Communities of Status Quo: Is there enough disruption in your Community of Learning??

Over the last year or so I have thoroughly enjoyed being part of the establishment of what looks to be a particularly fabulous West Auckland COL - Te Whiria te Tangata. It is great to see school communities of schools coming together to collaborate to improve student outcomes. It is great to see school communities of schools collaborating, full stop.

However I do have a concern. I am not concerned that communities of learning won't see schools coming together to improve learner outcomes, what I am concerned about is that they may not, because of their very structure and achievement challenges, actually change much else. When scanning the endorsed achievement challenges and in the conversations I have had with many colleagues from a range of communities, I keep thinking, is there much within COL plans and achievement challenges that move beyond the paradigm of business as usual? Or are we simply going to see communities of schools holding hands, singing kumbaya and patting their respective inquiries on the back?

Is there much within COL plans and achievement challenges that move beyond the paradigm of business as usual? 

At this point I need to make an admission. During the period of COL policy development, or what was then referred to as IES or Investing in Educational Success I was lucky enough to be serving on the then Deputy Minister of Education Nikki Kaye's 21st Century Learning Reference Group. We were in the throes of developing a set of recommendations that came together as the report Future Focused Learning for Connected Communities. I remember very clearly the day we were briefed on the plans for IES and getting my knickers in a complete twist. Why the freakin' heck weren't they weaving the need for innovation into the very DNA of the COL policy? Having long been an amateur futurist and early adopter of technology I was confident that critical thinking, technology, personalisation and greater learner agency was something we needed to support all schools and educators to tackle.

Amos the Amateur Futurist 😂

This was compounded by the fact that I had recently had the pleasure of leading a large scale ICTPD contract at Epsom Girls Grammar School, and whilst I won't make any spurious claims about leading massive change, I did see, first hand, the potential of a school wide teaching as inquiry initiative infused with an expectation to explore e-learning interventions within every inquiry. Inquiries were still firmly focused on raising student outcomes, and also had a focus on developing thinking skills and introducing differentiation to develop greater engagement and interest. Yes, it caused unease and a certain level of discomfort as each and every teacher was expected to explore technological interventions, whether that was personally appealing or not, but it also got teachers to see the potential for employing new and different ways of engaging and supporting learning.

In this case, the demand for technological pedagogical interventions was a disruption, albeit a fairly palatable and minor one. It stopped teachers simply resorting to interventions that sat within their comfort zone. In my mind teaching as inquiry or spirals as inquiry without discomfort and an element of disruption is simply teaching.

The great thing about the policy as exists it doesn't preclude disruption, it simply doesn't demand it. And I am certainly not suggesting there isn't brilliant and innovative work taking place, I am just concerned that COLs, particularly if schools and/or educators are risk averse, can avoid any real change. So what can we do? Well the first thing I would suggest is that any educators involved in leading or supporting a COL develop an understanding of exponential change and what this really might mean for the very near future of schooling in New Zealand. See Kaila Corbin's fabulous introduction to exponentials below:

Source: YouTube

And if you are in any doubt that this isn't really applicable to education, listen to what Sue Suckling Chairperson of NZQA has to say about the Future of Education. If the chair of NZQA questions the future of NZQA, NCEA and the whole current concept of schooling, you need to wake up and smell the curriculum! (Who just today announced NZ's first micro-credential on Twitter.)

Source : YouTube

What is your COL doing to prepare for the potential disruption of COOLs? What are they doing to prepare for self-taught teenagers who can accrue international micro-credentials that render NCEA and the current concept of school redundant? If we are going to come together to collaborate, let's come together to tackle some very real threats and opportunities that are closer than we think. 

If nothing else, design some elements of disruption that at the very least prevent your Community of Learning being little more than a synergetic version of the status quo.

Connect with and follow the less amateur futurists:

Frances Valentine

Cheryl Doig

Derek Handley

Kaila Corbin

Melissa Clark-Reynolds

Other posts that might be of interest:

#SUNZSUMMIT - What I learnt from attending SingularityU and what I reckon it means for education in NZ

It's not about our students not being school ready, it's about our schools not being 21st Century child ready

Keeping our cool about COOLs (without drinking the COOL aid)

Blue Sky High - five things every secondary school should implement...now 

Share:

Teaching as Inquiry: A mechanism for leading meaningful and manageable pedagogical change (and integrating Digital Technologies)

In light of this week's announcement from Minister of Education Nikki Kaye, it felt like the right time to re-publish this post. As pressure ramps up to integrate digital technologies and strategies, I heartily encourage you to use e-learning infused Teaching as Inquiry or Spirals of Inquiry within your school or COL as a way to lead meaningful and manageable change! It is so important that schools find a way to tackle the integration of the Digital Technologies head on, but do so in a way that is firmly focused on the learner rather than the tool or technology. 

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

This post was original published on 14/09/13.

Share:

It's not about our students not being school ready, it's about our schools not being 21st Century child ready

Image Source

In one of the many fantastic staffroom chats I get to have every week at HPSS there is one that keeps coming back to me. Last week I was chatting to my lovely colleague Heemi McDonald (make sure you read his blog) about the growing regularity of school leader meetings I seem to be sitting in on where educators are voicing concerns about increasing numbers of students coming in with more learning needs than before. Principals now more than ever are struggling with meeting the diverse needs of young children and young adults with increasingly complex needs. I myself have engaged in discussion where we have tried to find the source of these "issues". Is it the development in medicine that has seen more premature babies survive who may have experienced all kinds of complications? Is the increased screen time? Is it the sugar and processed food? The increasing amount of time toddlers spend in daycare?? The reasons, and ultimately the excuses, for children not being "ready" are endless.

All to often these discussions end up making me feel uneasy. They feel like (though not necessarily intentionally) that they are looking to place blame on the child and society and fail to ask what might be the real question - is the average school really 21st Century child ready? This was the seed Heemi planted when he challenged me and another colleague during this discussion. It was a genuine light bulb moment.

What are the measures we use when we assess "readiness"? A 2014 Education Review  article outlined school readiness as "Ideally, a Year 0 student should be able to listen carefully to stories, follow instructions, sit quietly on the mat, raise hand to ask a question, put on shoes and jersey, put bag away, wash hands, sit and eat food at break times, pack bag and carry it, and so on." Seems fair enough. When we think of secondary school it is more about expecting a standardised level of literacy, numeracy and self-management. However what we seem to be presented with is increasingly complex issues ranging from poor hand writing, struggling to sit still, possible dyslexia through to behaviours associated with autism.

Or are we?

On one hand it seems to me that we are "diagnosing" students more than ever. I have been an English teacher for 20 years, and whilst we have always got students to do a bit of writing and maybe some close reading on entry, this was mostly skimmed over by some teachers and used to pick out the students who might have been directed into a "supported band" and some some ludicrous "top band". We are now entering a period where all educators are expected to be in constant state of inquiry, scanning, diagnosing and designing individualised interventions to ensure we are all getting our Vygotsky on and ensuring all learning  is in the "zone of proximal development". Therefore, I have a hunch that part of the issue is that we now know and try to do more and therefore feel overwhelmed with who walks through our school doors. And unfortunately few, if any schools are using technology well to support this. This is could be a really interesting thing for us to focus on when talking about school resourcing. I believe this government is absolutely open to increasing funding of schools, they just need some serious data about where and why we should be prioritising the spending.

My second hunch is that a big part of the issue is that business (school) simply no longer meets the needs of the customer. It is not hard to find examples across many other industries of the many companies who have failed and folded as a result of not evolving quickly enough to meet the customers needs, such as Kodak who failed to respond to the digital revolution. The challenge for educators is that we are not a business, with businesses the failure is transparent as customers simply stop spending their money. With schools we are increasingly being lulled into a false sense of security. We don't physically lose customers because are an incredibly handy social construct - i.e. schools provide incredibly cheap and reliable babysitting and teen wrangling services. Students are not going to stop going to school because the produce or service are no longer fit for purpose, they are simply going to appear like they don't fit school, they are going to become harder to engage and possible even find it harder to succeed. We may not be physically losing customers, but I would argue that we are losing them on a mental and emotional level.

THE CHILD IS NOT THE PROBLEM. THE SCHOOL IS.

And before you get huffy, note I am not placing blame, I am simply making an observation. I am not placing blame because I recognise that meeting the changing demands of our young people is bloody hard. particularly when we have remained unchanged for such a long time. And it is beyond hard if you don't have a leader who appreciates this as a issue or as a challenge and/or you don't feel like you have the resourcing to make the necessary changes. Also we all need to have the smart tools that can may diagnostics and interventions more manageable. Heck I know many a change leader who struggles even when they have the vision required to evolve education.

But that said the most important tool in all of this is the teacher, or more precisely, the empathetic responsive teacher. By that I mean a teacher who simply believes each and every student is "school ready", simply by virtue of being present. The empathetic responsive teacher relishes the new literacies and the new capabilities that the 21st century child brings and is accepting of the challenges and differences they might also bring. So what if they aren't engaging in schooling in the same way that kids did five, ten or twenty years ago. Why the hell should we expect them to? I mean if I was a teenager now and forced to experience experience an education that felt like the high school equivalent of having to watch Phillip Sherry TV1 News  every single night I'd be disengaged as well!

So if these hunches are true, what now?

In the short term I think we and in particular our school leaders needs to shift our perspective. Really asking ourselves - What is school for? Who is school for? Is what we are serving up actually fit for purpose? Then secondly, in longer term, I think we need to develop a clear vision of what a genuinely "fit for purpose school" (by that I mean what the students REALLY want and need, not a crusty academic's vision based on undoubtedly outdated mental models) and develop a detailed case for precision funding based on targeted professional development and genuinely smart tools for diagnostics and genuinely smart learning management systems that have inbuilt 21 century instructional built into it. I also think we can then make a real argument for funding reduced contact hours, especially if we have the smart tools that can demonstrate how we are using those non-contact hours to design genuinely personalised learning for every learner. I want to know what IBM Watson might look like in education? Imagine what our Spirals of Inquiry or Teaching as Inquiry could become! Bloody exiting times we live in.

I look forward to diving deeper into this thinking as I spend my coming week in Edinburgh at the International Summit of the Teaching Profession. You can follow the tweets here or by following the hashtag #ISTP2017.

I am also keen to hear your thoughts, your hunches and your solutions. I am keen to hear what you think it might take for teachers to not feel overwhelmed and to simply be an empathetic responsive educational leader and teacher.

Share:

Teaching as Inquiry through a Design Thinking Lens

This week I was lucky enough to be invited to be a Learning2 Leader at Learning2 Asia - a fabulous practitioner led conference that was developed by an innovative group of educators frustrated by the conferences they had available to them. Learning2 is now spreading across the globe with upcoming meet ups in Johannesburg, Milan and Ecuador. For my extended sessions I looked at  how Teaching as Inquiry can be used a mechanism for leading change. As a result of attending the NoTosh edition of Google Teacher Academy last year in Sydney, I decided to combine what I knew worked about Teaching as Inquiry with what I picked up at GTA last year, resulting in what I think makes perfect sense - Teaching as inquiry through a Design Thinking lens.

Below is an outline of my workshop activities. Much thanks to Ewan, Tom and Hamish (NoTosh) for their generosity in sharing many of these ideas and resources.

Intro and PPT Presentation 

Link to slides

• Introduction to Teaching as Inquiry and Design Thinking
• Why we need to evolve our practice?
• How we can you use Teaching as Inquiry to become “adaptive experts”?

Professional Reading: Spiral of Inquiry

Phase One: Focusing Inquiry (Immersion) 

Key questions
What do we know about each student's:

• prior learning
• ethnicity/culture (Who are you? Where are you from?)?
• linguistic background/languages spoken?
• interests/hobbies/community involvement?
• aspirations/goals (both student and family/community)?
• skills, knowledge (including prior cultural knowledge) and understandings?
• expected levels of progress in your learning area/class?

Activity - Drawing the issue

Select one group of students you teach (may be a class or a group within a class)
Using the data and the questions above create a visual map of what you know about your learners and their needs - feel free to use any combination of words and images.
Identify an issue that is important and therefore worth spending time on.

Activity - Think, pair, share brainstorm

Think about your issue, get together with a partner and discuss and brainstorm all of the possible aspects of the issue. Try to challenge one another

Activity - Hexagonal Thinking

NoTosh website - Hexagonal Thinking

Phase Two: Focusing Inquiry (Synthesis)

Activity - How Might We questions

NoTosh Website - Explanation of template

Phase Three: Teaching Inquiry (Ideation & Prototype) 

Key Questions
Knowing what I do about my students:

• what themes/contexts/texts will connect with their lives, experiences and prior knowledge, including their prior cultural knowledge?
• what learning outcomes are important and relevant for them?
• what period of time will they need to meet these outcomes?

Knowing what I know about 21C skills:

• what skills are important?

Activity - 100 ideas in 10 minutes

NoTosh Website - Come up with great ideas
Sinner Man by Nina Simone (10 min song)

Activity - Prototyping

Select one idea, prototype and present

Activity - Idea Gallery and Rose, Bud, Thorn (if time)

Putting up your How Might We question on your screen and write out and place your prototype (the teaching strategy or intervention you are going to trial) on your keyboard. Move around the room, reading ideas and giving Rose, Bud, Thorn feedback.

Two PD Video - Rose, Bud, Thorn

Phase Four: Teaching and Learning (Testing)

This is the phase where you would trial the strategies with your class.

Phase Five: Learning Inquiry (Reflection)

Activity - Discussing ways you could collect post inquiry data (quantitative AND quanlitative)

Padlet - Workshop (feel free to check out the ideas shared at the workshop)

Reflection Activity - World Cafe

Activity - World Cafe

What will you take away from today's learning?
How do you see teaching as inquiry being used to lead change? Potential challenges/opportunities?

World Cafe Website

Resources & Links

Teaching as Inquiry NZC Website
NoTosh Website (Design Thinking Resources)
Using Teaching as Inquiry to guide an elearning action plan (video)
Teaching as Inquiry at Epsom Girls Grammar School (video)
Teaching as Inquiry: A mechanism for leading meaningful and manageable pedagogical change

Planning Templates

E-learning Action plan 2011
E-learning Action Plan 2012
Blank Teaching as Inquiry Planner

Extension activity: Thinking about the “why”

Collaborative Activity - Online Jigsaw Reading Activity Looking at the Research about

Teaching as Inquiry (feel free to use this with your colleagues).

In this activity you will be reading and attempting to summarise some key pieces of research about Teaching as Inquiry. Each group will be given a piece of research to focus on. You may like to divide the reading up between you, or choose to all read then discuss.

When you are ready to write up your key points or summary notes, use the Google Form link below for your piece of research.

When writing your notes, consider the following the questions:

• What are the key messages in this reading?
• What are the opportunities or pros of Teaching as Inquiry?
• What are the challenges related to using Teaching as Inquiry?
• What can schools/teachers do to make Teaching as Inquiry more effective?

Research Papers/Reports
ERO Report - Directions for Learning: The NZC, Principles and Teaching as Inquiry May 2011
ERO Report - Teaching as Inquiry: Responding to Learners July 2012
Learning Media Report - Coherence and Inquiry as Key Dimensions for Sustainability of Professional Learning
Teacher Professional Learning and Development BES Summary by Helen Timperley
Teaching as Inquiry: Understandings and Challenges Towards a Professional Being By Justine Driver
Lit Review 15-38
Learning from the QTR&D Programme by Lorna M. Earle Chapter 6 Collaborative Inquiry in QTR&D 44-62


Google Doc for Jigsaw Activity - feel free to make a copy and share!

Share:

Teaching as Inquiry - How might Claire better differentiate tasks to meet the needs of diverse learners?

Source

Over the course of Semester One, all teaching staff at Hobsonville Point Secondary School have undertaken a personal Teaching as Inquiry project, which enables teachers to focus on the specific needs of their learners but also provides a focus for the teacher's personalised professional learning plan.

I taught one Small Learning Module this semester, which was co-taught with Sarah Wakeford (our Learning Partnership Leader and Social Scientist extraordinaire). Our module was called Freedom Writers to Freedom Fighters - an English and Social Science integrated module looking at human rights and the literature that surrounds it, with a particular focus on black civil rights in Term One and the Treaty of Waitangi in Term Two. Our class was made up of 60 Year 10 students who range from curriculum level three to beyond curriculum level six plus. To add to the complexity there was the fact that I was often away with the NZTC so needed to ensure that any resources I created were scaffolded and supported high levels of self-directed learning.

Focusing Inquiry

In terms of learning outcomes, from an English perspective, I was looking at students being able to:

Term One

Make sense by analysing ideas, purpose and audience in extended written and visual texts. (L4/5)

generate by communicating understanding of ideas through a visual text. (L4/5)

Term Two

Make sense by comparing ideas, purpose and audience in connected texts (L4/5)

Generate by communicating understanding of connections across texts through PEEL paragraphs (L4)

Generate by communicating understanding of connections across texts through formal writing (L5)

AsTTle data was used to get a sense of where learners were at with their Reading and Writing and this was then cross referenced with samples of writing completed early within the module (and from my prior knowledge of learners as I had taught many of the students last year). 

Teaching Inquiry

From this I ascertained there was a need to develop not just flexible tasks, but different tasks that specifically prepared learners for different tasks that reflected where the students were at. To be fair I have never done this well in the past, I have really just got away with highly scaffolded tasks for all learners and of course supplementing this with targeted support for the students that needed it. And for the most part this has worked. 

Over the last year and a half, at HPSS, we have been working at developing very specific curriculum levelled learning objectives (that also reflected our learning design model) and a series of very specific assessment rubrics which break down each learning outcome into a curriculum level rubric broken down into SOLO sub levels that provide students with cognitive steps and descriptors that help them to get to the next level. Again, I am ashamed to say this is really the first time I have drilled down (in this much detail) into very specific curriculum levels at the junior level - this work alone has been incredible. Never before have I been so confident that an entire school staff understand the very nitty gritty of the curriculum document, and conceptualised what this means for all of our students. Once the rubrics were developed it became clear that a single task was not going to be appropriate for all, and for this reason I decided to develop two separate tasks - one designed for students working at Levels 3-4 and another for those working at Levels 5-6.

Teaching and Learning

Throughout the module both Sarah and I looked at ways we could cater for the diverse range of students in our module, ensuring we provided a range of texts that spanned genre, style, curriculum levels and modes. For the final task I was keen to get the students to demonstrate their ability to identify connections between texts and begin to relate their similarities and difference to the text purpose and audience. Usually I would give students a choice of modes (visual, verbal or written) to demonstrate their learning, however this time I did dictate the mode, simply because I also wanted them hone their essay writing skills. I was also aware that I was going to be away during the time they were writing their essay (or paragraphs) and wanted to ensure the task design enabled the students to be as self managing as possible.

So here are the two different tasks I designed:

Connected Reading Essay (Curriculum Level 5-6)
Connected Reading Paragraphs - Supported Version (Curriculum Level 3-4)

Learning Inquiry

Anecdotal feedback from a range of students is that the highly scaffolded instructions were super helpful. Their level of peer feedback has been impressive, resulting in me me feeling sublimely superfluous when I returned from my travels. The essays and paragraphs were due in on Tuesday and every student present completed the task. What was really pleasing is that a number of the students that completed the Level three-four task approached me when they completed that task and asked if they could have a go at building their paragraphs up to the essay task, the fact that they had an initial task that felt achievable definitely seemed to help build both their confidence and their ability to self manage to a far greater extent than I had seen in past modules. I am marking all of the essays and paragraphs over the holiday, but from what I have seen from a quick scan of all of their work, I have actually been blown away at the standard of writing and the depth of the understanding of issues within the texts - undoubtedly deepened by the integrated nature of the module with students exploring human rights from genuinely social science perspective.

Next Steps
To be honest I am little embarrassed I haven't been doing this as explicitly as this for years. My next step is to make this my normal/default practice. Beyond that I also want to make far better use of our slew of online platforms and ensure that my task instructions are not only differentiated explicitly for student readiness and curriculum level, but that they also adhere to the principles of universal design for learning by making the task instructions genuinely multi-modal.

I look forward to making this the focus of my Semester Two inquiry!

Share:

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:

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:

Learning to lead and leading as inquiry

Aa many of you will know I have a thing for teaching as inquiry, in particular I have a thing for teaching as inquiry as a means of developing future-focused adaptive expertise. In 2013 I was lucky enough to facilitate a number of Core Breakfasts on this topic - it was during this time that I found myself talking (and the audience...although I do talk to myself quite often) more and more about the concepts of leadership as inquiry and even governance as inquiry as a means of developing system wide adaptive expertise. Since that time I have tried to make this a central part of my personal leadership reflection cycle.

Last year was my first year as Deputy Principal (of an actual open and operational school) and was my first opportunity to lead my team, the Professional Learning Team. We got together and came up with a strategic plan for 2014 and it looked great. It was based on the school vision and values and it was focused on the meeting the needs of the students. They did an awesome at professionally supporting our staff and we all did the best we could to deliver the goods, even if some elements were squeezed simply as a result of the sheer fact that we were all (at times) fighting to simply keep our head above water in what was a massive first year as an operating school.

My team were (and are) fabulous, we delivered a great programme. However I did think aspects of my leadership was found wanting. Don't get me wrong, I am not seeking reassurance and trying to elicit compliments. I know I am a good leader, in fact I feel like I have proven my ability to lead in a positive, persuasive and passionate way in a range of contexts and communities, however I also believe I can always improve and am patently aware of my weaknesses. My main area of weakness as a leader is probably my same weakness as a teacher (and more than likely a quality many of us share....even if we may not want to 'fess up) - under pressure I default to leading how I like to be led, just like when I'm a bit tired, I default to teaching how I like to be taught.

I have a really clear understanding of how I like to be led:

• Give me a really clear vision and destination you want me to get to. 
• Make sure we have a shared understanding of what success looks like. 
• Once you've done that, please get out of the way and give me a whole lot of autonomy. 
• Let me get on with it. 
• Give me feedback on progress, be honest as to how I am going. 
• Have really high expectations. 
• Don't micro-manage me....in fact don't manage me at all. 

This strategy of leading the way I like might just be an awesome strategy....if I was leading a team made up of Claires (terrifying thought), but not necessarily the best way to lead an awesome but diverse and incredibly busy kick arse educators. Which leads me to my leadership inquiry for 2015 - How might I lead in a way that meets the diverse needs of each team member (modelled on servant-leadership) whilst maintaining a focus on student-centred leadership as a team.

I also might need to ask - How might I phrase a less convoluted How might I question... ;).

So where to next?

Once I have actually honed the topic of inquiry, my next step is to gather data from the team. I mean if I going to stop just leading in a way that suits me I need to understand what it is they actually need from me.

In terms of the big picture planning we have already co-constructed a strategic plan for Professional Learning in 2015. Like last year it is based around our vision, values, principles and the explicit needs of our learners. One thing I am going to try this year is a more one-to-one approach with the team meeting once a term to go over the strategy and plans for the term, but replacing fortnightly team meetings with fortnightly one-to-ones with each team member to help them develop more personalised strategic plans to support them in developing a sense of autonomy and ownership of their role - how this rolls out over the year will be dependent on the team member with support, guidance more tailored to their needs and meeting the way THEY like to be led.

Will this make a difference?

Only time will tell. One way I am going to try and capture this journey/inquiry is by using it as the basis for Leadership Inquiry as part of completing NAPP. Below is the Leadership Inquiry cycle as they frame it. Personally I'd argue for a simplified approach similar to the Teaching as Inquiry cycle...but the again maybe thats me and my default again - wanting to default my leadership inquiry to how I like doing my teaching inquiry.

I shall do my best to suck it up and toe the line like a good NAPP student...

maybe.

Leadership Inquiry Cycle/Questions

(1)  Common understanding

• What is the area of focus?
• What do you know about this focus area?
• Explore what is known- what is addressed well- what needs greater focus?
• Clarify expectations for developing this focus

(2) Gathering data

• What is going well and how can we build on this?
• What do students, staff parents say?
• What data do we collect? Analyse and interpret

(3)  Focus for improvement

• Have you got a broad question?

(4) Refining

• What could make a big difference?
• Ho will changes be sustained?
• Narrow the question 

(5) Question

• What is your new strategic, relevant, inquiry question?

(6) Demonstrating difference

• Do you need more information? How will you collect it?

(7) Action

• What strategies will you implement?

(8) Reflect, Celebrate

• What future direction will you take?

Share:

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: