Teaching Math- Back to the Basics

What does it mean to go Back to the Basics?

There has been a lot of conversation around the idea of teaching effectiveness and the choices that teachers make about how they teach, particularly teaching mathematics.  A recent editorial in the Calgary Herald draws attention to the widening gap that students in Alberta and North America are experiencing. What is at the heart of this discussion, discovery math and bringing math teaching back to the basics.

To engage in this conversation about teaching mathematics I would like to clarify some terminology for those that are not familiar with discourse around math teaching.

Inquiry (Constructivism) is not Equivalent to Discovery Learning

The apparent connection, which has been made between these two different ideas is false and unproductive. Firstly, the term “inquiry” is a stance, a way of being, not an approach to teaching. To inquire means to ask questions, to gather information about the world and use that to help answer those questions. However, there are three main ways of knowing through inquiry that Friesen et. al. (2015) highlight in their comprehensive review of inquiry: Minimally Guided Inquiry (discovery learning), Universal Inquiry Models (the discipline does not matter) and Discipline Based Inquiry. Of these three approaches, discipline based inquiry is a way to know our world that is authentic, personally meaningful, relevant beyond school and connects to real work. It is a way to thoughtfully and intentionally design learning experiences for students. As teachers, it is our job to provide authentic learning experiences for students. This comes from designing lessons, which are inspired by the disciplines which we have learned the information from in the first place. Students must experience the teaching of mathematics in ways that are authentic to the discipline of mathematics.

The False Dichotomy of Back to the Basics

The discourse in math has created a false dichotomy in the teaching of mathematics. Back to the basics, I believe, must mean back to the way we understand the world through the discipline of mathematics. Mathematics is not unlike any performance-based discipline. Yes we need to know basic facts in mathematics, like this “=” means equivalent. Yes we need to know the fundamental results found in our multiplication tables. We must practice these such that they are easily recalled. However, it is equally important that we understand how mathematics works. If students are merely learning algorithms to solve problems, and applying these algorithms repeatedly, again and again, they will not understand. Students must be given the opportunity to think like a mathematician. Students must learn to recognize the information that is necessary to solve a problem, that there are multiple ways to solve those problems and that all problems have with them assumptions that must be acknowledged. Otherwise, we are simply asking them to do math mindlessly and not to think.

My recommendation is that we embrace the idea that "Back to the Basics" means back to the ways of knowing in mathematics. It's not this way verses that, memorization verses conceptual understanding. It's "Yes" to practice and "Yes" to thinking, it's a resounding “Yes!” to foundational principles and a “Yes!” to deep conceptual understanding. We cannot abandon our learners in their quest to become literate in mathematics. Nor can we teach them that math is just a series of algorithms to solve problems in a textbook. To teach mathematics in that way would be a disservice to the learning of our students. We must embrace teaching math, authentic to the discipline and ignore the false dichotomy that plagues the discourse around teaching mathematics.

References

Calgary Herald Editorial Board. (2015). Editorial: Back to the Basics. Retrieved from:

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-back-to-basics

Galileo Educational Network. (2015). Focus on Inquiry, What is Inquiry. Retrieved from: http://inquiry.galileo.org/ch1/what-is-inquiry/

Inspired by the words of Dr. Sharon Friesen at the Werlund School of Education, University of Calgary and conversations with colleagues at the Galileo Educational Network.

For further understanding about the conceptual teaching of mathematics visit Dan Meyer’s blog: http://blog.mrmeyer.com

Supporting Professional Learning In Practice

As mentioned in the previous blog I wrote, professional learning is supported by providing choice and promoting inclusion of all. These are all great ideas in theory but in practice what structures and events need to be in place to ensure that this actually will work? There are four major ideas that have emerged through our experience in the implementation of this plan: 1. Time must be embedded, 2. Whole staff events are organized with the intent of promoting cross-pollination of ideas, 3. Communication of the vision must be clear and 4. Making the work visible for others must be a primary purpose.

The greatest barrier to all professional learning within a building is time. There is never enough time to do the professional learning that we intend. The immediate needs of the classroom far outweigh what is often perceived as an additional thing that I need to do. Here are some ideas we have implemented to have more time: 1. shorten instructional time slightly to give time back to teachers (we have 30 minutes of contact time Monday through Thursday); 2. meeting times on a monthly basis is modified to provide additional professional learning time; and 3. having 10 non- instructional days, 7 of which are driven by departmental and individual work. Other ideas may be to set aside regularly 10-15 minutes of whole staff meeting time or department meeting time to engage in professional learning conversations. As Stoll, Fink and Earl (2003) like to write, “It’s about learning and It’s about time”.

Organizing whole staff events are at the core of the sharing opportunities that we provide. In addition, these whole staff events are key moments for us to organize collaborative groups and clarify the work we are undertaking. Here are some of the events that we have implemented. The first example is one where staff members are given the opportunity to explore the three different approaches to professional learning (action research, peer coaching, and PLCs). This was a time to come to a common understanding of the three different approaches and establish groups. These groups would then form norms of interaction. A second example is running a mini-convention. This was a great sharing opportunity. Sessions were put forward and facilitated by staff members and other staff members would choose which session suited their interest and needs best. A third event was a sharing and celebrating event. During this time staff were given time to prepare and share the work that they had been doing throughout the year.  A final example was one we did at the beginning of the second year. We hosted a “Revisiting, Reviewing and Revising” day where staff were given the time to adjust the focus of their work, form new groups, and chose a different approach should they have discovered their first choice was not working for them. Embedded within all of these different events is the idea that the event must promote conversation, leading to a cross-pollination of ideas and that it must be inclusive of everyone on staff.

Upon receiving feedback about areas of growth it became apparent for the need to enhance the communication of the professional learning within the building. Communication originally was exclusive to whole staff meeting, staff e-mails and during whole staff events. The committee that organized the professional learning was comprised of individuals from a number of different departmental groups but did not have representation from everyone. These individuals would share the work of the committee and obtain feedback during their regular departmental meetings or through informal conversations. Enhancements to this communication model included the following: creation of posters to be distributed through work spaces in the building to help make visible the mission and goals of the professional learning, distribution of a summative report to all Learning Leaders from each department in the building, and the creation of an orientation handout for new staff. It is through strong communication where misconceptions and ideas are addressed and clarified for staff. In the absence of clear information individuals are likely to generate and share misinformation.

Finally is the effort to share our work with others. There are a number of different approaches that we have used to help capture the professional learning that is happening and then showing it back to staff. These would include: asking staff to document groups goals, focus and norms of interaction; staff members use poster paper to share ideas, laminating them and showing them back to staff at other times throughout the year; providing staff members a hash-tag to use digital media such as “Twitter” to record ideas, comments and suggestions that occurred throughout whole staff professional development events; using post it notes and posting them on a whiteboard making ideas visible to others. These are few of the ideas that we used to help in an effort to share our work with others.

Professional learning is at the core of teaching and learning. As part of the High school redesign initiative we are called into professional learning where: structures are created to better support new types of learning relationships; collaboration and shared decision making are encouraged; administrators participate in the learning community and expand their leadership roles; teachers build and have access to a growing repertoire of approaches to learning; teachers work together to improve the design and delivery of the curriculum (Alberta Education, 2011). It is my feeling that the professional development vision that we have created and are using meets all of these requirements.

References

 Alberta Education (2011). Educators Roles and Professional Development. Retrieved from: https://ideas.education.alberta.ca/media/74562/edrolesandpd.pdf

Stoll, L. ,Fink, D., & Earl, L. (2003) It’s About Learning (and It’s About Time):What’s in it for Schools?. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

Supporting Professional Learning- Empowering Staff through Choice and Inclusion

At the current school that I teach, we have implemented a three year plan for our professional learning. Currently we are ending year two of the plan. The mission that we have with regards to professional learning is two-fold: 1. promoting innovation of practice through collaboration, and 2. making our work visible for others.

The vision that we are using is summarized in the following diagram:

 

The plan appears to be complex at first but has within it a number of different ideas. Fundamental to its implementation is the idea that leadership must actively let go and provide time and choice in the professional learning that their staff members are involved in. Secondly, the way in which the plan is implemented must be inclusive of all members on staff, in that way all are valued for their contribution to the growth and development of the teaching and learning that happens within the building.

The question arises at what structures and events must be in place to help ensure that these ideals are put into action. Firstly, the introduction of evidence based professional learning. It is imperative that staff members are made aware of the fact that highly effective professional learning happens when problems of practice are at the center of the conversation. Those problems only will arise as a result of the use of student work and data, which provides insight into the learning that is happening within that individual’s experience. There are three approaches that are heavily supported by the literature (W. Auger & R. Wilderman, 2000; R. DuFour, 2007; M. Evans, P. Lomax, & H. Morgan, 2000; S. Scott & F.C. Webber, 2008; B. Showers & B. Joyce, 1996; D. Sparks, & S. Hirsh, 2000). in which teachers become co-researchers of learning. Those approaches include: Action Research, Peer Coaching and Professional Learning Communities. (PLC).

Given the fact that these approaches exist, the first act of letting go is not to marry your staff members to one approach. Each approach has its unique value and each may be best suited for different individuals. As a result, within this model staff members are given the option to choose which approach they would like to use.

The second act of letting go is in the acknowledgement that every context is different and each individual has specific needs that are very difficult to meet in a one-size fits all approach. As leadership recognizes this fact there is an inherent need to allow staff members to choose what the focus is of their professional learning. For example, a science teacher may choose to do an action research project at a high school on the implementation of a philosophy of education that is grounded in early childhood education. They may want to explore what the implications are for a change to their practice while still maintaining the rigor of their discipline. This project is great for that individual or even a group of individuals in that context but may not suite teachers in the physical education department. The focus of the work that is chosen by individuals whom we recognize as professional is best chosen by that professional.

It is also through this act of letting go of “what” individuals will work on and “the approach” that they will use that you have created a more inclusive setting. Educators from all areas are included in this model as they are given choice through the self-selection of the topic they are focusing their learning on, best suited for their context, and the evidence based approach to the their work which best suits their needs.

Collaboration is another foundation of inclusion. Having a requirement that all teachers must work with someone, but providing them the opportunity to work with someone by choice is also inclusive. Having the flexibility for those individuals to choose someone within the building or someone outside is an extension of trust which is paramount to creating a collaborative culture within your team. Forcing individuals to work on a problem of practice that is not directly related to both individuals that have entered into a professional learning contract are being set up for failure. It is important to recognize that I am not stating that they should not participate in a cross curricular work, but it is important to avoid the creation of contrived professional groups where staff are expected to comply as opposed to becoming engaged with their work. Ensuring that there is an expectation of this collaborative approach helps to open conversations, generate new ideas and provides the opportunity to share our work with each other. In the act of having a common purpose, such as improving the learning experience of all students, and working on it together with others you are being inclusive. Providing choice is an act of acknowledgment of individuals as professionals.

Professional learning is a very personal experience. Teachers who are given choice are more valued. Structures that are evaluated through an ethic of critique are more inclusive. Trust is extended through letting go and as a result a more collaborative culture emerges. This model of professional development is one which has experienced success at achieving this end. Read my next blog post to answer the question of how we put this theory into practice?

 

References

Auger, Wendy & Wilderman, Ron (Fall 2000). Using action research to open the door to lifelong professional learning. Education. 121, (1), 120-127.

DuFour, R. (2007). Professional learning communities: A bandwagon, an idea worth considering, or our best hope for high levels of learning?. Middle School Journal, 39(1), 4-8.

Evans, M., Lomax, P. & Morgan, H. (November 2000). Closing the circle: Action research partnerships towards better learning. CambridgeJournal of Education 30 (3), 405-419.

Scott, S., & Webber, C. F. (2008). Evidence-based leadership development: The 4L framework. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(6), 762-776.

Showers, B., & Joyce, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12-16.

Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (2000). A national plan for improving professional development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.

Participating in the Change in Education for Alberta- Possible Learning Outcomes for Science

Currently Alberta educators are embarking on a process to change the system of education to better meet the needs of the learners of today for tomorrow. Given this task, the Calgary Board of Education is in a process assembling the thoughts and ideas of all stakeholders about what this future will look like. We are engaged in a design process which involves the sharing of ideas, conversing about what matters in teaching and learning, and attempting to capture the essence of what is possible for future curriculum documents. Documents which: are dynamic not static; are flexible not ridged; will better ensure that students acquire the skills they need for their future.

I recently participated in a Curriculum Prototyping - Outcomes - Math and Science meeting to address what would be the overarching learning focus for students in a science classroom and what are some possible learning outcomes that we might put forward to guide the teaching and learning for the future science classes.
The idea of what a student should know after being taught science throughout their schooling re-emerged for me during a Science/Math system Learning Leaders meeting. Marina Clark, Science Specialist for the Calgary Board of Education, shared with the group a conversation that she had with a local Geologist about what he thought kids should know after they leave school. His idea was that students should understand the concept: “The earth is old and has seen great change.” Embedded within this statement are years of study and numerous topics to be explored, many of which are interconnected between other disciplines. It was this statement that sparked me to reflect on what I would want my three young children to know about and from science after they left school.

There I sit on a couch, my children just put to bed, and I begin reflect inspired during my meeting that day. My wife, Laura (who also happens to be a science teacher) and I start to throw around some of the big ideas which we felt make up the core of science. Here is our list:

Possible Learning Outcomes for the Future Science Curriculum:

1.       All life on Earth is interconnected.

2.       The sun is the source of energy for all life on Earth.

3.       Science is a clearly defined process subject to interpretation.

4.       Technology and science are deeply interconnected.

5.       Science uses language, symbols, mathematics and diagrams to communicate our current understanding of our world.

6.       Science involves manipulate skills.

7.       Living organisms are structured in complex and interconnected systems.

8.       Our understanding of our world has changed greatly and continues to change as new information emerges.

9.       Science is compelling in its predictive power as a result of its theories and laws.

10.   All matter is made of tiny particles which have characteristic and uncharacteristic behaviour.

11.   The earth is old and has seen great change.

 I brought forward these ideas that Curriculum Prototyping- Outcomes meeting. It was very powerful to have the opportunity to engage in conversation with others about their thoughts and ideas. The list that Laura and generated became the starting point for the conversation. Upon reflection and through our conversation numerous modifications to the outcomes became apparent. In addition, new thoughts arose such as: how science is about finding the connections between ideas that were not connected before; there are ethical considerations which students need to be aware which the field of science wrestles with daily; and careers in science are everywhere around us. Concerns were brought forward about maintaining the integrity of the discipline. Finally, six learning focuses emerged from the list: 1. process, 2. change, 3. energy, 4. interconnections, 5. structure and functions and 6. systems/organization. Clearly, we had just begun.

 Having the opportunity to engage in this type of conversation was powerful, thought provoking, and at the heart of what a future vision of education is about. I would encourage everyone to participate in such conversations, ensuring that the voice of Alberta teachers, the wisdom of the profession, is shared with Alberta Education. It is of the utmost importance that we support, through the sharing of our thoughts, idea and comments, Alberta Education’s effort to best prepare our students for their future.

 

Board-work: Students using Whiteboards to Make Their Learning Visible

There is nothing more exciting as a teacher, when you have that moment, the moment that you get out of the way and listen to what the kids are saying and they are just exploring ideas. Today I listened and watched a number of students talking about how to create a Lewis dot diagram for a number of molecules that they have yet to encounter. I listened to them say; “Try this. . . that doesn’t work, what should we do?, Try this. . .. I stood back in utter excitement knowing that they were in the full throws of learning something. THEY WERE LEARNING. I did not need to give them a test. I did not need to give them a quiz. They were in the zone, that special zone where it is not too easy but yet not too hard. Just at the end, when they exhausted all their ideas, I was called over and they asked for help. I gave them a couple of suggestions and then, the insight, the HUGE smile on their faces and the laughter that followed. It is just that moment that we as teachers all live for. Needless to say I felt as though I was making a difference.

I have to be quite honest that these moments seem to be occurring more and more for me as a teacher. I have to give credit to where it is due. I would like to share with you my insight.

Last year I was given the opportunity to teach in a classroom with a colleague who was teaching a math course. Our math department, phenomenal I might add, has been exploring an idea of how to get students more engaged in Math. After attending a conference with Peter Liljedhal from Simon Fraser University, our math teachers were inspired.  Who can doubt inspired education? Not me. As a result they have made a movement toward the incorporation of the latest and greatest technological advance in teaching, the whiteboard, and lots of them. The intention in their math classes is to have students doing math up out of their seats and doing it in small groups on a whiteboard. They have put up whiteboards on all the walls of their classrooms where there is space. The work that they are getting to do is affectionately referred to as “Board-work”.

Board-work is

1.       Cooperative and active

2.       Visible for others

3.       A great opportunity for formative feedback

4.       Time saving

5.       Engaging

6.       Promotes risk taking 

So what does board work look like in a classroom? Board-work is corporative and active by design. Students are working together in small groups. Often the teacher will have their students assigned into random groups of anywhere from two to six students. These groups will be assigned a set of problems for which all are responsible to try and solve. Students work together on a whiteboard, one writing others helping, monitoring, learning in the moment. If a group gets stuck, they can just look around the room and see what other groups are up to. Group learning is at the forefront of this organizational approach to learning.

Board-work is a visible for others and a great opportunity for the teacher to provide formative feedback resulting in lots of time saved. Students see that there are a number of different ways to solve a problem. As a teacher it is mind blowing. Rarely is there such an opportunity to provide such instant formative feedback to student work. Often we are organized in such a way that students work at their desk, a teacher circulates, provides individual help, and students may get some help from a neighbor. With board-work a teacher can help four students at a time and neighboring groups can listen in. Common mistakes become instantly visible for others to see and the teacher can address the whole class quickly to correct the issue. Making student work visible for others by bringing the work up off the worksheet and into a public form is another of its strengths.

Students love it. In a conversation with a colleague out in the hallway, I was asking, do you think that this approach could be extended beyond math and be used in a science classroom? His response, “Let’s ask.” He proceeded to stop numerous students in the hallway and ask them two questions: 1. “What do you think of board-work?” and 2. “Do you think that it could be done in Science?” It was a fantastic insight for me as I listened to student after student just light up and respond with how much they liked it. Additionally it was an overwhelming yes to the thought of doing it in a science class. One student even went as far as to say, “Could you convince my Chemistry AP teacher to do it?” Board-work in my experience is engaging.

Finally, board-work promotes risk taking in the simplest of ways. As students write on a piece of paper, and there is a mistake that needs to be corrected it seems to be so much more difficult to correct. When writing on a whiteboard, a student is more likely to feel the freedom to explore a variety of different ideas. With others, students will explore these ideas through conversation using the whiteboard as the visual for the exploration. Students often will say that is it so much easier and acceptable to make a mistake on the whiteboard as it is easily corrected. “I can simply erase it.”

It has been my goal has been to incorporate more board-work into my practice as a science teacher. Recently, inspired by the work that our math department has been doing I have discovered what structures might enhance the opportunity for these moments. I have found that taking a large group of students and dividing them up into 6 large tables (merging 6 individual desks) I have created an environment whereby I have enough room to visit everyone comfortably, students are ready to converse and get involved in group learning. Having each of these groups sitting next to a whiteboard is an open invitation for students to explore their ideas on the board. There is the opportunity for peer teaching, collaboration on a problem and me as the teacher to provide formative feedback.

If you are looking for one approach which can have a dramatic impact on teaching and learning, making learning visible in a classroom for you and others alike, I would have to say board-work is a great answer.

Bringing Reggio Emilia Inspired Education to a High School science classroom- setting the context

Teaching within the secondary context it becomes apparent that there are a number of opportunities for teachers who are looking to bring about the philosophy of Reggio Emilia and all that it embodies. Primarily the aspect of the philosophy that I am using to inspire my practice is that of documentation. My hope is that through this blog I will document my own experience and how it has changed my approach in the classroom.

To begin, I feel that it is important to set the context with which I am working to provide some insight of the struggles I have encountered. Currently I am working within a secondary school located in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The students are from a relatively high socio-economic standing. There is ample access to technology and there is a wealth of resources for students. The school has a lab science lab that can accommodate 80 students at a time. As well there is a provincial park that is within walking distance of the school and provides a great amount of potential.

Teaching in high school science in Alberta involves a great amount of accountability. Standardized testing is the norm in terms of evaluation. Students who are completing their last year of their high school education will find that their final grade is determined in large by multiple choice exams. One of which, their final exam, is a provincially administered test worth 50% of their final grade. Teaching to the test is not uncommon and students expect that school is all about preparation for those exams. Learning is reduced to a final grade in high school and learning opportunities are only valued if they are marked and are part of the grade. Test preparation dominates our understanding of learning and how to evaluate it.

How does Reggio Emilia fit into such an understanding of teaching and learning? We have embarked on a journey where we are hoping to explore the use of documentation as well ideas that gain their inspiration from the “Project Zero-Making Learning Visible” out of Harvard. What does documentation look like for this situation?

Throughout this semester I have been trying to bring the Reggio philosophy to my secondary science classroom. The intention of this series of blogs will be document the ideas that I have implemented as well as talk about the ups and downs associated with these attempts. Good reading.

Lateral Power to Lateral Education, Enter Reggio Emilia

Jeremy Rifkin has planted a seed, an idea, which he has been fleshing out for a very long time. I have been wrestling with his question and have been preoccupied with thinking about its importance. He poses the question of how we as a society can move beyond our current carbon dependant era. He outlines the fact that our society today is built upon a resource that is dug up out of the ground. He identifies the true currency of our modern economy as that of photosynthesis. Using history and the development of the human experience, through tribal relations to the modern first and second industrial revolutions which have been built on the convergence of new energy regimes with emerging communication technologies, Rifkin sets the stage for a new human experience. This new experience is where biosphere conscience guides our decision making and is realized though the convergence of the relatively recent ecofriendly energy regimes and the development of global communication technologies.

Being an educator with the knowledge that the lessons I teach today will be preparing a generation of individuals to face a reality which we the vast majority of the population cannot picture is a daunting task. It is easy to continue with the approaches and understanding that has been developed over the past 400 years through the Enlightment. It is easy to continue with this factory based approach to education where the autonomy of the educational experience is the norm and problems can be reduced to a single solution. It is easy to accept that knowledge is kept in one location, with the keeper of the keys, the leader of the lesson, the teacher at the front. These individuals will let me know if I have made a mistake. They will inform me of the right answer that I need to put on the test. We are completely familiar with the industrious nature of education and continue to prepare students for this future experience. We are called to recognize that this is not going to be the reality of our student's future. Rifkin provides a picture of what this new reality will be through his description of the Third Industrial Revolution.

Rifkin highlights the foundation of this new future as an extension of the empathic bond from the nation state to that of the entire globe. The far reaching nature of globalization has brought the human experience of individuals around the world into each other's living room. There is recognition on the part of the net generation that we can no longer sustain the carbon based dependence for survival as a species both due to the far reaching implications to our fragile coats of varnish on the globe (Bryson, 2004, p. 255), the biosphere, and the mere fact that there is a limited supply. A supply that some predict will be gone by the end of this century. There is a sense of tremendous urgency that we bring about this change and our future citizens of the planet are beginning to sense it.

How must our approach to education change to properly prepare our students for this future? Rifkin devotes an entire chapter to this idea of education and its importance for the preparation of future generations to understand, embrace and essentially save the human species. He highlights the fact that educators need to create experiences that uncover the knowledge that is distributed throughout the class. He recognizes that "[i]f knowledge is something that exists between people and comes out of their shared experiences, then the way our educational process is set up [top-down and autonomous] is inimical to deep learning" (Rifkin, 2011, p. 246). This is echoed by Starratt, 2005 in his essay which examines the moral character of learning and teaching and the related implications for educational leaders. He indicates that a "virtuous approach to learning, [is] an approach that seeks the good inherent in the dialogue between the learner and the worlds he or she is studying" (p. 399). Creating a dialogue that accomplishes this level of authentic learning experience, I feel is embodied in the Reggio Emilia philosophy.

In his opening speech at the world exhibition on the Wonder of learning in Denver Colorado in October of 2008, Harold Gothson, Senior Consultant for Reggio Emilia Institute from Stockholm, Sweden,
highlighted the importance of the Reggio Emilia approach to education and it's contribution to critical questions of our time including: issues of power and empowerment, issues of dominance and participation, issues of hope rejecting despair, issues of us as glocals – thinking global and acting local, issues of schools as a place for democratic meetings, and the issue of the teacher as a community worker and finally the issue of children as true members of citizenship. Reggio Emilia is grounded in 10 principals that achieve all which I feel Rifkin is looking for to ensure the proper preparation of students for the future. Fraser and Gestwick (2002) highlight the principles at the heart of the approach to learning including: the image of the child (competent, strong, inventive, and full of ideas); environment as teacher (designing an environment that facilitates learning); relationships (with the environment, the people in that environment, and its involvement in the co-construction of knowledge); collaboration (amoung teachers, children and teachers, children and parents, children and children and the larger community); documentation (a verbal and visual trace of the experiences and work and opportunities to revisit, reflect and interpret); progettazione (making flexible plans for the further investigation of ideas and devising a way to carry them out); provocation (listening closely to children and devising a means for provoking further action and thought); one hundred languages of children (making symbolic representations of ideas and doing so through a number of different media; and transparency ( using light as a symbol of the openness to ideas and theories from other parts of the world) ( p. 11). The fact that Reggio Emilia approach for learning was established in a post war time with the ideal that education at the earliest level was the most important way to change a society, I feel that it lends itself to the future that is embodied by the Third Industrial Revolution and thus can see it as a key component in ensuring the our future.

It is my hope that visionaries that have a voice on the world stage would bring forward the ideas embodied in the Reggio philosophy to the forefront for it is these types of ideas that will strengthen us.

References

Bryson, B. (2004). A Short History of Nearly Everything. Anchor Canada.
Fraser, S., & Gestwick,i C. (2002). Authentic childhood: Exploring Reggio Emilia in the classroom. Albany, NY: Delmar- Thomson Learning.
Rifkin, J. (2011). The Third Industrial Revolution: How Lateral Power is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Starratt, R. J. (2005). Cultivating the moral character of learning and teaching: a neglected dimension of educational leadership. School and Leadership Management, 25(4), 399-411.

Documentation: A Potentially Transformational Approach to Systemic Change in Education

Faced with the reality of the current industrial style educational system, working within a high accountability framework of standardized testing, the question arises, is this a sustainable approach to education? In describing sustainable leadership Any Hargreaves (2009) states that sustainable leadership creates and preserves sustaining learning. He goes further to define sustaining learning as "learning that matters, that is deep and lasts" (p. 187). Learning that takes place in a context that of high stakes test is arguably learning that does not matter. It is a type of learning that perpetuates the systemic ideals and values as opposed to developing the critical thinking skills that are needed to participate as a citizen in a democratic society. In his essay on cultivating the moral character of learning, Robert Starratt (2005) supports this view stating that "test-fixated learning promotes an unethical type of learning. This type of learning is inauthentic and irresponsible; it promotes an attitude where the integrity of the worlds represented by the academic subjects is of no importance outside of its instrumentality in providing decontextualized right answers to someone else's questions" (p. 402). Clearly there is a call to move away from the high stakes testing framework that ranks different institutions of learning or worse penalizes the school for poor performance.

In an effort to appeal to the need for the public to have a way to ensure that their dollars are being used wisely for the purpose of educating the next generation of tax payers what are the alternatives to these high stakes tests? Hargreaves (2009) calls on school leadership to become activists and engage with their current environment. What would this engagement look like? Being inspired by the Reggio Emilia approach to education, there are three areas that need to be considered.

Firstly, the Reggio Emilia approach to learning calls for a new way to document the learning of the child. Documentation is about making learning visible, allowing others to see the learning process. This is not captured in a simple pen or pencil test which provides a superficial snap shot of learning. As described by Tizianna Filippini, Coordinator of the Documentation and Educational Research Centre of Reggio Emilia, "[d]ocumentation is not just a technical tool, but an attitude towards teaching and learning" (Turner & Wilson, 2010, p. 6). It is through this documentation process that learning could be shared with policy makers. Enlightening these people about alternative ways of documenting learning is one of the key elements of systemic reform for education.

Secondly, there is a need to bring parents into the school. Parents will need to be informed of the other ways that students can display their learning. The Reggio Emilia philosophy calls for collaboration amoung teachers, children and teachers, children and parents, children and children and the larger community (Fraser & Gestwick, 2002, p. 11). There is the desire to have the parents view and understand documentation and how it displays the learning of their child. Getting parents on board, understanding an alternative to standardized tests in a key component to changing education into the authentic experience we are morally obligated to provide for children.

Finally, there needs to be a shift in the higher institutes of learning to accept alternative ways for demonstrating proficient levels of learning. Institutions like Colleges and Universities perpetuate the systemic structure of education through their entrance requirements. These institutions of learning need to consider the possibility of alternative methods to determining admission. Given the high stakes nature of acceptance into a post-secondary institutions, the social capital and the earning potential that it represents, parents are insistent that their child be provided an educational experience that maximizes the chances of gaining entrance.

As educational leaders inspired by the Reggio approach to education, hearing the call for change from the experts and thinkers in the field of educational leadership we need to become the maverick leaders that Hargreaves (2009) calls us to be. We have a responsibility as educational leaders to look for " transformational teaching and learning that connect academic learning to students' personal experiences and aspirations, so that students are changed by what they learn into deeper, richer human beings who want to use their learning to make the world a better place" (Starratt, 2005, p. 130). The Reggio Emilia philosophy and its approach to education provide an inspiring and potentially transformational option for changing an entrenched modern system.

References

Fraser, S., & Gestwick,i C. (2002). Authentic childhood: Exploring Reggio Emilia in the classroom. Albany, NY: Delmar- Thomson Learning.

Hargreaves, A. (2009). Sustainable leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership (pp. 53-73). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Starratt, R. J. (2005). Cultivating the moral character of learning and teaching: a neglected dimension of educational leadership. School and Leadership Management, 25(4), 399-411.

Starratt, R. J. (2005). Responible leadership essays. The Educational Forum, 69(4), 124-133.

Turner, T. and Wilson, D. G. (2010). Reflections on documentation: a discussion with thought leaders from Reggio Emilia. Theory into practice, 49(1) 5-13.

Transitioning Schools, Trust Considerations

Schools undergoing a transition moving from a sinking school to a moving school rely on the expertise of leadership to initiate this movement. Sinking schools are characterized by dysfunctional staff relationships and power issues (Stoll, 1999, p.525). Fundamentally underlying these dysfunctions are issues regarding trust. Schools that are faced with trust issues will most likely not participate in collaborative activities (Bryk et. al, 2003, p. 43). There has been some recent research in addressing trust issues leading to greater collaboration. Cosner of the University of Chicago highlights high school principals that were successful at building organizational capacity and provides tried and tested ways to develop trust.

Although there is no generic, one size fits all solution for addressing the issue of developing or reestablishing trust, two influential ways to move a school is to develop a focus on people and promoting positive politics. There appears to be a number of practical considerations that can be applied to solving trust problems according to Tshannen-Moran, “. . . principals support trust formation between teachers by shaping a cooperative culture, creating time and structures that support collaboration, establishing norms for interaction, intervening to help resolve conflicts or to enforce norms of behavior, and improving the conflict resolution skills of teachers.” (as cited by Cosner, 2009, p.256). Context is key, decisions about the final approach to solving the issue of trust need to be based on the specific situations that the school is faced with.

Creating a culture of trust is important to ensuring the successful transition from a sinking school to one that is moving. School leadership needs to focus on trust issues and ensure that they alleviate them. Doing so will create a culture that enhances compassion, fosters dependability, embraces frankness and subsequently leads to greater collaboration.

References

Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform. Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-44.

Cosner, S. (2009). Building organizational capacity through trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 248-291.

Stoll, L. (1999). Realising our potential: understanding and developing capacity for lasting improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(4), 503-532

Context in Education for Change

Throughout the postings that we have so far there is a common theme of change that is emerging from reading Gladwell's work, the Tipping Point. Previously we considered the role of different change agents in education and the contents of  a change message that we are trying to bring to people. The final consideration that Gladwell addresses in his writing is that of the power of context. There are a number of different contextual ideas that Gladwell refers to: the fact that small changes in context can determine whether a change will tip, the implication that behaviour is a function of social context and the idea of social channel capacity and its relationship to the most beneficial size of groups for change.

If one of the changes that you are trying to bring about is rebuilding an organization's morale we can apply the work of James Q. Wilson and George Kelling, the Broken Window theory (as cited by Gladwell, 2002, p. 141). The lessons from New York City and the changes that occurred within the city during the early 90's and the implications for schools can not be overlooked. We have seen this theory in action popularized in the movie "Lean on Me", a true to life story loosely based on a former high school principal from New Jersey who cleans up a school in all aspects.

Essentially New York City was not a pretty place to live in during the late 1980's and early 1990's. There was rampant crime throughout the city; the streets were unsafe as illustrated by the story of Bernie Goetz. Mr. Goetz was involved in shooting four black youths who were approaching him in a provocative manor. He fled the scene of the crime and was considered to be a hero having done what so many other New Yorkers felt that they could not do, stand up to the thugs. He turned himself in and was acquitted for his crime.

Wislon and Kelling surmised that this act of violence by an individual who would not have typically acted in such a way was a result of the context that he was living in. At the time the city had the appearance of anarchy. It was extremely dirty; graffiti on the walls of the subway system, people jumping the fare turnstiles, squeegee people not being addressed, numerous broken windows, and the list goes on.

Enter the change, addressing the issues one by one, the city made a dramatic turn around.  It was the little things that needed to be addressed. Clean up the subway system car by car. Apprehend the fare jumpers. Deal with issues of public urination. These seemingly small offenses combined together created a context of fear, people did not feel safe, people who were unlikely to act out, did so. It was all a matter of the surroundings.

There is an obvious application for the Broken Window theory in schools. In the position of leadership, faced with a school where you need to make a dramatic change it will not be a one shot, big idea that is going to transition your school. It is going to be addressing smaller issues one by one, issues that are creating a negative context within the building. Here are some ideas to keep in mind: deal with graffiti promptly, keep the washrooms clean, get out of the office and be visible to everyone, connect with people to be proactive as opposed to reactive, ensure that small acts of defiance are dealt with, avoid looking the other way, see confrontation as an opportunity to gain insight to the building and the people within. It is through dealing with the context of the building and the interactions there that you can bring about change.

The other highlight regarding context was the idea that there is an ideal maximum size of a group for which you can have the most effective interaction. Consideration of the size of the school can impact the ease at which you can bring about change. Reflecting on current schools and their size, there is wide variety. Larger schools are disadvantaged with regards to their communication. A school that has two thousand students over three grades will have a lot of difficulty ensuring that students do not fall through the cracks. So what is the maximum size for an effective group?

Social channel capacity is the number of individuals that we can keep track of with regards to their relationships with us and with others within the group. So what do you think would be the largest number of people that you could keep track of in terms of the interrelationships within a group? It turns out that there is supporting evidence to the number one hundred and fifty. One hundred and fifty is the maximum group size that allows for individuals to have a genuinely social relationship. Gladwell draws our attention to a number of examples where this is illustrated, the Gore-tex company and it's philosophy of forming new plants after the number of employees reaches that magic number, the Hutterites and the idea of splitting a colony when it reaches this maximum, the size of a platoon in the army and how it does not go above one hundred and fifty.

Why stay at this magical number of one hundred and fifty. The size of the group allows for greater informal one to one contact. Through this contact you will have a greater understanding of the strengths of the individual. You will have a greater capacity to transmit information. You will be able to develop relationships quickly and effectively. You will be able to call upon the transactive memory that is shared between individuals within that staff.

When organizing schools there are implications of the social channel capacity in two areas. The first applies to the teaching staff as a whole. Not that I have seen a staff that is greater than 150, there are a lot which get very close to this number, particularly when we consider support staff in conjunction with leadership and teaching staff.  Maintaining a staff that reaches the social channel capacity would be beneficial in implementing change as the context of the school is more apparent and the relationships are better visualized between staff.

The second consideration is that of the student body. There have been attempts to address the issue of having only one hundred and fifty students within a group at school and we have seen this in the form of the pod concept. I have had personal experience in the pod model of teaching and I would say that there are many benefits in terms of communication and the development of relationships with the students, particularly when paired with the concept of looping. This is a postmodern idea, having small communities of learners sharing with each other. Learning is a shared experience and if we are not able to develop relationships learning will not be as effective. The difficultly that arises from the pod concept is the resulting schools within schools. There is a fragmentation within the school as pods are islands unto themselves, connected to the school through leadership and the whole school concept. In addressing the issue social channel capacity and students another issue arises.

How as a leadership team can you have a whole school concept, with is symbols and traditions and still maintain these small groups? This is a key question in attempting to change schools in a post modern fashion. In attempting to answer this question, leadership is directed to the extracurricular aspects of a school. Through the participation in whole school activities such as intramurals, sports teams, music programs, art and drama programs there is a unification that would hopefully create this whole school culture.

Through this exploration of the Tipping Point we can see a number of different implications for change and the change process in education. Keeping in mind the transitions that are happening with society as a whole we can not ignore the ideas that we have talked about. We have visited considerations such as; the need to understand the messengers for change, the message itself and the context in which the message is being shared. Changing schools in education is inevitable and it is important that we have a clear understanding of the process and the individuals involved as we try to change schools and education for the better.


Reference

Gladwell, M. (2002). The Tipping Point- How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. New York, NY: Back Bay Books.