PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by:

On: 26 April 2011
Access details: Access Details: Free Access
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Evaluation & Research in Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t794297791
Teachers' Perceptions of Personalised Learning
Ikumi Courcier
a
a
Department of Educational Studies, University of York, UK
To cite this Article Courcier, Ikumi(2007) 'Teachers' Perceptions of Personalised Learning', Evaluation & Research in
Education, 20: 2, 59 80
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.2167/eri405.0
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/eri405.0
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised
Learning
Ikumi Courcier
Department of Educational Studies, University of York, UK
This paper explores personalised learning, which is a new teaching and learning
style in the Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners launched by the
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) for England in 2004. The research
was based on semi-structured interviews with 13 teachers mainly in charge of Key
Stage 3 at two 11

18 comprehensive schools in North East England, combined with

consideration of their published documents and those of further schools that have
been used by the DfES as exemplars of personalised learning in operation.
Personalised learning seems to be the collection of ideal old and new approaches
used to promote the creation of ideal classes and schools. Because definitions of
personalised learning can be ambiguous, a number of schools and teachers in
England have been struggling to understand and make effective use of the new style.
Moreover, some teachers appear to be confused between personalised learning and
other styles and approaches to school and class organisation. There could be a
danger, therefore, that personalised learning becomes an acceptable banner under
which very different and even retrograde practices continue to operate.
doi: 10.2167/eri405.0
Keywords: personalised learning, individualised learning, CASE & CAME, differentia-
tion, theoretical aspects, empirical aspects
Introduction
The main purpose of this research is to refine an understanding of what
personalised learning means, in the contexts in which it is being applied
today. To do so, it is necessary to take account of both its theoretical and
empirical aspects. Theoretical aspects include what has been written in policy
documents, such as the UK Department for Education and Skills (DfES) five
components of personalised learning, as well as what has been portrayed in
school literature, and in the writing of other academics and commentators.
Empirical aspects include the approaches that schools or teachers adopt in
practice. Throughout this paper I have used the term style to describe
overarching concepts within education today, such as that of personalised
learning. The term approach is used to describe various practical methods of
teaching which may together be used to implement a style.
It has been suggested that personalised learning originated from Howard
Gardners theory of multiple intelligences (Guldberg, 2004; Johnson, 2004).
For example, considering the individual pupils interests, needs and abilities,
and finding out the best learning style for each pupil (Good & Brophy,
1990) are important elements in defining personalised learning. Moreover, it
0950-0790/07/02 059-22 $20.00/0 2007 I. Courcier
EVALUATION AND RESEARCH IN EDUCATION Vol. 20, No. 2, 2007
59
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
seems that the creation of an ideal school, which personalised learning aims
towards, appears to be based on the type of school that Gardner desired.
Accordingly, personalised learning appears to be an ideal theory. In effect,
some schools in England have already started a number of approaches
included in personalised learning, and some teachers would do so as a matter
of course. However, in practice, it seems that most English schools and
teachers have difficulty in initiating personalised learning. This may be
because of its ambiguous and broad definition and the subtlety of its
differences from other learning styles.
Personalised learning in England
Personalised learning was introduced as a new teaching and learning style
in the Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners produced by the DfES in
July 2004. It is claimed that personalised learning is the Big Idea (Pollard &
James, 2004) for education in England. Also, in 2004, the then Secretary of State
for Education and Skills referred to personalised learning at the 2004 Labour
Party conference (Pollard & James, 2004). However, it is somewhat confused
and controversial. Slater (2005) pointed out that, only a year later, the most
recent documentation by DfES had not mentioned personalised learning.
Perhaps the idea disappeared following a change of Secretary of State. On the
other hand, some schools appear to have partially implemented it. Some case
studies are introduced later in this report. As Pollard and James (2004) stated,
the Prime Minister, the Schools Minister and the Head of Standards at the
DfES have all made speeches on this subject.
Here is the explanation of personalised learning given in the document
A National Conversation about Personalised Learning:
In education this can be understood as personalised learning the drive
to tailor education to individual need, interest and aptitude so as to fulfil
every young persons potential. (DfES, 2004a: 4)
The Key Stage 3 National Strategy (2004a) reveals that personalised learning is
a procedure for both teaching and learning. In other words, it does not seem to
be one specific learning style. Both teaching and learning are important in
personalised learning. To improve pupils abilities and performance as
independent learners should be a major consideration in accommodating
pupils aspirations and needs (Key Stage 3 National Strategy, 2004a). It may
also be essential for students themselves to discover and learn their most
appropriate learning style. Therefore, it must be necessary for teachers and
pupils to take responsibility for teaching and learning respectively. If teachers
were skilful and pupils knew their own learning strategy, great results could
be achieved. This is because pupils could absorb meaningful lessons and learn
in their own individually optimum way.
Some schools and teachers have already taken these concerns into account
and started new approaches to personalised learning, even before its official
introduction by the government. For example, special educational needs
for those who are regarded as being emotionally, mentally, physically
and/or socially handicapped (Kyriacou, 2001) seem to provide an active
60 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
example of personalised learning. That is to say, personalised learning
encompasses the suggestion that effective approaches to special educational
needs should be carried out for other pupils in ordinary classes. Another
aim of personalised learning is to contribute to the principle of equity and
social justice (DfES, 2004a). In other words, in personalised learning pupils
should be thought of as individuals regardless of distinction caused by
gender bias, social economic status or ethnicity. This is all a bit vague. What
more guidance is available?
The five key components of personalised learning
In terms of teaching, the DfES document A National Conversation
about Personalised Learning indicates that personalised learning will
become a style that responds in a variety of ways to enable pupils to reach
their best. Personalised learning is about how pupils learn rather than what
they learn (Barnard, 2005). Generally, there are the five key components of
personalised learning introduced by the DfES in September 2004: Assessment
for Learning, Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies, Curriculum Entitle-
ment and Choice, School Organisation, and Strong Partnership Beyond the
School (DfES, 2004a). The ensuing emphasis is on Key Stage 3 because that is
the focus for this new research.
The Key Stage 3 National Strategy (2004a) explains that Assessment for
Learning refers to planning suitable targets and finding an appropriate
learning style for individual pupils. This entails making effective use of
evidence and data of pupils attainment and performance. Considering written
and oral feedback between teachers and pupils is necessary. Confirming
pupils understanding in class by utilising peer and self-assessment is also
important in this component. Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies
implies clarifying essential learning skills in the curriculum, utilising
technologies and keeping up participation. This component requires teachers
to increase their teaching repertoires and knowledge of subjects, and to help
pupils study in groups or independently. Curriculum Entitlement and Choice
means providing high quality education and equal opportunities to learn in
the core curriculum for every pupil. This component also aims at providing
pupils with enough information and support to make their own decisions at
earlier and later stages at school. School Organisation is requiring school staff
to organise a school that promotes good teaching and learning. Strong
Partnership Beyond the School is presented by Beyond the Class in Key
Stage 3 National Strategy, and includes parental and community partnerships
and school support for all pupils.
These components can provide good fundamental ideas for the utilisation of
personalised learning, although they are still ambiguous. Also, the compo-
nents do not appear to suggest clear and specific ways that might enable
teachers to implement personalised learning in classrooms. They seem to
include old approaches to teaching that have already been initiated, and some
new approaches that may emerge in more general use in the future. However,
suggestions that include both old and new approaches appear to create
confusion and lack of clarity. It may be a long time before schools and teachers
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 61
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
are clear enough about personalised learning to be able to organise a new
curriculum around it.
Several learning styles
It is said that a precise definition of personalised learning is not needed
in order to make it work (Barnard, 2005). However, it can be difficult to
clearly identify the differences among various approaches without concise
operational definitions. Clear definitions are important because they may
affect peoples action and certainty. Even the Education Secretary, Ruth Kelly,
has discussed whether or not the term personalised learning is just jargon
(Slater, 2005).
There are a variety of teaching styles similar to personalised learning, such
as independent learning and individualised learning. According to the
document A National Conversation about Personalised Learning, persona-
lised learning is a style needed to fully realise individual need, interest and
aptitude (DfES, 2004a). It is important to bear in mind that personalised
learning is thought of as a teaching style as well as a learning style here.
However, the description individual need, interest and aptitude may make it
difficult to understand the difference between personalised learning and
individualised learning, as it adequately covers both. The document also
indicates that personalised learning is a way for pupils to become e-literate,
independent, fulfilled and life-long learners. Moreover, the Key Stage 3
National Strategy (2004a) has referred to building independent learning as
an item of the Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies, as stated in the
previous section of this report. The description building independent
learning may make it difficult to discover the difference between personalised
learning and independent learning. Probably, this confusion of the definitions
of these diverse styles is caused by their similar objectives. Because these styles
have some similar aims, their definitions may look alike. The most specific
difference appears to be that personalised learning implies both teaching and
learning, whilst independent learning and individualised learning have more
focus on learning than teaching.
The speech about personalised learning by David Miliband, the former
Minister of State for school standards, at the North of England Education
Conference in January 2004 partly described the subtle difference between
personalised learning and individualised learning as follows:
High expectation of every child, given practical form by high quality
teaching based on a sound knowledge and understanding of each childs
needs. It is not individualised learning where pupils sit alone at a
computer. (DfES, 2004c)
In addition, what is different from individualised learning is that personalised
learning seems to focus on group and whole-class work (TeacherNet, 2005).
The Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP) has also stressed
the importance of pupils group work. In terms of individualised learning,
Baines et al. (2003) pointed out that this entails pupils working on the most
appropriate individual tasks to fulfil their needs. It seems that this places
62 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
emphasis upon pupils studying individually, utilising different tasks from
others. The progress of their studying might be different as well in this case. In
terms of independent learning, the purpose is to motivate and allow pupils to
learn on their own. In this style, pupils do not always depend on their
teachers. The pupils try to challenge the teachers knowledge (Campbell et al.,
2004). The Key Stage 3 National Strategy (2004b) insisted that personalised
learning is not simply new jargon for independent learning, as studying
independently is not the main purpose of personalised learning. Moreover, it
may appear that a one-to-one approach between teacher and student is needed
in both individualised learning and independent learning. It must be
physically difficult for teachers to teach individual pupils in limited time in
a class. Group activities or whole class work may lighten teachers workload.
Therefore, focusing on the activities in groups or a whole class can exemplify
the significant differences between personalised learning, individualised
learning and independent learning.
Personalised learning seems to consist of various approaches. Two
approaches are introduced here because they can be seen as parts of
personalised learning. These approaches are accelerated learning and
differentiation. Basically, accelerated learning is described as being based
on the study of brain functions (Accelerated Learning Systems, 2001).
According to Smith (1996) and ALITE (2005), accelerated learning is an
umbrella term derived from understanding how the brain works, keeping and
collecting information, gaining various kinds of intelligence, and having
motivation and faith in oneself. According to Smith (1996), accelerated
learning motivates pupils to develop thinking skills. Examples are Cognitive
Acceleration in Maths (CAME) and Cognitive Acceleration in Science (CASE).
Consequently, it seems that where accelerated learning is specifically different
from personalised learning is the specific focus on how the brain functions. It
appears that accelerated learning has the purpose of ensuring that pupils
become capable of finding the most appropriate learning method for
themselves. Smith pointed out that pupils would learn how to learn through
accelerated learning. He suggested that great lessons result from pupils needs.
Accordingly, it may be seen that the aims of accelerated learning appear to be
common to those of personalised learning. It appears that accelerated learning
overlaps with some elements of the five key components of personalised
learning launched by the National Strategy:
.
finding an appropriate learning style for individual pupils by using
evidence and data of pupils attainment and performance effectively in
Assessment for Learning;
.
clarifying essential learning skills in curriculum in Effective Teaching
and Learning Strategies, and
.
providing pupils with enough information and support to make their
decisions at earlier and later stages at school in Curriculum Entitlement
and Choice.
In terms of Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies, the thinking skills
CAME and CASE include other elements.
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 63
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
With regard to the thinking skills, Adey and Shayer (1994), as cited by
McGuinness (2000), pointed out that CAME and CASE originated from
Piagetian work. McGuinness (2000) argued that thinking skills should be
elicited verbally by utilising various methods. She has introduced Activating
Childrens Thinking Skills (ACTS), which is a project to develop thinking
skills in mainstream classes at Key Stage 2 in Northern Ireland. This project
included a variety of approaches: critical thinking, creative thinking, search-
ing out order and imposing meaning on information, planning, problem-
solving and making decisions (McGuinness, 2000). According to her, pupils
have improved all those skills through ACTS although they have difficulty in
explaining thinking. She also noticed that the constraint of time makes it
difficult for teachers to complete the project. Boardman (2004) conducted
research and found that thinking skills activities and lessons encourage
pupils to explore their own interests and their most appropriate learning
style. She added that the thinking skills activities motivated pupils to
participate in the lessons. Moreover, pupils started to attain higher marks
because of their motivation. Teachers are also stimulated to carry out more
interesting activities and lessons over time. In considering these, teachers and
pupils seem to approve of the thinking skills activities and lessons.
Furthermore, these activities and lessons appear to cover some elements of
Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in personalised learning:
.
clarifying essential learning skills in the curriculum;
.
helping pupils to study in groups or independently;
.
keeping up participation, and
.
increasing teaching repertoires and teachers knowledge of subjects.
This is why the thinking skills, undertaken in CAME and CASE, can be
regarded as an approach of personalised learning.
The notion of differentiation was also controversial when it was
introduced. Basically, pupils are differentiated by factors such as gender,
ability and choice. Deane and Tumber (1998) suggested that differentiation
should take account of pupils needs, which might arise from their gender,
ethnicity, linguistic or cultural background. It is also important that pupils
are able to fulfil their potential and learn independently by utilising the
approach in the classroom. Deane and Tumber (1998) also pointed out that
both pupils and teachers are expected to carry out differentiation. In
considering these elements, differentiation seems to have some similarities
to personalised learning. Both differentiation and personalised learning
enable all pupils to obtain an equal opportunity to learn in their best
way, since important aspects such as gender, ethnicity and background
should be considered. Differentiation and personalised learning also aim at
realising all of the pupils potential and making them independent learners.
It appears that both differentiation and personalised learning involve
both pupils and teachers. However, it appears that there is a specific
difference between differentiation and personalised learning. Differentiation
focuses on activities in a classroom whilst personalised learning also takes
into consideration those outside a classroom. Therefore, differentiation can
64 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
be one approach of personalised learning as teaching and learning in classes.
In thinking of differentiation as one approach of personalised learning, it
includes a number of elements of the five key components of personalised
learning:
.
clarifying essential learning skills in the curriculum and helping pupils to
study in groups or independently in Effective Teaching and Learning
Strategies, and
.
providing high quality education and equal opportunities to learn
in the core curriculum for every pupil in Curriculum Entitlement
and Choice.
Case studies
Barnard (2005) has revealed that some school leaders are excited
about personalised learning. In practice, some schools have recently utilised
a number of approaches of personalised learning. Case studies carried
out by DfES in some mixed comprehensive schools are introduced here.
According to this research, a school in southern England, in which pupils
achieve high levels at all Key Stages, has adopted Assessment for Learning
(AfL) (DfES, 2004d). According to the documentation made public by the
school, it has carried out independent learning too. In this school, independent
learning is viewed as the approach that pupils undertake to complete their
own projects. The head teacher of the school seems to view personalised
learning, in particular Assessment for Learning, as an impressive learning
style. It also appears that he has found that pupils behaviour and motivation
as well as attainment have been getting better owing to personalised learning.
The research by DfES (2004d) also reports that personalised learning
provides pupils with opportunities to speak out their opinions and exchange
feedback with teachers.
The research revealed that the organisation of a school in terms of per-
sonalised learning has been encouraged in one school in central England
(DfES, 2004b). Particularly, this school emphasises Behaviour for Learning
(BFL), which has four steps or consequences (DfES, 2004b). According to the
description of the research, consequences one and two seem to involve verbal
warnings. Consequence three appears to signify a detention, and consequence
four means separation from friends in an isolated place in the school. It seems
that worse behaviour could result in a warning from the governors, or
exclusion. This school has utilised AfL as well, in particular at Key Stages 4
and 5.
Another report by Walsh (2005) shows how another school in southern
England is organising mixed-age classes where pupils are assigned by ability,
from September 2005. Pupils are assessed by their work in class, results of
examinations, and teachers commentary. Each ability group is given a name:
Access, Entry and Levels 1, 2 and 3. The head teacher has insisted that this idea
has originated from personalised learning. She also argued that individual
pupils are different so that the learning pace must also be different (Walsh,
2005). The National Coordinator at the Leadership Network claimed that
personalised learning implies mixed-age teaching, where pupils are classified
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 65
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
by ability (Barnard, 2005). In other words, it seems that pupils can move on
whenever they are ready.
It is often said that carrying out personalised learning can be quite difficult
even though the idea appears to be straightforward and ideal. However, as
stated above, some schools have partly accepted and utilised it. Because it
seems that each school has the right to organise their own curriculum in
utilising personalised learning, they are able to determine how to implement
it. Therefore, schools may be able to discover more appropriate methods of
implementation for themselves. In taking this into account, it must be possible
for schools to carry out not only personalised learning but also one-to-one
approaches such as individualised learning and independent learning at the
same time. In practice, the school in southern England has carried out a few
programmes including AfL in personalised learning, learning how to learn
and independent learning. Consequently, it appears possible to start persona-
lised learning through the adoption of these other styles, although this may
not be without some difficulty. It must also be important for individual schools
to take responsibility for utilising these learning styles.
Methods
Sampling in England
Interviewing head teachers and teachers at secondary schools in England
was the main method of data collection for this research. The interviewees
were head teachers, core subject teachers and teachers who were responsible
for teaching and learning programmes for special educational needs and
gifted and talented pupils. At first, interviews with pupils were considered.
However, access to pupils was difficult because of school timetables. There-
fore, eventually, only teachers interviews were held. Thirteen teachers in total,
in two schools, accepted the request for an interview.
In terms of the research into personalised learning, English, science and
mathematics were selected because these have been core subjects in secondary
schools since 1988. As pupils at Key Stage 3 have to take national tests in these
subjects, they tend to study harder for them than for other, non-core subjects.
All pupils must study the core subjects, while they can choose the non-core
subjects that they like. That is to say, the different number and attitudes of
pupils in non-core subjects classes may make it difficult to compare teaching
and learning carried out in each school. Moreover, the National Curriculum of
Key Stage 3 describes more concrete and specific areas covered in the core
subjects than the non-core subjects. The specific areas of the core subjects can
help to draw comparisons between schools. Therefore, the opinions of core
subject teachers must be more beneficial for this research.
It may also be possible to make links between the effectiveness of the
National Curriculum and that of personalised learning. In this respect it was
useful to carry out interviews with teachers responsible for special educational
needs and for gifted and talented pupils. This is because it seems that
programmes for pupils needing special education or gifted and talented pupils
include some approaches common to personalised learning. In other words,
66 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
good approaches in these programmes might become important items of
personalised learning. Therefore, it would be interesting to consider these
teachers opinions.
Modern Foreign Language in Year 9 is also described in this report although
this subject is a non-core subject. This is because it is an interesting example of
differentiation by gender, which is implemented in the school interviewed.
The English schools
It was generally difficult to gain consent for interviews from schools. After
being declined by some schools in England, three 1118 comprehensive
schools in North Yorkshire were approached for this research. One of the
schools declined the request as the teachers were very busy with their work,
particularly at the beginning of a new term. Another school accepted the
request willingly. This school is known as School A in this paper. In order to
hold interviews with staff in School A, it was necessary to contact the head
teachers personal assistant to arrange a schedule. After several telephone
conversations, the interviews took place in School A on 13 April 2005. The staff
at the school were helpful and friendly. The school was located near the sea
and was difficult to reach without a car. It appeared that the rules of the school
were strict and traditional. It was interesting that there was a list of rules on a
board at an entrance to the school. Moreover, there were two pupil
representatives at the school entrance on the day of the interviews. In the
interviews, there were opportunities to talk to the head teacher, a senior
teacher responsible for personalised learning, an assistant head, a head of
special educational needs, a head of language, a head of mathematics, a head
of science and a head of English.
Another school was also willing to help with this research. This school is
named School B in this paper. In order to arrange the schedule for the
interviews, making contact with an assistant head over the phone was
necessary. School B was located in a town. The teachers seemed to be active
and a little strict. In this school, we were able to talk to the head teacher, two
English teachers, a mathematics teacher and a science teacher.
Methods of analysis
The interviews with the teachers were transcribed and summarised to help
with the analysis. After the interviews, the transcripts were analysed using the
following three questions:
.
What is personalised learning?
.
What do teachers think personalised learning is about?
.
What is going on in schools in relation to personalised teaching and
learning?
The question what is personalised learning? was analysed by drawing
various types of figures. In order to build up the figures, theoretical and
pragmatic perspectives were needed. In other words, what the government has
suggested as opposed to what the schools have implemented were necessary
elements to help to develop the figures. Only a few elements are described in
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 67
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
this paper because of the constraint of space. Using the already selected and
explained effects would make it easier for readers to understand the figures.
Moreover, the findings from the key questions helped to discover the structure
of the final figure. Teachers opinions provided useful data to help define
personalised learning in the end.
For the question what do teachers think personalised learning is about?,
various kinds of responses from the teachers were taken into account. At this
stage, finding out the perceived definitions of several styles such as
individualised learning and independent learning was of importance. The
definitions of the new approaches that the teachers referred to in the
interviews also needed to be understood. Some teachers tended to have
completely different opinions and it was important to focus on these extremely
different points of view in order to analyse the data effectively. It was also
important to find out the connection between the answer to this key question
and that of the next key question what is going on in the schools? This was
because teachers perceptions would affect the teaching and learning styles in
classes and schools.
When it comes to the question what is going on in schools in relation to
personalised teaching and learning?, there were diverse approaches carried
out in each class and school. However, only significant approaches were
selected for discussion here mainly because of the constraints of space. In
responding to this question, it was intriguing to explore the gap between the
practice in the schools and the policy upon which the government has insisted.
Other intriguing topics and points also emerged from the data, as is usual.
These are largely ignored in this paper because of the limitation of time and
space. The author will be happy to provide further details on request.
Findings: Personalised Learning in England
What is personalised learning?
It is important to take into account both theoretical and empirical
aspects when thinking about personalised learning. The theoretical aspects
mean what the government has referred to in its plans for personalised
learning, while the empirical aspects address what is actually going on in
relation to teaching and learning in the two comprehensive schools included
in this study.
Figure 1 shows what personalised learning is by comparing it with
individualised learning. The figure suggests that personalised learning and
individualised learning are viewed as relatively bigger categories than the
other elements. Therefore, they are called styles which consist of some of the
approaches described in this paper. In terms of the approaches, they are
considered teaching or learning methods. In the figure, for example, CASE
and CAME are called approaches. The approaches that the two schools have
carried out or intend to carry out are important elements in the figure as well.
By conducting theoretical research, some of the main reasons why people
tend to get confused between personalised learning and individualised
learning could be suggested. One important reason might be because of the
68 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
similar aims of both styles and this perspective was useful in helping to
describe Figure 1. In Figure 1, personalised learning and individualised
learning are shown to have similar aims. These aims are: to fulfil individual
Similar Aims
Personalised
Learning
Individualised
Learning
Pupil Responsibility
(Informal)
Teacher Responsibility
(Teacher-led)
Teacher Responsibility
(Teacher-led)
Accelerated
Learning
CASE and CAME
Learning
how to learn
Differentiation
Links with other
schools and colleges
Parents support
Special classes
ICT and
e-learning
Peer- and Self-
assessment
Feedback
Independent
Learning
Figure 1 A map showing the links between personalised learning, individualised
learning and different approaches
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 69
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
pupils needs, interests and potential, and to make pupils life-long learners.
Moreover, what differentiates personalised learning from individualised
learning seems to be related to pupils and/or teachers acceptance of
responsibilities. In detail, in personalised learning, both teachers and pupils
need to be responsible for their own teaching and learning respectively in
order to make outcomes. On the other hand, it appears that individualised
learning expects only teachers to direct individual pupils towards their own
goals. This is because in this style, pupils study individually by using different
tasks suitable for their level and pace. In other words, in individualised
learning, the good teaching skills needed to look after each pupil inside a class
may be far more necessary than pupils learning skills. Therefore, it seems that
the difference between personalised learning and individualised learning is
expressly related to who needs to take responsibility for teaching or learning.
Figure 1 shows that personalised learning is expected to include both pupil
responsibility and teacher responsibility, while individualised learning is
expected to have only teacher responsibility.
The approaches in Figure 1 indicate what the schools interviewed have
already implemented or intend to do, for this would make it easier for readers
to identify the approaches explained. Theoretically, whole class or group
activities should be carried out using the approaches of personalised learning.
Other approaches that may be used in lessons are not introduced in the figure
due to limitations of space.
Even though personalised learning is called learning, it implies teaching
and learning not only inside but also outside of classes, as the five
components of personalised learning have already suggested. It is necessary
to bear in mind that personalised learning does not include teachers help with
pupils out of class, which is separate from teaching and learning. On the
contrary, it seems that individualised learning aims at learning inside the
classroom. The point here is that individualised learning is about individual
pupils learning. However, it seems that individualised learning focuses not
on the way pupils learn, but the way teachers teach a class. Thus, it appears
that each style is different.
Figure 1 clarifies that personalised learning is slightly different from
individualised learning, as David Miliband insisted (DfES, 2004a). It illustrates
that a variety of approaches are combined to produce personalised learning. It
is evident that the five components of personalised learning include old ideas
and new ideas, though the definitions are quite ambiguous. That is to say,
personalised learning is the collection of old approaches and new approaches.
The old approaches are mainly what the schools have already started. The new
approaches are what the schools have not begun yet. Therefore, it seems that
only the ideal approaches have been picked up by the government in order to
organise ideal schools. Consequently, personalised learning can be just the
collection of ideal old and new approaches. It can be true that the five
components of personalised learning are just suggestions to organise ideal
schools. In the next section, the findings used to build Figure 1 are described in
more detail.
70 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
What do teachers think personalised learning is about?
Teachers understanding of each teaching and learning style is likely to
affect lessons in their class. It seems that the knowledge of personalised
learning and other styles is connected with the teachers responsible for
providing the teaching and learning programmes in the schools interviewed.
It may also depend on whether or not the other teachers in the school have the
information about new styles of teaching and learning. For example, the
teachers interviewed in School A appeared to have some idea about
personalised learning. In this school, the teacher responsible for teaching
and learning programmes had a positive opinion of personalised learning. It
seemed that this teacher had already given some information about persona-
lised learning to the other teachers. Interestingly, the prospectus of School A
had similar aims to those of personalised learning, such as teachers trying to
provide all pupils with equal opportunities to fulfil their potential and
needs. The prospectus of School B also suggested an emphasis on the
importance of motivating individual pupils to foster their potential and take
responsibility for their learning. However, it seemed as if the teachers in
School B did not receive information about personalised learning. This may be
because the teacher responsible for teaching and learning programmes in
this school had not told her colleagues about personalised learning. In fact,
she revealed that she would not tell the other teachers about it until they
covered all approaches encompassed in personalised learning. She added that
she did not want to make her colleagues bewildered by the definition of
personalised learning.
For example, in School A, a teacher responsible for Special Educational
Needs pointed out:
I think everyone can get personalised learning working with the
National Curriculum, to work more heavily on ICT to use computer
programmes and try interacting with a teacher through a computer,
which takes a lot of traditional approaches, takes responsibility, takes a
group interaction, but actually that child is doing work at their level. We
want computer programmes to support childrens reading and spelling.
(Special Educational Needs teacher, School A)
It appears that this teacher had some ideas about personalised learning. The
teacher who had responsibility for teaching and learning programmes in
School A also had clear ideas about personalised learning:
Personalised learning is the way they go away to investigate how to
do that on their own. So, theyre learning on it. I can work with them
and show them. But they can research that and they can think about
that, too. (Teacher responsible for teaching and learning programmes,
School A)
On the other hand, a few teachers in School B admitted that they did not know
about personalised learning. For example, a science teacher in School B said:
Maybe its differentiation, or its not differentiation? Im not exactly sure
what you mean by personalised learning. (Science teacher, School B)
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 71
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
A mathematics teacher in School B revealed as follows:
We dont do any personalised learning. . . I dont know anything about
personalised learning at all. (Mathematics teacher, School B)
This mathematics teacher also revealed that the English teacher responsible for
the teaching and learning programme in the school had told her that
personalised learning is completely different to differentiation.
These interviews may suggest that teachers in School B did not obtain
information about personalised learning. This may be because the English
teacher responsible for teaching and learning programmes had not conveyed
this information. Therefore, whether or not teachers are aware of personalised
learning may be related to the school and the knowledge, understanding and
attitude of the teacher responsible for teaching and learning programmes. If
the teacher responsible for teaching and learning programmes provided other
teachers with clear and concise ideas about these new styles, other teachers
could obtain more knowledge about the styles.
The interviews with the teachers in School B showed another interesting
finding: that differentiation can be a part of personalised learning. This is
because both differentiation and personalised learning aim at fulfilling
individual pupils needs, interests and potential. Furthermore, teachers
and pupils need to take responsibility for their teaching and learning
respectively in both styles. In Figure 1, differentiation is linked with both
teacher responsibility and pupil responsibility. The reason why differentia-
tion is placed in the teacher responsibility element is because this
approach has been set under the school policy. However, it does not mean
that this approach includes work out of class. Rather, differentiation implies
teaching and learning inside class. This is why the element learning
how to learn leads to differentiation. This also shows that it is necessary
for pupils to take responsibility for their own learning. In considering these
effects, it seems that differentiation overlaps with some elements of persona-
lised learning. Thus, it can be true that differentiation is one approach to
personalised learning. However, it appears that the subtle differences
between differentiation and personalised learning make the teachers
bewildered, though differentiation by ability has been implemented
in the school where the mathematics and English teachers interviewed
above work.
It seems that some of the teachers still have difficulty in finding out the
specific differences between personalised learning and other styles. In fact,
some teachers think that a number of learning styles and personalised
learning are the same although their names are different. It appears that this
is related to the argument whether or not personalised learning is just more
jargon. The English teacher in School B described personalised learning as
an umbrella. According to her, teachers in the school have already carried
out several approaches in personalised learning. Thus, personalised learning
could be the umbrella, and the teaching and learning approaches that are
already undertaken in class could be regarded as the umbrellas ribs. It
seems that these ribs stand for the old approaches which they have
already implemented in classes. As mentioned earlier, this English teacher
72 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
in School B insisted that she would not tell any teachers about personalised
learning until they covered all approaches in the style. Otherwise, teachers
might become confused by the difference between personalised learning
and differentiation. That is to say, the teacher may explain what persona-
lised learning is to other teachers when they finish carrying out new
approaches of personalised learning which they have not yet started in
class. In considering this point of view, it could be true that personalised
learning is the ideal collection of good old approaches as well as new
approaches, although this mixture of various approaches may have left the
teachers bewildered.
What is going on in schools in England in relation to teaching and
learning?
It seems that each school decides what teaching and learning styles
they would like to utilise. In fact, it is said that schools have the right to
organise their own curriculum when considering personalised learning, so
that each school is able to adopt different and effective approaches for
themselves (DfES, 2004a). Therefore, it appears that it depends on the school
and its policy when it comes to the acceptance of different teaching and
learning styles. It also seems true that teachers roles are very important
in arranging the personalised learning curriculum. This is because the
approaches that they have adopted in their classes can be included in
personalised learning even though they sometimes do not realise the fact.
Moreover, it is teachers who arrange the teaching approaches in their classes.
Consequently, the decisions made by school leaders and teachers within
the schools are crucial when it comes to utilising teaching and learning styles
in schools.
Differentiation by gender at School A
In practice, the two schools interviewed have carried out a number of
different approaches. In School A, differentiation by gender in Modern Foreign
Languages in Year 9 has been implemented. The French teacher in this school
indicated that it has been working well. It seems that she believes boys and
girls learn differently. According to this teacher:
Weve done an experiment, this year. Weve, in Year 9, we split the
classes. So in Year 9, weve got a class for boys and a class for girls.
Because of accelerated groups. And what we are trying to do is that two
teachers with the boys and girls try to teach them differently because
girls learn differently from boys. So learning is a bit personalised.
(French teacher, School A)
It appears that this French teacher thinks that accelerated learning or
differentiation is an element of personalised learning. She also pointed out
that boys are good at doing, moving around and touching something in order
to study effectively. On the other hand, according to her, girls are good at
visual learning using textbooks or writing down words. It was also
intriguing that she described pupils different personalities as a reason to
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 73
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
divide them into boys groups and girls groups. This French teachers
response may imply that all boys have the same personality, as they are
boys, and so do girls, as they are girls. However, it must be dangerous to
group boys and girls accordingly. This is because all pupils are different
even if they are categorised as being of the same sex. It could be true that
the ways of learning for boys and girls are different. However, probably, it is
not appropriate to classify all pupils by gender. If what the French teacher
believes was true, differentiation by gender could be good for pupils who
have extreme male characteristics or female characteristics. For example, the
learning style for boys might be very suitable for pupils who have only male
personality, and vice versa. This is because they appear to have a specific
learning style that is characterised by their gender. However, it cannot be
denied that there are diverse kinds of pupils who have a variety of
personalities. That is to say, not all pupils have such an extreme personality.
In this respect, the classification of pupils by gender in a class may not be
appropriate for boys who have partly female characteristics and girls who
have partly male characteristics. Consequently, there should be other
effective learning approaches for these pupils. For instance, it could be
good for some pupils to study using mixed approaches, for example ones
that involve touching a thing and then writing about it. It would also be
important to find out how and to what extent each pupil attains their goal
when discussing differentiation by gender. Therefore, it may not be wise to
provide fixed approaches for pupils based on their gender. More impor-
tantly, it must be essential to regard pupils as individuals. As a result, the
most suitable approach for each pupil regardless of gender is probably
different. It would be interesting to discover how the differentiation by
gender in the school will work hereafter.
Differentiation by ability at School B
School B has introduced differentiation by ability, particularly in mathe-
matics and science. The Key Stage 3 prospectus for this school explains
that mixed-ability classes are arranged to provide an equal start for pupils
in Year 7. In Year 8 and Year 9, setting tends to be used. The head teacher
in the school pointed out that differentiation by ability is about what
happens inside a class, while personalised learning includes all angles such
as those provided by teachers, pupils, parents, communities and schools. It
seems to him that personalised learning has a much larger number of criteria
than differentiation. In mathematics classes in this school, pupils are set
mainly according to their scores in exams and performance in class. Teachers
test pupils every half term and pupils are set into three classes. Pupils
constantly move up or down the sets after the tests. The content of textbooks
is also differentiated by pupils ability. The mathematics teacher expressed
her opinion: I couldnt imagine being able to teach maths in a mixed-ability
class. This could mean that teaching pupils with a wide range of ability
levels in one class is very difficult, especially when taking account of
individual interests, needs and potential in a mixed-ability class. In fact,
74 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
some other subject teachers maintained that they prefer setting classes to
mixed-ability classes as well. However, they also revealed that gifted and
talented pupils have less opportunity to develop their faculties even if there
was class setting in the school. The mathematics teacher pointed out that
there is a big difference between the brightest and the least bright pupils
even in a top class. She added the following:
We have huge learning resources and learning support department.
And most of them are targeting at children obviously having a
physical disability. Mainly they are in groups where its weaker
children rather than the top end. I think that is the case everywhere so
that we dont really do it for very bright pupils. (Mathematics teacher,
School B)
In taking account of individual pupils interests, needs and potential, gifted
and talented schemes need to provide more opportunities than currently
available for these pupils to develop their ability or skills. However, what
teachers referred to in the interviews suggests that to tailor these requirements
for pupils is, in practice, very difficult in a class. The science teacher explained
the difficulty in looking after gifted and talented pupils in the mixed-ability
classes as follows:
I think the problem weve got is that people who are talented and
gifted, they are high-achievers who are going to be sad unfortu-
nately because your time is taken up with bringing the lower achievers
up to the level that they should be at. So your time becomes directed
toward the lower achievers and the middle band. Unfortunately, the
gifted and talented in the top are going to miss out. (Science teacher,
School B)
The head teacher pointed out that difficulties in providing the pupils with
more opportunities to achieve their goals are related to limitations of time,
class size and cost. It appears that these problems are strongly connected with
the practicalities of teaching and learning. Consequently, teachers need to pay
more attention to the gifted and talented pupils if they want to improve all
pupils ability or skills.
CAME and CASE
Teachers have carried out a number of interesting approaches in their
classes. Here, approaches strongly related to personalised learning are
introduced. They are called Cognitive Acceleration in Maths (CAME) and
Cognitive Acceleration in Science (CASE). CASE is usually utilised in science
classes and CAME in mathematics classes. First, it is important
to find out the general definition of these approaches. These styles are
regarded as ways to develop thinking skills. Secondly, the difference
between what teachers do in their classes, and their general views, could
be discovered from the interviews. It would also be interesting to compare
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 75
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
the situations in the two schools. The science teacher in School B described
CASE as follows:
CASE lessons are trying out metacognitive learning. Its based in
Key Stage 3, so its Year 7 and 8. Its the series of practical investi-
gations and they last an hour. And you get kids to think about
problems, and theyve got to discuss it in peers or groups. Then they
carry out the investigations. So kids try to think why it does work,
and try to give ideas, then feedback to the class at the end. (Science
teacher, School B)
It seems that what he has done in this class and the general definition are
similar. The teacher responsible for teaching and learning in School A also
talked about CASE and CAME:
For example, in science, they use a programme called CASE. One for
geography called CAME. That actually is a programme for thinking
through the subject. Instead of giving you answers, you have to go away,
find out. (Teacher responsible for teaching and learning programmes,
School A)
In comparing these two interviews, it appears that both schools have
implemented CASE and CAME in very similar ways. In other words, teachers
understand clearly what these approaches should be. Moreover, thinking
skills can be regarded as an important approach to make pupils independent
learners. That is to say, this could be one of the approaches of personalised
learning. In Figure 1, CASE and CAME are linked with both pupil
responsibility and teacher responsibility in personalised learning. This is
because what pupils are expected to do in CASE and CAME, such as
developing thinking skills, appears to be mainly the pupils job. Also,
carrying out interesting lessons and activities to make the pupils think over
time is the teachers job.
Summary of Findings and Suggestions
Summary of the findings
Personalised learning, individualised learning and differentiation have
similar aims. This tends to cause confusion amongst teachers.
1. Characteristics that are unique to personalised learning:
(a) Personalised learning is the collection of ideal old approaches
and new approaches. The old approaches mean what good
schools or teachers have carried out before the introduction of
the style. The new approaches are the ones that are suggested for the
style.
(b) The five components of personalised learning made public by the
government are just suggestions to aid the organisation of ideal
classes and schools.
76 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
(c) Both teachers and pupils need to be responsible for their respective
teaching and learning.
(d) Teachers are expected to use whole class or group work in a class.
Pupils need to become independent and lifelong learners.
(e) Some teachers have a clear idea of personalised learning, but others
do not. The decisions by school leaders and teachers are very
important in accepting personalised learning.
(f) Personalised learning takes account not only of what happens inside
schools but also what happens outside schools.
2. Characteristics that are unique to individualised learning:
(a) Individualised learning focuses on only the teachers responsibility.
The name individualised learning here presents learning, but it is
focussed on the teachers, who direct pupils to their goals. Thus,
teaching can be more important than pupils own learning in this
style.
(b) Individualised learning appears to be carried out inside classrooms.
3. Characteristics of differentiation:
(a) It seems that differentiation is one part of personalised learning
because it has similar aims.
(b) Both teachers and pupils need to take responsibility for their
teaching and learning respectively.
(c) Differentiation appears to be carried out inside classrooms.
(d) Both of the English schools interviewed have initiated differentia-
tion. School A has classified pupils by so-called gender (actually
sex). School B has divided pupils by ability (actually performance).
Differentiation by ability may be more promising because it is more
clearly connected with pupils competence than differentiation by
gender. Despite differentiation by ability, however, several teachers
revealed that gifted and talented pupils were generally given fewer
opportunities to develop their ability than the less able.
4. Characteristics of CAME and CASE:
(a) It seems that the schools interviewed in England have utilised these
approaches in similar ways to the ACTS project. Moreover, the gap
between the definitions and the practice appears to be small, so that
teachers seem to understand clearly how CAME and CASE should
be implemented.
(b) Thinking skills cover some elements of Effective Teaching and
Learning Strategies in personalised learning practically as well as
theoretically.
Practical suggestions at schools
In the future it would be extremely beneficial to make personalised
learning in England a practical reality rather than a theoretical possibility. To
achieve this, firstly, teachers and schools should consider all ages and
subjects. It would also be important to be able to handle some early
difficulties in utilising the new styles. The government, schools, teachers,
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 77
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
pupils and parents all need to cooperate with one another in order to make
the teaching and learning styles more effective and universal. It may be
wise for the government to watch what is going on in schools more carefully
and to provide more detailed suggestions. Schools and teachers will need
more knowledge and teaching training for the new styles. Strong school
management in promoting effective use of personalised learning would also
be essential. Pupils have to become independent and to learn how to learn
on their own initiative. Parents are expected to know what their children are
interested in. Therefore, everyone should engage with the new styles in order
to make it work.
Suggestions for future research
In the future, a larger amount of data will be needed to fully understand
general educational trends across the UK. Strategies to bridge the gap between
policy and practice at schools will be required as well. It would be interesting
to see how most state schools in England will utilise personalised learning
hereafter. It is important that leadership and school management become well
established in making greater use of personalised learning. It must also be
necessary to find out how teachers understanding of the styles changes and
how they cope with any confusion. Discovering the attainment gap between
other styles and personalised learning also seems to offer an area of interest in
the near future.
Conclusions
The teachers interviewed think that it is very difficult to implement
personalised learning in their classes in practice although the idea is very
good. This suggests that there are gaps between the practice in schools and the
meta-level policy introduced by the government in England.
The schools interviewed have already started some approaches to perso-
nalised learning without a clear idea of the new style. There are some
teachers who utilise several components of personalised learning without
realising it. Making use of personalised learning without understanding it
fully could be dangerous, promoting potentially divisive approaches to
teaching rather than offering additional approaches to learning. The more
clearly the teachers understand what personalised learning is, the more easily
pupils may become independent and lifelong learners. Again, it should be
kept in mind that it is dangerous to promote all the different styles and
approaches of personalised learning, without clear knowledge of what they
consist of in practical terms. More detailed knowledge of teaching and
learning styles will make it easier to carry out the styles effectively. It is also
important that all teachers, schools, parents, communities and the government
cooperate with one another within an accessible framework in order to make
good decisions and effective use of the teaching and learning styles involved
in personalised learning.
78 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
Correspondence
Any correspondence should be directed to Ikumi Courcier (dolphine8168@
msn.com).
References
Accelerated Learning Systems (2001) What is Accelerated Learning? http://www.
acceleratedlearning.com/method/what_is.html. Accessed 18.05.2005.
ALITE (2005) What is Accelerated Learning? http://www.alite.co.uk/about_al/what_
is.htm. Accessed 18.05.2005.
Baines, E., Blatchford, P. and Kutnick, P. (2003) Changes in grouping practices over
primary and secondary school. International Journal of Educational Research 39 (1),
934.
Barnard, N. (2005) Were a school not a factory. TES 29 April, p. 27.
Boardman, P. (2004) Thinking is fun! Thinking skills simulate enjoyment in the
classroom for both teachers and pupils. Teacher Development 8 (2 & 3), 221232.
Campbell, R.J., Kyriakides, L., Muijs, R.D. and Robinson, W. (2004) Effective teaching
and values: Some implications for research and teacher appraisal. Oxford Review of
Education 30 (4), 451465.
Deane, M. and Tumber, M. (1998) Differentiation: From Differentiation to Effectiveness.
Cheltenham: Mary Glasgow Publications.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2004a) A National Conversation about
Personalised Learning. Nottingham: DfES.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2004b) Ninestile school, Birmingham
organising the school for personalised learning. http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/
personalisedlearning/downloads/Ninestiles_School.doc.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2004c) Personalised Learning: Building A
New Relationship with Schools. Speech by David Miliband, Minister of State for
School Standards, North of England Education Conference, Belfast (8 January 2004).
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/speeches/speech.cfm?SpeechID95. Accessed 06.04.2005.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2004d) Seven Kings High School, Red-
bridge. http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/personalisedlearning/downloads/Seven
KingsSchool_Sept04.doc.
Good, T.L. and Brophy, J.E. (1990) Educational Psychology: A Realistic Approach (4th edn).
London: Longman.
Guldberg, H. (2004) Class divisions: Who benets from the personalised learning stra-
tegy of dividing school pupils into subsets? http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/
0000000CA60E.htm. Accessed 14.08.2005.
Johnson, M. (2004) Personalised learning: New directions for schools? New Economy 11
(4), 224228.
Key Stage 3 National Strategy (2004a) Personalised learning: Features of the ve components.
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/keystage3/respub/sm_0411mtg.
Key Stage 3 National Strategy (2004b) Personalised learning Q&A. http://www.
standards.dfes.gov.uk/keystage3/downloads/sm_0411mtg4personlearn_qa.doc.
Kyriacou, C. (2001) Effective Teaching in Schools (2nd edn). Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.
McGuinness, C. (2000) ACTS (Activating Childrens Thinking Skills): A methodology
for enhancing thinking skills across the curriculum (with a focus on knowledge
transformation). Paper presented at the ESRC TLRP First Programme Conference,
Leicester, United Kingdom, 910 November.
Pollard, A. and James, M. (eds) (2004) Personalised Learning: A Commentary By The
Teaching And Learning Research Programme. London: TLRP and ESRC.
Seven Kings High School (2004) Documentation of Independent Learning. Essex: Seven
Kings High School.
Slater, J. (2005) Whither that old personal touch? The Times Educational Supplement 1
April, p. 2.
Teachers Perceptions of Personalised Learning 79
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
Smith, A. (1996) Accelerated Learning in the Classroom. Stafford: Network Educational
Press.
TeacherNet (2005) Personalised learning. http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/management/
newrelationship/personalisedlearning/. Accessed 21.01.2005.
Walsh, C. (2005) Switch to mixed-age classes. The Times Educational Supplement
1 April, p. 4.
80 Evaluation and Research in Education
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

A
t
:

0
3
:
2
3

2
6

A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1