Spirals of Inquiry

Doing some reading about enquiry models, I had previously read about the ‘Spirals of Inquiry’ model. I attended a presentation at the ICSEI conference in January and was absolutely blown away with the presentation by Judy Halbert and Linda Kaser who delivered a session entitles ‘Knowledge exchange through inquiry networks: A BC perspective’. The book co-authored by Halbert and Kaser entitled “Spirals of Inquiry: for equity and equality” can be an informant to the Scottish context as the new narrative for Curriculum for Excellence in evolving to Curriculum for Excellence and Equity (CfEE). This enquiry model supports the aspirations of CfEE to inspire our young people to develop skills which will allow them to move forward in making their dreams a reality supported by enquiring practitioners. Learners need to remain curious and as Halbert and Kaser said at the presentation “all learners should leave more curious than they arrived”. As Halbert and Kaser state (p20);

”What is especially important from an equity perspective is that vulnerable learners experience the greatest positive impact in terms of both increased motivation and depth of learning”.

In order to realise our aspirations for our young people the teaching workforce must also be life-long learners and not just pay lip service to this. Practitioners should be curious about learning and think of themselves as “designers of learning” (p37) and how this can be transferred to learners through their teaching pedagogy to facilitate skills and knowledge development.

One of the key factors that affects young people’s learning ability is the belief that they can! Every young person needs a cheerleader, someone who is explicit in communicating positive belief and helping young people to develop resilience both as an individual but also resilience in their learning. Through being more resilient, young people can then develop a more independent way of learning, becoming agents of their own learning, and are confident they can learn and comment on the learning of others. This growth mindset stance is not only applicable for young people but also applies to practitioners, who must be willing to become an ‘adaptive expert’, Timperley (2011) and continually identify and modify their research enriched practice when needed to respond to the needs of their learners. Halbert and Kaser also discuss Timperley’s argument that engaging in inquiry and knowledge building cycles is one of the key ways to develop adaptive expertise and is at the core of professionalism (p63).

Having an ‘enquiry as stance’ Cochrane-Smith & Lyttle (2009) helps teachers to develop a deep understanding of the experiences of their learners and use this as the basis for informed professional learning. Professional learning for practitioners should be our core business, driven by learners needs as enquiry practitioners “allow for a range of outcomes and keep searching for increased understanding and clarity” (p11). Professional learning needs to be of high quality and includes time for practitioners to engage in professional dialogue so as to shape new knowledge and come to new understandings. Although attending conferences, workshops and events can help us reframe our understanding and perhaps give us insight into current educational thinking, professional learning has to be more than this. It has to support the practitioner in creating professional knowledge by engaging with new information that challenges their assumption and perhaps long held beliefs and supports the creation of new meanings. This can be a transformative experience as the old ways of learning and teaching are replaced by new research enriched pedagogy which is learner centric.

The ‘Spirals of Inquiry’ lays out an approach which helps practitioners to be focused on the pursuit of quality learning experiences for young people by asking questions of one’s own practice. The process of the ‘Spirals of Inquiry’ has six steps which overlap but at each step the following questions should be asked;

What’s going on for our learners?

How do we know?

Why does this matter?

 The first two questions keep the learners at the heart of the inquiry and the last question helps to ground the inquiry team as Halbert and Kaser state “productive inquiry focussed teams don’t rush”(p48).

 

The steps of the Spirals of Inquiry process are as follows;

1.    Scanning

The scanning phase involves collecting a variety of rich evidence and considering useful information in key areas of learning.

2.    Focusing

This phase is about gaining greater clarity about the situation for learners before deciding on a course of action. This involves listening to all the stakeholders in the situation to understand the differing perspectives before committing to actions.

3.    Developing a hunch

Developing a hunch involves reflecting on the ways in which professional practice may be contributing to the situation for the learners. It requires the team to stand back and take stock of the key driver in the situation for learners.

4.    New professional learning

This is the phase that advocates that practitioners should engage with research, as Halbert and Kaser state “the best innovation education solutions often draw on what is already known to develop something new that is consistent with sound theory and evidence” (p55). There are challenges within this phase which include ensuring that all practitioners have sufficient time to engage in new learning and that the professional learning is linked directly to their context with their learners in mind.

5.    Taking action

Taking action is the phase that everyone has been itching to get to. It is the jumping across the knowing-doing gap and trying out new practice with plenty of opportunity built in for dialogue, observation, reflection and the opportunity to take risks and learn from mistakes.

6.    Checking

The final phase of checking is the time to check that the difference made was ‘good’. The inquiry can only be thought of as ‘good’ if learner outcomes have improved. The key is to have a general agreement ahead of time about what evidence to look for and what constitutes enough of a difference, therefore using performance standards in both the scanning phase and the checking phase makes a lot of sense.  This phase is also the time for personal reflection for practitioners, who should think about what went well? What could have gone better and why? Then celebrate their achievements and work out how to build on these.

Sustained enquiry matters so practitioners can support young people get the best learning experiences possible. This also helps practitioners to continually evaluate and adapt their practice driven by the learning needs of the young people they work with. For this to be successful the enquiry teams need to be supported by their leadership teams but it would also be beneficial if they created a micro-network in Scotland to support each other. These enquiries would have to have a clear focus and purpose but can also be supported through advice from GTCS.

The Spirals of Inquiry network has a website which can be used for further information, http://noii.ca/spiral-of-inquiry/

 References

Halbert, J. & Kaser, L. (2013) Spirals of Inquiry – for equity and quality:The BC Principals & Vice Principal Association : Vancouver

Third Spaces

“Strengthen evaluation and research, including independent knowledge creation”

The above recommendations from the OECD report (2015) has had me thinking about partnership working, collaborations which has led me to the theory of the ‘third space'.

There can be tensions between academic researchers and the teaching profession as practitioner researchers when working in partnership or collaboration, for example, Who’s agenda take precedent? Who owns the new knowledge? This has led me to think about the creation of ‘third spaces’ (or hybrid spaces’) which will allow academic researchers and practitioner researchers to work together in a more sustainable way.

In order to overcome the tensions in the relationship between academic researchers and practitioner researchers, Hulme et al. (2009) have discussed the use of ‘third spaces’. ‘Third spaces’ redefine the professional stances of the academic researcher and practitioner researcher, and challenge the ‘established hegemonies’ and ‘competing cultural traditions’. Partnerships that currently exist between academic researchers and practitioner researchers can be successful, however, if we are to truly become research informed, we have to move beyond partnerships to create collaborative working spaces.

This notion of a ‘third space’ has been explored by many researchers. Soja (1996:57) developed the theory of ‘third space’ which was then used by Moje et al (2004:42) to conclude that through ‘third space’ activities ‘new knowledges’ can be generated.  Hulme et al. (2009) talk about the ‘third space’ as providing a “platform on which professionals from a variety of backgrounds can relate to each other at different levels of conversational complexity” (p538). Thus it can be considered as a ’neutral space’ and moving into this ‘neutral space’ allows academic researchers and practitioner researchers to challenge their own assumptions and to enquire into the unfamiliar. However, this can only be achieved as Hulme et al state (2009:541) “after social and individual identities have been partially surrendered or altered”. Hulme et al go on to discuss how identities of self are challenged as the partner researchers adopt a language of co-operation and collaboration, and the “co-construction of knowledge” (p539). This gives rise to an opportunity for the researchers to move “beyond ‘using reflective dialogue’ to ‘using generative dialogue’” Scharmer (2001). Hulme et al (2009:541) continue to say that ‘third spaces’ offers researchers a “safe, secure and supportive” place that “stands between the formal areas of practice”, offering places for collaboration and joint working to achieve the aims of the enquiry. Thus the ‘third space’ allows the researchers to reassess their usual ways of working and interacting and creates a joint working space to develop an ‘expanded professionalism’ moving beyond ‘silo thinking’ into a more collaborative co-creation. Zeichner (2010:92) describes this moving beyond their usual sphere as a “transformational setting” and so leads to closer collaboration with a common purpose, which then leads to a shared discourse.

So how do we create ‘third spaces’ for academic and practitioner researchers to co-create knowledge to support a more research enriched profession? Is there a case for a mediator who straddles the academic and professional worlds to support the creation and maintenance of the ‘third space’? Could this be a role for national bodies, professional associations or other independent bodies?

Once the third space is created how do we proceed? What ‘new knowledge’ do we need to create? The shared purpose of the ‘third space’ will help researches to build understanding and champion expansive learning.

What are the rules and norms of ‘third space’? How do we leave our histories at the door so we can co-create ‘new knowledge’? These will have to be negotiated in each unique ‘third space’ with each researcher compromising to support the shared purpose but without losing themselves and their experiences.

How do we share this ‘new knowledge’? Technologies already exist that would allow sharing of ‘new knowledge’ but we must never forget that teachers are ‘time poor’ and thus new knowledge needs to be expressed in ways that promotes the benefits of engaging with research in manageable packages.

‘Third space’ working can build on partnership working and move it to the next level. Although this appears straightforward, this co-creation of new knowledge in ‘third spaces’ is ambitious and requires commitment from all sectors of education, if we are to move forward to become a research enriched profession and improve the life chances of children in Scotland.

References

Hulme, R, Cracknell, D. & Owens, A. (2009) Learning in third spaces: developing trans-professional understanding through practitioner enquiry. Educational Action Research; Dec2009, Vol. 17 Issue 4, p537-550, 14p

 Improving Schools in Scotland: An OECD Perspective (2015)

http://www.oecd.org/unitedkingdom/improving-schools-in-scotland.htm, last accessed 16-1-16

 Moje, E.B., Ceichanowski, K., Kramer, K. Ellis, L. Carrillo, R. & Collazo, T. (2004) Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading research Quarterly, 39(1), 38-71

 Scharmer, O. (2001) Self-transcending knowledge: Sensing and organizing around emerging opportunities. Journal of Knowledge Management 5, no. 2: 137–51.

 Soja, E.  (1996) Third space: Journeys to Los Angles and other real and imagined places (Malden, MA, Blackwell)

 Zeichner, K.  (2010) ‘Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college and university based teacher education’, Journal of teacher education, 61 (1-2), 88-99

What went on at ICSEI?

This week I had the great privilege of attending the ICSEI conference, (International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement) in Glasgow. From their website;

“ICSEI is an energetic global community bringing together policy makers, researchers and practitioners from over 80 countries in the ICSEI community to share cutting edge knowledge and powerful practice with a view to enabling education systems and schools to become learning organizations for the sake of better education for all.” 

Day 1

The opening keynote on Wednesday was given by First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon to launch the new National Improvement Framework (NIF). The First Minister spoke of the NIF being focussed on excellence and equity, to ‘close the attainment gap’. She went on to discuss how attainment and achievement will be recognised to support pupils as they transition through their educational career and into the world of work. The final point the First Minister made was around the implementation of standardised assessments which will provide data alongside teacher judgement to determine student progress.

“Faith in the expertise and judgement of teachers is at the heart of CfE and NIF”

Next, Prof. Graham Donaldson delivered a keynote entitled “The improvement trap (so what?): keeping the focus on improvement for children”. In this presentation, Donaldson discussed how living in a time of rapid change and globalisation, education becomes increasingly important and educators have to not be drawn into the ‘vortex of diminished ambition’, which is metrics driven and has a reductionist view of education. To escape the ‘the vortex’ teachers need to be empowered, trusted and research informed (laudable sentiments!). According to Donaldson, teachers should take the opportunity to become agents of change by working collaboratively and accepting accountability. Also through a rich broad curriculum, which has inspiring values and purpose, including rich assessments teachers can escape ‘vortex of diminished ambition’.

The final keynote was delivered by Dr Rowena Arshad who discussed how pupil’s attainment and achievement are linked to feelings of security and confidence, which allows all students to commit their energies to learning. In order to be secure, students have to feel included and this can only be discussed openly when we have the difficult discussions about how students are excluded. In this it is most important to listen to the ‘voices of the young people’ to allow them to speak up about ‘casual discrimination’ that ‘forces’ students to conform and leads to assimilationist behaviours.

‘Harmony is no indicator of justice’

Tony Finn, chaired and delivered the first paper in the symposium about ‘enhanced teacher professionalism’. Finn examined how standards of professionalism can help support capacity building of teachers and help teachers become more research informed.

The next paper was delivered by Ken Muir, CEO GTCS who discussed how teacher agency through professional standards, professional update, MyGTCS and practitioner enquiry supports teachers to lead the change in Scottish education by being research informed and interogating their own practice.

The final paper of the symposium was delivered by Tomas O’Ruairc, who described how at the heart of teacher professionalism in Ireland is time and space for teachers to share their learning through reflective practice. O’Ruairc outlined Ireland’s journey to aspriational excellence, based on integration, innovation and improvement.

Day 2

The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Life-long Learning, or ‘Minister for Weans’ as  she put it, delivered the opening keynote. In her keynote address, the Cabinet Secretary spoke about the twin aims for Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) being excellence and equity and how these are being addressed through the key drivers of ‘raising attainment for all’ and ‘closing the gap’ initiatives. The Cabinet Secretary went on to contend that the National Improvement Framework (NIF) will generate data to provide transparency of progress at every level and inform policy making at local and national level. She also highlighted recommendations from the recent OECD report with teacher judgement being a key element in assessing student progress. The final announcement by the Cabinet Secretary was the establishment of a new group to embed the new SQA qualifications. The group will be charged with providing recommendations by March to support further implementation of the Senior Phase. In response to the Cabinet Secretary’s address Andy Hargreaves said Scotland had to ‘continue to be bold and specific’ in improvement.

The second keynote address was given by Prof. Allan Walker. Walker shared his experience of the Chinese education system and the paradoxes and mysteries of what makes it work. He discussed how high performing schools are commissioned to help poorer performing schools in a highly stratified system. He went on to talk about how leaders spend lots of time observing and discussing learning and teaching, and see themselves as connectors – cultural, structural and relational. The final point was around how leaders promote teacher-led school based research and nurture harmonious school environment through valuing relationships.

“Lead teachers are called backbone teachers”

In the GTCS symposium chaired by Ken Muir (@GTCSKen) that followed the keynote we discussed ‘The Teacher Learning Journey in Scotland’. Tom Hamilton (@GTCS_Tom) started the session discussing the complexity of being a teacher in Scotland and how standards can help to support professional learning journeys. Norrie McKay (@GTCS_Norrie) and I, continued the presentation giving a critical analysis of the support and challenges of the early career teachers’ journey. The session was finished by Ellen Docherty (@GTCSEllen) and Jacqueline Morley (@GTCSJac) discussing the impact of professional learning and enquiry.

The next symposium was based on using enquiry to support teacher learning. The first paper from University of Glasgow, discussed the current key issues in professional learning as;

·         Teacher agency

·         Influencers and leaders of learning

·         Critically engaging with practice

·         Leading professional learning

·         Building in-school professional learning communities

·         Use of technology in professional learning

·         Evaluation and impact of student attainment

The main thrust of the next paper was how Taiwan teachers have mobilised themselves and have developed ‘learning navigators’ who work together and support others to improve pedagogy.
My paper was next and I discussed practitioner enquiry as the ‘itch’ in your practice and how to undertake enquiry using @fkelly’s model and referencing the GTCS resources of Education Source – EBSCO, which offers access to 17,000 articles and journals, our e-book collection. I also discussed how we support practitioners to share enquiry through the Education Hub.

The final paper was delivered by Men Muir (@GTCS_Ken) explaining how successful professional update needs teacher ownership, leaders in schools and local authority that foster a culture and value Professional Update and finally acceptance /recognition that professional learning is central to improvement

Day 3

This keynote was amazing. It was delivered by Marinieves Alba who discussed a cradle to college approach to education. Alba shared the work being done in poor neighbourhoods in New York which provide wrap around care for families so that the students can focus on learning, this is awe inspiring. The schools are the hub of the community which builds educational capital through love and support. The school system supports families by catering for the basic needs, so that the students are ready to learn and develop self-efficacy and self-sufficiency.

“Strong instructional leaders, accountability and the view of the whole child and their families”

The next symposium I attended was “Policy translation and mistranslation“. It opened with Paul Campbell (@PCampbell91) discussing his Master’s thesis around ‘Teacher Agency in Education Policy Development’ and asking questions such as “How does policy development work in Scotland?” Does ' we ask' 'you say' ' we do' promote teacher agency? The main findings were that teachers tend to have policy done to them rather than being involved in policy creation, but this is balance by some who would say ‘it’s not my job to make policy’.

This was followed by a very interesting paper from the University of Stirling about ‘Translation of policy, from CPD to Professional Learning’. The most interesting slide in the presentation was charting the change in language from CPD to Professional Learning as below,

‘McCrone Report’ (2000)

            CPD 25            : professional learning 0

Teaching Scotland’s future (Donaldson 2010)

            CPD 199          : professional learning 25

National Partnership Group, response to Donaldson (2011)

            CPD 75            : professional learning 125

GTCS standard Career-long Professional Learning (2012)

CPD 0             : professional learning 43

The change in the language has been accompanied by a change in perception of the purpose of CPD/PL. CPD was considered by teachers to be ‘going out of school’ whereas PL is ‘built into school community’ and I like the last quote given by the University of Stirling which was;

“CPD was done to you, PL you do yourself”

The final paper of the symposium was delivered by Prof. Stephen McKinney who discussed sectarianism and Scotland, and the contention that denominational schools can be considered sectarian in and of themselves and that suitable resources should be made available to schools to be able to discuss sectarianism.

Day 4 – Practitioner’s day

Pasi Sahlberg opened his keynote with a tribute to Lemmy for Motorhead (most unexpected!) before going on the discuss school improvement in a very informative and entertaining way. Setting the context of school improvement which Sahlberg called “complex”, he urged leaders to ”break away from the crowd” and stop and think! Using PISA data, Sahlberg showed that the top performing education system was Finland from 2000 on and he went on to examine what makes a good educational system? and why do some education systems not improve?

He argued that there needs to be a merging of the ideas so that parameter of what makes a good education system and why do some not improve are complementary.

Sahlberg went on to discuss the global phenomenon of policy migration and the impact of ‘GERM’ (global education reform movement). The key points being;

Competition- unhealthy practice prevents improvement

Human capital – cannot bring about improvement without social and professional capital

Fear of failure – there is a need for more experimentation

Digitalisation- technology as a tool to support learning but you need to have a good pedagogical reason to use it otherwise it’s just fluff

In the final symposium for ICSEI 2016, the first paper was delivered by Louise Stoll who discussed the idea of evidence based education but she said she preferred the term ‘evidence enriched’, which I like. Stoll discussed the work she is involved in, which promotes knowledge exchange through networks. The most interesting aspect for me around how to engage practitioners in research which she called “helping practitioner encounter research in manageable chunks and varied formats”, definitely something for GTCS to think about, but at the same time Stoll acknowledges that it is about developing relationships and it takes time!

The next paper from Jarl Inga Waerness discussed a project around supporting leaders in school improvement. Their findings were very interesting and resonate with the direction of travel in Scotland;

“the municipality was inquiring into our professional learning activities, instead of just evaluating our results”

“using the process led to better prepared teachers that discuss teaching quality instead of data quality”

The third paper from Linda Kaser and Judy Halbert discussed the Spiral of Inquiry: for equity and quality, as a model of teacher learning and knowledge exchange.

For this to be an effective professional learning experience there needs to be a clear focus and purpose to the inquiry. There also needs to be structures and rhythms within the enquiry and there needs to be a third space to allow practitioners to step beyond themselves and be creative.

“All learners should leave more curious that they arrived!”

This was the paper for me that shifted my axis, I have read a little about this but now am going to explore more around the Spiral of Inquiry and Third Spaces.

ICSEI Glasgow 2016 was great experience where the sharing of ideas and thoughts about improving education systems, schools and teachers can be used to support all young people to be the best they can be. Bring on Ottawa 2017!

Practitioner enquiry

As the holidays beckon, I have been thinking about practitioner enquiry and how to support teacher to develop an ‘enquiry of stance’ mindset. I have sources research articles and a few books to help delve deeper into practitioner enquiry and improve my understanding. I am interested in the history of practitioner enquiry i.e. where and when did this concept emerge? I am also wondering about the costs and benefits of practitioner enquiry. Having undertaken research in my own classroom I know that it can have a massive impact on both the teachers learning and pupils learning, but how do we support and promote this professional learning activity with teachers? Here are some thought on practitioner enquiry as I continue to critically think through how GTCS can support teachers as part of professional learning in practitioner enquiry.

The purpose of any professional leaning activity should be related to increasing skills, knowledge or practice of the teachers but must also be linked to improved outcomes for learners. Practitioner enquiry should lead to deep transformative learning which significantly informs and influences professionals’ understanding, practice and impact on pupil experiences.

Practitioner enquiry is a key aspect in the professional learning of a teacher in Scotland and is embedded in the Standards. The Recent BERA study (2014 p6) discusses the need for teachers to be “equipped to engage in enquiry oriented practice” and have the “capacity, motivation, confidence and opportunity to do so”. By engaging in practitioner enquiry Brookfield feels this empowers teacher as “we become much less willing to give away our histories” (1995 p187) and take responsibility and pride of our own professional learning. When teachers become engage in practitioner enquiry and engage with research literature they benefit by becoming more confident in their own practice.

GTCS support practitioner access literature via an investment in EBSCO Educational Resource. EBSCO is an on-line resource providing registrants with access to a collection of over 1,700 journals, a selection of eBooks, and additional research resources in the field of education and a range of ebooks. There is also a Research Engagement Group (REG) which has been set up to help support, promote and facilitate critical engagement with research, as we know that teachers are 'research rich but time poor' and therefore appropriate resources to support engagement is critical. We are also in the processes of setting up a Teacher Network group to support the work of the REG.

Practitioner enquiry is given many names in literature, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009 p39) use the term practitioner inquiry as “a conceptual and linguistic umbrella term” for action research, participatory research, teacher research, self-study, the scholarship teacher and using practice as site for research. Although each enquiry method has their own important differences all have similar underlying principles as Cochran-Smith and Lytle put it they “share as sense of the practitioner knower and agent for educational and social change”.

Cochran-Smith and Lytle coined the term ‘inquiry as stance’ in the late 1990’s and have expanded on its meaning between then and now. ‘Inquiry as stance’, “positions the role of practitioner and practitioner knowledge as central to the goal of transforming teaching, learning, leading and schooling” (p119). The ‘inquiry’ part relates to engaging with research and questioning practice to develop a “critical habit of mind” (p120) while the ‘as stance’, “capture[s] the ways we stand, the ways we see and lenses we see through” (p120).

As defined by Menter et al (2011), practitioner enquiry is a ‘finding out’ or an investigation with a rationale and approach that can be explained or defended and then the findings shared so it becomes more than reflection or personal enquiry. Practitioner enquiry is usually undertaken within the practitioners own practice or in collaboration with others. Evaluation and reflective teaching are deeply bound into practitioner enquiry and within collaborative enquiry the group shares a common research question which can then be ‘investigated’ through different lenses to enhance knowledge creation and dissemination within the group and beyond. 

For teachers, regular engagement in practitioner enquiry supports professional growth by challenging or ‘disrupting thinking’ and ‘ingrained habits of mind’. Practitioner enquiry helps to create a space to stop and look again at existing ways of working. It is argued by McLaughlin et al (2004) that teachers who engage in research have ‘better understanding of their practice and ways to improve it’. For some teachers, enquiry may promote levels of critical reflection that are ‘transformative’. However, transformative learning can only occur when individuals have the opportunity and skills to really question and consider their underpinning beliefs, assumptions, values and practices. This goes beyond developing content knowledge and requires a criticality and questioning approach and as such the process of transformative learning can be challenging and 'uncomfortable'. The gains from transformative learning however, could be that it can lead to meaningful changes in practice which impact positively on pupil learning.

Practitioner research can play a major part in making change more systemic and indeed sustainable as practitioners become agents of their own professional learning. Systematic enquiry helps teachers to “‘let go’, unlearn, innovate and re-skill in cycles of professional learning throughout their career in response to changing circumstances” Menter et al (2011 p19).

Practitioner enquiry allow teachers the space to engage with research and create their own knowledge which is very pertinent to their students in their situation. Even more powerful yet is being part of an enquiring community, where all data and evidence is given consideration and the reliance on test scores and ‘what works’ is are included but critically reviewed to establish the best path for the establishment at that time to support student learning. When a community becomes an enquiring community it opens up the possibility to challenge assumptions, to articulate values, to make their practice problematic and to form partnerships with academics to engage in theory and research to further enhance the life chances of their students.

Claxton (2002 p15) discussed what students need to be ‘good learners’ which is;

“Being a good real-life learners means knowing what is worth learning, what you are good (and not so good ) at learning, who can help, how to face confusion without getting upset, and what the best learning tool is for the job at hand”

The same can be said for any learner, teachers who engage in practitioner enquiry will find themselves in the position of a learner and will have to as Claxton (2002) discusses have to have a strategic overview of their learning, plan and organise their learning, be flexible, make meaning of their learning, have self-knowledge and self-awareness and be effective at revising strategies. All of this takes time and need multiple opportunities to gain maximum learning but small incremental changes in practice, akin to marginal gains theory (http://marginallearninggains.com/about), should be supported, recognised and celebrated.

Bibliography

Brookfield, S.D. (1995) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Claxton, G. (2002) Building Learning Power. Bristol: TLO Limited

Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009) Inquiry as a Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation Teacher College Press, New York

Menter, I Elliott, D Hulme, M. Lewin, J Lowden K. (2011) A Guide to Practitioner research in Education. SAGE publishing

Thoughts about STEM

In the last few weeks I have been thinking a lot about STEM and its impact. This has come around from a few things such as a meeting with the Royal Society of Edinburgh and GTCS’s Martin Osler (@MartinOsler) presenting the Partnership of the Year Award Sponsored by GTCS, which won this year by Dalziel High School and Amec Foster Wheeler for a five year project encouraging pupils into STEM subject. There has also been some coverage in press and I think I am missing teaching science (I am the only one who gets excited when I open the Chemistry of Christmas, today it was acetic acid (C₂H₄O), cool stuff).  So I had a look at the Education Source - EBSCO and pulled off three articles which all discuss different aspects of STEM subjects.

Let’s start with the bad press. In the last while there have been some disturbing notions about STEM subjects and some opinions are most unhelpful. For example, the twitter frenzy #distractinglysexy that was created after Jeremy Hunts comments about female scientists, see below;

Tim Hunt, an English biochemist who admitted that he has a reputation for being a “chauvinist”, said to the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul, South Korea: “Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry.”

Source: The Guardian (June 10^th 2015)

Unfortunately you don’t have to look far to find similar misguided campaign’s, for example, IBM’s ‘Hack a Hairdryer’ campaign, which has recently come in for criticism both in the media and on twitter and due to the negative media attention, IBM have pulled this campaign.  The aim of the campaign was sound, in that it was to "reengineer misperceptions about women in tech, and to focus on what really matters in science”, however the way this was then marketed was not as ‘sound’.

I would love to have been in that meeting,

“OK chaps, we have to engage more females in engineering, any ideas?”

“Well, what can we use that all women relate to?”

“I’ve got it! They all love playing with their hair so what about hairdryers?”

What a great opportunity missed.

Criticism in the press;

“IBM's "hack a hairdryer" campaign suddenly attracted a barrage of criticism by Twitter users who called it patronising and sexist”

(BBC website 7^th December 2015)

And on twitter;

There are also concerns that the implementation of CfE has narrowed the curriculum and had led to a fall in the uptake of STEM subject by 4% in 2015, reported in Holyrood, here.

There are good news stories as well, this week we see an astronaut from Britain launching to the International Space Station where he will spend six months carrying out experiments and research. This weekend sees the end of the 21^st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (#COP21) with a ‘historic’ climate change agreement being agreed to by around 200 countries. Aberdeen Council lead the way to support primary teachers move from feeling ‘trepidation’ to ‘science champions’ by investing in staff capabilities, reported in Holyrood, here. There is also lots of good resources and support through STEMNET and the learned Societies such as the Institute of Physics, Royal Society of Chemistry and the Royal Society of Biology.

Even with all of these supports and resources we are still not meeting the demand from industry for students with a focus on STEM subjects. STEM subjects are still seen as the way forward to keep the global workforce sustainable and economically viable in an ever changing and digitising world. In a recent Telegraph article (8-12-15), here, they discussed how mothers who were not fond of STEM subjects, for whatever reason, are also passing on this “preconceptions about science to their own daughters”. From my experience of parents evening, I can say I have witnessed this so many times. Parents coming into the science lab and starting the conversation with “I was never any good at science so I don’t think she/he will be either”, I always love that conversation! In the article by Wenger et all (2014, p37), they cite Toglia (2013) who discuss the “socio-economic status, their parents expectations, jobs and educational level and the influence of respective advice centres” as all factors which influence girls in continuing with STEM subjects. So the perception of themselves as learners and social influences could have a more direct effect on girls choosing or not choosing STEM subjects.

The way children learn through play also impacts on their learning through out there lives. Girls tend to keep their play within the confines of ‘game’ whereas boys tend to go outwith. I saw this with my own children when they played with Lego, my boy would build something then break it apart and make random things, which all had a purpose - usually destruction! Whereas my daughter always built what was on the box and was satisfied when it was finished. This leads me to wonder then if there is something in the way learning is constructed into already existing schema (Piaget, 1975) that supports different thinkers, whether boys or girls, as Wenger et al (2014, p39) states “STEM subjects demand high levels of abstract thinking from students because of the models and formulas the respective information is condensed in”. Wenger et al (2014) goes on to discuss the need for more ‘independent learning opportunities’ so girls can build mental models, self-esteem and view of themselves as being ‘good’ at STEM subjects.

Another aspect that influences whether students’ progress into STEM subjects is the ‘edutainment’. In science subjects in early years, through primary and into the first stages of secondary there has been a focus on making science ‘fun’ to engage students. While I do like this aspect, it can only best serve the STEM subjects if this is underpinned by scientific rigour and followed up with a discussion around ‘what do our results tell us?’ rather than ‘just for fun’. As Pittinsky & Diamante (2015, p 47) state “At first glance, it looks like the problem begins when the fun stops”.

Teachers also have a huge role to play. In a cluttered education system with various pathway options and subjects jostling for attention, it can be hard for students to make decisions about the best subjects to take. Teachers need to be ‘gender free’ with advice and it is worrying to read in a Telegraph article, cited above, “Too often, I hear stories of teachers and career advisers telling girls that science is not for them”. So maybe we have to re-culture teacher’s knowledge and expectations for all students. Within the STEM subjects we need to start working more collaboratively, instead of the subject silo’s, and in co-operation with each other to promote a STEM mindset as Morrison and Bartlett (2009) cited by Pittinsky & Diamante (2015) state we will have moved to a time when “the STEM subjects are to be seen as a collective curriculum, where their content can become integrated or fused as one subject”.

Studying STEM subjects for all students can stir curiosity and enhance creativity, innovation and support positive learning experiences. Coupled with non-gender specific advice and continuing to increase the awareness of the pathways and careers offered by studying STEM subject – not that I am biased!

References

Pittinsky, T.L.&  Diamante, N (2015) Going beyond fun in STEM: Kappan magazine.org p47- 51

Retrieved 15-12-07 p

Roberts, A. (2013) STEM is here, Now what? Technology and engineering teacher p22- 27

Wegner, C. Strehlke, F. Weber, F. (2014) Investigating the differences between girls and boys regarding the factors of frustration, boredom an insecurity they experience during science lessons:

Themes in Science and Technology Education, 7(1), pp 35-45

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-35027902

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/10/nobel-scientist-tim-hunt-female-scientists-cause-trouble-for-men-in-labs

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11848342/Barbie-and-Lego-Sexist-toys-put-girls-off-science.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/11288761/Just-one-percent-of-parents-want-their-daughters-to-be-engineers.html

https://www.holyrood.com/articles/feature/stem-striving-excellence

Useful websites

http://www.nationalstemcentre.org.uk/timpeake

http://www.iop.org

http://www.rsc.org/

http://www.rsb.org.uk/

Playtime and time to play

'We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.'

(George Bernard Shaw, 1856--1950)

This week has had me thinking about play and the usefulness of play in social and academic development. I tuned into the #Scoteduchat this week which hosted questions around nursery primary transition but I think the thing that I was most take with was the use of play.

Each of these has led to me to thinking about how important play is in both social and academic development but also about how parenting and interaction through play is vital to childhood development and how this fits into the Scottish Attainment Challenge. I had a quick search in Education Source – EBSCO (https://www.gtcs.org.uk/GTCS-login.aspx - log in page) and found a paper by  Kanhadilok & Watts (2014) about Adult play-learning and I also had a quick look at the Education Scotland website for more information on play and came across the Play Strategy for Scotland: the vision.

I am playful and I used play in my secondary classroom with the students, from the more obvious games for learning but also in social interactions which were playful. Playfulness as discussed by Kanhadilok & Watts (2014) as “the predisposition to frame (or reframe) a situation in such a way as to provide oneself (and possible others) with amusement, humour, and/or entertainment”. Playful approaches to learning sit within constructivist theories of learning and can prompt learning especially when learning is driven by curiosity and creativity. Playfulness is a ‘mindset’ and is linked to the ‘pleasure principle’ so if it becomes a chore then it stops being play.

I love the idea of play as a medium for learning and watching children play, you can see creativity and social skills in action. It is interesting though that the research on childhood play is extensive according to Kanhadilok & Watts (2014) “some 3000 psychological research papers focused on children's play” in the last decade but at the same time “only around 40 have addressed play in adults”.

Children love to learn, from the Play Strategy for Scotland: The vision (p15)

“Play allows children to experience and make sense of their world, to challenge themselves, practise skills and manage their emotions, interact with others or enjoy time alone”.

This ties in with Dewey’s thinking around learning involving active discovery rather than the passive remembering of facts and figures. Sugata Mitra famous experiment Hole in the Wall (HIW) experiment (1999) gave children free access to a computer embedded within a wall between his office and an Indian slum at Kalkaji, Delhi. This and further experiments have shown that children want to, and love to learn and are not afraid to making mistakes. Some adult have a fear of being wrong and are shamed by being wrong, children are far more like Edison;

“I have not failed, I have just found 10,000 ways that won’t work”,

Article 31 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that “every child has the right to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts”. So not only is it a ‘right’ but we also tacitly know that play is a ‘good’ thing and the benefits go beyond fun, into aspects of resilience, creativity, problem solving and make significant contributions to children ‘well-being’, a key aspect of the GIRFEC agenda. Through play children interpret their world and negotiate risk taking, challenge and manage themselves and learn co-operative and collaboration, all of these skills are being heralded by employers. Play remains important “throughout infancy, childhood, the teenage years through adolescence, and beyond into adulthood and at all ages, stages and abilities” (p13).

The recent emphasis on outdoor learning has been a step forward and the use of natural materials to support ‘academic learning’ is laudable. Early years practitioners are crucial in developing children who are curious about the world around them and using outdoor play experiences to support children’s development. According to the Play Strategy for Scotland: the vision (p19) “the greatest potential to develop free play in schools is outdoors, before and after school, during break times and, through out-of-school care”, but how to achieve this?

In the current climate where the perception of risk to children playing outdoor is often higher than the reality, this raises issues of children not having opportunities to practice their skills, experiment and to challenge themselves out with the ‘control’ of adults.  The Play Strategy for Scotland: the vision (p21) states that “children and young people who play outdoors more often have better social networks, are more confident and are more involved in their local communities than those who are outside less often” and I agree with this, that children need to time to develop skills through play and being independent which will support them as they grow up.

Play is not just for the little ones but through play in early years children can start to develop neural pathways that support learning. It was fortuitous that just as I am finishing writing this post that the EIS have put out a press release commenting on Professor Siraj’s Review of Early Learning and Childcare, Larry Flanagan is quoted to have said;

"It is welcome that the Scottish Government has acknowledged the essential nature of teacher involvement in the nursery sector, while restating its own commitment to ensuring that all children in nurseries have access to a teacher."

So play is important and should be nurtured as “play is the universal language of childhood” and beyond, so who wants to go jump in some puddles!

References

Aubrey, K. & Riley, A. (2016) Understanding and using educational theories: Sage publishing

Kanhadilok, P. & Watts,M.(2014) Adult play-learning: Observing informal family education at a science museum: Studies in the Education of Adults, Vol. 46, Issue 1

Review Of Early Learning & Childcare: EIS Comment

http://www.eis.org.uk/public.asp?id=3185&dbase=2

last retrieved 15-12-04

PLAY STRATEGY FOR SCOTLAND: OUR VISION: Scotland's first national play strategy. (2013)

http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0042/00425722.pdf

last retrieved 15-12-04