We talk all about more on Education.....

Showing posts with label PLD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PLD. Show all posts
, , , , , , , , ,

Realising the Future of NZ Education - an open letter to all NZ educators (and Minister Parata)


On Saturday I was lucky enough to be invited to speak at The Festival of Education as a supposed 'mover and shaker'. Here is an overview of my presentation on 'Realising the Future of Education' which endeavored to look at why, how, what, when we need to change education and what the government could do (IMHO) to support it. Okay, so not so humble...more righteous really.

Why must we change education?
As Ludwig Lachman stated, "the future is unknowable, but not unimaginable" and whilst we can't see into the future, we can look to a strong body of research to try and divine our present and future learners' needs. Put simply, we need to change education, because the world is changing...and changing rapidly. In the Western world we have moved through the 'Agrarian Age' where the land and agriculture were central to existence. We then moved into the 'Industrial Age', it was in this period that what we know as modern school structures and curriculum really came to the fore...and by and large there they have stayed. We are now however entering the 'Knowledge Age' where increasingly society and the economy is driven by ideas, information, problem solving, creativity and innovation. In a world where our learners are faced with more information, more people, more careers (but fewer jobs available) and fewer resources - our learners need new skills. Add to this the notion that the rate of change is accelerating, see Moore's Law based on Intel founder Gordon E. Moore's prediction that the power and speed of computer processing power would double every year, a prediction that holds true 50 years after it was made. It could be argued that we are, in fact, entering a period of hyperchange. Indeed. As Heraclitus once stated, "the only constant is change".

How do we need to change education?
Firstly we need to change our focus. We need to ensure we are focusing on actual 21st Century skills. This does not mean we need to throw out traditional learning areas with the proverbial curriculum bath water, but we do need to overlay these subjects with skills such as complex communication skills, collaboration, critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, innovation as well as digital and information literacy skills. These are skills that need to be developed in a way that reaches across traditional subjects and silos. With this traditional subjects and silos may also need to be challenged so as to find more authentic connections and contexts to make the learning more relevant to our learners' worlds. 

We also need to address our models of teaching practice. As Scott McCleod highlights in his blog Dangerously Irrelevant three educational shifts are needed which will have the most impact on our students future and their success within it. There is a need to move from low level thinking such as recall and rote learning to high level thinking and complex problem solving. We must engage shift from analog to digital (or I would actually argue 'blended') and as Sugata Mitra states "unlock the power of new technologies for increasingly self-directed education". Which leads us to the final shift - teacher centred to student centred. Critical thinking, digitally rich and increasing levels of self direction will ensure we are developing learners who can survive in the knowledge age and flourish in the age of hyperchange.

I would actually argue that self-direction and developing student agency and efficacy is the fundamental shift. In a sense we want step away from our 'caged' classrooms to develop increasingly 'free range learners'.

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).

I would argue if we are to realise the new MoE catchphrase 'Education, Excellence, Equity' then I would suggest we actually look very closely at the concept of 'Universal Design for Learning'. We need ensure that we are actually using pedagogical approaches that are reaching all learners. We need to ensure all learners are provided with multiple means of representation (or ways of receiving information...think visual, oral and written, offline and online). We need to ensure all students have multiple ways of expressing and evidencing their learning (again think visual, oral and written, offline and online) and multiple ways of engaging. This is equitable, but it is also challenging for educators have not had the methods or means of teaching challenged (in any rigorous way) for some time.

At HPSS we are in our infancy (we only opened this year), trying our best to meet these challenges. doing our best to learn and share along the way (see this earlier post to see how we are going about it). We are looking at delivering secondary education in increasingly authentic and engaging ways, offering up a programme that addresses a desire to develop both personal and academic excellence through a mixture of specialised learning (in both integrated and single subject modules), learning hubs, project learning and a generous serving of MyTime. We certainly don't claim to have nailed it...yet, but I would say we are wearing our future focused nappies rather well. You can check out both Steve and Maurie's recent reflections on our progress. 

How can we lead change in our schools
So how can we all lead this change, particularly when not given the gift of a clean slate. Put simply we will all need to get good at changing. We will need to lead our educators to become adaptive experts who as Linda Darling Hammond states "know how to continuously expand their expertise, restructuring their knowledge and competencies to meet new challenges.” All leaders in schools need to be firmly focused on the future. Future focused leadership is  about change leadership. Luckily, that continuous cycle for developing adaptive expertise already exists within the New Zealand Curriculum, the Teaching as Inquiry cycle in a sense represents an effective model of change management on a micro or classroom level. It is actually just a matter of ensuring that all teachers (and leaders) actually engage in robust, longterm inquiry. They need to be looking to student data, getting to know their learners' interests and needs and trialling new strategies. In fact, they need to become learning designers who are willing to iterate and prototype their teaching practice on a daily, weekly and annual basis. And it is important that the cycle is continuous so as to build on growth achieved from previous cycles of change management. As the Sigmoid Curve demonstrates, long term gains are more likely when transformation happens in periods of growth rather than decline. Put simply, it is better to be proactive than reactive. We simply must all keep evolving and moving forward. It might seem brutal, but quite frankly if you aren't willing to move forward, maybe you should consider moving out of the way. It isn't about innovation for innovation sake. It is about innovation for improvement sake.

How can we be supported to make the necessary changes?
Firstly we need to be acknowledged by the present MoE as active partners in our own future and knowledge building (letting educators help select the foundation members of EDUCANZ might be a good start...just saying :-). As Keri Facer stated "the future is not something that is done to us, but an ongoing process in which we can intervene" - please let us all intervene...we are more than capable of doing so. If there is one thing (more like a few things) I could say face to face to Minister Parata, it is this. Be warm but demanding! We have the technical infrastructure (or at least we soon will have that) and for that we are incredibly grateful. I can only look forward to promising developments such as Network for Learning evolving in to an even richer platform and portal (please get ESAA working and mash up a solid range of pre-provisioned SMSs and LMSs for all schools to easily engage with...just a suggestion). We have phenomenal educators - yes some are better than others (just like our learners..we vary), but with the right support we can all fly. We have spectacular students - I actually wish you would stop labeling them so bluntly - your term 'priority' is potentially problematic. I am sorry, but for me, ALL students are my priority learners. I know we have a tail that desperately needs addressing, I am just not convinced that label actually helps. We have a stunning curriculum - don't waste resources and time on changing it...just yet. It is slim, it is creative, it is both freeing and just constraining enough. I adore the NZC from front to back and front again. So you if could just leave it be (for now) that would be ace. Yes, please have high standards for us as we have (and you want us to have) for our learners, and if you must, measure results, but just don't publish them. Use achievement data as you would have us use achievement data, for identifying teachers (who are learners too), school and geographical areas that need your resourcing and support. In publishing that achievement data, all you are doing is creating shame, and you know as we do that shame only does harm. It creates resentment, it creates loss of face, it eats away at confidence and knocks the very communities you claim you want to support and rebuild. This doesn't mean we want you to be soft, quite the opposite - we need you to be firm. Firm, warm and supportive. What we need for all educators and all schools, whether they are struggling or 'successful' (and achingly traditional) is recognition, celebration (The Festival of Education was a good start) but more than anything we need resourcing so WE receive the education WE need as well.
Demand high standards.
Demand excellent outcomes.
But mostly, provide generous amounts of ongoing professional learning and support. Provide support that is as relevant and authentic as the education we must provide for our learners.

Where and when will we make the change?
So whilst my last paragraph might have been targeted at those who support us, I would like to end with a call to arms to all educators. All challenges aside, we are actually more than capable of leading positive change ourselves. We need to set aside any perceived barriers, be it our leadership, our school, our socio-economic situation, classroom or class size - the reality is we can all start making changes in what and how we teach our young people. We can begin by supporting one another by sharing our stories, our resources and our strategies. We can create our own networks and support systems, whether they be the teacher next door or teachers on Twitter across the country or globe. Without resorting to singing some Whitney Houston or John Farnham at you, we need to acknowledge that the change actually starts with you - you wanting to change and then actually, quite simply, changing. As Ford once said, "if you think you can, or think you can't, you're probably right". The change can start here and now… …it’s simply a matter of developing a growth mindset.

In lieu of me attempting a power ballad (my colleagues will attest that it wouldn't be a wise idea), I leave you with this...a short poem by Claire "Righteous" Amos. ;-)

The Future of Education
The educational revolution will not be televised.
It will be blogged, tweeted and co-constructed in code.

The future is unknowable.
Change won’t be slowed.

So hurry up, build your own map.
And whatever you do, at least get on the road.
Share:
Read More
, , , , ,

Courageous Sharing at HPSS



This afternoon my co-DPs and I had the opportunity to share our curriculum structures at EdChallenge (a PLG for senior leadership teams organised by the Albany Senior High School - thank you for including us!). It was awesome and terrifying to have an opportunity to attempt to articulate a year's thinking in a little over 20 minutes. A few things struck me. For one, we have done A LOT of thinking and we have come along way. It was great to hear Di and Lea share their journey with their teams in developing and realising visions for our Learning Design and Learning Relationships respectively. Their leadership has resulted in some incredibly deep thinking. 
Interestingly, we have remained true to our original thinking in Term One and indeed Maurie's and the BOTs vision from the year prior. However, on closer inspection, we have absolutely grown and built on these initial plans as we have welcomed on more and more of our team on board. There was a real sense of collaboration and leadership driving what was presented today (see above).

What was also evident was a sense of a thinking journey. We began the year with a period of convergent thinking - developing as a small team a strong nucleus or core to our structure. Then as teams were introduced we entered a phase of divergent thinking so as to develop different strands such as specialised learning, learning teams, project learning and professional learning. We now seemed to have come full circle with a need to become convergent once more so as to streamline our thinking and our taxonomies. This cycle will undoubtedly repeat itself as we continue to evolve, and may form a useful structure for 'leading as inquiry' process over the coming years. Converging to locate our next focus or priority and then diverging to explore solutions and opportunities. This echoes an interesting cycle of collaboration and autonomy - a cycle which seems integral to collaborative leadership being sustainable in the longterm.

Another thing that struck me as I left for home (only slightly traumatised by such an act of unbridled and uncensored sharing), is that we are bloody brave. In fact we are all brave at HPSS. Throughout this developmental foetal like stage we have basically been sharing our ultrasounds with the world! Guts and all, we have shared our thinking, our ideas, our challenges and and our excitement (not looking at anyone in particular Mouldey). 

This is awesome and something we should remember to celebrate. For this reason, I would like to dedicate this post to my courageous colleagues who have been sharing their learning and thinking online and face to face. 

And here we are, warts and all, the HPSS bloggers:

Senior Leadership Team

Specialised Learning Leaders

Learning Team Leaders

Project Learning Team

Professional Learning Team

Share:
Read More
, , , ,

Teaching as Inquiry: A mechanism for leading meaningful and manageable pedagogical change

NB. This was first written as a position paper for Waikato University, hence the 'novel-esque' lengths. 
Source: http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/Curriculum-documents/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/Effective-pedagogy
Issue
An important leadership issue that exists at a micro (school) and macro (systemic/national) level is that school-based, episodic and initiative-focused professional development does not support meaningful and manageable pedagogical change to occur.

Context
This is particularly important as many New Zealand schools have been expected to design and implement a school curriculum based on the New Zealand Curriculum from 2010 and Te Mauratanga from 2011, whilst also introducing National standards from 2010 and the newly aligned NCEA standards from 2011. At the same time a number of schools have also been working on implementing e-learning across the curriculum.

Position
My position is that pedagogical change can and must occur. With the ‘right tools’ school-based professional development can result meaningful and manageable pedagogical change. I believe one of the most effective ways that leaders can help educators to achieve the required pedagogical changes is through the implementation of ongoing school wide professional development framed around the ‘teaching as inquiry’ cycle.

Literature Review
Recent educational literature highlights both the issue of episodic, initiative-focused professional development and the position that ‘teaching as inquiry’ can support teachers in achieving both meaningful and manageable pedagogical change.

In the summary section of the ‘Teacher professional learning and development: best evidence synthesis iteration (BES)’, Timperley (2008) highlights “the strong, mostly anecdotal, evidence that much professional development has not been effective in terms of achieving change in teacher practice” (p.x). PPTA President Robin Duff (2007) also suggests in the BES that the current professional development is not enough, stating, “For many teachers, one-day workshops are all the professional development they experience because of the cost and unavailability of better options. These are not the ideal form of PD, although they may still have their place to share new information or to enable teacher networking.” (p.xii).

Timperley (2007) also suggests the importance of setting up conditions that are responsive to the way that teachers learn. She emphasises the need for teachers to define and monitor their goals and progress towards them. Now, more than ever, teachers need to see themselves as life-long learners who are adapting to changing needs of students (Bolstad et al. 2012). As Timperley (2007) states “an essential element of this inquiry is that teachers see themselves as agents of change - for their students and their own learning” (p.xliv). ‘Teaching as inquiry’ allows a teacher to align their learning to meet the demands of their curriculum and the needs of their specific students. This assists in making the professional learning authentic and personally meaningful in a way that initiative-focused sporadic professional development does not.

Another reason ‘teaching as inquiry’ provides such effective professional development is its focus on student learning outcomes. Alton-Lee (2003) and Timperley (2007) promote the importance of clear learning outcomes as goals, which then inform teachers’ learning goals which ensures the focus is on the student from the outset. This is reinforced by Fullan (2001) who states that “the key to system-wide success is to place educators and students at the centre” (p.1). He highlights the importance of educators focusing on the student and not just the educational initiative of the moment. This also means that teachers can appreciate the links between how and what they teach, how learners respond and what the students actually learn for ‘teaching as inquiry’ to be effective and actually lead meaningful change (Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, & Fung, 2008).

One of the key reasons that pedagogical change is often challenging to achieve in schools is due to the way schools deal with the introduction of ICT tools and strategies as a singular focus. As Fullan (2011) states “no successful country became good through using technology at the front.” (p.5). Without the focus on pedagogy and student outcomes, technology has the potential to become a distraction (Fullan, 2011) detached from the student’s learning. Using a ‘teaching as inquiry’ model to support ICT professional development ensures the focus remains on the student outcomes, not ICT tools in isolation. Noeline Wright (2010) highlights the importance of embedding “technological tools into the natural flow of schooling” (p.14). Educators need to use the ‘teaching as inquiry’ cycle to ensure they are examining the effectiveness of ICTs and online learning (Means, 2009). Similarly, Alton-Lee (2003) highlights the need for “curricular alignment: The use of resources, teaching materials and ICT is aligned with curriculum goals to optimise student motivation and accomplish instructional purposes and goals.” (p.ix). ‘Teaching as inquiry’ becomes increasingly important as it supports educators to trial new teaching interventions and measure the impact that teachers have as knowledge-generator (Robinson, 2003).

One reason why episodic initiative-focused professional development fails to result in meaningful and manageable change is because there is often inadequate time and support provided. As Aitken (2008) states “while research and inquiry can powerfully illuminate the impact of practice on students and take us forward, the process may involve discomfort” (p.31). Timperley also (2007) highlights the importance of organisational conditions and support, suggesting that teachers are unlikely to engage in inquiry if these are not present. As Alton-Lee (2008) states “the challenge for us all is to create systemic conditions that support teachers in their learning and inquiry” (p.31). Therefore, for learning and inquiry to be meaningful and manageable, school leaders have a responsibility to develop and sustain a school-wide learning community and are responsible for supporting and sustaining a continuous culture of learning amongst staff (Bolstad et al., 2012). The 2012 Education Review Office (ERO) report on ‘teaching as inquiry’ also reinforces these ideas, observing, “effective practice was seen where school leaders had worked with teachers to build an understanding about ‘teaching as inquiry’. They had progressively established systems to support inquiry, and were monitoring how effectively inquiry was impacting on learning.” (p. 9). However, ERO also highlighted that this was happening in only a few schools, which would suggest that whilst ‘teaching as inquiry’ has been identified as a meaningful and manageable way to enable pedagogical change, schools still struggle to make it a priority. As Justine Driver (2011) states in her thesis “teaching as inquiry is a tool for implementing change within schools and managing change is challenging for school leaders and teachers” (p. ii).

Assumptions, justifications and the larger educational picture
My position is that ‘teaching as inquiry’ is a process that has the potential to facilitate pedagogical change. However, one assumption is that appropriate time and support is important in making the inquiry successful and effective. Aitken and Sinnema (2008) highlight that teachers need to inquire into the impact of their actions on their students and into interventions that might enhance student outcomes. The New Zealand Curriculum (2007) also states that effective pedagogy requires that teachers inquire into the impact of their teaching on their students. ‘Teaching as inquiry’, if implemented across the school, can be an effective way for teachers to evolve their pedagogical practice whilst focusing on the needs of their learners. This process also addresses school wide goals, which often focus on improving student learning and achievement.

Findings gathered from a study I undertook (having implemented a school wide professional development model framed by the ‘teaching as inquiry’) support the assumption that appropriate time and support is important in making the inquiry successful and effective. During 2011 and 2012 I was responsible for leading and reporting on a school wide ICT professional development contract for over 150 teaching staff at Epsom Girls Grammar School (a large girls secondary school located in Epsom, Auckland). It was during this time that I observed first-hand the pressures teachers felt due to the simultaneous implementation of the NZC, newly aligned NCEA standards and the introduction of ICT tools and strategies. This process provided a range of new understandings of the issue and it was during this time that I also saw first hand, how ‘teaching as inquiry’ could be used as a mechanism for achieving meaningful and manageable pedagogical change.
Figure 1
Arriving at the end of the first year of a three-year school-wide ICT PD contract, feedback from the teaching staff suggested (as assumed) that teachers were feeling overwhelmed by ‘yet another’ educational initiative (ICTPD) that had been added to an already busy professional development programme. There was also a level of frustration with the first year of the professional development being sporadic and having focused (as it does in many schools) on the ICT tools and strategies in isolation, highlighting the issue episodic, initiative-focused professional development. It was therefore necessary to change the focus to their students’ learning outcomes, not just the ICT tools and strategies alone. The way this was achieved was through the development of an ‘E-learning Action Plan’ (refer to Figure 1) that used used the stages of the ‘teaching as inquiry’ cycle to inform an action research project which was completed by curriculum based professional learning groups (PLGs).


The aim of this inquiry process was to provide all curriculum teachers, with a process to guide their integration of e-learning tools and strategies that was directly related to student outcomes and aligned to school-wide and personal learning needs. This provided a mechanism for pedagogical change that felt both manageable and meaningful to both the teacher and learner. The contextualisation and personalisation that ‘teaching as inquiry’ allowed meant that teachers could also focus on implementation of the newly aligned NCEA standards within the same cycle, which added to the sense of achieving pedagogical change (by introducing ICTs tools and strategies) in a way that was meaningful (as it was focused on the student) and manageable (as it integrated student learning outcomes, NCEA and ICT needs to be addressed in a single contextualised cycle) way.
Figure 2
It was in the second year of leading the school wide professional development that feedback was gathered that further justified the assumption that manageable and meaningful pedagogical change can be achieved using ‘teaching as inquiry’. This time the model was adapted to more directly address the demands of the NZC (with a particular focus on thinking, collaboration, differentiation) as well as focusing on the implementation of ICT tools and strategies. It was this adapted model that highlighted how ‘teaching as inquiry’ could be used to address the many challenges teachers are facing, including the implementation of the NZC, the demands of the newly aligned NCEA achievement standards as well as the need to be integrate ICT tools and strategies. The use of ‘teaching as inquiry’ allowed all of these topics to be aligned within a single cycle of school wide professional development. (refer to Figure 2)

The feedback from teachers was again very positive, with many highlighting how this process made implementing aspects of the NZC and introducing ICT tools and strategies manageable and ensured that the focus remained on the student throughout.

The experience at Epsom Girls Grammar School, I believe, reinforces how effective ‘teaching as inquiry’ can be in supporting teachers to navigate their way through the demands of the NZC, assessment and ICT tools and strategies that results in pedagogical change that is both meaningful and manageable. This however, can only be successful if the school provides the time and structures to enable inquiry and learning to take place.

Over the last two years I have also shared this strategy, through platforms such as EdTalks, NZC Online, Ulearn and a series of national conferences and online communities. Several schools have now adopted this model and feedback would suggest that this approach works well across the wider New Zealand educational landscape. There are a number reasons why I believe through using teaching inquiry, professional development can be meaningful and manageable in today’s learning environment. Firstly, it is based on effective pedagogy as outlined in the NZC. Secondly, it can be personalised to meet teacher professional needs and to encompass a range of educational initiatives. Thirdly, it can be contextualised into any curriculum area. It also provides a plan of action that provides structure and a level of accountability (if plans are shared and reported on). The final reason I believe ‘teaching as inquiry’ is so effective, is that it puts the focus on the student outcomes, not just the initiative of the moment.

Conclusion
Adaptive experts also know how to continuously expand their expertise, restructuring their knowledge and competencies to meet new challenges. 

(Darling-Hammond, 2006)
In a time when teachers are juggling a number of demands it is important that we provide them with strategies and processes for becoming adaptive experts who can achieve pedagogical change in a manageable way. As Earle (2008) states, “action research and focused inquiry both contribute to professional learning for teachers” (p.11) reinforcing the idea that ‘teaching as inquiry’ can be used, at both a micro (school) and macro (systemic/national) level, to guide not only professional learning but can also become a mechanism for achieving meaningful and manageable pedagogical change.

REFERENCES
Aitken, G. & Sinnema, C. (2008). Effective pedagogy in social sciences/tikanga a iwi: best evidence synthesis interation (BES). Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.

Alton-Lee, A. (2003). Quality teaching for diverse students in schooling: best evidence synthesis. Wellington, N.Z.: Ministry of Education.

Bolstad, R. & Gilbert, J. (2012). Supporting future-oriented learning & teaching: a New Zealand perspective. [Wellington, N.Z.]: Ministry of Education.

Driver, J. (2011). Teaching as inquiry: Understandings and challenges towards a professional way of being. Unitec Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://130.217.226.8/handle/10652/1828

Education Review Office. (2011). Directions for learning: the New Zealand curriculum principles, and teaching as inquiry. Wellington, N.Z.: Education Review Office.

Education Review Office. (2012). Teaching as inquiry: Responding to learners. Wellington, N.Z.: Education Review Office.

Fullan, M. (2011) - The wrong drivers.pdf. Retrieved from http://elearn.waikato.ac.nz/pluginfile.php/523311/mod_forum/attachment/1235832/Fullan%202011%20-%20The%20wrong%20drivers.pdf

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. London, U.K.: Routledge.

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers. London, U.K.: Routledge.

NZ Curriculum Online. (n.d.). National Standards. Retrieved July 18, 2013, from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/National-Standards

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development & Education Review Office. (2010). OECD review on evaluation and assessment frameworks for improving school outcomes: New Zealand country background report 2010. [Wellington] N.Z.: Ministry of Education.

Schleicher, A. (2011), Building a High-Quality Teaching Profession: Lessons from around the World, OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264113046-en

NZ Curriculum Online. (n.d.). Teaching as inquiry. Retrieved July 18, 2013, from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/Curriculum-stories/Case-studies/Teachers-as-learners-Inquiry/Teaching-as-inquiry

TeachThought - Learn better. (2013). Retrieved July 18, 2013, from http://www.teachthought.com/

Timperley, H. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: best evidence synthesis iteration (BES). Wellington, N.Z.: Ministry of Education.

Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. Retrieved from http://www.orientation94.org/uploaded/MakalatPdf/Manchurat/EdPractices_18.pdf

Wright, N. (2010). e-Learning and implications for New Zealand schools: a literature review. Wellington. N.Z.: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/77667/948_ELearnLitReview.pdf
Share:
Read More