What Works..?

PISA [Program for International Student Assessment] is an OECD initiative that occurs triennially. PISA focuses upon assessing the capacity of students to problem solve, as well as apply their knowledge and skills in new ways. PISA also differs from many mass-produced tests that are administered by national or state jurisdictions, as they do not seek to assess the learning of any one particular curriculum.
Given these traits, it is a little more difficult to artificially improve PISA achievement via sheer familiarisation with test formats, conditions and content, as can be the case with many mass-produced tests... 

A significant point about the information derived from PISA is that it shines a light on equity, putting it on equal footing, in terms of importance, with actual achievement. This tends to be another point of difference with most standardised tests, which don't usually put as much emphasis or do as good a job of measuring how equitable our schools and education systems are.

Probably the main purpose of PISA is to enable analysis of how different countries structure their education systems and, importantly, to help identify some of the practices, structures and policies that show up as common among the systems that demonstrate high achievement and high equity. In the clip below, Andreas Schleicher goes into detail about this:

So what are the common traits of high-performing, highly-equitable education systems..?

• Government and society value education, schools and teachers.
• A growth, rather than fixed mindset, permeates through the system - policy makers, parents, teachers and students believe that all students are capable of learning, rather than lowering expectations based upon demographics and stereotypes... 
• Schools and teachers in such systems "embrace diversity with differentiated pedagogical practices... and they personalise learning... "
• "Nowhere does the quality of an education system exceed the quality of it's teachers" - teachers, themselves, as well as systems, value and prioritise ongoing Professional Learning.
• "Teachers work together".
• Teachers have professional autonomy - they are clear about where they need to go and what they need to aim for, but they are trusted to choose the ways and methods of pursuing these standards and goals, in order to best meet the needs of their unique local contexts. They are not robots on a production line and they do not 'follow' heavily-prescribed programs and curriculum documents.
• Further to the above point, high-performing systems have moved away from past goals of standardisation and compliance, to empowering principals and teachers to be inventive, innovative and creative.
• Honing in on the equity aspect, systems with low disparity between their highest and lowest achievers "invest resources where they can make the most difference, they attract the strongest principals into the toughest schools and the most talented teachers into the most challenging schools."

What [if any... ] are the excuses for not prioritising these traits of high-performing and highly-equitable education systems..?

 

Innovation Project

At the beginning of term four last year, I approached my Principal with a 'proposal' regarding facilitating the development of more innovative teaching approaches within our school.
The underlying principles of this proposal included:

• The way children learn is changing.
• Education is [needs to be] changing.
• Schools and teachers need to be constantly evolving their practice in order to effectively meet the needs of modern learners - We need to be learners, too.
• Innovation is more likely to develop ‘at the margins’, rather than when applied from above en masse.

More of the 'why' included:

Whilst how we learn and our resultant views about education have been [gradually... ] evolving over time, the modern rate of change is greater than it has ever been before, due to the 'digital revolution' and, in particular, the rise of the Internet.

The resultant changes in society are increasing exponentially and are affecting a range of different aspects of our lives, including how we access information, how we communicate, what we do for leisure purposes, the jobs that we have [and will have], as well as how we learn.

As usual, my Principal was very supportive and willing to try something new in a bid to improve the capacity of our teachers.

In terms of the process we were looking to implement, the plan was to work with one or two teachers who were keen to try a new idea / initiative / approach / etc. in their teaching. A point that we wanted to stress was that it wasn't especially important 'what' the idea / initiative was, but more that the teacher was looking to take a risk, try something new and adopt an innovative mindset. 

To support and help facilitate this, we would schedule some extra release time [one hour per week] for the participating teacher/s, support relevant Professional Learning opportunities and provide ongoing coaching. 

When considering how to best 'sell' this idea to staff, I had worked on a hunch about how our school tended to be perceived... 

Our school is very organised, very structured and very detail-oriented. I was pretty confident that the perceptions held of our school [both internal and external] would reflect this notion, so we did a 'word association' asking for respondents to nominate five words that they most strongly associated with our school. The words available to choose from came from two categories, borrowing from some left-brain, right-brain theory:

Sure enough, we were clearly perceived to be 'safekeeping', rather than 'experimental':

Not sure if my analogy was the best... but I tried to explain it in the context of us having one 'wheel' spinning very well [the green, safekeeping one... ], but we needed to start paying some more attention to getting this other 'wheel' [the yellow, experimental one... ] spinning... 

Anyway, we had two enthusiastic teachers take the bait and decide that they wanted to be a part of this project. Both did a great job in researching and implementing two very different projects in their respective classrooms [one focusing on Learning Spaces and the other upon Yoga and Relaxation Strategies].

This week, the two teachers completed the final aspect of their 'projects' when they shared their learning journeys with our whole staff. Both were very pleased with the outcomes of their respective projects, sharing student surveys, photographs and their own observations.

We have now invited other people to nominate to participate in a similar process [one has already committed] and we are hoping this more future-oriented, innovative type of mindset will spread to more of our staff and that this sort of initiative will allow us to 'build in' a structure and process for innovation and continuous professional learning to be occurring at our school.

Closing Gaps...

Interesting policy initiative coming out of England (whose edu policies, along with the USA's, we tend to mimic... ): Schools told to narrow pupil gap 

My first reaction was that it was good to see equity of outcomes being valued and prioritised... However, the devil is probably in the detail - how will "attainment" be measured..? Will a broad range of assessments be taken into account, or will a single test that only focuses upon a narrow range of knowledge and skills be the tool of choice..?

How will this affect schools and teachers..?

If the former method is used (multiple and varied sources of data to inform judgements about attainment), schools and teachers would be more likely to focus their energies on teaching and learning that addresses the full range of curriculum areas, as well as see less benefit in 'training' students in the formats and conventions of one particular assessment type....

If the latter method is used (single, large-scale test that excludes many areas of the curriculum), it would seem more likely that schools and teachers would narrow their own focus towards that which is tested, that which they are going to be measured upon... 
i.e. Poorer, less-privileged students get a narrower education, with far less opportunity for experiencing concepts, discussing with peers, making stuff and learning in modern ways... 


Maybe I'm being cynical, but this approach seems a tad short sighted to me, when longer-term, more strategic initiatives are required to fully address the inequities in educational attainment in our schools.
Is this an example of Government policy 'washing its hands' of responsibility for inequitable outcomes and passing the onus wholly onto teachers and schools..?

When is it OK to fail..?

I read this interesting article recently about the benefits of failure.

Some good advice regarding the mindset we should adopt towards failures... Here are some interesting quotes that resonated a bit with me:

• embrace and foster a culture of experimentation... 
• failure is acceptable... 
• don't go on repeating the same failures over and over again... 
• most companies have "low tolerance for failure culture" - no room for experimentation... 
• failure... can mean different things to different people.
• honourable failure... and incompetent failure... 
• we learn through experimentation... 
• it's not the failure [that's important]... but rather the learning.
• failure in organisations most often happens on two levels: the failure to anticipate and the failure to execute. 
• the fast pace of change we experience today actually seems to happen much faster outside organisations than inside. It takes time to adapt to changes... 

Takeaways... 

We need to adopt and value experimental ways of thinking and working. 

We need to 'budget' for failures to occur, when we are trying new ideas, initiatives, etc. 

We need to learn from failures that we inevitably experience from time to time, rather than continuing to fail in the same way. 

Failure to change, evolve and improve is a failure in itself - if we don't actively pursue new ways and innovations, we are guaranteed to fail. 

Change is happening in 'the real world' at an increasingly rapid rate, whether we like it or not - better to to be proactive about keeping pace with this than to bury our heads and have our practice become irrelevant.

How do you want to work..?

Just read this interesting piece on introverts and work spaces.
The gist is that modern work environments, with their emphasis on open-plan spaces, 'incidental' meetings, high collaboration, etc, are not as effective as many people think they are and, in fact, actually have a negative impact upon those with introverted preferences.

I am a bit conflicted by this notion that open, collaboration-focused work environments are negative for introverts... I understand some of the discomfort felt by introverted types in such environments, but I believe strongly in the importance of people exploring diverse perspectives, accessing the knowledge and skills of many (rather than one),working together to solve complex problems, etc, etc... I also think schools need to be preparing students to be good at working with other people and communicating well, in preparation for living and working in a world that places growing emphasis on these skills...

We all have to act out of preference at certain times, so that we can get along with people that are different to ourselves, as well as tailor our behaviour to the situation and context we find ourselves in. The key to 'coping' with this need to act out of preference is to know how and when you can meet your own needs - the article has some techniques that are useful [and very familiar to me!] for - in this case - introverts. 

So should introverts continue to 'push back' against the growing emphasis on collaborative work practices, or should they 'put up', shelving their discomfort in the interests of the greater good..?

Back to the Future

This is a video of American author, Isaac Asimov, where he discusses how computer technology will change the way people learn and the role of schools:

In this 1988 interview, Asimov shares his predictions for the future of learning. What a visionary - he discusses many of the changes that education is still grappling with and aspiring towards, 25 years later!

• The end of information scarcity - computers [particularly the Internet] have 'changed the game' regarding access to information. We no longer need to seek out a rare expert / master / [teacher?] to access information.
• Prescriptive curricula - not necessary when people have access to abundant information in their own homes, via computers.
• Personalisation of learning - people are increasingly able to use technology to choose what, when and how they learn, rather than having little choice over any of these elements, as has typically been the case in traditional school systems.
• One-to-one learning - before formal education was opened up to the public, the wealthy and powerful would access learning via a tutor / master / etc [one-to-one for a few... ]. The invention of schools enabled access to education for many, but in a less-personalised, one-to-many relationship. Computer technology sees an opportunity to return to a one-to-one learning arrangement, but this time for many, rather than just the privileged [one-to-one for many... ].
• Life-long learning - we shouldn't 'finish' learning at school. It's not prison, where the aim is to 'get out'... 
• Digital Divide - it won't be possible to supply all children with computer technology initially, but we should embrace the learning potential of new technologies, anyway, whilst working towards equality of access.

So, a quarter of a century on, should we be happy with the progress schools and education systems have made towards this vision, or is there still lots of work to do to realise this "revolution" in learning and the role of schools..? 

Reforms worth fighting for

Popular viewpoints about what systemic education reforms should be aiming for have evolved over time. The 'Fourth Way' builds upon previous movements that have had some differing foci and features:

1. First, we had the [relatively] high trust of teachers, but low accountability and collaboration, resulting in the 'silos' mentality and greater potential for a lack of awareness of current theories, research, innovations, etc... 
2. Then we had the zealous drive for consistency - pursued via standardisation, high accountability, prescriptive curricula and programs, narrower [that which was tested... ] learning experiences for students, etc. Many of these elements are still popular [often increasingly so!]. 
3. Building upon the previous movement was the collection, analysis, comparison and use of DATA - to measure, to assess, to inform, to justify, to group, to 'target', to personalise, to differentiate, to report, to determine salaries, etc, etc... Surely the more information we have about our students, the better..? Right..???

The article above features two professors who, in analysing education systems around the globe, have identified and synthesised the best elements of these respective systems that need to be spread and incorporated globally. Some of the points that jumped out to me as important and worthy of aspiring towards were:

• Decentralised governance - schools need to be able to adapt and target the unique local communities that they serve.
• Broad, flexible curricula - allow teachers and schools the freedom to follow unique, localised pathways towards curriculum goals. i.e. Give them the destination and let them determine the course that best suits their students, rather than prescribing directions that are written for the masses.
• Principals who focus on maximising and improving the performance of teachers, rather than 'administration'...   

What do you think? Are these some of the right 'ways' for education to be reformed..?

The Big Question

This week, we introduced a concept we are calling 'The Big Question', where we elect a single, complex question or problem that we as a staff will 'ponder' for a number of weeks, before revisiting the nominated question / problem down the track for thorough discussion.


There were a few reasons why we wanted to try something like this...

Environmental

Schools tend to be notoriously busy places, often with little time and opportunity for deep thought, reflection and discussion about issues. The sheer quantity of decisions and tasks we have to deal with often leads to an efficiency mindset - useful for completing a high number of tasks and decisions, but perhaps less so for dealing with complex tasks and decisions in a quality fashion. 
We wanted to provide time and space for deeper, more thorough thought, reflection and discussion.

Individual

Whilst many people are inherently suited to fast-paced, instinctive decision-making and are naturally confident about airing their views in group settings 'on the spot', many others prefer time for reflection, often in quiet, individual settings. 

Improved decisions

Big, important questions and problems deserve well considered responses and decisions, rather than 'snap' judgements. 
Providing time and a suitable context for all people to develop and flesh out their views will better-enable the full range of perspectives to be considered and lead to more informed and more democratic decisions.

How?

So, how we are trialing this is by having staff 'vote' for one of a selection of 'potential' big questions, then giving time [the duration of this first school term] and space [probably an online, forumish space... ] for their individual viewpoints to 'percolate', before revisiting the question early next term for thorough discussion.

If being realistic, not everybody will engage with this and drag themselves from the busyness of day-to-day school life, but hopefully we will get a few people to 'lift their eyes' and spend some time thinking about the bigger picture...  

And We're Back!

Today was 'officially' our first day of the 2013 school year, although our students don't resume until tomorrow - so it doesn't quite feel like 'real' school yet... 

Given it was the first time we had all been back together since the end of last year, there was obviously some reuniting, some holiday small talk and just general catching up to be done... 
In reality, though, there wasn't a huge need for these sorts of pleasantries, as most staff had been in and out of the school for the past two weeks preparing for the new school year! 

Once we got into our full day of PL, it was typically busy, fast-paced, full of information and detail, but also good fun.
Starting the day with some creativity exercises to 'energise' ourselves for the day, we followed with engagement announcements (!), welcomes for new staff, the detailing of key messages for 2013, a session on our approach to teaching Reading, a session on our approach to teaching behaviour, Skyping with a consultant for a Grammar and Spelling program that we use, a session on Professional Learning and Innovation, the work-shopping of some potential Mandatory Reporting scenarios, a Phonics session, then some general 'housekeeping' and 'need to know' stuff [timetabling, budgets, etc.]... 

At one point during the day, we had to write down something we were looking forward to in 2013... I wrote something like "working with motivated colleagues"... 
Admittedly, I didn't think long about it at the time, but, upon reflection, this is one of the absolute best and most rewarding aspects of working at my school [and many others, I'm sure]. 

We are all anxious for the students to start tomorrow and everyone is focused on doing what we can to make the first day, then the first week... as smooth and positive as possible for students and teachers - particularly our new teachers.

Bring on tomorrow! 

Desegregate and Diversify

In this video, a US Professor explains the benefits of desegregation policies on education in America:


Not only did black children benefit from their improved access to education, but - despite commonly-held fears at the time of these policies being enacted - white children's education did not suffer and there were significant inroads made into some of the education and later life disparities that had been in existence between blacks and whites.


Obviously, in America, there is work still to be done to make their country more equitable, but, in Australia, too, this is an important issue and education has a significant role.

What are we doing here to actively pursue 'desegregation' and diversity in out schools..?
What are we doing that contributes towards the segregation of people..? 
Such segregation plays out not just on the basis of race, as professor Rucker focuses upon, but also occurs in Australian schools through the division and separation of children based upon income, religion and other factors.

What would have happened if the US had not actively pursued desegregation policies..? What would their educational achievement 'gap' look like..?
We talk lots in Australia about such 'gaps' - the importance of 'closing' them, but also their growing nature... 

If we are serious about a more equitable society with reduced variation in educational achievement, social problems, occupational achievement, etc, then we need to not only discourage policies and structures that 'segregate', but also actively pursue higher levels of diversity in our school environments.

Carrots, sticks and all of that...

Most people are pretty familiar with the two main types of human motivation, extrinsic - the performance of an activity / task to achieve an external, separate outcome - and intrinsic - the internal drive that comes from the individual's inherent interest and enjoyment of the activity / task, itself.
In Drive, Daniel Pink makes the case that a reliance on extrinsic motivation to improve the performance of people [in workplaces, schools, etc.] has been the staple of "Motivation 2.0" and that we now need to move to "Motivation 3.0", which instead focuses on intrinsic motivation.

Intrinsic Motivation

We are increasingly motivated by intrinsic drives because of the changing nature of our work. Algorithmic, routine, single-solution work was common and important right up until late last century. Nowadays, it is the more 'heuristic' forms of work that are becoming - not only more common - but more valuable, too - "Routine work can be outsourced or automated; artistic, empathic, nonroutine work generally cannot."

Extrinsic motivators can be effective when the work is inherently uninteresting or dreary... Now that more of our work is "more creative and less routine... more enjoyable", we need to shift to the form of motivation that is more effective for this type of work - i.e. motivators that 'tap into' the greater sense of inherent interest and joy that we can potentially derive from working creatively, solving problems and working with other people.

Pink builds a lot of his theory from the work of Richard Ryan and Edward Deci, who identified three key elements of intrinsic motivation - autonomy, competence and relatedness. Pink, too, identifies three key elements - autonomy, mastery and purpose.

• Autonomy refers to our desire to be self-directed and our capacity for choice in how we work.
• Mastery refers to our natural urge to get better and our capacity to apply and extend our skills.
• Purpose refers to our beliefs about whether our work matters and contributes to something important. Whether the organisations we work for stand for something... 

If these three needs are well satisfied, people are likely to work with greater creativity, innovation and engagement - all traits that are becoming increasingly desirable in a world that relies less and less on people to do routine, algorithmic, instruction-manual-type work... 

Extrinsic Motivation

Relying on extrinsic forms of motivation is far less sustainable and effective in the long run. They can excessively narrow our focus [to achieving the external reward, itself] and can devalue the task / activity being performed [hindering long-term performance].

That said, there are some circumstances where extrinsic motivators are appropriate and effective - namely, when the task is of the routine, rudimentary, single-solution, low cognitive-effort variety. Not all tasks that we need to perform are inherently interesting and enjoyable... 

Another point to be wary of when applying extrinsic motivators is the distinction between 'if-then' rewards and 'now-that' rewards.

Contingent motivators - 'if you do this, then you get that... ' - amplify the negative effects of extrinsic motivators, with people directing their focus to the end reward.

Rewards that are unexpected, after the event, etc, are less likely to take away focus from performing the task, but still allow for recognition and reward for effort and good performance - 'now that you've completed this task well, you get this... '. These sorts of rewards can also help facilitate aspects of intrinsic motivation. eg: An unexpected, 'now-that' reward can improve one's sense of mastery [they know they've done a good job... ] or purpose [they know they've done something important for the organisation... ].

As a teacher, I need to take care in how I use extrinsic motivators. I think they have a place, as not everything we ask and need students to do is inherently fun, interesting and enjoyable [although this should be a high priority when designing learning experiences!]... They can also help facilitate intrinsic motivation, when used in a targeted fashion [an obvious example being the awarding of positive feedback upon progress being made, or an important task being performed... ]. But, as much as possible, I need to be conscious of not having the reward be the reason that the student performs the task.

Schools, themselves, need to focus on creating working conditions for teachers that facilitate intrinsic motivation - teachers should have autonomy over how they do their work, be encouraged to constantly be pursuing mastery and be clear about their purpose within their school.

We need teachers to be working collaboratively, with creativity and with innovation, so schools need to create conditions that best allow for this.

Measuring Teacher Quality

I recently read this article about the views of a data expert on the use of student test scores to determine teacher effectiveness. I found myself nodding in agreement at so much of it that I didn't think I could adequately share the sentiments via a tweet!

Data King Nate Silver Isn't Sold on Evaluating Teachers With Test Scores | Education on GOOD

Quotes in blue [my bits in black]:

"There are certainly cases where applying objective measures badly is worse than not applying them at all, and education may well be one of those.

• Just because the concept or big idea is worthy, doesn't mean we should accept poor application that does damage, rather than good - Yes, it is worthwhile to raise the quality of teachers, to identify the 'high-quality' teachers that can spread their good practice and lead, as well as to identify teachers that need development, but if the measures taken to do this are damaging to teacher practice and student learning, then a better pathway needs to be found... 

one of my projects involved visiting public school classrooms... talking to teachers, and their view was very much that teaching-to-the-test was constraining them in some unhelpful ways."

• Pursuing such a narrow, prescribed pathway to 'effectiveness' is highly-limiting, dumbs down teachers and makes them easily-replaceable [anyone can follow a narrow formula and do what they are told... ].

it's a "topic that requires a book- or thesis-length treatment to really evaluate properly,"

• But that would be too complex and difficult to 'sell' to the public - who wants to read a book or a thesis when you can get all the information you need from a graph on the front page of the newspaper?!?

Silver's hesitation about using test scores to evaluate teachers isn't exactly a surprise given that he's driven by data and facts, and plenty of other individuals and organizations have laid out the case against the practice pretty thoroughly.

The NRC noted that research does not support the practice and while they believed tests can be used to inform, "a single test should not be relied on as the sole indicator of program effectiveness."

• Too simple. Teaching is a latent variable - there are a myriad of identifiable traits [think planning documents, assessment strategies, use of space, quality of interactions, level of student engagement, questioning skills, capacity to differentiate learning experiences, level of professionalism, capacity for self-reflection, commitment to Professional Learning, etc, etc... ] that could be used to help inform a measurement of teacher effectiveness, but to narrow it down to only one seems very silly... 

holding teacher accountable for growth in the test scores (called value-added) of their students is more harmful than helpful to children's educations.

• ... because of the affect this will have on the way the teacher teaches - they are near forced to focus all of their time, creativity and teaching energies upon what will be tested [what they are accountable for] - everything else that contributes to a quality education falls by the wayside... 

Placing serious consequences for teachers on the results of their students’ tests creates rational incentives for teachers and schools to narrow the curriculum to tested subjects, and to tested areas within those subjects.

lose instruction in history, the sciences, the arts, music, and physical education, and teachers focus less on development of children’s non-cognitive behaviors—cooperative activities, character, social skills

despite the abundance of smart people speaking out against the practice, education policy makers continue their push for including test scores in teacher evaluations.

• So how do people 'push back' against narrow, simplistic and damaging policy viewpoints..?

Linchpin

Linchpin, by Seth Godin, is essentially a book about people and their work. In particular, it focuses on what is important work in today's society, how individuals can make themselves valuable ("linchpins") and what typically restricts us from doing this important work.

What is important work?

What used to be important was being compliant, following instructions, being a cog in the system... This is what employers were looking for in the factory era, where the goal was ever-increasing productivity...

"For nearly three hundred years, that was the way work worked... Factories created productivity, and productivity produced profits."

But the relentless pursuit of productivity means an inevitable 'dumbing down' of the work: "The essence of mass production is that every part is interchangeable. Time, space, men, motion, money, and material— each was made more efficient because every piece was predictable and separate... first you have interchangeable parts, then you have interchangeable workers."
Once your skills are deemed "interchangeable", your work is not valuable and you are easily replaced.

What is valuable is that which is scarce... Nowadays, given our systematic training of people to be 'cogs in the system', what is scarce (and therefore valuable... ) is:

• People who "exert emotional labor".

• ie. Those that do the 'hard' thinking and the 'hard' relational work - think empathy, generosity and NOT avoidance...

• People who "make a map".

• ie. Those that are willing and able to 'blaze a trail' and lead others through the tackling and solving of challenging problems or circumstances.

• People who deliver "unique creativity".

• ie. People who generate new ways and ideas... People who don't 'rest' on the status quo or tradition.

• People who can solve complex problems.

• ie. People who don't need to refer to an instruction manual (or a line manager... ) for every professional hurdle they encounter...

• People who have unique knowledge or talents.

• ie. People who have something that is rare and difficult to replace - think the expert in their field, the sportsperson with a special talent...

It is those that are demonstrating these traits that will be doing the most important work (c/f those that are still operating in the 'factory' mindset... ).

The big obstacle.

Our "lizard brain" - the limbic system of our brains. This section is the evolutionary elder of the neocortex, which is the section that drives our creativity, our complex problem solving and our big-picture, future-oriented thinking.
Unfortunately, this more biologically-entrenched part of our brain tends to be difficult to overrule, even by the more rational thinking neocortex... This results in a "resistance" to that which is not familiar, that which is beyond the status quo, that which is new and different...

To be valuable, to do the important work, we need to overcome this resistance and unleash the natural strengths of the newer parts of our brain.

How do schools create an environment that develops "linchpins" and allows them to thrive?

In creating an environment that promotes the development of this new type of worker, schools would need to allow, indeed encourage, staff to utilise their creativity, their individual strengths, solve problems, etc. - conditions that allow teachers to separate themselves from being "a cog in the... machine". Teachers need opportunity to prove themselves as difficult to replace.
We have cause for optimism - all schools would already have these sorts of "linchpins" within their ranks. There are probably a myriad of creative ways to maximise the impact of these influential teachers and staff members, but a couple of basic tenets stand out for me:

• Give them large amounts of autonomy - let them 'off the leash' to create, innovate, anticipate and solve problems, spread ideas and generally, 'do their thing'...
• Feed their sense of purpose - prioritise and focus their roles on important work, not trivial, menial tasks that *anybody* could do.

People and their work - a changing relationship...

Words that I'm uncomfortable with...

Below are a few words that I'm a little uncomfortable with, when they're used in an education context... I don't generally break out in a cold sweat when I hear these words... but, for me, they tend to send a message, represent a particular belief, or imply a notion that I don't feel good about.

Awards / rewards

As in: Students receiving these for some form of achievement...
Why not? They are often awarded too far past the actual achievement; They are extrinsic motivators which do little to facilitate intrinsic drivers or sustainably motivate students; They can devalue those that don't get the award; They tend to promote competition, rather than collaboration.
Alternative(s)? There is not much doubt about the importance of feedback for student learning - feedback often includes points, stickers, reward systems, etc, but the focus should still be on informing the child about what they've done right / wrong and what they need to do to improve. Extrinsic motivators can play a part in providing this feedback ('I've earned points for that action - I must be doing the right thing... '), but we should try to avoid having them become the reason the child performs the task... 

Behaviour management

As in: 'You need good behaviour management to be able to control the class... '
Why not? The word "management" wrecks it for me... It implies a negative outlook - 'the best I can hope for is to 'manage' these students... '. It also suggests that control is the goal, or the desired outcome.
Alternative(s)? 'Student wellbeing'... 'Behaviour development'... 'Social skills'... Anything that shifts to a growth mindset would be preferable for me - I want to help people learn, not control them...

Compliant

As in: 'The students should be compliant... ', or 'Little Johnny is being non-compliant... '
Why not? My iPad dictionary's definition is "Inclined to agree with others or obey rules, especially to an excessive degree" - ummm... excessively agreeing with others doesn't really fit with 21st century skills and mindsets like critical thinking and innovation... And I am not a ruler of a kingdom - I don't want, need or deserve (!) to be obeyed...
Alternative(s)? Engaged = attracted, involved, participated - a far loftier goal for how we want students to act in our classrooms.

Consistency

As in: 'There should be consistency from teacher to teacher, from classroom to classroom... '
Why not? I'm not as sure about this one, as this is a commonly-stated goal for school improvement... However, it doesn't really sit well with me - consistency is good if it refers to raising the level of quality to the highest level in existence, but not if it is restricting people by devaluing their individual strengths...
Alternative(s)? I think we need to do more to unleash teachers to exercise their individual strengths. Having to conform is demotivating. Perhaps aspiring towards consistency through a greater focus on collaboration and sharing of individual strengths is a better way...

Explicit

As in: 'We need to make sure we are doing the explicit teaching'...
Why not? I'll refer again to the iPad's dictionary... "Stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt". I'm not against this form of teaching, per se, but it is more the common, underlying message that I'm not comfortable with - to me, when someone makes a statement like the example above, they are reinforcing traditional, teacher-centric models of education. I think there are times when kids need to have concepts and skills "stated clearly and in detail... ", but I don't think we need to be reinforcing and promoting 'telling' at the expense of authentic, first hand learning experiences if we can help it...
Alternative(s)? Anything that shifts the emphasis from the teaching to the learning.

Instruction

As in: 'The quality of instruction is important to student learning'... 
Why not? Like the previous example, it is more the message being sent than the actual application of the term, itself, that doesn't 'sit right' with me... 'Instruction' is defined as "a direction or order", or "detailed information telling how something should be done... ". Similar to the last example, it values the notion of the teacher being heavily responsible for any learning that occurs. We know that students having first-hand experiences of concepts for themselves leads to deep and lasting learning - 'instruction' implies a restriction of this capacity, as information is 'fed' to students.
Alternative(s)? Similar to the previous example - shift the emphasis to the student being the most active participant in the learning experience, rather than passively receiving from the teacher... Perhaps 'guiding', or 'assisting'..?

Preparing for (High School... University... Tests... )

As in: 'We need to be preparing students for the homework demands they will have in high school... for how to write essays at university... for how to take mandated, standardised tests... '
Why not? No we don't - we don't need to dumb down and compromise what we hold to be our best practice, in order to 'prepare' students for somebody else's poor practice.
Alternative(s)? Stick to our guns about what we believe to be best for student learning - don't throw out these beliefs and values because other institutions are making poor decisions... 

Respect

As in: 'Little Johnny [may or may not be the same child from the earlier example... ] is not showing any respect... '
Why not? This is a tricky one, as showing and treating people with respect is undoubtedly a good thing. However, sometimes it comes across from people that they are 'entitled' to automatic respect, by way of their position. This is not a healthy way for teachers, school leaders, or anybody to go about seeking respect. People - children included - rightly respect actions and behaviours, rather than positions or titles.
Alternative(s)? Something that implies equality in the relationship - respect should be reciprocal. We need to earn the respect of the students and the colleagues that we work with via our actions. 

Standards

As in: 'We need to set some standards about student behaviour... ', or 'your child's report reflects their achievement against their year level standards... '
Why not? Regarding behaviour, we obviously need to have some clearly-communicated boundaries that students understand, but it is the overly-aggressive, show-'em-who's-boss, standard-setting that can ruin relationships before they have a chance to form... With standards-based curriculum reporting, it seems a little easier to inform parents how their child compares [albeit in simplistic, five-point scale terms... ], but a little harder to accurately inform them of where their child is actually achieving at and the appropriate next steps for their future learning... 
Alternative(s)? We need to teach students appropriate behaviours, just like we teach them to read, write, etc. Expecting students to all meet a designated standard [and getting upset when they don't] is akin to expecting them to all be at the same standard for English, Maths, etc. With curriculum standards, we need to be careful that we are not funneling people down a narrow path towards a... standard [!!] outcome - people need opportunity to focus on and develop their unique interests, talents and passions.

Tradition

As in: 'That is the tradition around here... '
Why not? Excessive reliance on traditional ways is becoming less and less useful in a world that is changing faster and faster. 
Alternative(s)? We need to be open to change and new ways. 'Because that's the way we've done it in the past... ' is becoming less and less valid as a reason for making a decision. 


What do you think..?

Why School?

I've just finished reading Why School, by Will Richardson - another notch on the holiday reading list belt! 

The book makes a compelling case for why and how education needs to be revolutionised.

The Old [Existing... ] Way

"Our story about education has gone basically unrevised for 150 years. Time's up."

Sure, there have been some changes to the way we educate children over the course of time, but these have been of incremental, even glacial pace given the vast period of time that 'formal' education has existed for... 

A rough timeline of change in Education... 

Whilst there may be some give or take on the actual dates in the graphic above, it can be said with some safety that we, as a profession, are still using some the same methods and approaches that we were [gulp... ] 1000 + years ago!?!

Education has been / is slow to respond to the changing way that society is learning, communicating and recreating. A similarly slow response has been seen from Education to other trends of societal change, including Gamification and Social Media... 
Teenagers and Business are a couple of segments of society that have generally been much quicker to adapt to these changes than Education has been...  

No so much the old, but certainly the recent and current excessive focus on standardised testing and competition, has lead to an inevitable narrowing of focus - narrowing of curriculum content and skills that students are exposed to, as well narrowing methods of measuring how 'good' a student / teacher / school / country(!) is.

The pathway towards educational 'success'..?

This heightened state of urgency regarding testing, data and measurement of progress is all related to a philosophy of ongoing, incremental improvement... This is laudable, as we all [should] want to get better at what we do... 

The Case for Radical Change

Education no longer needs gradual 'tweaking'... We refine, polish and focus on minute improvements when we are near-perfection - our systems and methods were likely closer to this state when we were preparing students for an industrial society. A factory processing model was appropriate when students were likely to end up working in factories, or occupations that relied upon consistent and accurate application of fundamental skills and knowledge. In the future - even now, in the present - there will be far greater value placed upon creativity, problem-solving, collaboration and other much-quoted(!) '21st Century Skills'.
So we don't need improvement, we need significant, revolutionary change - we need to be "doing school 'differently', instead of simply 'better'".  

One of the most significant changes that has occured in society, which Richardson keeps coming back to, is the sheer abundance of information that is available to almost anyone nowadays - there is now unprecedented accessibility to knowledge and knowledgeable people. This information and expertise is only becoming increasingly accessible.

The New Way

"In this new story, real learning happens anytime, anywhere, with anyone we like - not just with a teacher and some same-age peers, in a classroom, from September to June." 

• Students have increased autonomy about what they are learning - less sausage factory, more motivated learners.


• Learners should have flexibility about where they seek assistance from - go to where the expertise is, rather than a central, nominated person who cannot possibly be expert in all areas...


• Provision of opportunities and experiences for children to participate in and learn from digital environments - don't ignore these increasingly significant aspects of our lives. 


• Discovery, rather than delivery - "move away from telling kids what to learn, and when and how to learn it."


• More collaborating with other people and creating new products of learning, less consuming of content.


• Teachers to be collaborating, communicating and sharing with fellow professionals beyond their own school - spread quality practice and ideas.


• We [students and teachers] need to be good at learning, not simply knowing or remembering - knowledge is not only increasingly easy for people to access, it "is constantly changing and being updated", as well. 


• Teachers need to adopt a mindset of being ongoing learners - "... the adults in the room need to be learners first and teachers second."

Is inspiring too strong a word..? The book was certainly motivating and left me hopeful that, despite the stodginess of Education systems and the burden of overcoming "the roots of 150 years of tradition around schooling", teachers can begin to join bottom-up reforms of how we teach and how we ask students to learn.

Brain Bugs

I recently finished reading a book by Dean Buonomano about the brain and some of its imperfections - Brain Bugs: How The Brain's Flaws Shape Our Lives.

There were a series of fascinating insights into some of the dilemmas we face, as a result of the human brain's recent struggles to evolve at a rate that is consistent with the rate of change we are experiencing in modern society. There was also plenty of practical advice for how we can help our own brains [and those of others] overcome some of these biologically-stubborn 'flaws'... 

A complex device

"Your brain is a web made of approximately 90 billion neurons linked by 100 trillion synapses - which in terms of elements and connections surpasses the World Wide Web, with its approximately 20 billion Web pages connected by a trillion links."

Human Brain vs the World Wide Web... 

For a variety of evolutionary reasons, our brains are naturally-inclined to be good at making approximations, recognising patterns and making connections. This points to the importance of students learning about knowledge / skills / concepts in an interrelated manner and being taught to make conceptual connections, rather than being taught knowledge and skills in an isolated, 'stand-alone' fashion - our minds work best by storing knowledge "in an associative manner: related concepts... are linked to each other."

On the other hand, human brains perennially struggle with mathematical calculations - we will "never be able to match the numerical prowess of digital computers". Despite our ability to carry out highly-complex tasks ["... virtually every human brain on the planet can master a language... "], we have to think hard in order to solve relatively simple mental calculations... 
Our brains are also quite poor storage devices - there are limits to how much information we can store and how accurately we can recall that information. Fortunately, technology is fast alleviating this issue for us - there is an ever-lessening need to ask the brain to store information, as we now have Google, YouTube, Internet-connected mobile devices, electronic calendars, etc. to perform these tasks for us.
In schools, we no longer need to be focusing on 'filling up' students with knowledge and content - knowledge is increasingly accessible in the age of the Internet and it is biologically inefficient!

Manipulating behaviour and motivating people

It seems we may be 'hard wired' to seek immediate gratification - particularly for activities that are related to the limbic section of the brain, responsible for some of our more basic functions. 
The term temporal discounting has been coined to describe how "the perceived value of a reward decreases with time." i.e. We become progressively less interested in a potential reward the longer that we have to wait to receive it... 
So we need to provide frequent positive feedback about progress to students [and teachers... ], to ensure that they engage with the journey towards the long-term outcomes - show them the steps along the way, not just the final destination. Gamification, with its focus on short cycles of feedback about the performance of 'players', does this well.

"... our brain is rigged to favor immediate gratification" - people need short cycles of feedback to maximise motivation.

Irrational Fears

We excessively fear many things because it made biological sense to fear such things 100,000 years ago... eg: We have an "innate uneasiness and distrust of outsiders... [because] competition and aggression between neighboring groups was constant throughout human evolution... " This 'innate', but often irrational fear, is routinely exploited by politicians ["amygdala politics"] and others, in order to strengthen their followings.
These outdated fear circuits reflect our genetic encoding, which "can only be reprogrammed on a slow evolutionary timescale". Skunks are a good example of "the consequences of running an outdated operating system". The cocky skunks will nonchalantly turn around and spray a potential enemy with their powerful odor - a tactic that serves them well against most species they encounter, but not against speeding cars... 
These outdated fears also commonly lead to excessive conservatism and reliance upon traditional ways. Partly, this is due to our memories having "no convenient way to delete information" - even proven bad information can be hard to eradicate... 

So how do we overcome conservative and outdated - but tightly-held - views that exist in our schools..? How do we expediate necessary change?

Overcoming our 'brain bugs'

In order to effectively tackle the inherent flaws of our brains, we need to develop our awareness of how the brain works.

The term, asymmetric paternalism [George Loewenstein] refers to the concept of enacting laws and regulations that "take our propensity to make irrational decisions into account." Without restricting our freedom or available choices, such laws "should nudge us toward the decisions that are in our own and society's best interests"... 

• If we had greater collective awareness of the brain's workings and its potential flaws, would schools be able to put some structures and processes in place to protect against irrational conservatism, or fear of difference..?

Another approach is to use the brain's propensity to value the behaviour of the group - "studies suggest that one of the most important determinants of people's behaviour is what they believe others are doing... ".

• Do schools need to work harder at promoting and celebrating people who are demonstrating the behaviours and actions we are hoping to 'spread'..?

Anyway, that's enough for now, my brain hurts...