NCEA - Considering the 'Big Opportunities'

These recent months have seen a number of groups start putting their stake in the ground around the NCEA Review. It has been interesting seeing people reveal their cards, and often exposing some odd assumptions about what is actually being reviewed and who is shaping the review within the Labour/Green/NZ First camp. For the sake of "joining the conversation" I thought I might share some my personal thoughts about the NCEA Review and it's proposed "Big Opportunities".

Note - the parts in italics are taken from this document: Download the Big Opportunities discussion document which can be found here. 

For what it's worth I actually think NCEA is pretty cool as it is. I like it's flexibility and that it already let's "you do you". If anything I think it is our mindsets that needs to be reviewed first before we get to the actual framework. Here is my pondering about that perspective: NCEA - we need to review our mindset first

But that said, I also see some great opportunities being presented via the NCEA Review.

Big Opportunity # 1: Creating space at NCEA Level 1 for powerful learning

What? Rebuild Level 1 as a 40 credit qualification – 20 for literacy and numeracy and 20 for a project.

Why? Reduces overall NCEA assessment workload, while giving learners a more engaging, relevant qualification, reflecting vital skills, knowledge, capabilities, and attitudes.

I couldn't agree more that NCEA assessment workload needs to be reduced and that Level One is the place to do it. However I personally don't think this goes far enough. Level One NCEA strikes me as a low value credential at best and I actually believe if we look at the evidence presented by ERO about the damage over assessment does, we would be better served by removing the expectation for students to complete NCEA Level One altogether. That said I do recognise for a small number of students Level One NCEA will be the qualification they leave school with, so for that reason I would retain it within the framework as an optional certificate (which it is already) for those that really need it. For the rest I would argue that a two year journey towards a rigorous and high quality Level Two NCEA Certificate (or three year journey towards LEVEL Three NCEA Certificate) would be far more powerful and hopefully a lot less stressful.

You can read the ERO report here: Wellbeing for Young People's Success at Secondary School (February 2015) : 19/02/2015 

You can also see how Hobsonville Point Secondary School have taken this approach already: Update on NCEA at HPSS (and introducing the HPSS Qualification Programme)

I can assure you, after experiencing the removal of Level One NCEA (as a seperate entity) first hand, that the sky has not fallen, nor have the grades. In fact our initial cohort who experienced this approach has gained similar pass rates at Level Two to the national cohort and decile band, and have gained higher levels of Merit and Excellence endorsement than those at similar schools, and have done so without stressing out.

Within this opportunity there is also mention of a seperate project qualification. I LOVE project based learning and in experiencing the facilitation of projects myself, I can say, hand on heart, that it represents some of the very best learning a student can experience. That said, the idea of a 20 credit project qualification also strikes me as problematic. Firstly, because I don't actually believe a high stakes assessment is needed for projects to be powerful learning. Secondly, I would also like projects to remain a place where it was safe to fail. Some of the biggest learning can come from trying, failing and trying again. And thirdly, a big old blob of an assessment feels oddly inflexible. One of the greatest attributes of NCEA is that it is innately flexible, which is awesome, for everyone. 

Instead I suggest the following. Projects could in a sense be seen as a new subject or learning area for those who are so inclined. Make it seem somehow compulsory for all and I think you would kill it. Within that learning area there could be a range of Achievement Standards designed around Design Thinking and Lean Startup frameworks and you could instead assess the ability to empathise, define, ideate, prototype, test etc. 

This might include standards such as: 

Define the needs and opportunities of a customer, client or project partner

Define a Problem within a defined context

Develop a range of ideas to address a defined problem and context

Develop a prototype for a solution addressing a specific problem and context

Undertake a critique of a solution for a specific problem and context

And so on and so forth. Thereby encouraging schools to see the potential for project based learning as stand alone or an integrated approach to learning, but doing it in such a way where it can be assessed either in part or in full depending on where the student or school is at. 

Plus I would offer this at Level Two and Three only. Thus encouraging schools to see that you can take time to go deep and wide with learning before focusing on high stakes assessment. 

You can see more about my journey into project facilitation and my initial thinking about what I like to reframe as an Innovation Curriculum: Prototyping an Innovation Curriculum - HELP! 

Big Opportunity #2: Strengthening literacy and numeracy

What? Benchmark literacy and numeracy at the level needed for success in further learning and employment.

Why? Gives confidence that every learner with an NCEA has the literacy and numeracy they need to  flourish.

As an English teacher with twenty years experience I would agree this is a great idea. Whilst I liked the idea of broadening how students gained numeracy and literacy through a wide range of standards I can also see the breadth has become somewhat problematic. I can see that there is a need for us to be careful about how we define and measure functional numeracy and literacy in such a way that it is actually a foundational set of numeracy and literacy skills that will support learners through further learning and living.

I do wonder if this might be simplified by creating a set of literacy and numeracy microcredentials that can be assessed through a range of learning contexts. The assessment and discrete threshold concepts and skills could be clearly defined and standardised whilst leaving it completely open as to how the learning may occur. Clear criteria could be set and students might submit portfolios of evidence through an national online platform when they and their teacher thought they were "at the level". This would be externally assessed and moderated to ensure it met "the standard", whatever that might be. I actually think this sort of internally taught but externally assessed approach (as long as it was inclusive and adhered to the principals of universal design for learning) could be a massive win for learners and teachers alike. You could address the "pearl clutcher's" concerns about unreliable internal assessments and also address the crisis of teacher workload as they try and get their head around increasingly complex demands. Plus it would level the playing ground around assessment opportunities and conditions.

More on this idea can be seen here: Future Focused Assessment - imagine if schools did no high stakes assessment...

Big Opportunity #3: Ensuring NCEA Levels 2 and 3 support good connections beyond schooling

What? Introduce pathways opportunities to NCEA Levels 2 and 3, giving every young person access to learning relevant to their pathway (e.g., from a community action project, work placement, research essay, or an advanced tertiary course).

Why? Helps prepare learners for the transition to work or further education, regardless of their pathway.

Yep. Like this idea. Again, wouldn't attach it to Level One and wouldn't design anything too big and clunky that would have the unintended outcome of students being streamed into this pathway only. Instead I would consider developing another subject or learning area, or maybe a strand within the wider 'Projects' learning area and call it Pathway Projects. Hobsonville Point Secondary School already have such an option which was developed by our Pathway Leader Jayne Dunbar and building on the wider Project Curriculum developed by Sarah Wakeford and Liz McHugh and team.

You can read more about that here:  https://sites.google.com/hobsonvillepoint.school.nz/hpss/curriculum/ncea-and-careers

Basically, I do believe there should be an opportunity for students to be recognised for the work they do in researching and developing their pathway beyond school, just as long as it doesn't accidentally becomes a stream that unintentionally narrows the learner's horizon.

Big Opportunity #4: Making it easier for teachers, schools, and kura to refocus on learning

What? Shift culture from achieving as many credits as possible to encouraging quality teaching and learning.

Why? Prioritises courses with deep learning, which help learners develop powerful knowledge, skills and capabilities, and attitudes.

Yep. Totally. Let's stop thinking about (and wasting money) digitising out-moded exams and instead think how can develop digital platforms, such as Amy the AI Maths Tutor, to support our teachers and learners and move to an approach where high stakes assessment is taken out of schools and replaced by a set of (inter)nationally recognised microcredentials that are designed to support universal design for learning (and assessment), that can be completed anytime and anywhere. Let's free up teachers to focus on developing robust teaching and learning relationships and providing more in-depth one on one support.

You can see more about my thinking around this topic here: The Digital Blue Yonder - what's on the digital horizon for education and how might we harness it?  

Big Opportunity #5: Ensuring the Record of Achievement tells us about learners’ capabilities

What? Enhance the Record of Achievement with better summary information and space for learners to detail achievements outside of NCEA.

Why? Makes the Record of Achievement better at explaining what learners are capable of.

Again, this gets a big old yes from me. At present the Record of Achievement is relatively meaningless, listing specific standards, which out of context mean little to anyone beyond the classroom.

My only real worry is that those pushing back against this are actually pushing back on the idea that everyone can succeed. I can't help feeling that in some think-pieces and statements already out there, there is a desire (by some) for a version of "academic rigour" that infers that a system is failing if everyone can enjoy personal success. That if a system doesn't somehow rank and divide it can't be seen as genuinely rigorous or reliable. Then again, maybe this is just my reading through my lens, one which is driven by a desire for equity and inclusiveness. I look forward to having my fears dispelled.

Big Opportunity #5: Dismantling barriers to NCEA

What? Make NCEA more equitable, starting with making it easier for learners to access Special Assessment Conditions and removing fees to enrol in NCEA.

Why? Gives every learner access to NCEA, regardless of their learning support needs or socio-economic status.

Hell yes! NCEA should never be unattainable due to financial or learning barriers. In fact I would go further and do this AND ensure every learner had access to a suite of online learning tools such as Grammarly and Text Help's Read and Write. I would ensure the principles of Universal Design for Learning were woven into every Achievement Standard and part of the design of any online learning or microcredentialling platform! We must do everything we can to ensure learning, assessment conditions and opportunities for achieving personal success are as equitable an inclusive as possible.

You can read more about the power of TextHelp here: https://www.texthelp.com/en-us/what-we-do/case-studies/hobsonville-point-secondary-school/

And more about UDL and learning design here:
https://teachingandelearning.blogspot.com/2017/02/amplifying-best-practice-with-byod-and.html

And here: http://inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/universal-design-for-learning/

In summary, we need to seize this opportunity to respond to the NCEA Review and its Big Opportunities. Please think carefully about your responses. Make sure you are fighting for a framework that can be personalised. Whether you're a grammar school, a traditionalist, progressive or a bleeding heart liberal, NCEA should be able to work for you, or rather it should, most importantly, work for your learners. This isn't about some lefty liberal takeover of education, it is however about ensuring our national assessment is fit for purpose, fit for the future and a fit for wherever you might sit on the educational landscape.

There is room for all of us! And room for all of us to succeed.

And a note to some. Stop trying to turn this into some daft binary debate about knowledge vs. skills. THIS IS NOT A CURRICULUM REVIEW. Also, we all know that skills in a vacuum is nonsense. Knowledge was, is, and will always be powerful. The skills required to do something with that knowledge is even more important.

And...

Yes, we have issues with staffing to worry about.
Yes, we can get our knickers in a twist about the amount of reviews taking place.
Yes, we can feel peeved about who we have assumed who is being listened to (or not).

However, there is no denying...

...WE HAVE ALL BEEN INVITED TO JOIN CONVERSATION!

Being inclusive does not mean that you have not been or will not be listened to. Quite the opposite. So read, think, debate, speak, write and give your feedback and ideas whilst you can.

Complete a survey or submit your lengthier thoughts here:  http://www.conversation.education.govt.nz/conversations/ncea-have-your-say/

If you are interested in the wider debate you might also like to read:
https://stevemouldey.wordpress.com/2018/02/15/great-pedagogy-trumps-ideology/
https://karenmelhuishspencer.com/2018/04/28/of-policy-and-practice/
http://principalpossum.blogspot.com/2018/04/a-step-forward-knowledge-and-skills.html
https://theflippedscientist.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-scarecrows-of-education.html

Share:

"Tech doesn't improve student results - study" - why news reports like this are damaging (and missing the point).

Source: TV3 News

Journalists love a bit of scaremongering and in many ways I can't help feeling that the reporting of a recent OECD report on the impact of technology on results is just that. As I read news report after news report last night (many of which seemed to be either directly taken from Reuters or an OECD press release with little or no critical analysis) I could nearly hear the shrieks of delight from the pearl clutching naysayers bubbling with excitement at the "evidence" that, clearly, change is bad.

Now don't get me wrong, I have no issue with the report itself, or the fact that the OECD are looking at the impact that tech has on results such as PISA. Look at the actual OECD site and it is interesting reading (you can also see the full report here), their discussion actually focuses on the need for a "new approach needed to deliver on technology’s potential in schools" - and they are absolutely right. Technology integration needs to be strategic and needs to look past the "dazzle" that tech can provide and focus on the enrichment, extension and support only a technology rich environment can provide. I heartily encourage educators to incredibly critical about how and why they plan to introduce and integrate tech into the classroom.

What does concern me is that the vast majority of the reporting is misleading and completely overlooking the real value of tech in the classroom.

Firstly, there is the issue that the fact they are trying to link the use of tech to improved test outcomes is problematic at best. Has anyone looked into the impact of using biro and refill on test outcomes? Technology or pen and paper can both be used effectively or ineffectively, the fact that you are using either tool is not necessarily relevant to a test that measures Maths, English or Science. The fact that the students are on a computer for any amount of time tells us nothing about how pedagogically sound the use of the tech is. Stick a kid in front of computer without pedagogical approaches designed to leverage the advantages of working online and of course they are going to be distracted by the "dazzle". Compare this with teachers who are using traditional modes such as direct instruction and rote learning, wheeling out a pedagogical approach that has been honed over the last century, (with little regard for learner engagement or agency) and of course you will probably get better "test results". The relevance of said tests for measuring success in a 21st Century context could also be bought into question...but I fell that probably calls for a dedicated blogpost.

Secondly, there is the issue that the way this report has been summed up by most news agencies really does miss the point about why it is is so very important that tech is integrated (effectively) into teaching and learning across the board. The advantages of tech integration is rich and varied. Most importantly it is about providing young people to the opportunity to develop the skills they will need to thrive in the 21st Century. There are many reasons for integrating tech (which have little to do with test results) and quite frankly if we ignore these we potentially short change an entire generation of young people.

Below are just a few reasons why I believe every school must be looking to integrate tech effectively.

Learner Agency 
See my earlier post here. Learner Agency is the idea that the learner has a sense of ownership and control over their own learning. The word 'agency' is defined as "action or intervention producing a particular effect", so I guess if we apply this to the learner, it means they engage in a particular action or trial an intervention which then produces a particular effect. In the context of a school this might involve students taking action, whether it be through reading, researching, discussing, debating, experimenting, making or tinkering and as a result, gain (through their own efforts) new understanding and new learning. This being a shift from the notion of teachers, teaching at the student and fundamentally providing all of the knowledge and content which they then transfer to the the empty vessel. And as I stated in my earlier post, genuine learner agency can really only be achieved where tech is accessible.

Introduce one to one devices or BYOD and actually give students the freedom to use technology in a variety of ways - not just a glorified exercise or text book. There is no question - all students having access to a browser is incredibly liberating if you just shut up and get of the way and let them go explore and actually use more than just the latest app or platform you've stumbled upon. Technology is not actually about improving grades, it's actually about improving agency (and hopefully greater agency should then result in better outcomes).

World Trends
Core Education explore a wide range of world trends to bring together an annual summary of trends pertaining to ICT use in education. These provide an excellent starting point that go beyond our own experiences or opinions and encourages us to consider what these trends might need for our learners. We need to consider also the period in which we actually live. Our ancestors came through an Agrarian (agricultural) age where the ability to farm and work the land was essential. Our parents and maybe even we have come through an Industrial Age where the need for industrial and technical skills were very important. We are now entering what is referred to as a Knowledge Age defined on the NZCER Shifting Thinking website as

"a new, advanced form of capitalism in which knowledge and ideas are the main source of economic growth (more important than land, labour, money, or other ‘tangible resources). New patterns of work and new business practices have developed, and, as a result, new kinds of workers, with new and different skills, are required."

and as they also state

"Knowledge Age worker-citizens need to be able to locate, assess, and represent new information quickly. They need to be able to communicate this to others, and to be able to work productively in collaborations with others. They need to be adaptable, creative and innovative, and to be able to understand things at a ‘systems’ or big picture’ level. Most importantly, they need to be to think and learn for themselves, sometimes with the help of external authorities and/or systems of rules, but, more often, without this help."
These are our students, and many of these skills are best learned in an online space - this is where they can, very quickly, locate, assess and present information. Tools such as Google Docs is what enables them to collaborate and co-construct anytime or anywhere. Blended Learning is key to enabling learning that meets the demands of a 'knowledge' rather than 'industrial' age.
Research Findings
Research by it's very nature is backward looking, so it is important that we do not sit back and wait for the evidence that e-learning is effective before we even deign to dip our toes. It can be tempting to simply say there is not enough evidence yet. However I would suggest that whilst relatively small there is plenty of compelling evidence and research available. This is particularly true if you look at the evidence gathered as a part of 'Teaching as Inquiry' projects where e-learning has been a focus. Literature reviews such as Noeline Wright's 'e-Learning and implications for New Zealand schools: a literature review' brings together a wide range of findings. In her conclusion Wright highlights a wide range of potential benefits, ranging from motivation and engagement to the development of critical thinking and multiliteracies. It is important to remain critical about the benefits of ANY pedagogical approaches, not just the e-learning ones. We seem quick to defend traditional methods and modes when there is little more evidence that they are in fact effective. For this reason it is important that we reflect on all of our approaches, gather pre and post data and feedback from students to ensure that all practice is indeed evidence or research based. We need to ensure our practice (and the research we base it on) is actually current and responsive. It is not okay for teachers to base practice on an approach that might have been exciting when Pong was a cutting edge video game.

NCEA
Many would argue that NCEA is actually an argument for protecting the mighty 'paper and pen', indeed external exams are written by hand...for now. In April 2013 NZQA's Dr Karen Poutasi stated in a speech to SPANZ "we are reasonably confident that we can reach a position within 8 years where most students will be sitting examinations using a digital device." That means your Year 1-4 student will most likely be sitting their exams online. Our Year 9 students will most definitely be creating and submitting internal assessments online. To do this well, and to ensure our learners gain the skills they need to gain Excellence or at least achieve the very best results they are capable of, then we need to give them practice. More than that, we need to be explicitly teaching them, or giving the time and space to develop the skills to do this well. Learners will need to be able to locate, synthesize and present information. They will need to be able to do it safely, lawfully and effectively. This takes time. We need to start now. In fact all students need to have started yesterday.

Differentiation and Universal Design for Learning
There is also the fact that pedagogically speaking the integration of tech is actually a no-brainer. We have a responsibility to ensure they way in which we facilitate learning and gather evidence of said learning is inclusive. All students have a right to learn and enjoy success, therefore we must be meeting the needs of a diverse group - not just the select few that learn the way you do or did in your day. Consider differentiation as defined by Carol Ann Tomlinson which seeks to provide a range of learning opportunities differentiated for student readiness' learning style and interest. This is possible in a paper based classroom, but choices will still be limited and controlled by the teacher and the resources made physically available to the learner. You might provide a small range of different activities and maybe texts that a either written or more graphic based. Consider this now in a blended learning environment where if a student can access the Internet they can access unlimited resources - written, visual and oral. A teacher may well need to support a student in locating appropriate material or may even curate a collection for them. The speed and ease in which differentiated learning can be facilitated in a blended environment is incredibly enabling. If a teacher can also let the student take the lead and have the power to negotiate methods and modes for learning and evidencing learning,, then you on to something quite magic. Similarly if you consider the diagram below with a blended learning lens it is again a no-brainer. As stated on the Cast website

" Universal Design for Learning was initially is a set of principles for curriculum development that give all individuals equal opportunities to learn. UDL provides a blueprint for creating instructional goals, methods, materials, and assessments that work for everyone--not a single, one-size-fits-all solution but rather flexible approaches that can be customized and adjusted for individual needs."

Who wouldn't want this for their learners? Providing multiple means of representation (of information), means of expression (evidencing learning) and means of engagement is nigh on impossible in a purely paper-based classroom, and again it limits it to a single teacher perception of what they think they know about the students ability, learning style, interests or even their mood or tiredness on any given day.

So as you can see, whilst tech doesn't necessarily (in and of itself) improve test results, it can (if used effectively) improve outcomes in a much richer sense of the words. The reason that such shallow and often lazy reporting of such "studies" upset me so much is that it can make the desire for educators to embrace change even harder than it already is. I do wonder if the authors of these news report realise the collateral damage of attention grabbing headlines and shining the light on the aspects of the report that fuel the fire of traditionalists yearning for "evidence" to drag their heels even more. In an earlier post I explored the challenges educators face in navigating the space between education al paradigms and if if I'm honest, lazy (or at least superficial) reporting of genuinely interesting studies are just resulting in a whole raft of nervous educators who managed to take "two steps forward" probably just retreated a sh#tload of "steps back".

Cheers for that.

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:

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:

Hack Your Classroom: Week 6 - Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners

This is a topic that has long been close to my heart. It really began with a two day conference with Carol Ann-Tomlinson, the woman I consider to be the guru of differentiation. It was her analogy of likening teaching through one mode or strategy as being akin to playing Ten Pin Bowling with just one ball - some days you were lucky a pulled off a strike, but more often you than not,  you only knocked down one or two or more likely achieved a gutter ball. It was this analogy that caused a light bulb moment where I realised by having a singular approach I was quite possibly robbing many of my students of the opportunity of being engaged and learning the best they could.

Tomlinson's approach to differentiation has three layers. She argues that we should be differentiating for student readiness (not the same as ability), student interest and/or student learning style. Learning can then be differentiated by Content (or context), process, product or learning environment.


There is a nice overview of the topic here: Differentiation of Instruction

For me personally, the easiest way to introduce differentiation is through student choice. The PPT below is one that I developed with David (Head of Science Faculty at EGGS) which we used as an introduction for differentiation through choice.

Differentiation Introduction from Claire Amos

Differentiation and Blended Learning

There is also the fact that pedagogically speaking e-learning or blended learning is actually a no-brainer. We have a responsibility to ensure they way in which we facilitate learning and gather evidence of said learning is inclusive. All students have a right to learn and enjoy success, therefore we must be meeting the needs of a diverse group - not just the select few that learn the way you do or did in your day. Consider differentiation as defined by Carol Ann Tomlinson which seeks to provide a range of learning opportunities differentiated for student readiness' learning style and interest. This is possible in a paper based classroom, but choices will still be limited and controlled by the teacher and the resources made physically available to the learner. You might provide a small range of different activities and maybe texts that a either written or more graphic based. Consider this now in a blended learning environment where if a student can access the Internet they can access unlimited resources - written, visual and oral. A teacher may well need to support a student in locating appropriate material or may even curate a collection for them. The speed and ease in which differentiated learning can be facilitated in a blended environment is incredibly enabling. 

Universal Design for Learning

For me, Universal Design for learning is simply an extension of differentiation. It is about providing choice arounds methods and modes for learning to ensure all learning is inclusive. Universal Design for Learning is based on the idea that to be inclusive teaching and learning needs to provide multiple means of representation (i.e. visual, written oral representation of information), multiple means of expression (i.e. through spoken, written visual presentation of understanding) and multiple means of engagement (i.e. variety of time, place, online offline, pace etc). For the most part this can be achieved by giving students much greater choice and variety in the ways that they receive information and evidence their learning or understanding. 

Universal Design for Learning and Blended Learning

Similarly if you consider the diagram below with a blended learning lens it is again a no-brainer. As stated on the Cast website 

" Universal Design for Learning was initially is a set of principles for curriculum development that give all individuals equal opportunities to learn. UDL provides a blueprint for creating instructional goals, methods, materials, and assessments that work for everyone--not a single, one-size-fits-all solution but rather flexible approaches that can be customized and adjusted for individual needs." 

Who wouldn't want this for their learners? Providing multiple means of representation (of information), means of expression (evidencing learning) and means of engagement is nigh on impossible in a purely paper-based  classroom, and again it limits it to a single teacher perception of what they think they know about the students ability, learning style, interests or even their mood or tiredness on any given day.

http://www.cast.org/library/UDLguidelines/version1.html

So I guess the #hackyrclass challenge is simple - how are you meeting the diverse needs of your learners? How are you giving them choice and ownership of using the means and modes that best meet their needs and interests?

Share: