Leading Professional Learning and Development (PLD) with Purpose ~ U

View this email in your browser

Leading Professional Learning and Development (PLD) with Purpose The research findings on effective PLD (Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, & Fung, 2007) have been out a long time, so one might reasonably expect that positive changes would have been made at the school level, but often, our observations do not support this assumption. Take one of the major and best-known findings: effective PLD should involve the school leaders, not just the teachers.  Someone recently said in my hearing that that was mostly the case now.  Unfortunately, that is not our experience.  We frequently find that school leaders are not involved in the same PLD opportunities as their teachers. No doubt there are many good reasons for this.  The most obvious is probably time. For example, if a senior leader has carried out formal learning in the topic, they may well justify their non-attendance.  And if the leader is a principal of a large school, they may well feel conflicted as there is probably a lot of PLD going on and they cannot attend it all. This last point regarding too much PLD illuminates the biggest problem in PLD, in my view.  There is still too much of it happening in schools and it is frequently not specifically connected to the identified causes of key learning problems that are negatively impacting teacher practices and student learning.  If it was tightly-connected to problems in current practices, schools would have a plan for key shifts they want in teacher behaviours each term (agreed with teachers) and key shifts in learner outcomes.  Rather, we still tend to see very generalised PLD that makes no effort to check its effectiveness against key teacher outcomes, and key learner outcomes. Thus, I once again conclude that while there is a lot of talk about the spiral of inquiry, learning and action (Timperley, Kaser, & Halbert, 2014), what we see demonstrates a lack of understanding of its fundamental messages, one of which is that the effectiveness of ‘teacher learning’ should be a collective inquiry and one that is regularly checked against desired shifts in teacher outcomes and desired shifts in learner outcomes (quick wins).  In other words, its effectiveness needs regular checking on small easily discernible, but important teacher and learner outcomes. The current practice of allocating PLD hours to schools and Kāhui Ako may well be unintentionally reinforcing these poor practices.  The fact that schools and Kāhui Ako get this ‘free’ means they are often overly hasty to apply for it (don’t want to miss a deadline) and then look for ways to ‘spend it’ without having carried out the key causal inquiry.  Old habits are hard to break. Leaders have been applying PLD as if it is a generalised ‘treatment’ for what they see as generalised problems with teaching, for a long time. Effective PLD is led by school leaders to address specific and clearly articulated problems (i.e., they are not a secret)  (Timperley et al., 2007).  Leaders and teachers need a very clear purpose for PLD and that purpose arises from a clear problem definition – i.e., what is the major cause of this issue that we need to address?  That is the ‘inquiry’ part that is supposed to precede the PLD or ‘learning’ part of the cycle.  And that is just the beginning.  Where is the ‘action’ part of the cycle?  The action is the change in teacher and leader practices.  Leaders’ actions will inevitably be part of the problem.  Organisational practices that leaders set up, create the conditions for teachers to learn and act.  Often, these are key barriers or enablers for better outcomes.  In other words, leaders and teachers both need to be part of the problem definition and part of the solution – it is not an ‘either or’ and the solution will not only rest with PLD.  Any improvement is likely to require multiple strategies to get the desired shift in outcomes. But it is the regular checking for those shifts in teacher, leader and learner outcomes that is the big missing piece in the improvement efforts of most schools and Kāhui Ako that strikes me over and over again.  Outcomes are, it seems, often just afterthoughts or ‘hoped for’ results that will come along sometime. So, some practical advice from the research and many observations of what is not done well in New Zealand and Australia are: If you are a leader of a large organisation and it is not realistic for you to attend a given PLD opportunity that you nonetheless think is important for your staff, get them to present you with some key findings and the recommendations along with the rationale for those changes that arise from what they have learnt.  This allows them to influence you and your thinking.  When leaders are not involved it is critical that they know what they have to do to provide the support for the required changes. Don’t just ‘get in’ PLD.  Have a very clear purpose for it and be open with staff about what the purpose is.  Too often leaders hide their true concerns but if you do that you are not opening your thinking up to critique and validity testing. Do bring in some critical expert voice (not a provider who simply wants to be re-employed and therefore does not offer critique).  The ‘answer’ is not always in the room.  Timperley and colleagues (2007) point to a study where three conditions were tested: one where teachers gave each other collegial support, one where teachers worked from a text book and one where they engaged repeatedly with an expert.  No prizes for guessing which was the only method that made an impact; the one with outside expertise.  Outsiders with a level of expertise see things differently to those who are used to ‘the way things are here’. Don’t treat PLD as something to ‘be done’ and then move onto the next thing; effective PLD requires multiple opportunities for adult learning and lots of time for teachers to engage with the ideas. But most importantly of all, have a way of checking that some shifts are happening every term: for leaders, teachers and learners!  If you are not getting improved results in the short term, there will be no motivation to continue and it is unlikely you will get better results by waiting and hoping. We know this is not easy to do.  That is clear by how rarely we see it effectively enacted.  But please, give the effectiveness of your PLD some critical thought and if relevant, take some small steps to improve it. Linda Bendikson Direction, UACEL  l.bendikson@auckland.ac.nz Follow UACEL on Facebook

10 Characteristics of Learner Centered Experiences  

Posted on October 7, 2017by Katie Martin

Education Reimagined defines the paradigm shift from teacher-centered to learner-centered as shifting how we see learners and their critical role in their own learning now, and throughout their lives. The critical shift is that “Learners are seen and known as wondrous, curious individuals with vast capabilities and limitless potential. This paradigm recognizes that learning is a lifelong pursuit and that our natural excitement and eagerness to discover and learn should be fostered throughout our lives, particularly in our earliest years.” When we focus on learners, connect to their interests, needs, and goals, we can create experiences that ignite curiosity, develop passion, and unleash genius.  As I work with diverse educators and talk with students, there are common characteristics that always surface when people share powerful learning experiences. They often share experiences that are: personal, allow learners to exert agency, have goals and accountability, they are inquiry-based, collaborative, authentic, allow for productive struggle, provide and use models, ensure time for critique and revision as well as reflection.
As I think about some of the most impactful learning experiences in my own life, they align with the same characteristics that I hear from others. One of the most recent and definitely impactful learning experiences was the opportunity to participate in a TEDx event and do a talk along with some amazing friends and educators. My experience encompassed diverse opportunities for growth and empowered me to grow and learn significantly. Reflecting on my own learning and what others share with me regularly makes me think about the how we learn in schools and how critical it is to create the conditions that support learner-centered experiences in diverse classrooms.

Personal 

In an effort to create more purpose and autonomy in schools, there is an increased focus on personalized learning.  This is a good thing but it can also be overwhelming for those who are responsible for the outcomes to allow learners (educators and students) to learn in ways that meet their needs. Too often for the sake of “convenience” we standardize learning experiences that rarely meet the needs for all.  Instead, personal learning connects to learner’s beliefs, strengths, experiences, and passions to start from where the learner is and move forward from the towards the desired learning goals.
As I reflected on this and connected it to the TedX experience, I realized that what made it personal is that I got to choose the content and had the autonomy to organize the talk in a way that made sense to me. What is also important to note is that nobody else spent time making this a personalized learning experience for me. The goals were the same for all of us- 8 minutes to share your idea worth spreading. The difference was in the flexibility and resources to learn in ways that met our unique goals and needs. I had access to resources on public speaking to watch at my own pace and set milestones to reach along the way that directly related to developing and delivering the talks.

Agency

To support my learning I had access to an online course with a variety of modules. If there was a course that I wasn’t interested in or was not helpful at the moment, I skipped it and found additional resources that best helped me to meet my overall goal, not micromanaged to complete each and every task. Everything I learned was purposeful and related to growing my own expertise and confidence to be at my personal best and I was held accountable by an authentic task.
What these experiences have continuously taught me is that we can’t control the learners and simultaneously expect them to be motivated without opportunities to exert agency in the learning process. Agency comes from the power to act and requires learners to have the ability to make decisions and take ownership of their own behaviors in the process.  To close this gap in how we want to learn in schools will require changing how we design learning experiences for educators.  

Goals + Accountability

From the time we finalized the speaker list to the event date, we had four weeks to prepare our talks and it was intense!  We backwards mapped our plan from the date of the even and created a plan and strategic goals to be ready in time. I had weekly check-ins with coaches and assignments each week that were directly related to crafting the speech.   At the end of the four weeks, I was accountable for delivering an 8-minute talk and my own level of accountability to bring my personal best far exceeded any external measures that anyone else could have placed on me.
We often prioritize what we are held accountable and for this very reason accountability systems are set in place to check homework, take attendance and make sure that you taught the curriculum.  This is where the accountability gets a bad rap. Often times because it is easier to measure, we hold people accountable for standardized tests, grades, and other data that is easy to capture yet often fail to set goals and hold others accountable for developing the skills that we say we actually care about like creative thinking, complex thinking and problem solving, communication, and innovation.

Inquiry-based

 Inevitably, when learners are posing questions and seeking answers, they are more invested than if they are being told what to think or do.  In my case it was, ‘What makes a great talk?’ and ‘How can I best organize and share my ideas?’ I was motivated read, watch, listen to a lot of different speakers to organize my ideas and develop the talk and the slides.  When challenges are presented or learners can find their own to solve, they are often more intrinsically motivated to seek answers to questions that they are genuinely interested in figuring out.

Collaboration

Although I was the only one on stage, this was far from an individual endeavor.  I had to work with many people along the way that was critical to the process. I called on different individuals based on their strengths throughout the process.  And at times, when I wasn’t ready I had a team that pulled me along and made sure that I was pushed to do my best. The face to face collaboration was important but I wasn’t limited by that as I could reach out to others in my network and learn from diverse individuals. Creating opportunities for learners to build on the strengths of others and work together allows for new and better ideas to emerge.  When we are exposed to diverse ideas and perspectives, we grow in our own practice and impact others as well.

Authentic

My excitement and anxiety about the event was fueled by the public accountability of my performance in front of people I really admire. Also, the fact that it was being recorded for anyone to see took it up a notch too. Having this experience reinforced the importance of creating opportunities for students to share their work beyond the classroom. Connecting students with experts, peers and other learners allow for a different level of accountability and authentic feedback than one gets from simply handing something into a teacher for a grade. Experiences, where learners get to solve a challenge that is meaningful and relevant to their context, can empower learners to take action and do something that matters to them and others.

Critique + Revision

Over course of the four weeks, I had many, many iterations of my talk.  The first ones were bad. Really bad. Thankfully, nobody was grading my first drafts and I had multiple opportunities for critique and revision.  I had to push myself to practice in front of my peers, knowing it was far from perfect.  Feedback, by nature, will unearth some things that need to improve and is not always easy to hear. But if we don’t create conditions where feedback is part of the process, how can we expect real growth in our learning?
With each version that I shared it with my friends and family and coaches, it got better (never perfect). Instead of expecting the first draft to be the best, we need to realize that with time, clarity, critique and revision, we are capable of much more than we realize. When we raise our expectations and create the conditions to achieve those expectations, people will often go above and beyond. It is important to deliberately create the conditions where learners feel valued and can openly share challenges to grow and improve as a critical part of the learning process.  

Productive Struggle

Creating an environment where learners are encouraged to take risks in pursuit of learning and growth rather than perfection is absolutely foundational to shifting practices. I know a lot of people have done these talks or some version of them and it’s not a big deal. I also had people tell me that is it would be their worst nightmare. It definitely was a step out of my comfort zone but within reach and I am thankful for the opportunity to push myself.  This reminded me of one of my students in 7th grade who had just moved from the Philippines and his English was not very strong yet.  I had assigned each student do a presentation and he wouldn’t do it. I could have tried to force him or I could have failed him but instead, I asked if he would be willing to share his presentation with me and a friend.  He thought about it and agreed.  This was the right amount of struggle for him and a safe learning environment, whereas the for the others it was in front of the class and in other venues.  The learning task has to be within the right zone and allow for a productive struggle or some learners will shut down if they feel it is too far out of reach, even if you threaten them with a failing grade.  This also means that the right task or product will likely be different based on the learners in the class.

Models

While I was preparing for my talk I watched a lot of TED Talks. They helped me see how great speakers put their stories together, how to craft their slide deck, and how they connect with their audience. Each time I watched, I had a different focus depending on where I was as a learner. Models are so powerful in the learning process but so often in school, we have this fear of copying or cheating.  There is a lot of talk about creating rather than consuming but to create something better, I relied on models to inspire new ideas, build off of and stimulate my own thinking and creativity. No matter how much I loved Brene Brown or Simon Sinek’s talk, I couldn’t copy them but they did inspire me in a lot of ways. If an assignment has only one right answer or final product, maybe there are some opportunities for it to be revised.

Reflection

Reflection is often the forgotten part of the learning process, in a fast moving world, taking time to pause and reflect can easily get cut when we lack time but it is often the most valuable part of the learning process. I videotaped myself and although this was painful and I hated every minute of watching it, it helped me see what I looked like and sounded like and reflect on where I could improve. Taking in what I had learned from others, the feedback I received and figuring out how to make the changes in my own way, was critical to my growth.
I would love to hear your thoughts and ideas on the 10 characteristics.  What am I missing?  What could be revised?

Why do we STILL have reports?

June 10, 2018 | whatedsaid

Why is it that, in this day and age of instant communication, most schools and parents still expect the kind of report card suited to another era?
Why do reports traditionally go out twice a year, when there are endless ways teachers and learners can, and do, communicate their learning throughout the year?
Why do teachers spend great chunks of time reporting in a summative way on a final report, when formative assessment, goals and ‘feed forward’ during the year are so much more valuable?
Why don’t teachers, parents and learners share the learning via online portfolios, easily accessible throughout the year, demonstrating process, progress and final product, with facility for reflection by students, feedback by parents and ‘feedforward’ by teachers?
Why don’t learners communicate their learning more with parents and the wider world through the many possible channels available online?
Why do governments and administrators continue to dictate not just the existence of report cards, but often the format and parameters they should fit?
What if the hours teachers spend writing and proofreading reports were instead allocated to professional learning and collaborative planning that enhanced future learning?
and…
WHY has so little changed in the four years since I last wrote those questions?

3 Questions To Challenge Practices That No Longer Work in Education George Curous

The Principal of Change

Stories of learning and leading

In the 06/03/2018 edition:

• 3 Questions To Challenge Practices That No Longer Work in Education

3 Questions To Challenge Practices That No Longer Work in Education

By George on Jun 03, 2018 07:36 am

I read this snippet from the article, “Why Children Aren’t Behaving, And What You Can Do About It,”(a great read) in an interview with author Katherine Reynolds Lewis, regarding her new parenting book, The Good News About Bad Behavior:

Whether you’re trying to get your child to dress, do homework or practice piano, it’s tempting to use rewards that we know our kids love, especially sweets and screen time. You argue in the book: Be careful. Why?

Yes. The research on rewards is pretty powerful, and it suggests that the more we reward behavior, the less desirable that behavior becomes to children and adults alike. If the child is coming up with, “Oh, I’d really like to do this,” and it stems from his intrinsic interests and he’s more in charge of it, then it becomes less of a bribe and more of a way that he’s structuring his own morning.

The adult doling out rewards is really counterproductive in the long term — even though they may seem to work in the short term. The way parents or teachers discover this is that they stop working. At some point, the kid says, “I don’t really care about your reward. I’m going to do what I want.” And then we have no tools. Instead, we use strategies that are built on mutual respect and a mutual desire to get through the day smoothly.

I have written about the impact of awards before and although we know long term that awards often do more harm than good for critical thinking skills and intrinsic motivation, why do schools still do them? My gut tells me this is more about tradition than what is good for our learners.  It is hard to move away from what always was, to move to what could be, because we are often too scared to challenge and ask questions.  “Tradition” from the past doesn’t ensure success from the future.

This is not to say that some “traditions” haven’t been challenged and rethought for the betterment of our students. As a kid, I hated reading because I was continuously forced to read books that were no interest to me. Now, you are seeing educators focusing on helping students find books that they love, even if they are harder than their “level,” and kids are becoming more interested in reading because they get to read texts that interest them, and in many ways, represent who they are.  Of course, we have a long way to, but I have seen a significant shift in this practice alone because it is more about what is best for learners than this is what we have always done.

If we want to challenge our schools to move forward, we have to start questioning some of the things that we have always done and thought about and focus on what we can create.

Here is a simple exercise that can make an impact to move forward.  Ask your staff to identify something that we need to rethink our schools.  Have them answer these three questions:

1. Why did we do that practice in the past? 
2. Is it beneficial to our current students in the long-term?
3. What could we do instead that would be better for our students?

There are two major reasons why these questions are crucial.

The first, which is obvious, is to ensure that we are doing what is best for students.  The second reason is that we do not shift to something new in our school without really thinking about whether it works or not.  There are some practices from the past that are still relevant in schools, and when you change something solely for the sake of changing it, you will cause more issues than solve.

If you are interested in implementing this process with your schools (or a modified version), please involve parents and students in the process.  NEVER change something that has been a tradition for years in your school without involving your community.  They need to understand and be able to contribute to the solutions, not just sit on the sidelines.

As I stated earlier, not all past practices are wrong, as well, not all new methods are suitable.  That being said, it is crucial to ask, “Why do we still do this?” and not just get comfortable with what has been done in the past while we know there are better ways.  Tradition has its place but it should never limit the opportunities for the future of our learners.

The Push and Pull of Leadership - George Couros

The Principal of Change

Stories of learning and leading

In the 05/27/2018 edition:

• The Push and Pull of Leadership

The Push and Pull of Leadership

By George on May 27, 2018 07:24 am

Ugh…I love this quote so much from “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People“:

Look at the weaknesses of others with compassion, not accusation. It’s not what they’re not doing or should be doing that’s the issue. The issue is your own chosen response to the situation and what you should be doing. If you start to think the problem is “out there,” stop yourself. That thought is the problem.

This reminded me of a conversation I had years ago with a principal who was complaining about their teachers not coming along. As he complained, I asked, “If you are the leader and they are not moving forward, could the issue be with you and not with them?”

The comment was not to lay blame but to remind the principal that leadership was about leading.  How good of a leader can one be if no one is ready to follow?

Instead of laying blame on others on why they won’t move forward, ask questions, get to know where they are coming from, and go to them.  Leadership is both push and pull.  It is not about getting someone to jump from A to Z, but finding out where the point A is, what that looks like, and sometimes walking beside them to help them build confidence and competence along the way to get to that point B.  After that, point C doesn’t seem so bad.

Of course, this is not to say the individual doesn’t have a responsibility for their growth either.  But understand, you cannot change anyone. You can only create the conditions where change is more likely to happen.

Just remember that the next time you get frustrated with someone seemingly not moving forward, don’t try to figure out what is wrong with them or their attitude. Figure out what you can do to support them on their journey.  Complaining about what is wrong will never make it right.

• November 1, 2017 A Cadence of Accountability to One Another
• January 19, 2016 Why Your Best People Leave and Why That Can Be Okay
• February 15, 2015 5 Ideas for Conversations on Change
• April 9, 2018 Focusing on 3 Layers of Education
• March 21, 2016 The Message and the Messenger

An Integral Curriculum at Amesbury School

https://www.futureofeducation.nz/future-of-education-dr-lesley-murrihy-articles/2017/11/13/an-integral-curriculum-at-amesbury-school

An Integral Curriculum at Amesbury School

March 05, 2017

Ensuring that learning is real life and takes place in an authentic learning context is one of the commonly touted characteristics of 21st century learning.  The main thinking behind this is that students will learn best when there is a real purpose for their learning. I am sure this is true. However, I am coming to understand that a much more important reason is that the complex times our children are growing into will require a much greater ability to make decisions which are very complex in nature. These decisions will require synthesis of huge amounts of wide-ranging, diverse and contradictory information and ideas, complex thought processes, strong moral/social justice awareness ( a strong vision of how the world should be) and an acute political awareness. As a staff, we have come to know this as decisional capital as per Michael Fullan and Andy Hargreaves (Developing Professional Capital, 2013); and, I think, the only way to gain this capacity is to engage with real life problems. Decisional capital cannot be taught as a bunch of skills in isolation, though skills are a necessary component. Decisional capital is developed as people engage with the messiness of real life situations and problems and use reflective and other practices to increase their understanding of the reality of how the world works and make decisions which display this increasing “practical wisdom.”

At Amesbury School we believe it is important that this kind of learning is not only for the adults in the school; but that students have opportunities to begin to develop decisional capital. We also do believe (as above) that students learn best when they can see a real purpose for their learning, and “real life contexts” provide this.  Hence, at Amesbury we strive to deliver an “integral” curriculum. This means that learning begins with real world experiences/interactions or problems or contexts. As we inquire into the experience/interaction, we realise that we need skills to understand the “thing” better and so we step aside from the real world experience and learn the skills that will help us with our inquiry. We then take the skills back into the inquiry and now we are better equipped to carry on our investigation into how the world works.

This is the ideal process, but the reality is that learning, particularly in the early years at school cannot always (or even often) be based on real life contexts. There is considerable skill-based learning that needs to happen so that students can begin to engage more deeply in the inquiry process. So, though it is our belief that skill-based learning such as reading, writing and maths is best when it “falls out” of an inquiry, we realise that for our junior students particularly, learning programmes need to be more skills-based until the students develop a sufficient level of skill to access learning at a deeper level within an inquiry. This changeover of emphasis happens at different ages for different children. We believe, in general, that it happens about the time a student reaches Level 20 in reading. An important aspect of the personalisation of learning at Amesbury School is recognising where students are at and ensuring that each child’s programme is appropriate to his/her developmental level in relation to this.

This “integral curriculum” approach is different from more traditional schools which tend to present decontextualised learning for much of the day and do this in very clearly defined bands of time.  At Amesbury, you are likely to see this much more in Koru Hub – although our goal is to integrate the skill-based learning of reading, writing and maths into inquiry as much as is practicable. But in Harakeke Hub, although, of course, reading, writing and maths are taught regularly; it, hopefully, will not happen in the kinds of clearly defined bands you might see in other schools. We would expect this learning, at this level, to be taught increasingly through an inquiry approach. Although, it might look a little different for individual students with differing needs.

The current inquiry called The Dragons’ Den” is a good example of this. A real-life, authentic opportunity to take part in the Churton Park Festival provided the context for the inquiry. Teachers looked at the matrices to see what achievement indicators in reading, writing and maths could/would authentically be covered during this inquiry and, in their planning, they set goals for each student. As students moved through the inquiry, the authentic activities or tasks they did for the inquiry, such as writing emails asking people for help and support or seeking information, provided evidence towards the achievement of the indicators. As required, and in a timely manner, the teachers provided skills-based workshops for each student who needed it, to assist students to gain the skills to successfully participate in the inquiry (such as giving change in maths or working out profit margins).

The teacher planning required for an integral approach to teaching and learning is complex. To begin with, we have the real life context of the inquiry which teachers need to explore and plan for.  What are the essential understandings of the world or the powerful ideas we want students to explore as part of this inquiry? Then we have the skills-based component. What reading, writing and maths skills will authentically “fall” out of the inquiry?  Teachers will have to prepare a range of skill-based workshops to cover these. However, there is a further layer – we now need to personalise this, because not all children will need the same workshops or the same level of workshop. Some students will already have the indicator highlighted on their matrix and they will need a different set of workshops or to cover a similar indicator at a higher level. Within the delivery of workshops, students will take more or less time to pick up the learning. This will need to be catered for in the planning.

Our commitment is that each child will receive the education that he/she needs, not the one that is better for another child in the group. Our commitment is also that we will not waste students’ time by having them sit through a workshop or session that is either too hard or too easy.  We want the learning of all students to be exactly as it needs to be.  Of course, this is aspirational…..we are not there yet.  However, we are getting closer to having the systems, structures and processes which will enable this aspiration to become a reality.

And then sometimes we are just not able to provide an authentic context for coverage of particular achievement indicators. Sometimes, in order to ensure coverage of the Amesbury Standards, we do just have to provide decontextualized skill-based learning. It is not how we prefer to do it, but sometimes it is the only way.

I know that as parents you want everything for your child. What makes this approach safe in terms of ensuring that the skill-based learning of reading, writing and maths is continuing appropriately within the “integral” framework, is our focus on the matrices. The matrices ensure a constant focus on where your child is at and where he/she needs to get to next.

I want to mention that an “integral” approach to learning introduces much more complexity to teachers’ work, but, we believe, it is the only way to go. The students’ engagement during The Dragons’ Den inquiry is testament to that fact. Many of you have commented to me on your child’s enjoyment. But let me be clear….it is fun, but it is not only fun. There is appropriate and personalised learning of the basics and some deeper understandings of the world all wrapped up into an engaging inquiry. As a result, our children will not only be able to do reading, writing and maths, but they will also learn to engage with the world in meaningful and complex ways.

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/@future-learning/2018/05/16/109682/modern-classrooms-wont-fix-education?preview=1

Dr Mohamed Alansari

Dr Mohamed Alansari is a research fellow at the University of Auckland’s School of Learning, Development and Professional Practice

FUTURELEARNING

Modern classrooms won’t fix education

Was it really the furniture that created NZ’s long tail of educational under-achievement in the first place? Dr Mohamed Alansari casts a critical eye over 'modern' classrooms 

As new waves of practitioners, researchers, and policy-makers assume command, school corridor chats often turn into betting rounds. Bets are often raised on which policy is going to be introduced next, which budget is going to get the chop next, and how teachers are going to be ‘summoned’ and ‘told’ how to teach better, where to teach, and what to teach more/less of.

Therefore, it is not surprising when new initiatives and policies are viewed as fads by those impacted directly.

One recent fad was the $517 million spent over the last five years to make classrooms ‘flexible’, ‘stylish’, ‘innovative’, and hence modern. Common definitions of such environments include:

Modern learning environment (MLE): a classroom that is different to the traditional style of rows of desks facing a teacher.

Innovative learning environment (ILE): a collaborative, flexible classroom that can evolve to meet the needs of a rapidly-changing society. It covers teaching style and technology, as well as lighting and colour.

Flexible learning environment (FLE): physical classroom design, encompassing light and colour, furniture, and how pupils and teachers are able to move between spaces.

But, teachers in a traditional classroom setting can still use collaborative and flexible processes, utilise the physical space to maximise learning time, and employ technology to enrich the learning experience of students. And, we have great case studies of schools who have always excelled irrespective of whether students were placed in small or large environments, using technology or not. So, why the need for a makeover? Was it really the furniture that created New Zealand’s long tail of educational under-achievement in the first place? Or are we just equating ‘modern’ with new and effective, and ‘traditional’ with old and ineffective, in the hope that the new will overcome the old?

Indeed, classroom makeovers seem to be undertaken with the view that IKEA-inspired spaces are likely to address (if not reverse) 30 years’ worth of current research that describes the educational inequities and challenges that continue to exist within our education system. While I do not disregard the potential benefits of enhancing learning environments, I do worry that this change is largely driven by financial constraints, and seldom accompanied by evidence-based practice.

There has been extensive media coverage of the mixed reaction to the modern classroom trend, and what is common among these articles is intriguing yet worrying. They show a lack of consensus on the pedagogical rationale, inconsistent (if not inaccurate) reporting of the effectiveness of such innovations on student learning gains, and the concerning view that some children would rather stay home than attend an overcrowded environment as judged by their parents.

Unless educational leaders recognise that significant changes in practice require time, ongoing support, and effective use of evidence and data for future improvements, modern learning environments may well be a multi-million dollar missed opportunity.

Because the research on modern versus traditional learning environments is yet to grow, I am only able to offer insights and questions for those interested in debates on learning environments for maximising student gains (note: the emphasis is on the learning environment, not its modernity):

Moving to a modern learning space does not necessarily mean students’ disciplinary or behavioural issues will vanish, nor does it mean that students’ academic achievement will peak. It also does not necessarily mean that workload is halved when two teachers are put into a larger space. So, what do modern learning environments really solve?

Teachers need to know what problems modern learning environments are going to solve, since they also know that other factors such as effective feedback, formative assessment practices, goal setting, micro teaching, enhanced classroom relationships, and high teacher expectations can explain twice as much the variance in student outcomes when compared with modernising learning environments.

I am often puzzled by authors who discuss modern learning environments and completely omit the seminal body of literature on learning environments, and instead use competing theories that support their arguments. Practitioners need to start looking for learning environments theories, and not just learning theories that help describe how learning can be facilitated in modern landscapes.

What we do know from previous research is that supportive learning environments can be characterised by strong classroom relationships, opportunities for personal growth, and classroom management practices that reduce disruptive time to increase learning time. So, as teachers transform their learning spaces, they will need to work out how to still retain the unique contribution of all these features. And the fact is, not all teachers can teach in modern learning spaces as of yet.

What is really required is evidence that modernising learning environments is the most effective solution to address the roots (not just the consequences) of existing educational problems/challenges. We need evidence that student academic gains in modern learning spaces are significantly larger than those in traditional spaces; and that these environments are beneficial to all students irrespective of their learning needs, individual differences, and demographics.

Now, by saying evidence I do not mean citing studies concluding that modern learning environments are ‘effective’ and ‘have a strong impact on student outcomes’ based on four interviews with teachers highly rated by their community. Nor do I mean a one-off survey of 100 native-speaking students who are already achieving at or above their expected levels of academic progress. A survey conducted on the other side of the world and published in a low-quality journal would not suffice either. Our students deserve better than that.

And then finally, the question must be asked about learning time for teachers to introduce, sustain, and monitor these modern learning environments. New initiatives often require strong buy-in and commitment from all those involved, including time for learning or upskilling. For some teachers, this can mean getting to work with other teachers they enjoy working with and admire; for others, in-class teacher cooperation is a new learning experience that requires trust, rigour, and capacity-building.

And so, unless educational leaders recognise that significant changes in practice require time, ongoing support, and effective use of evidence and data for future improvements, modern learning environments may well be a multi-million dollar missed opportunity.

Newsroom is powered by the generosity of readers like you, who support our mission to produce fearless, independent and provocative journalism.

Comments

Newsroom does not allow comments directly on this website. We invite all readers who wish to discuss a story or leave a comment to visit us on Twitter or Facebook. We also welcome your news tips and feedback via email: contact@newsroom.co.nz. Thank you.

Advertisement