Where's the research? Why we need to stop looking in the rear vision mirror at longitudinal research and data.

Don't get me wrong. There is no question that educational research is useful and that understanding what has worked in the past can and should inform our decisions about which pedagogical interventions we use day to day.

However if we limit ourselves to what is formally researched and published in peer reviewed papers we are going to continue to fail a good portion of our young people. To get a change in outcomes we must change our practice.

“If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.” - Henry Ford


It concerns me that there is still a tendency (for some) in education to dismiss new approaches, new strategies, new ideas, patronisingly belittling new ways of doing things as fads and passing fancies, simply because there is yet to be a lofty body of evidence that proves it works across the board. Sitting around and waiting for the evidence to be served up on a silver platter before you are willing to try new interventions and strategies is only going to result in our learners missing out on on a whole raft potentially effective and engaging approaches. It also results in practice becoming stale and whole schools becoming stuck state of stasis.

And let's be honest, even the proven stuff is not working for all students. If any of the researched approaches was the silver bullet we would all be sitting back watching all our students succeed. But of course the notion that any one approach is the answer is naive. Technology in and of itself is definitely not the answer (although universal access most definitely opens up your options for a greater variety of approaches), MLEs are definitely not the answer (although what they too enable a far greater variety of approaches), Hattie is not the answer (although his work may provide part of the answer for many). No one approach nor one collection of approaches is ever going to be the (complete) answer. And if it was the answer 25 years ago or even 25 days ago, the chances are it may not be the answer tomorrow.  In a world which is changing at an ever increasing rate the answer is going to keep on changing.

"The only constant is change" - Heraclitus

So what is the answer?

I believe it has to be and and.

As professionals we absolutely need to take it upon ourselves to be well read and well versed in what has been proven to work in the past and we need to have these approaches and strategies as a foundation for our pedagogical practice, the basis of our teaching toolkit. This might include; understanding what effective direct instruction looks like, understanding what effective questioning looks like, knowing how to give effective feedback and feedforward and so on and so forth. But if this is where we stop and look only to the past for our best practice, we are simply missing out on better practice. We will undoubtedly become less efficient, less relevant and ultimately run the risk of becoming redundant as a result of not changing our practice to meet that change of society and the demands that society puts upon our young people.

"When the rate of change outside of the organisation is faster than the rate of change inside the organisation, the end is in sight."  - Jack Welch 

If we are to evolve and adapt, if we have any hope of becoming what Linda Darling-Hammond refers to as adaptive experts, we absolutely must embrace the new, even if some strategies may not stand the test of time. Of course we do not blindly adopt every shiny new tool, strategy and approach for the sake of it. There is absolutely no point in innovation for the sake of innovation and change for the sake of change. In whatever we do, we absolutely must keep our eye on the prize - improving outcomes for our learners.

For me, the answer lies in nailing that stuff in the rear vision and being open to the new and shiny, albeit whilst appraising the new and shiny with a critical eye. This is where the concept of the "spiral of inquiry" or "disciplined inquiry" is key. If I am going to be creative, be innovative, be a risk taker, I absolutely have to do it in such a way that I am also critically evaluating the impact of 'new pedagogies' on my student's learning.

I really like the diagram below (from the REPORT of the Professional Learning and Development
Advisory Group) as it builds on the concept of teaching as inquiry. Beginning with the focusing inquiry where you 'Analyse what's going on for your learners', then 'Define your focus', Develop your thinking about why this happening', Learning more about what can be done' and the 'Take action - try new solutions' and then 'Check the difference you have made. '

Source: http://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/Initiatives/PLDAdvisoryGroupReport.pdf

This is the key, trialling the new and shiny when we have identified a need, develop our thinking, learn more and then try new things and then check if the new stuff worked. This is not about the risking the student's success by throwing out the baby with the bath water and blindly adopting every new practice that comes along, this is not about turning whole cohorts into lab rats or guinea pigs, this is about trying ew ideas and being willing to sometimes fail forward, now that at times you will in fact propel forward.

Personally I think we need to get on with trialling a whole range of seeming unproven strategies, as long as we are doing so mindfully and with a view to gathering the evidence as we go. We have to learn to embrace uncertainty and believe all of our abilities to create new knowledge and new approaches. And if we do gather evidence (whether it be successful or not), I believe we have a responsibility to disseminate and share, thereby building the body of evidence (whether it be quantitative, qualitative, empirical or anecdotal) to help ensure any particularly effective 'new pedagogies' are adopted alongside the tried and true.

And maybe it's time to stop glorifying 'best practice' and talking 'better practice' instead.

Share:

Navigating the space between educational paradigms

Source

One of the toughest things about being a champion for educational change is that you need to take people with you. In fact sometimes its even tough to take yourself with you.

Many times on this blog (and basically any chance I get to speak to groups) I have spoken about the need for educational change (see a particularly ranty presentation here). I know I am not a lone voice, in fact I get the sense that there is a veritable tsunami building up behind what initially felt like ripples and then waves of educators talking about this very issue. People like Sir Ken Robinson popularised the notion that schools need to change with his TED talk How Schools are Killing Creativity and Changing Educational Paradigms. This was echoed and reinforced by the work of Sugata Mitra with his hole in the wall work and his TED talk Build a School in the Cloud and I know we all cheered for that Logan LaPlante for whom Hackschooling made happy. Locally we have a growing number of educational leaders calling for change with NZCER writing an excellent report Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching - a New Zealand perspective and just this year we saw the launch of Dr Jane Gilbert's AUT Edge Work - Educational Futures Network. I am also proud to be part of school and team who are trialling different ways that we can better meet the needs of our learners in the 21st Century (check out Maurie or any of team's blogs to see what we are up to at HPSS).

I don't actually think the challenge is understanding why we need to change education or even what we need to do in order to change it. For me the central challenge is that we appear to be a bit stuck in the space between. The space between education's past and education's future. I suspect this period will be looked back on as that uncomfortably pimply pubescent period where we transitioned, painfully and unnecessarily slowly, from an industrial age education system to a more agile knowledge age model. But at present, we are neither there nor here. Actually who am I kidding. Plenty of people are still back there. And happily so. Some of us have hurled ourself into the unknown whilst many others have stuck with comfortable old 'there' and are  simply dangling pedagogical toes over the precipice whilst really clinging to the industrial mainland.

All around us are examples of businesses and industries who have made the transition - think about how you used to book travel, how you used to do your banking or share written communication - there are so many examples of change, because industries have to change, if you don't, you simply lose customers - in business you evolve or die.

However, compulsory schooling doesn't seem to work that way. For many, there is what is perceived as an intellectual argument for change that might make them feel a little uneasy maintaining the status quo. However as long as we have a system where schools can be positively antiquated yet publicly lauded as educational successes for hothousing students focusing on little more than assessment and results results results, then we are unlikely to see any sizeable change in the near future. I mean there are days when the NZ Herald or Stuff's education section feels like the educational equivalent of Antiques Roadshow! Add to this that for many, which school they attend is not their choice, and even if it was, there is so little choice that you are probably limited to choosing between co-ed, single sex and/or maybe religious or not. Then there is the issue that criteria for 'a good school' is so outdated that it seems based on little more than decile and league tables combined. In fact the more antiquated the school the more highly it seems to be regarded.

Be a pioneer and make change anyway and you run the risk of being seen as risking student success and making a generation of students guinea pigs. Irregardless of the fact that we are all failing our young people in numerous other ways with our national focus on results and little else. I actually believe we can move forward and deliver a better educational model AND have our students succeed at qualifications such as NCEA, I just think it's a shame that there is little enticing others to risk making change when the only thing that seems to matter to many are results which quite possibly have little or any relevance as an indicator for longterm success in the 21st century. Add to this the issue that if we do change schooling we must have the confidence of our students and community and often for parents their only reference point is their own education. Even if they actually didn't succeed in that system or even enjoy it, they are hugely nervous if we depart from a traditional school model and what the school down the road is doing. So as well as working hard to change and improve educational models we also have the additional job of translating and PR, "selling" one paradigm to those that came from another. This translation needs to occur for the educator as well. I know I have often faltered, knowing full well that we must make the change but at times terrified at the thought of heading off into such a new terrain with a map or guide book.

Add to this the issue that entering a new paradigm actually requires extra resourcing. At HPSS we are attempting all kinds of creative solutions to try and make future-focused learning happen on a budget and resourcing model that is well and truly based on an industrial age equation of one teacher to 25-30 students teaching students eight discrete learning areas. I would argue that if our government really wanted innovation they would reward those that are doing it with a different resourcing formula that allowed for greater planning and professional learning to reflect that we are no longer simply serving up tweaked iterations of what we  have serving up in schools for the last 25, 50 or 100 years. Change takes time, effective change takes a whole lot of learning.

Personally if I was Jo or Joanne Blogs I would be way less concerned that schools like HPSS are "experimenting" with new approaches and be way more concerned that many schools are not experimenting at all and that in fact they are being celebrating for engaging in damaging, high stress approaches to preparing students for little more that assessment success. That scares the hell out of me.

So what is the answer? I suspect we have to "feel the fear and do it anyway". I mean, human kind didn't create cars, learn to fly or fly to the moon by being safe and happily living in the past. I just hope we can find a way to have more, if not all educators leave the past behind us as well and for communities to demand the change rather than fear it.

Finally, I also hope this documentary comes to NZ - it might just encourage more of us to navigate the space between educational paradigms - the space between the past and the future. Before it's too late.


Most Likely to Succeed Trailer from One Potato Productions on Vimeo.

Share:

So why are you still doing NCEA Level One?

At HPSS we have been pondering this question for a while. There are a number of reasons we have been tackling this question. 

Firstly, because Maurie keeps asking us. (See his post on our NCEA journey here.) 

Secondly, because there is an increasing sense that students are being over assessed and are being forced to focus on formalised high stakes assessment for three (or possibly even four) years running. 

Thirdly, there is the issue that Level One NCEA Certificate is of little value. Once upon a time School Certificate did serve as an exit certificate for some, but today little if any students are likely to end their schooling journey at Level One. 

There's also the fact that you don't even need to do Level One to get Level One! As long as students get Level Two they actually achieve Level One by default at the same time - magic!

To add to this there is also the very real issue of student stress and anxiety bought on by over assessment. In this recent ERO report Wellbeing for Young People's Success at Secondary School (February 2015) : 19/02/2015 ERO identified assessment overload as one of the biggest challenges to student wellbeing, stating, "students in all schools were experiencing a very assessment driven curriculum and assessment anxiety. Achieving academic success is a part of wellbeing but is not the only factor. Very few schools were responding to this overload by reviewing and changing their curriculum and assessment practices."

Surely if this is identified issue we ALL need to be tackling this issue head on. 

Well at HPSS we are. 

Below is an outline of our plans for approaching NCEA in a way that will focus on doing less better.

Here's hoping we might be able to convince you to do less with us

HPSS NCEA Pathways Strategic Plan

HPSS Graduate Profile

With the importance placed on NCEA Level Two by government and tertiary training (and by default, employers), we should expect that all HPSS graduates achieve Level Two NCEA (hopefully with endorsement) and that most achieve Level Three with University Entrance. Students will also be expected to be able to evidence development and mastery of Hobsonville Habits (possibly through a learning passport or portfolio).

NCEA at HPSS

NCEA at HPSS will be responsive to our learners’ needs, learners will be able to gain credits and recognition of their learning as appropriate to their readiness.

HPSS Foundation Programme and NCEA Level One

The first two years of the Foundation Programme (Year 9 and 10) at HPSS will focus on learning skills and learning how to learn. These years will focus on laying down the foundations for enjoying both academic and personal success throughout their time at HPSS and developing the skills needed to be confident, connected, actively involved, and lifelong learners.

During the third year of the Foundation Programme (Year 11), teachers within Level Six modules (and projects) will offer approximately 20 credits in total for the year (approximately 1-2 standards per module), which may focus on achieving the required 10 + 10 numeracy and literacy credits. Students would only be expected to submit evidence that suggested they were working at Level Six or above, meaning that students may begin building their portfolios at any point during their Foundation Programme. Throughout this period the focus of the modules would be building skills and learning with exposure to a wide range of learning opportunities.

Attainment of  NCEA Level One Achievement Standards will most likely be assessed as part of Level Six modules. The Level Six modules in the latter part of year will prepare learners for external examination as appropriate.

By the end of the third year (Year 11) it is expected that all students will have gained at least 20 credits at Level One (or above) and will have gained most, if not all literacy and numeracy requirements.

By offering just 20-30 credits towards NCEA Level One as part of the Foundation Programme means teaching and learning and the assessment supporting this, is:

• Scaffolded
• Transparent
• Fair and valid and reliable (conditions, expectations set from the outset and equity of  access ensured)
• Progressive
• Allows for learners to gauge clearly where they are at and negotiate next steps
• Aligned from an early stage to the pathways required/enjoyed/that engage them and will support personalised quality pathways into, through and beyond school.
• No surprises
• Builds capability
• Ensuring we are focusing on teaching and learning rather than formal summative assessment
• Supporting the wellbeing of students and minimising risk of assessment fatigue and related stress.

A more long term vision of what NCEA and learning pathways could look like are outlined here. Please note the colours equate to curriculum levels (Red = 3, Orange = 4, Yellow = 5, Green = 6, Blue = 7, Indigo = 8, Violet/Pink = 8+). Each block represents collections of modules offered to students in their 1st to 5th year at HPSS. Students might choose modules from any of the blocks in any given year according to where they are at in particular areas.

HPSS Future Transition Programme - NCEA Level Two/Three and beyond

All Level six, seven and eight modules will be designed with opportunities for students to be assessed against Level One, Two or Three Achievement Standards which are clearly signalled alongside learning outcomes and rubrics. Where appropriate, modules will assess learners at Level One and Two or Level Two and Three so that learners can be assessed at the level appropriate for them. Modules offered will be a mixture of single or integrated learning (when integration will facilitate deeper more connected learning). Modules in the latter part of the year will be designed to ensure learners are being prepared for required external standards to provide opportunities for gaining Merit and Excellent endorsement.

In the fourth year (Year 12) at HPSS the focus will be on students gaining at least 60 NCEA credits at Level Two or higher. This will combine with the students 20+ credits at Level One which will result in the student gaining a Level Two NCEA Certificate (as well as gaining Level One NCEA Certificate at the same time) with the opportunity to also gain Merit or Excellence endorsement.

In the fifth year at HPSS students will be continuing to work towards Level Two or Three NCEA whilst also pursuing learning beyond the school. This may include taking scholarship modules, tertiary level papers and/or gaining wider experience through internships or entrepreneurial projects.

The aim is that ALL learners will leave HPSS with a minimum of Level Two NCEA, hopefully with Merit or Excellence endorsement. Learners will also leave with a portfolio of work that demonstrates the development of Hobsonville Habits and Key Competencies to support ongoing success as life-long learners.

NCEA at HPSS in summary

Our intention is to provide a qualification framework that focuses on quality over quantity. The intention is for all students to gain at least Level Two NCEA and that most (if not all) will gain Level Three NCEA with some kind of endorsement.

A year by year outline could be:

• By the end of Year 11 all students have gained at least 20 credits in total at Level One or higher. Most students will have also gained the Literacy and Numeracy requirements.
• By the end of Year 12 all students will have gained at least 60 credits at Level Two or higher.
• This will combine with the 20+ credits at Level One or higher to make up the requirements for gaining their Level Two NCEA Certificate (hopefully with some kind of endorsement). All students will have gained their Literacy and Numeracy requirements.
• By the end of Year 13 most (if not all) students will gained at least 60 credits at Level Three. This will combine with 20+ credits at Level Two to make up the requirements (80 credits) for gaining their Level Three NCEA Certificate. Students will have also planned their achievement standards carefully to ensure entrance requirements required for their desired tertiary pathways.

Share:

Effective Andragogy - Universal Design for Leading and Visible Leadership

This year I am undertaking a number of personal professional and teaching inquiries. I am participating in the National Aspiring Principals Programme (NAPP) where I am undertaking a leadership inquiry. I am also working on Masters in Educational Leadership for which I am intending to complete a thesis (in the next year or two). As well as these two external opportunities for inquiry I am also completing three inquiries that are borne out of my personal professional learning plan I am completing as part of our professional learning and appraisal cycle at HPSS.

Our HPSS Personal Professional Learning Plan is an attempt to support staff in developing a sense of agency and ownership of their professional development, but done in such a way that ensures their inquiries are focused around putting the HPSS Principles of Innovate, Engage and Inspire into practice. Within the goals there may be 1-3 teaching inquiries with the opportunity to also focus on 1-2 more personal inquiries around their areas of leadership or learning. Below is my first attempt to frame up personal goals/inquiries which were developed with the help of my 'critical friend' Steve Mouldey. NB. The HMC stands for How might Claire.

My first personal goal got me thinking. 

As I looked at it more closely, I realised I was looking to apply what I regarded as effective pedagogy to what I hope is effective leadership. We strive to differentiate our teaching and learning as a means of meeting the needs of diverse learners, but do we differentiate our leadership style so as to meet the diverse needs of our team? Do we tend to adopt a model of leadership that we think might suit the context or project (and simply reflect how we like to be led) and forget that we are still dealing with a range of people that need a range of approaches to meet them where they are at? As I mentioned in an earlier post - this is an inquiry I am exploring with my Professional Learning Team. To begin my focusing inquiry I have started with a simple activity of actually meeting with each of my team and simply asking what kind of leader they needed me to be for them to feel supported and encouraged to develop as increasingly autonomous leader in their own right? How I work with them from here on in is going to be determined by their needs combined with a common framework or approach of having termly strategic team meetings (where we consider our collective plans for the term in relation to our collective strategic plan) and individual fortnightly catch ups (that can be more or less regular than that according to needs) where we discuss their short term goals for each term. If this improves how we function as a team and how they perceive my leadership effectiveness will only be seen as we move through the year - so I am guessing it is a case of 'time will tell'.

This in turn got me thinking about what I hope to do my thesis on - the idea of looking at the impact of de-privatisation of practice has on leaders. When I discussed this idea with my principal Maurie Abraham (who shares his practice and reflections very openly) he suggested that I was talking about 'visible leading'. That was absolutely what I was talking about. I really want to explore what happens when leadership practice and reflection on leadership practice becomes visible, transparent and openly shared through presentations, blogs, tweets and other online communities. Does the very act of sharing change practice? Does it provide opportunities for feedback and support the leader to become an adaptive expert in a way that keeping leadership practice closed to everyone except those directly affected by it? This in turn got me thinking about the concept of visible learning as defined by John Hattie "Visible Learning means an enhanced role for teachers as they become evaluators of their own teaching. Visible Teaching and Learning occurs when teachers see learning through the eyes of students and help them become their own teachers",  which made me think that in a sense this is what I am talking about, but in a leadership context. The leader that shares and openly reflects on their practice is seeking to become evaluators of their own leading, seeing leadership through the eyes of those they are leading (hopefully) and help them to become their own leaders.

Considering these two inquiries alongside one another and I realised another thing -  I keep coming back to looking at leadership through an effective pedagogy lens or more precisely though a lens of effective andragogy. Is this an effective way to think about leadership, or am I merely defaulting to my teacher role? Does that even matter? 

So many questions. 

Here's hoping I might discover some answers along the way.

Share:

How might we deliver a NCEA qualification pathway that reflects our vision and values?

NB. All of this in draft. The following reflects our thinking at this stage only.

Too often in schools assessment is the the tail that wags the curriculum design dog. At HPSS is is our aim to challenge and instead design an approach to NCEA that is determined by our vision for teaching and learning...and not the other way around.

So what is our vision, principles and values at HPSS?

Our Vision
What we want for our young people:
To create a stimulating, inclusive learning environment which empowers learners to contribute confidently and responsibly in our changing world.

Our Principles
The foundations of our curriculum decision-making are:

• Innovate through personalised learning
• Engage through powerful partnerships
• Inspire through deep challenge and inquiry to develop  empowered learners

Our Values

• Excellence
• Inquiry
• Connectedness
• Collaboration
• Innovation

So how might this translate into a vision for NCEA that is stimulating and inclusive, that innovates, engages and inspires? How might we genuinely personalise the NCEA experience? The beginning of that thinking is below:

HPSS Graduate Profile

The importance placed on NCEA Level 2 by government and tertiary training (and by default, employers), we should expect that all HPSS graduates have Level 2 NCEA (hopefully with some kind of endorsement) and most have Level 3 NCEA with UE. Students would also be expected to be able to evidence development and mastery of Hobsonville Habits (possibly through a learning passport or portfolio).

NCEA at HPSS

NCEA at HPSS will be responsive to our learners’ needs, learners will be able to gain credits and recognition of their learning as appropriate to their readiness.

HPSS Foundation Programme and NCEA Level One 

NCEA Level One will be available to students and could be worked towards during the first three years of HPSS as part of a Foundation Programme where the focus is on multiple varied learning opportunities, a balance of breadth and depth and learning a wide range of skills. NCEA Level One would be attained through a mixture of a portfolio approach and explicit NCEA tasks to gain internal achievement standards over time. External achievement standards (exams) would be available to allow for students who wish to gain Merit and Excellence endorsement at the end of their third year (Year 11) at secondary school. 

The first year of the Foundation Programme (Year 9) at HPSS will focus on learning skills and learning how to learn. However, where a student produces an exemplary piece of evidence of learning that meets the criteria and conditions of assessment for an internal Achievement Standard the student and learning area teacher may choose to share the assessed and internally moderated piece of work with the Learning Area Leader and. A process for this might be Learning Area Leader would store a copy of the work in a secure set of NCEA folders that have set for each student. This would ensure the work is kept secure so it can be submitted as a Level One NCEA task in their second or third year at HPSS (with careful checking that standard versions have not changed in the meantime). Readiness to be assessed against Level One NCEA prior to a student's third year (Year 11) at HPSS will be negotiated with learning area teachers on a student by student basis.

During the second and third year of the Foundation Programme (Year 10 and 11), teachers within modules (and projects) would offer approximately 16 credits in each learning area at Level One (instead of the traditional 24 credits) which would also include the required 10 + 10 numeracy and literacy credits. In all NZC Level Five and Six modules, opportunities to submit work that could contribute towards NCEA will be signalled to students along with learning objectives and curriculum level rubrics at the beginning of each module or semester. Students would only be expected to submit evidence that suggested they were working at Level Six or above, meaning that students may begin building their portfolios at any point during their Foundation Programme. Throughout this period the focus of the modules would be building skills and learning with exposure to a wide range of learning opportunities. Explicit NCEA tasks will most likely be delivered as part of Level 6 modules. The Level 6 modules in the latter part of year will prepare learners for external examination as appropriate.

By offering NCEA as part of the Foundation Programme it means teaching and learning and assessment supporting this, is:

• Scaffolded
• Transparent
• Fair and valid and reliable (conditions, expectations set from the outset and equity of  access ensured)
• Progressive
• Allows for learners to gauge clearly where they are at and negotiate next steps
• Aligned from an early stage to the pathways required/enjoyed/that engage them and will support personalised quality pathways into, through and beyond school.
• No surprises
• Builds capability 

A more long term vision of what NCEA and learning pathways could look like are outlined here. 

Link to view document

Please note the colours equate to curriculum levels (Red = 3, Orange = 4, Yellow = 5, Green = 6, Blue = 7, Indigo = 8, Violet/Pink = 8+). Each block represents collections of modules offered to students in their 1st to 5th year at HPSS. Students might choose modules from any of the blocks in any given year according to where they are at in particular areas. 

HPSS Future Transition / Graduate Programme - NCEA Level Two/Three and beyond

All Level 6, 7 and 8 modules will be designed with opportunities for students to be assessed against Level One, Two or Three Achievement Standards which are clearly signalled alongside learning outcomes and rubrics. Where appropriate,modules will assess learners at Level One and Two or Level Two and Three so that learners can be assessed at the level appropriate for to them. Modules offered will be a mixture of single or integrated (when integration will facilitate deeper more connected learning). Semester B modules will be designed to ensure learners are being prepared for required external standards to provide opportunities for gaining Merit and Excellent endorsement. 

In the fifth year at HPSS students will be continuing to work towards Level Two or Three NCEA whilst also pursuing learning beyond the school. This may include taking scholarship modules, tertiary level papers and/or gaining wider experience through internships or entrepreneurial projects.

The aim is that ALL learners will leave HPSS with a minimum of Level Two NCEA, hopefully with Merit or Excellence endorsement. Learners will also leave with a portfolio of work that demonstrates the development of Hobsonville Habits and key competencies to support ongoing success as life-long learners.

Individual Achievement Plans (IAPs) - Creating a genuinely personalised NCEA pathway 
One strategy we would like to explore further (again this is merely a kernel of an idea!) is the idea of an Individual Achievement Plan (IAP). This would involve Learning Area Leaders (LALs) to look at modules (which may be integrated or single subject) and look at the learning objectives (learning areas deliver common LOs each term based on a termly concept to ensure that whatever mixture of modules students take, they are assured of achieving curriculum coverage) and identify the opportunities for Achievement Standard attainment, this would then be used to collate a 'NCEA buffet menu'. This information would mean when a student (particularly those prior to Year 11) who were demonstrating an ability to work at Level 6 or higher in any one Learning Area, the teacher, Learning Area Leader, Learning Coach and student could discuss if it was appropriate to access. Beyond Year 11, this approach may also mean that students may have the opportunity to negotiate being measured against specific standards, could seek opportunities for work in one area to be evidenced for an Achievement Standard in another area (of course careful consideration of assessment conditions would be a must) rather than  being forced to digest the same old "degustation menu" that departments serve up year after year.

We are the first to admit that we we are not make easy for ourselves, but then again that has never been our intention. What has been our intention is the desire to live our vision principles and values and genuinely walk the talk as well. There is much outlined here that presents a logistical challenge rather than an insurmountable challenge. It will be interesting to see how this evolves.

Source: NCEA Pal

One thing I am hoping is that the software evolves to support us. NCEA Pal looks like it actually has the potential to be able to track their achievement. What I would love next is the ability to use the app to plan for their assessment, to support learners to to take the reigns and co-construct (with a knowledgeable educator) the Individual Education Plan. Couple this with a teacher dashboard view and we'll be good to go...hint hint NCEA Pal. Maybe N4L could help ;)

Finally if anyone out there is genuinely personalising NCEA we would love to hear from you! Feel free to comment here or email me at claire@hobsonvillepoint.school.nz

Share:

So what are you doing differently this year in your classroom (and/or school)?

Source

Whether you did a formal inquiry into your teaching practice last year or simply taught some kids and did some some stuff, one truth will remain - there are a number of things you need to change about your teaching and/or learning environment this year.

As my ancient buddy Heraclitus once stated (admittedly didn't hear him first hand, but am choosing to trust my sources), "the only constant is change". Now this is most certainly true of our world, society and most work places, but unfortunately bar a change of names on your class roll this often not the case in the classroom. I acknowledge change is challenging and many of you work in environments where change feels glacial at best, however that needn't bother any of us as change starts with you! Whether you are in a dynamic environment where everyone is striving for "adaptive expertise" or feel like you are a lone nut in a school where the status quo (which may well produce excellent academic results) is protected, there is nothing stopping you leading the charge, even if it is only in the safety of your most likely four walls of a classroom.

The chances are if you are the sort that reads this blog, you are already thinking about change, if so, I would love to hear your plans, if not, here are some scenarios and ideas of areas you might like to address and change up this year:

Scenario One: My kids results results were disappointing last year.

I start with this as this is often the data your HOD and SLT look at, and if you are teacher senior secondary it is the sort of thing that might have bummed you out when NCEA exam results were published in the holidays. The obvious thing to do is when you have your new cohort is to ensure that you know their learning needs in specific areas and ensure you address these through careful differentiation and UDL strategies (that we will discus more thoroughly later), however I suggest you do something different - address the personal elephant in the room. One thing I did a few years back when I was briefly HOD at AGGS was to get all of us to actually look more closely at ourselves. As teachers we be can very quick to look at student data and identify their potential strengths and areas that need greater support, but how often do we really do that to ourselves.

Here's the process: hunt out as many years class results of your own that you can get your hands on (even if you don't have the hard evidence I am sure you can work this out with some brutally honest reflection), now look at it closely and as objectively as possibly - which areas do your students tend to do well in and which do they do 'comparatively' suck at. At this point you need to quiet your internal defence mechanism that tries to blame the kid's weaknesses, socio-economic status and exam/assessment writer's flaws and be  really honest - are there some parts of the curriculum or subject that you teach that you don't like? Are there areas that you are weaker at, so gloss over, in comparison to the areas you LOVE and indulge in like a pig in mud. I bet, if you are REALLY honest, there is one or two areas where it's actually you who is a but sucky (for me it was on always Unfamiliar texts in English....big yawn...and I sucked). Next step, declare it, either in a quiet chat to someone you see as a support person or even better (if you have the team culture that makes this safe) share it as a group. Be sure to call the bullsh#tters who say their only flaw is caring too much or working too hard. If you are doing this as a group, once you have declared your area that needs addressing, get everyone to declare an area or two of success and choiceness - you can then use this as a way to find in-school mentors, and people you can bribe with coffee until they spill their secrets and resources. If you don't have team approach you can still sniff out those that love the stuff you love less and connect with them - coffee dates work well, classroom observations even better.

Scenario Two: My kids did okay/great/awesome, but if I'm honest, they were a bored and/or stressed (or maybe you were bored and/or stressed too) 

and/or

I am in a school where I have little autonomy and don't feel like I have much freedom to plan what I want.

First up, kids doing okay or even excellently academically is not an excuse to rest on your laurels and say "I nailed it!". High five yourself for sure, but this should simply free you up to focus on what other areas you need to change, iterate and evolve in your practice. Whether you are in a school where autonomy is limited or somewhere where you can do as you wish, the following are a range of innovations you might like try on for size. As with anything I suggest you wrap a teaching as inquiry approach around your personal change, ask yourself "What is important (and therefore worth spending time on), given where my students are at?" This will ensure you are not you are not just innovating for innovation's sake, that you are trialling these strategies because they meet your students needs in some way. And don't just limit yourself to strategies where there is lofty research and evidence base to prove their worth. Hattie is only talking about the sh#t that's been happening for years anyway, if we have any hope of NZ being the world leaders in education we need to stop looking solely in the rear-vision mirrors, instead put those headlights on full beam and look forward. I mean, Edmund Hillary didn't sit around waiting for the evidence that scaling Mt Everest would be choice for his career, he just cracked on and did it.

So what are some new strategies/approaches you could try?

• Teach your kids about 'growth mindset' and 'grit' - we talk about this a lot as teachers and how we need have a growth mindset, but do you actually teach this to your students?? In a post I did last year as part of the #hackyrclass series I provided this definition - 

Mindset is a simple idea discovered by world-renowned Stanford University psychologist Carol Dweck in decades of research on achievement and success—a simple idea that makes all the difference.

In a fixed mindset, people believe their basic qualities, like their intelligence or talent, are simply fixed traits. They spend their time documenting their intelligence or talent instead of developing them. They also believe that talent alone creates success—without effort. They’re wrong.

In a growth mindset, people believe that their most basic abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work—brains and talent are just the starting point. This view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment. Virtually all great people have had these qualities.

Teaching a growth mindset creates motivation and productivity in the worlds of business, education, and sports. It enhances relationships. When you read Mindset, you’ll see how.

Source: http://mindsetonline.com/whatisit/about/

You might also like to teach your students about the idea of 'grit' or as TED Talker Angela Lee Duckworth puts it: grit (according to her) not ability is the key to success.

• Introduce design thinking - Whilst it might be easy to write off design thinking as just another passing fancy of us educators that reckon we are all super cutting edge, it is important to recognise that design thinking has been around for ages and is not going anywhere, what feels flash in the pan for us is actually a well proven approach that we can use as teachers to iterate our planning and more importantly a skill we can share with our learners to ensure they really do become life long learners (and innovators). I have a full explanation of design thinking in a post from last year, where I included this definition:

What is Design Thinking?

“Design thinking is a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer's toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.” —Tim Brown, president and CEO

Thinking like a designer can transform the way organizations develop products, services, processes, and strategy. This approach, which IDEO calls design thinking, brings together what is desirable from a human point of view with what is technologically feasible and economically viable. It also allows people who aren’t trained as designers to use creative tools to address a vast range of challenges.

Design thinking is a deeply human process that taps into abilities we all have but get overlooked by more conventional problem-solving practices. It relies on our ability to be intuitive, to recognize patterns, to construct ideas that are emotionally meaningful as well as functional, and to express ourselves through means beyond words or symbols. Nobody wants to run an organization on feeling, intuition, and inspiration, but an over-reliance on the rational and the analytical can be just as risky. Design thinking provides an integrated third way".

Source: http://www.ideo.com/about/

• Turn your classroom into a maker space - So why do we need to thinking about makerspaces? Because making things is choice, is fun and makes learning memorable. I bet if you reflect on your favourite experience as a learner, it most likely involved actually making something. Personally I think all teachers and all classes should be looking to develop one. The reason I think this is simply - they develop 21st Century Skills (particularly critical thinking, collaboration, creativity and problem solving) and provide students with opportunities to engage in constructivist/deep learning. Look at our New Zealand Curriculum and I also see many opportunities within a makerspace environment to engage in effective pedagogy and for students develop a wide range of competencies. In a post I did last year, I provided the following definition (and a whole lot of ideas and resources):

What is a Makerspace?

Makerspace describe a makerspace as community centres with tools. Makerspaces combine manufacturing equipment, community, and education for the purposes of enabling community members to design, prototype and create manufactured works that wouldn’t be possible to create with the resources available to individuals working alone. These spaces can take the form of loosely-organized individuals sharing space and tools, for-profit companies, non-profit corporations, organizations affiliated with or hosted within schools, universities or libraries, and more. All are united in the purpose of providing access to equipment, community, and education, and all are unique in exactly how they are arranged to fit the purposes of the community they serve.

Makerspaces represent the democratization of design, engineering, fabrication and education. They are a fairly new phenomenon, but are beginning to produce projects with significant national impacts.

Source: http://makerspace.com/

• Let your kids go free range - I believe self-direction and developing student agency and efficacy is the fundamental shift all educators need to make to become more future-focused in their practice. In a sense we want step away from our 'caged' classrooms to develop increasingly 'free range learners'. Even if your school is not embracing of free-range approaches, there is a lot you can do in your classroom. In a post I wrote last year (yep, last year was very good year ;) I shared the following definition and a whole lot more thinking about this topic. 

Free range learners who are:

• Free to choose how they learn
• Free to choose where they learn
• Free to choose how they process their learning
• Free to choose how they evidence their learning
• Free to experience learning that is relevant and responsive to their needs not our limitations

This does not mean the teacher becomes redundant, quite the opposite as they are challenged to provide authentic relevant contexts for learners, with just enough 'enabling constraints' to ensure that our little chickens don't accidentally cross the road...in heavy traffic. Our roles need to change from teacher, to facilitator and ultimately to learning activator. Providing triggers and opportunities to learners to develop the relevant skills needed for their world (whilst somehow pleasing those pesky bloody UE requirements....universities of NZ...you have a lot to answer for in relation to slowing progress).

• Practice and teach the concept of 'mindfulness' - mindfulness, like design thinking might be easily written off as the next edu-fad, but personally, in a world where the pace of life and the amount of time we spend online, I believe mindfulness is simply a means to maintain balance. In terms of what mindfulness is, I like the infographic below. And this is not just for students, I have shared my journey towards increased mindfulness here (very much a work in progress).

Source: http://mindfulnessinschools.org/mindfulness/

Scenario Three: We have just introduced BYOD and I am sh#tting myself.

Fear not. BYOD is choice. It is not a destination, marker of modernity or an effective pedagogy (in and of it's self), it is simply access to a whole lot of approaches that can vastly improve student outcomes, engagement and autonomy (if used well). My main suggestion is that you actually make it about the students making the most of BYOD, not the teacher. You will achieve this by simply letting go a bit and letting students choose how they record their learning and share their learning and by ramping up your level of vigilance - don't be sitting at your teacher desk wondering why kids are distracted by the technology and access to cat videos. You need to be present (if you have to sit, sit behind them) or even better - amongst them! And you need to ensure their learning is interesting and relevant to them! Because if it isn't, a more interesting distraction is just a URL address away. Many moons ago, I made this wee EdTalk and this wrote this blogpost to provide a few simple ways STUDENTS can be the ones making the most of BYOD.

Claire Amos: Ten tips for BYOD from EDtalks on Vimeo.

Share:

Graduating Teacher Standards - Are they future-focused enough?

As you may (or may not) know, one of the many and varied roles of the New Zealand Teachers Council is to approve and review all Initial Teacher Education programmes. It was during my first council meeting where a number of the new Masters ITE programmes were being approved that the question came to me (once again): Are the Graduating Teacher Standards future focused enough?? The reason I asked myself and others this, is that I felt the courses we were looking at could have offered more. It wasn't that they weren't rigorous and well thought out, it was just that they felt lacking, particularly in the 'future-focused skills' area. When I voiced these concerns the response I got was, that we couldn't demand the courses to include anything that wasn't demanded in the graduating teacher standards. On reading the standards more closely I am not so sure. Surely if you take the second point of Standard One "have pedagogical content knowledge appropriate to the learners and learning areas of their   programme" and place this statement into a 21st century context aren't we demanding that courses provide them with the appropriate pedagogical content of the 21st century? Or are these standards too open to interpretation? Does one person's view of 'appropriate pedagogical content' vary so greatly that it in a sense becomes redundant? I can of course understand why the standards were written this way, anything too specific would become outdated within a heartbeat. But that said, is there something more we need to add?

I realise my ability to influence these discussions might be hampered by the fact that NZTC is now in it's twilight hours as we stare down the barrel of EDUCANZ taking over, still, no harm in trying.

So if the Graduating Teacher Standards in their present state are not (in my opinion) ensuring we have cutting edge, future-focused ITE programmes, what needs to change? Or is it not the place of the standards to determine this, it actually the providers themselves? My opinion is it probably a combination of the two. Firstly, you would hope that providers would take it upon themselves to ensure their courses were as future-focused as possible, I mean that is what they are preparing teachers for isn't it. Surely the courses wouldn't be designed to maintain the status quo? It's possible that our desire to base all practice on a strong evidence base is going to limit innovation in these courses. If you are only willing to offer what has proven to work in the past, then surely we have an issue. In terms of the graduating teacher standards changing, I think it is less about change and more about providing a current and future focused appendices to support the standards. This could be a document that gets reviewed annually, informed by what is being seen during ERO reports and areas that need focused on right now (I apologise if this doc already exists and I just don't know about it...). In a way I'd liken it to how I imagine the WOF system works (or seems to work from the outside), the same things might be on the list each year, but you get the sense they have another list somewhere that gives them an area to focus on, because current stats suggest it is an area that needs addressing. Wouldn't it be great if we had a group of innovators, risk takers and trail-blazers who helped to inform this secondary list of requirements. Recommended foci might include ensuring that every new teacher has researched how a range of IT interventions might best be used to support effective pedagogies. That all new teachers know how to make the most of a BYOD classroom environment. All new teachers would begin their career well versed in the work of Rachel Bolstad and Jane Gilbert, with Sue McDowall, Ally Bull, Sally Boyd and Rosemary Hipkins and the paper Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching - a New Zealand perspective and understand why we must prepare our students for the 'knowledge age' and prepare them for being increasing self-directed and self-reliant. And the likes of Professor Welby Ings might encourage teachers to value creative expression over rote learned "Excellence".

Maybe if we provided these annually updated insights into what our Graduating Teacher Standards look like in our current and future contexts we could make them available to all teachers, to provide an innovative and future-focused support document for our Registered Teacher Criteria as well. Then, taking it a step further, why don't we use these innovative, future focused, status quo challenging ideas as a basis for free online MOOCs available to all educators that could share their learning through an online teacher community (surely NZTC...or EDUCANZ and N4L's Pond could nail this one) and learning reflections could be make up part of a teachers online portfolio for appraisal. Okay. Now I'm getting sidetracked. But you get my gist, graduating teacher standards (and maybe even RTCs) are not enough in isolation to ensure that all ITE programmes are producing not only competent teachers, but innovative and future-focused educators as well.

The graduating teacher standards as the exist at present are below. Have a read and let me know what you think.

Future-focused or protecting the status quo?

Graduating Teacher Standards: Aotearoa New Zealand

These standards recognise that the Treaty of Waitangi extends equal status and rights to Māori and Pākehā alike.

Graduates entering the profession will understand the critical role teachers play in enabling the educational achievement of all learners.

Professional Knowledge 
Standard One: Graduating Teachers know what to teach

1. have content knowledge appropriate to the learners and learning areas of their programme
2. have pedagogical content knowledge appropriate to the learners and learning areas of their   programme
3. have knowledge of the relevant curriculum documents of Aotearoa New Zealand.
4. have content and pedagogical content knowledge for supporting English as an Additional Language (EAL) learners to succeed in the curriculum

Standard Two: Graduating Teachers know about learners and how they learn

1. have knowledge of a range of relevant theories and research about pedagogy, human development and learning.
2. have knowledge of a range of relevant theories, principles and purposes of assessment and evaluation.
3. know how to develop metacognitive strategies of diverse learners. 
4. know how to select curriculum content appropriate to the learners and the learning context.

Standard Three: Graduating Teachers understand how contextual factors influence teaching and learning

1. have an understanding of the complex influences that personal, social, and cultural factors may have on teachers and learners.
2. have knowledge of tikanga and te reo Māori to work effectively within the bicultural contexts of Aotearoa New Zealand.
3. have an understanding of education within the bicultural, multicultural, social, political, economic and historical contexts of Aotearoa New Zealand.

Professional Practice
Standard Four: Graduating Teachers use professional knowledge to plan for a safe, high quality teaching and learning environment

1. draw upon content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge when planning, teaching and evaluating. 
2. use and sequence a range of learning experiences to influence and promote learner achievement.
3. demonstrate high expectations of all learners, focus on learning and recognise and value diversity.
4. demonstrate proficiency in oral and written language (Māori and/or English), in numeracy and in ICT relevant to their professional role.
5. use te reo Māori me ngā tikanga-a-iwi appropriately in their practice. 
6. demonstrate commitment to and strategies for promoting and nurturing the physical and emotional safety of learners. 

7. Standard Five: Graduating Teachers use evidence to promote learning
8. systematically and critically engage with evidence to reflect on and refine their practice. 
9. gather, analyse and use assessment information to improve learning and inform planning.
10. know how to communicate assessment information appropriately to learners, their parents/caregivers and staff.

Professional Values & Relationships
Standard Six: Graduating Teachers develop positive relationships with learners and the members of learning communities

1. recognise how differing values and beliefs may impact on learners and their learning.
2. have the knowledge and dispositions to work effectively with colleagues, parents/caregivers, 
3. families/whānau and communities.
4. build effective relationships with their learners.
5. promote a learning culture which engages diverse learners effectively.
6. demonstrate respect for te reo Māori me ngā tikanga-a-iwi in their practice. 

Standard Seven: Graduating Teachers are committed members of the profession

1. uphold the New Zealand Teachers Council Code of Ethics/Ngā Tikanga Matatika. 
2. have knowledge and understanding of the ethical, professional and legal responsibilities of teachers. 
3. work co-operatively with those who share responsibility for the learning and wellbeing of learners.
4. are able to articulate and justify an emerging personal, professional philosophy of teaching and learning. 

Source: NZTC Website

Share:

Mindfulness and the Machine

Simply Being App

This is something I have been thinking about for a while, borne mostly out of my own bad habits of being "connected" and "online" for most of my waking hours. I suspect I am not alone. I love technology and I love it's capacity to provide instant information (and gratification) at the click of the button. In many ways technology allows me to be hyper-efficient - emails responded to quick smart, meeting minutes created and shared on the spot, sharing or rather over sharing every magic moment, meal and milestone instantly. In my teaching I was an exuberant early adopter of technology, embracing the way that it allowed me to make learning available 24/7, supported young people to share and publish rather than simply "hand in" work. When I am not teaching I am learning via this hyper connectivity, reading articles, blogposts, watching TED talks and connecting with educators around the globe via Twitter and Google+. When not learning, I am still online, shopping (ebay, Amazon and a Paypal account make it way too easy) or I am indulging in my passion for design and interiors, stalking folk on Instagram and creating mood boards for imaginary second, third, forth careers as a stylist, nutritionist and all round satorialwhore. In the fleeting moments left over I do manage Yoga once or twice a week, face to face offline sit down dinners with my family and read on yet another device - my Kindle. And I love it. I love the connections made, I feel like I learn constantly and get a huge amount of enjoyment from sharing as well. I genuinely believe our lives can be enhanced and definitely believe learning is enhanced and supported through this access to technology. 

But at what cost?

What are we missing whilst trapped in the magnetic glow of a laptop, tablet or increasingly our smartphones. One thing I have become increasingly aware of is the fact that I struggle to put down my device. My iPhone is more often than not glued to my palm, it's crappy battery life sending me into irrational panic attacks as I worry I might be forced to go offline - my God, how will I cope?! I also check, compulsively and mindlessly: my inbox, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram - what do I think I am missing in the five or so minutes that passed?? And what am I really missing as a result? Children are excellent at identifying the issue with my 9 and 10 year old daughters often pointing out that I am always on "that thing". I am also increasingly aware that I kid myself that I can effectively multitask and think I can conduct conversations with my kids and husband whilst staring zombie like at my LCD lover. And it's not just me. We are all doing it in this household. Whilst I'll admit I am the ultimate recidivist offender I do also note that it's increasingly common for all four of us to be subtly lit from below whilst pretending to watch "reality" TV. Zombie TV habits to support our zombie online surfing, or in the case of my three amigos, zombie game playing. I have also started to become aware of pretending I am having an actual conversation with my children or husband as I grunt and stare at the screen. My lucky family get to live with the lazy stereotype of a teenage boy - not ideal, I mean there's good reason for teenage boys not being Mums (no offence teenage boys...although I suspect you being part of my readership is slim). And it's not just my at home behaviour that is beginning to disturb me. It's the checking of my phone at traffic lights...it's not like I'm driving is it. Or the poor manners that have crept into my catching up with friends, family and colleagues - don't mind me, I'm just ignoring you whilst I just check my Facebook. Okay more like my Facebook, Inbox, Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest, weather....and if you are really lucky I might even photograph my food and share it with the world. It appears my online habits have eroded something I hold dear, my manners.

So what now? They say recognising you have a problem is the first step to recovery. Step one nailed.

For me the next step is where the mindfulness comes in. Mindfulness is enjoying a genuine renaissance in the western world, both in the business and education worlds and I suspect it is no coincidence that this is occurring at the same time that we are reaching saturation point in terms of our technology use. Just as we have seen the "slow" movement grow as the pace of life increases to points of ridiculousness, so too are we seeing mindfulness come to the fore just as our behaviours become increasing mindless. However, I don't believe it needs to be about being overly reactive and shunning technology, I believe it is simply about being more mindful about how we make the best use of the technology. Excuse the sexist trash talk, but it really is time to ensure that technology is my bitch, not the other way around. This isn't about foregoing technology at all, in fact technology is incredibly powerful and closing the digital divide needs to be a huge priority. It is simply about ensuring that technology is supporting my attempts to be a well-rounded successful human being and not thwarting it by sucking my into it's digital void.

So how how can we ensure we have a more mindful relationship with technology? Well I am employing a range of strategies. Maybe it's the English teacher in me, but the first step has been reading up on mindfulness, Thrive by Arianna Huffington has been particularly powerful as it helps to hear from someone whose perspective is aligned to mine, someone who embraces technology and someone who has always relished being a hyper busy "yes" person (admitted she has took this to the next level somewhat...). I really enjoyed the way Huffington speaks from experience, names the elephants in the room and then suggests ways we might challenge the status quo. A highly recommended read.

The second way I am tackling my marriage to the machine is by putting in place a few ground rules: switching off by 7.30-8.00 at night, leaving my phone in my handbag at cafes and restaurants (any friends reading this, feel free to call me on this one) and having technology free holiday time (I head to Kawau on Wednesday and plan to stay offline until the following Wednesday). This may not sound like much for some, but for me this is a big healthy step in the right direction. I am also working on my acts of conscious mindfulness when using my devices as well and actually thinking about what I am doing, working on doing one thing at a time, mindfully, rather than jumping between tabs, skimming, scanning constantly - easy said than done, believe me.

I am also looking at developing my mindfulness practices in other ways. I already do Yoga a couple of times of week, I am looking to add to this regular walks with my kids and dogs (sans phone) and fortnightly sessions with a personal trainer (believe me it's impossible to be anywhere but in the moment when you are being forced to work out that hard). The cost of the trainer has been covered by giving up my daily takeaway coffee (yet another mindless behaviour I realised I wasn't really even enjoying).

The final way I am working on my mindfulness is, rather ironically, is by using a mindfulness app. The app 'Simply Being' is beautifully simplistic, offering 5, 10, 15 or 20 minutes guided meditation supported by voice and music or voice only. I am doing five minutes a night just sitting cross legged on my bed with the aim of working up to 20 minutes over the next few weeks. It is amazing what five minutes of simply doing nothing can achieve - well worth a try.

And it's not just my habits I am concerned about, as a Mum and as an educator I really do worry about their generation, at least we know another way of operating. I believe mindfulness and mindful use of technology is something that needs to be taught and modelled (hence wanting to change my own behaviours). I don't buy in to the rhetoric that BYOD stands for Bring Your Own Distraction, I believe technology must be available to all students, just as long we commit to supporting them to manage themselves at the same time. It's important to acknowledge that teenagers with devices are like labradors with food, they ain't going to stop gorging themselves unless you stop them (for the most part). Mindfulness in and of itself has a real place in our curriculum, increasingly we hear about schools who adopt mindfulness programmes and see all kinds of improved outcomes. It's also about teaching manners, maybe that what we need in schools - Mindfulness, Manners and Machines 101.

Share: