthesis. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.

Clarke, S. (2001) Unlocking Formative Assessment: Practical Strategies for enhancing pupils’ learning in the primary classroom. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2011) Research Methods in Education: Seventh edition. London: Routledge.

Conway, J. (2012) Classroom Environment: it’s not about YOU, it’s about THEM. Available at: https://youtu.be/bNcQjnpmFns. [Accessed 15th 2018].

Cosco, N. (2016) What nature teaches children. Available at: https://youtu.be/Dhas9OEc1Lk. [Accessed 15th October 2018].

Croll, P. and Hastings, N. (1997) Effective Primary Teaching: research-based classroom strategies. London: David Fulton Publishers.

Cyster, R., Clift,P.S. and Battle, S. (1979) Parental Involvement in Primary Schools. Windsor: NFER Publishing Company. 

Dearden, J., Emerson, A., Lewis, T. and Papp, R. (2017) Transforming engagement: a case study of building intrinsic motivation in a child. British Journal of Special Education, March 2017, Vol.44 Issue 1, pp8-18.

Department for Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills (2008) Observing Children. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.

Devereux, J. and Miller, L. (2003) Working with Children in the Early Years. London: David Fulton.

Dockrell, J.E and Shield, B.M (2006) ‘Acoustical barriers in classroom: the impact of noise on performance in the classroom’ British Educational Research Journal. Pp.25-509.

Donaldson, G. (2015) Successful Futures: Independent Review of Curriculum and Assessment Arrangements in Wales. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.

Dweck, C. (2010) The Effect of Praise in Mindsets. Available at: https://youtu.be/TTXrV0_3UjY. Accessed [15th October 2018].

Elston, C. (2007) Using ICT in the Primary School. London. Paul Chapman Publishing.

Eystyn (2018) Effective Practice. Available at: https://www.estyn.gov.wales/effective-practice/search?tags=2323&search=outdoor&order=desc. [Accessed 15^th October 2018].

Farrell, P. (1995) Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties: Strategies for Assessment and Intervention. London. The Falmer Press

Garner, P. (2009) Special Educational Needs: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge.

Gray, C. and MacBlain, S. (2015) Learning Theories in Childhood. London: Sage.

Grigg, R. (2015) Becoming an Outstanding Primary School Teacher. Oxon: Routledge.

Hansen, A. (2012) Reflective Learning and Teaching in Primary Schools. London: Sage.

Hayes, D. (2008) Foundations of Primary Teaching - fourth edition. Oxon: Routledge.

Hayward, A. (2006) Making Inclusion Happen. London: Paul Chapman.

Her Majesty’s Inspectors of Schools (1987) Primary Schools, Some Aspects of Good Practise

Holt, J. (1982) How Children Fail. Penguin.

Holt, J. (1983) How Children Learn. Penguin.

Huda, M., Maseleno, A., Teh, K.S.M., Don, A.G., Basiron, B., Jasmi,K.A., Mustari, M.I., Nasir, B.M. and Ahamd, R. (2018) Understanding Modern Learning Environment in Big Data Era. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning; 2018, Vol. 13 Issue 5, p71-85.

Imray, P. (2008) Turning the Tables on Challenging Behaviour: A practioner’s perspective to transforming challenging behaviours in children, young people and adults with SLD, PMLD or ASD. London. Routledge.

Koegel, R.L., Rincover, A. and Egel, A.L. (1982) Educating and Understanding Autistic Children. California: College-Hill Press

Kreider, H. (2000) The National Network of Partnership Schools: A Model for family-school-community partnership. Cambridge. University of Harvard

Kyriacou, C. (1998) Essential Teaching Skills. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

Meggit, C. (2007) Child Development: Birth to 16 Years. Oxford: Heinemam Education.

Moon, B. (1985) Better Schools: A Summary.

Mooney, C.G. (2013) Theories of Childhood – An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget and Vygotsky. Manchester: Readleaf Press.

Mukherji, P. and Albon, D. (2015) Research Methods in Early Childhood. London: Sage.

OFSTED (1993) Achieving Good Behaviour in Schools. London: OFSTED. 

OFSTED (2006) Safeguarding Children: An Evaluation of Procedures for Checking Staff Appointed by Schools. London: OFSTED.

Pink, D. (2009) The puzzle of motivation. TED. Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation/transcript [Accessed 14/10/2018]

Pink, D. (2011) Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. London: Penguin Publishing Group.

Pitts, C.E. (1971) Operant Conditioning in the Classroom: Introductory Readings in Educational Psychology. The University of Michigan: Crowell.

Potter, F. and Darbyshire, C. (2005) Understanding and Teaching the ICT National Curriculum. London. David Fulton Publishers Ltd.

Pritchard, A. (2014) Ways of Learning: Learning theories and learning styles in the classroom. London: Routledge.

Rawson, M. and Rose, M. (2006) Ready to Learn from Birth to School Readiness. Gloucestershire. Hawthorn Press.

Reed, M. and Canning, N. (2010) Reflective Practice in the Early Years. London: Sage.

Roaf, C. and Bines, H. (1989) Needs, Rights and Opportunities in Special Education. Falmer.

Robinson, K. (2015) Creative Schools. United States of America: Penguin.

Rogers, S. (2011) Rethinking Play and Pedagogy in Early Childhood Education – concepts, contexts and cultures. London: Routledge.

Stolk, J. (2015) Creating Autonomy-Supportive Learning Environments. Available at: https://youtu.be/SxlFzrfdqa4. [Accessed:14th October 2018]

Sparrow, J. and Ferndale, P. (1989) ‘Methods and Techniques: Teaching and demonstrating classical conditioning’, Teaching of Psychology, pp.204-207.

Thorndike, E, L. (1913) Educational psychology: Vol. II. The psychology of learning. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College.

United Nations (1989) The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. New York. UN

White, J. (2015) Digital Literacy Skills for FE Teachers. London: Sage.