Archive

• Change in Education: The Amoeba vs The Paramecium

  February 25, 2016 6:46 PM Comments Off on Change in Education: The Amoeba vs The Paramecium

  In his new book, Creative Schools: The Grassroots Revolution That’s Transforming Education, Ken Robinson calls for a changing of the guards in terms of the metaphors that we use to think about our work in education. In particular, he wonders how our approach to schools and systems of education might be transformed if, instead of the familiar industrial/mechanistic metaphor that currently grounds education design, we begin to think in terms of natural ecosystems.

  Well, this got me thinking a little more deeply about the natural world that we inhabit and what other insight and inspiration might emerge if we look at little more closely. From a biological perspective, you can’t look much closer than the fascinating world of single cell organisms.

  And that’s where I found my mind going this week. In particular, I couldn’t stop thinking about—you guessed it—AMOEBAE and PARAMECIA. I forced myself to move beyond some of the struggles I had with high school science class and landed on the differences between the way the amoeba and the paramecium get from one place to another. Here are couple of video clips that may remind you:

  Notice how the paramecium moves from Point A to Point B as a single unit, propelled along by the coordinated movement of hundreds of tiny cilia. It appears to be very deliberate and intentional, doesn’t it? Our friend the amoeba, on the other hand, navigates its world by sending out part of its cytoplasm into the desired direction. The rest of the body then eventually flows into the pioneering pseudopods, gradually establishing a new location. Notice that there are multiple pseudopods being formed at any given time!/p>

  I’m thinking that, as a metaphor, the amoeba may hold some promise for our conversations about change in education.

  • For one, the very name amoeba is Greek for change!
  • Second, I love the exploratory nature of the movement. I would never pretend to get inside an amoeba’s head (wherever that might be) but, when compared to the movement of the paramecium, there is something about the way the amoeba travels that just seems much more open to possibility and changing direction if need be.
  • I find that the way the cell resources flow into each pseudopod very powerful. It’s almost as if the nucleus of the amoeba is saying, “Go and check things out. We trust you and we’ll be right behind you—literally!”
  • And there is a sense in which the ability to easily change shapes allows the amoeba to respond to both its internal and external contexts in a very fluid way.

  Now, I have nothing against the paramecium. In fact, its controlled and predictable movements will be attractive to many. But, in terms of a possible new metaphor for innovation and change, I think I will spend a little more time thinking about the amoeba!

  There are some who like to talk about system change that is planned, coordinated and very deliberate. It’s change where the entire system is on the move, in the same direction. It’s sometimes risky for creative thinkers to consider sticking their neck out to move off in a different direction. 

  But what might happen if we used an amoeba metaphor to help frame our approaches to change as well as  the way that we support imagination, creativity AND innovation?

  And just to get you thinking about it a little more, I’ll leave with you with one of my favourite Christine Lavin tunes, illustrated here by young students from the Park School in Brookline,Massachusetts:

• CEA Launches the 2016 Indigenous ‘Innovation that Sticks’ Case Study Research Program

  February 23, 2016 12:00 AM Comments Off on CEA Launches the 2016 Indigenous ‘Innovation that Sticks’ Case Study Research Program

  FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

  Toronto – February 23, 2016 – The Canadian Education Association (CEA) is proud to launch the Indigenous ‘Innovation that Sticks’ School District Case Study Program to showcase how one K-12 First Nations-focused learning program has increased Indigenous student engagement, achievement and retention, and has the potential to be implemented in other classrooms, schools and school districts across the country.

  “CEA knows there are on-reserve/off-reserve schools where tremendous innovation is happening by taking risks and implementing culturally relevant, community-supported, innovative programs that connect deeply with Indigenous learners and their way of learning and coming to know.” says CEA President and CEO Ron Canuel.  “We want to learn about, understand, and promote how one successful program for Indigenous learners has grown beyond one classroom.” 

  The selected Indigenous learning program will receive a $10,000 bursary to be used to continue to support the growth of their innovative practice. The educators and community members that help drive this learning program will share their expertise with a CEA case study researcher to package the ‘lessons learned’ from their successful learning program and publish a case study report to share with other change leaders across Canada faced with the challenge of determining how they can get their own ‘innovations to stick’ and achieve their goals.

  This case study program represents a golden opportunity for on-reserve/off-reserve schools or district leadership teams to be recognized nationally for their work while informing, inspiring, and impacting colleagues facing similar challenges in their classrooms.

  [ibimage==6713==Original_size==none==self==null]

  It’s easy to apply. For more details, please visit:
  www.cea-ace.ca/innovationthatsticks

   

  Max Cooke
  CEA Director of Communications (bilingual)
  416-592-6300 ext. 225
  mcooke@cea-ace.ca
  @max_cooke

   

  Founded in 1891, CEA is a network of passionate educators advancing ideas for greater student and teacher engagement in public education. 

   

  Supported by:

  

   

  This initiative is generously funded by State Farm Canada, which shares CEA’s commitment to supporting leaders who are transforming Canada’s education system.

  ® State Farm and related trademarks and logos are registered trademarks owned by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, used under licence by Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company and certain of its affiliates.

• Are all 75% averages created equal?

  February 11, 2016 7:26 PM Comments Off on Are all 75% averages created equal?

  Consider the following two data sets. The first table is a listing of the final marks for Marta, a Grade 10 student at a public secondary school in Ontario. The second shows final marks for Shekar, a classmate of Marta’s at the same school. 

  Marta J:
  Math: 52%
  English 69%
  Science 65%
  History 72%
  Phys-Ed 74%
  Visual Arts 88%
  Music 92%
  Comm Tech 85%

  Shekar R

  Math 88%

  English 75%

  Science 88%

  History 72%

  Phys-Ed 72%

  Visual Arts 65%

  Music 67%

  Comm Tech 70%
  
   A couple of questions to begin. First, how would you likely react to these two reports if you were:

  • a parent
  • a school administrator
  • a secondary school guidance counsellor
  • a University/College admissions board

  Second, who would you predict would have the best chances of success in moving forward towards graduation? Finally, who would you predict would be most engaged in their high school coursework?

  Now, I realize that there are plenty of moving parts at work in the typical Canadian secondary school. There’s a real sense in which simply laying out a set of final report marks doesn’t really speak to the complexity of situation but that, perhaps, is the whole point!

  The fact is that, on paper, both of these students have an overall Grade 10 average of 75%. So, they’re both very similar in terms of success, right? Yet, I’m wondering how many of us would naturally assign more value to Shekar’s results. After all, his scores in Math and English will resonate with those who subscribe to the belief that success in these two areas are a strong predictor of success in school, work and even life. In fact, many systems would automatically flag Marta as a candidate for some sort of remediation as she prepares for assessments in both of these areas. In many cases, Shekar would be considered the smarter of the two students.

  
  

  But in his book, The End of Average, Todd Rose introduces a different way of looking at the idea of success in complex systems and organizations. He uses the Jaggedness Principle as a way of challenging us to look at the limits that are imposed on our vision when we insist on judging and valuing people using narrow definitions of success. Human ability, according to Rose, is a complex, jagged thing—there is no smooth “line of best fit” that can be used to measure talent, ingenuity, intelligence, creativity, imagination—those complex dimensions of our humanity. Yet our instutitutions of opportunity, like schools, continue to pretend that all of this can be adequately captured by a system of one dimensional “tests” and the mathematics of aggregation.

  
  

  To be sure, aggregating data can appear to smooth out the jaggedness, but this is an illusion that, on the one hand, prevents us from seeing the rich deposit of talent and potential inherent in the individuals that walk into our schools every day and, on the other, takes our focus away from some deeper conversations about school and program design. 

  
  

  In Rose’s words,

  A quality is jagged if it meets two criteria. First, it must consist of multiple dimensions. Second, these dimensions must be weakly related to one another.

  So, let’s go back to the two reports that I presented at the beginning. It’s clear that, while our attention may have initially been drawn to the fact that one student was clearly “stronger” in measures of math and literacy, we may have missed the multi-dimensional nature of each student. The underlying assumption that there is a strong relationship between success in math and language and future success as a student (and an employee) puts us at risk of missing the fact that Marta shows obvious strength in the Arts and Communications Technology.
   

  It’s an assumption that would cast Marta in a deficit position when, in reality, it is very likely that she has developed as the result of her work in these areas. In fact, we would likely find some strong alignments to the competencies that many are calling for as part of the 21st Century learning conversation.

  
  

  Now, I’m not arguing for one minute that math and language are not important aspects of a students’ development. They are. And I’m not arguing that Shekar’s competence should not be recognized. They should, and likely are! I am suggesting, however, that our current narrative of the successful student might lead many to place more value on one set of results over another. And this, I believe, is problematic.

  So two questions have emerged for me in viewing our school systems from the perspective of Todd Rose’s Jaggedness Principle. 
  

  
  

  First, how can we begin to think about schools in such a way that more of multi-dimensional dynamic of students is recognized and allowed to shine through? And second, how might the Jaggedness Principle offer new insights and perspective on how we plan programs, design curriculum and value the competencies that are developed throughout the schooling process?
  

  
   

  As always, I’m hoping that this is something that we can continue to discuss in a variety of contexts. I’m still allowing this to rattle around in my mind. I would be interested to know where your conversations lead!

• The Coffee House, Liquid Networks and The Challenge to Change

  January 13, 2016 7:05 PM Comments Off on The Coffee House, Liquid Networks and The Challenge to Change

  I’m not sure if Steven Johnson loves coffee as much as I do, but he certainly has a great deal of appreciation for the coffee house! In his 2015 TEDTalk, Where Good Ideas Come From, Johnson points out that, in addition to the coffee being consumed:

  (more…)

• Now Trending

  December 17, 2015 11:50 PM Comments Off on Now Trending

  As educators, we are bombarded daily by educational trends. Twitter tells me that “big data” will help to inform school practice. A colleague promotes yoga and mindful practice in high-needs classrooms and my child’s school division has incorporated an industry-led technology focus. We look to our past and towards the future anticipating the “latest trend” and the “next big thing.” We have seen open classrooms, experiential learning, brain-based education, personalized instruction and professional learning communities, to name a few. Educators, eminently practical and resourceful, have unpacked and reconfigured these ideas to fit their unique students and contexts.

  Over the last years however, it appears that the pace of educational change has reached epic proportions. Differentiated learning has transformed into universal design, personalized learning environments have incorporated flipped classrooms and individualized learning spaces. Curriculum focused on environmental outcomes has evolved to include outdoor classrooms, play-based instruction and place-based learning. MakerSpaces and Design Education are replacing other learning spaces across school communities. The availability of information through technology, blogs and social media means that educators are receiving more and more information about innovations in education. While innovation is exciting, invigorating and necessary, this influx of information also creates stress as educational leaders face continual pressure to evolve and transform in the interests of student engagement and success.

  Teachers similarly feel the pressure of trending in education, as expectations change and educational leaders ask for more innovation related to engaging students in the learning process. Unfortunately, transforming personal practice is not an intuitive or simple process for many educators. In the early 1930s sociologists began to look at the adoption of agricultural technologies and speculate why some farmers adopted innovations and others did not. Sociologist Everett Rogers refined this work and both quantified and developed categories to describe the spectrum of how people react to innovations within their discipline.¹ Roger’s research indicated that 2.5 percent of people innovate, 13.5 percent adopt innovations early, 34 percent adopt innovations with some additional support, 34 percent are late adopters who need lots of support and training, while 16 percent are “laggards” (Rogers’ term!) and are resistant, if not undermining, to change efforts. While this continuum is subjective to both culture and discipline, it seems applicable within an educational context.

  Because educational change can be both stressful and difficult, it is important that educational leaders approach “trending” in education with caution, insight, knowledge and humour. Picking the right changes, for the right reasons, is an important skill for educational leaders. In my work with these leaders exploring how to apply innovations within their context, a few key strategies have become clear.

  Understand the difference between long-term trends and fun innovations. The New Horizon Report, published by the New Media Consortium, explores what is on the horizon for education and suggests that two long-term trends within the field of education are: rethinking how to bolster student engagement, and how to shift to deeper learning approaches.² Understanding how society is evolving and moving with these changes is an important skill for educational leaders who want to remain nimble and responsive to students’ needs.

  Know yourself. With so many theories, innovations, programs and ideas being promoted for both the students’ benefit and for corporate profit, it is important to understand who you are as an educational community. Dig deep and figure out what educational pedagogy resonates with your community. Does the idea of excellent, subject-rigorous instruction fit with your understanding of the aims and objectives of education? Does a more fluid, student-led, constructivist path reflect your educational community? What pedagogy underpins your educational programming? 

   Know your educational theory. When contemplating the adoption of a new innovation or program, it is important to ask yourself several questions: Where is the innovation coming from and what does it mean? What is the pedagogy that underlies the innovation? Does the innovation connect to your school’s mission, vision and teaching philosophy? Pull out your undergraduate educational theory textbooks and figure out what underpins an innovation and what sort of ideas it supports.

  Develop your own frameworks. Work within your educational community to develop contextualized frameworks around outcomes, teacher growth, assessment practice and instructional practice. For example, create a framework around Rogers’ spectrum of educators’ reactions to changes in educational practice. Look to research to figure out ways to help teachers move along this continuum of professional growth. Finally, use these frameworks to help guide the application of innovations and trends, rather than having trends inform the choice of frameworks.

  Keep it simple. Cognitive scientists tell us that the human brain can absorb and work with at most three to five core concepts simultaneously. This means that if you are trying to lose weight, complete your graduate degree, build a kitchen addition, innovate your classroom practice and learn to speak Spanish, you are likely to run into trouble! The same holds for educational systems. Doing too much at once makes it difficult to get anything done effectively. Stick to a few innovations that make sense as priorities for your school community.

  Look to other disciplines. Redirect your trend watching. Instead of running after the next trend in education, examine advances in other disciplines. Read Gawande’s book on how the medical system has worked to improve doctors’ diagnoses.³ Is there a way to incorporate Gawande’s insights in your work as educators? Go on a city architecture tour and see what human-centered architecture involves. Are there insights that can be applied to educational learning spaces? Use the insights from other disciplines to deepen your educational practice.

  Branding, though promoted as the new norm, does not necessarily drive better learning. Reconsider this trend in favour of deeper educational practices.

  Contemplate being unknown. There is increasing pressure on educational leaders to “brand” schools and develop niche services. Trending underpins the ability to be a brand. Being known as the school with an awesome MakerSpace or engaging Project-based Learning pedagogy is seen as good for both the school and for educational leaders. Districts are showcasing these schools in an increasingly competitive and scrutinized environment, while schools and administrators promote branded entities through social media. Branding, though promoted as the new norm, does not necessarily drive better learning. Branding can disperse the energies of school leaders, entrench schools in practices that no longer fit their community and support “pizzazz” over deep learning. Reconsider this trend in favour of deeper educational practices. 

  Organizational theorist James March reminds us that all organizations need to continue to innovate, explore and evolve to be viable and dynamic organizations.⁴ As a person who leans towards innovation and “early adoption,” it’s important that I do the work of interpreting and unraveling educational trends. Too much or the wrong innovations can get in the way of being an effective organization. Too few or unexamined innovations can get in the way of effective educational practice. I suspect that educational trending will continue at a terrific pace as our access to technologies and information continues to shape our collective consciousness. Developing the skill of using trends selectively and intentionally is an important task for educators.

  En Bref: Cet article explore la pression d’innover en éducation comme forme d’amélioration scolaire. Selon l’auteure, la poursuite de chaque innovation en éducation peut surcharger et frustrer le personnel et fragmenter les efforts investis. Giesbrecht examine plusieurs pratiques – simplifier les priorités, comprendre la culture de l’école, trouver l’inspiration dans d’autres domaines et résister à la pression d’avoir une image de marque – susceptibles d’aider les divisions à déterminer quelles innovations sont adaptées à leur contexte. L’article se veut un point de départ pour la discussion, posant les questions  : « Comment pouvons-nous savoir quelles innovations en éducation sont adaptées pour nous? » et « Comment pouvons-nous appliquer de façon réfléchie et responsable les innovations en éducation? »

  ---

  First published in Education Canada, December 2015

  1 Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 3rd ed. (New York: Free Press, 1983).

  2 L. Johnson, S. Adams Becker, V. Estrada and A. Freeman. The NMC Horizon Report: 2015, K-12 Edition (Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium, 2015).

  3 Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto: How to get things right (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2009).

• Leadership from the Middle

  December 7, 2015 4:42 PM Comments Off on Leadership from the Middle

  My colleagues and I have been working on “whole system change” (how all schools in a province/state/country can improve) since we carried out the evaluation of England’s literacy and numeracy strategy from 1998-2002.¹ We then applied the lessons from England to Ontario’s reform strategy that began in 2003. In an earlier article for CEA² I identified the “big ideas” as:

  1. All children can learn
  2. A small number of key priorities
  3. Resolute leadership
  4. Collective capacity
  5. Strategies with precision
  6. Intelligent accountability
  7. All means all.

  We have learned a great deal about whole system change, which we have captured in a complete case study of Ontario, 2003-2015.³ As we examined and worked with systems around the world – some that were relatively centralized and some relatively decentralized – we began to search for a more powerful way to seek whole system success regardless of the starting point.

  The answer, and the focus of this article, is “Leadership from the Middle” (LftM), first identified by Hargreaves and Braun⁴ in their evaluation of the implementation of a special education initiative in Ontario. For this initiative, the government allocated $25 million to the Council of Ontario Directors of Education to lead implementation across all 72 districts. The government, if you like, asked “the middle” – the districts – to lead system change.

  LftM and its rationale

  In education system terms, the top is the state, the middle is districts or regions, and the bottom is schools and communities. Top-down leadership doesn’t last even if you get a lot of the pieces right, because it is too difficult to get, and especially to sustain, widespread buy-in from the bottom. In many ways the Ontario strategy was led from the top (the government), and although it did contain many strong partnership ideas, it ultimately will not be embedded enough to establish sustainable system change (see the discussion of New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (NPDL) and Ontario below). Similarly, bottom-up change (e.g. school autonomy) does not result in overall system improvement; some schools improve, others don’t and the gap between high and low performers grows wider.

  The key question, then, is how can we achieve the strongest system coherence, capacity and commitment resulting in sustained improvement?

  Leadership from the Middle can be briefly defined as: a deliberate strategy that increases the capacity and internal coherence of the middle as it becomes a more effective partner upward to the state and downward to its schools and communities, in pursuit of greater system performance. The goal of LftM is to develop greater overall system coherence by strengthening the focus of the middle in relation to system goals and local needs. Thus, it is not a standalone, but rather a connected strategy. This approach is powerful because it mobilizes the middle (districts and/or networks of schools), thus developing widespread capacity, while at the same time the middle works with its schools more effectively and becomes a better and more influential partner upward to the center.

  The LftM strategy is being used in several systems around the world, and my colleagues and I are currently involved in initiatives in California (districts working with each other on system goals), Connecticut (districts working in cohorts), and Quebec (again districts working together on local and province-wide priorities). For this article I will draw on two examples: one from the relatively decentralized system of New Zealand; the other from the relatively centralized province of Ontario.

  System change in New Zealand

  In 1989, New Zealand passed a radical (at the time) piece of legislation entitled Tomorrow’s Schools that abolished regional authority and created individual school autonomy, with each school having its own school council. Assessing its impact is beyond the scope of this article, but we can say that by and large, improved performance of the overall system did not ensue (for example, the gap between high- and low-performance schools increased). In 2014, the current government passed another initiative, called Investing in Education Success,that provided a substantial new budget of 369 million NZ dollars in order to set up networks of schools that would work together to leverage improvement. There are some 2,500 schools in New Zealand; it was expected that all schools would participate in networks of 5-20 schools. Initially the proposal was imposed on the system and was greeted with widespread opposition.

  Over the past year and a half, the system has worked on a resolution that I would essentially call an LftM solution. For example, the government and the primary school teachers’/principals’ federations worked out guidelines in something called the “Joint Initiative.” Here are its five fundamental principles:⁵

  1. Children are at the centre of a smooth and seamless whole of educational pathways, from earliest learning to tertiary options.
  2. Parents who are informed and engaged are involved in their children’s education and part of a community with high expectations for and of those children.
  3. Teachers and education leaders, supported by their own professional learning and growth, and those of their colleagues, will systematically collaborate to improve educational achievement outcomes for their students.
  4. Teachers and education leaders will be able to report measurable gain in the specific learning and achievement challenges of their students.
  5. Teachers and leaders will grow the capability and status of the profession within clearly defined career pathways for development and advancement.

  Within these overarching principles, New Zealand is working out additional requirements to guide the work of emerging networks. These guidelines are consistent with eight criteria that Santiago Rincon-Gallardo and I formulated in relation to LftM networks of schools or districts. We have identified eight essential ingredients of effective networks:⁶

  1. Developing high-trust relationships
  2. Focusing on ambitious student learning goals linked to measurable outcomes
  3. Continuously improving instructional practice
  4. Using deliberate leadership and skilled facilitation
  5. Frequently interacting and learning inwards
  6. Connecting outward to learn from others
  7. Forming new partnerships among students, teachers and families
  8. Securing adequate resources to sustain the work.

  It is too early to assess the impact of New Zealand’s LftM strategy, but it does provide a clear example of deliberately trying to mobilize the middle for system success.

  New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (NPDL) in Ontario

  Ontario makes for a particularly interesting case because it has had strong success using an assertive strategy from the government combined with partnerships with its districts. This has served the province well on basic measures of literacy, numeracy (though less impressively), and high school graduation. What becomes evident is that such a model may not be suitable for innovation and its related 21st century skills.

  My colleagues and I are pursuing, in seven countries including Canada, a strategy that we call New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (www.npdl.global). New pedagogies refer to developing learning partnerships between and among students, teachers, and families. We are currently defining and developing the details of these partnerships, which essentially are based on proactive learning roles for students and for teachers using the latest pedagogical practice.

  Top-down leadership doesn’t last even if you get a lot of the pieces right, because it is too difficult to get, and especially to sustain, widespread buy-in from the bottom.

  Deep learning is the 6Cs: Character education, citizenship, collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical thinking. Again we are defining and developing instruments to assess and support these outcomes.

  There are currently some 15 districts in Ontario and Manitoba working to implement and disseminate these ideas in practice. Let me be explicit how this represents Leadership from the Middle:

  • The center of gravity of NPDL is districts and schools, not the province. The ideas are compatible with government policy but not led by the province. This is especially interesting in Ontario because after some eight years of central leadership (2003-2011), districts are having more opportunity to lead change. I cannot say that this is a result of deliberate policy but can observe that many districts are showing new initiative in their own right and in teaming up with other districts, with NPDL being a prime example.
  • The essence of this LftM work consists of innovation and dissemination. Having established a basic instructional capacity in implementing literacy, many schools and districts are now going deeper into new pedagogies that engage students and teachers in real-life problems.
  • This model of change is one that Maria Langworthy and I formulated in A Rich Seam. We described the process as: “Directional vision, letting go, and reining in.”⁷ Clearly this represents a dynamic model, but it also requires a degree of “discipline.” First, directional vision shapes the direction (our NPDL definition for example); second, letting go encourages people to do new things within the broad new direction. We are currently documenting examples of this work in action as students and teachers, for example, are tackling local problems and working together to come up with innovative solutions; third, reining in is built into the process of co-learning. Again we are documenting what this looks like but it consists of the use of targeted questions and protocols to arrive at new meaning and new assessment.⁸ Because the model is laden with transparency, precision of action, assessment of what is being learned including outcomes, and continuous exchanges and deliberation, good ideas get sorted out and retained. This is not a linear model but more or less simultaneous. It generates and assesses a great deal of innovation. These ideas can be further sorted in relation to provincial frameworks and assessments.

  In NPDL we are assessing, capturing and spreading what is being learned. It sounds messy and to a certain extent it is, but it promises to produce better ideas, more quickly, with greater local capacity and ownership. At the same time, this is played out within an overall mindset that we have called “systemness”: a commitment to contributing to, and benefitting from, the larger system. LftM cultivates activities and co-learning that constantly place people in the context of interaction at their own level, and also beyond it as ideas are sorted out in regional, provincial, and in the case of NPDL, international exchanges.

  In short, NPDL is a strong, specific example of LftM oriented to innovation and the future of learning. 

  The promise of LftM

  It is crucial to say that every time the middle gets together, it is not automatically a good thing. We referred earlier to our eight criteria for collaboration.⁹ Thus having a strong moral purpose focus, working on deep new pedagogies and learning outcomes, affecting the whole system, and so on, are all essential components.

  LftM is a new concept, and has not been fully tested and assessed. But there are at least three big reasons why it holds great promise:

  1. It appeals instantly to a critical mass of people who want a role and have hitherto not been able to see where they fit. When people become aware of LftM ideas they quickly identify with its potential because it is a strategy that finally gives people in the middle a prominent role to play.

  2. It can be used in a variety of ways and is especially suited to breakthrough innovations that are so sorely lacking in public school systems. Traditional school systems have become stodgy and boring for students and for educators. LftM enables and unleashes badly needed innovation on a large scale while at the same time helping to assess and sort out what should be retained and spread.

  3. By definition, it implicates the whole system starting from the middle out, up and down. In addition to our system-use of the concept, LftM can and should be used at other levels. Schools, for example are the middle if you use a within-district focus. Teachers, students and families are the middle when you think of intra-school and community work.

  Conclusion

  Governments have become less and less effective at leading system change.

  The old model – prioritize and implement – is no longer suitable. It cannot generate innovation and learning fast enough for the demands of the 21st century. For the latter you need continuous innovation in real time generated and assessed through co-learning (laterally within and across classrooms, schools and districts; and hierarchically school to district to province). For this kind of innovation, the middle is essential.

  Leadership from the Middle represents a new and powerful way of thinking that frees us from outdated and limited models that depend on top-down versus bottom-up thinking. It liberates a greater mass of people to become engaged in purposeful system change, and ultimately to own the changes that they create together.

   

  En Bref: Le changement issu d’une approche descendante « top-down » des gouvernements n’engendre pas un changement systémique (amélioration de toutes les écoles), pas plus que le changement issu d’une approche ascendante « bottom-up », venant de la base où chaque école jouit d’autonomie, n’amènent de grands progrès. Pour rehausser la cohérence et l’impact à l’échelle du système, une nouvelle stratégie beaucoup plus prometteuse voit le jour : le leadership provenant du milieu (« LpM »). Le LpM renforce les conseils scolaires et les réseaux d’écoles, qui collaborent pour régler des problèmes précis en vue d’accroître des capacités pédagogiques et des compétences collectives ayant des effets mesurables sur l’engagement des élèves. Dans cet article, l’auteur cite la Nouvelle-Zélande et l’Ontario comme exemples de la mise en pratique de cette stratégie mobilisatrice. Le LpM est mieux adapté à l’innovation, à la diffusion, à l’engagement des élèves et des enseignants, ainsi qu’à des apprentissages en profondeur tels le développement de la personnalité, l’éducation à la citoyenneté, la collaboration, la créativité et la pensée critique. Bref, le LpM consiste à mobiliser tout le système en vue des nouveaux modes d’apprentissage plus profonds requis pour le 21e siècle.

    

  ---

  Illustration: iStock

   

  First published in Education Canada, December 2015

  1 L. Earl, M. Fullan, K. Leithwood, and N. Watson, Watching & Learning: OISE/UT evaluation of the national literacy and numeracy strategies (London, England: Department for Education and Skills, 2003).

  2 M. Fullan, “Big Ideas Behind Whole System Reform,” Education Canada 50, No. 3 (2010): 24-27.

  3 M. Fullan and S. Rincon-Gallardo, “Developing High Quality Education in Canada: The case of Ontario,” in Adamson, Astrand, and Darling-Hammond, Eds., (London: Routledge, in press). 

  4 A. Hargreaves and H. Braun, Leading for All (Ontario: Council of Ontario Directors of Education, 2010). www.ontariodirectors.ca/downloads/Essential_FullReport_Final.pdf

  5 New Zealand Education Institute, Ministry of Education, Joint Initiative Agreement (Wellington NZ: 2015).

  6 S. Rincon-Gallardo and M. Fullan, “Essential Features of Effective Networks and Professional Collaboration,” Journal of Professional Capital and Community (in press).

  7 M. Fullan and M. Langworthy, A Rich Seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning (London: Pearson, 2014), 48. 

  8 M. Fullan, “Leadership in a Digital Age,” Presentation at the Deep Learning Hub (October, 2015). www.npdl.global

  9 See also our “coherence framework”: M. Fullan and J. Quinn, Coherence: Putting the right drivers in action (Thousand Oakes, CA: Corwin Press, 2015).

• Bottoms Up

  December 3, 2015 10:02 PM Comments Off on Bottoms Up

  There is a growing global consensus that learning needs to shift. We want to see school systems creating deep, engaging learning that will build students’ capacity to think critically and creatively, to cultivate the innovative minds that will be able to thrive in our digital, global, knowledge economy. Yet concrete changes in teaching and learning practice in schools have lagged behind the impassioned calls for more student engagement, creativity and innovation generally. The educational buzzwords that we have developed in visions for 21st century learning have not been enough to transform what and how we actually teach and learn. It is time for educational leadership to shift the focus of the learning innovation conversation from why we are changing to the practical question of how.

  Learning innovation

  The purpose of innovation in education is to create continuously better learning for the young people that we serve. Too often, the learning innovation agenda has been sidetracked by an unhealthy obsession with adding new forms of technology. While digital technologies are appropriate for solving particular learning challenges, it is useful to separate them from discussions about learning innovation. Learning innovation is not an outcome; it is a problem-solving process. I define learning innovation as a creative process used to create better learning in complex and people-filled systems.

  Mobilizing educators as innovators

  To enable systemic innovation, we must support educators in adopting new identities as learning designers. Innovative change can only come from frontline educators forming insights, learning, and experimenting with new ideas and methodologies – in partnership with their students. Leading innovative change in schools is thus not a question of finding the right idea to implement, but rather harnessing the creative talent of educators and students. What works for one group of students will not necessarily work for another group, whose conditions and experiences are different. In education, the most useful insights and innovations often come from the ground up, from educators who practice in a real-world environment and can experience the shifts in student needs and learning first-hand.

  The creative aspects of teaching and the creative capacity of teachers are largely untapped resources for innovation and change in education. All too often any innovation that is happening in schools is happening outside of and underneath the regulatory processes in place. Instead of harnessing creativity, many school systems repress it. Most of the shared insights and creative “teaching hacks” that we find discussed by teachers are applicable in narrowly defined conditions where no higher permission is needed. Much of what they teach and how they should teach is determined at the national or regional level as policy and curriculum. This limits the creative capacity of frontline educators to change and improve through innovative efforts in the classroom.

  It is time for educators to see themselves as part of what Richard Florida calls the Creative Class: creative professionals who continually work to “create meaningful new forms” of teaching and learning.¹ Teachers as creative professionals are engaged in an iterative design process. As a process of creativity, design is grounded and insightful, aiming to produce new forms of practice that make learning better, not just different. As Tom Sherrington neatly sums it up, “design is a form of creativity that suggests deliberate, planned innovation built on a foundation of research-informed professional wisdom.”² Empowered as learning designers, teachers can get creative with a purpose, using the challenges of their environment to identify opportunities, learn and improve.

  Learning designers innovate because they are open to changing what they do, and how they do it, based on what they’ve learned about themselves and their environment. They are not necessarily the most technologically enabled, or the most overtly creative people. As the U.K. innovation strategist Charlie Leadbeater puts it, they are rather the ones finding and solving interesting challenges for their students and themselves.³

  Give permission through conditions

  Changing a system through creative talent is a different challenge, requiring a different approach, than developing and implementing pre-formed learning solutions from the top. For this kind of innovative change to start happening, we need to unleash creative educators who are willing to “create new ideas, experiment, fail, and try again.”⁴ Time and again we see, in various organizations and systems that rely on innovation to improve, that collaborative, creative work needs a different set of conditions in which to thrive.

  As many school systems are not accustomed to cultivating and managing innovative work, there is an opportunity to learn from the best practices developed in other sectors. Many of the best practices around managing creative employees and networks are about protecting innovators from rules and procedures – effectively turning traditional leadership philosophy on its head. Organizations that evolve and get better tend to empower innovation as a human learning process.

  Fledgling organizations, start-ups and innovative groups work through small, protected creative teams. Authority is flatter and more evenly distributed, meaning that there is less emphasis on permission. They are also more open and collaborative.

  For Richard Florida, the first two rules for leaders of creative teams are to remove distractions and impediments, and to spark creativity (rather than compliance with the rules).⁵ For Google, preserving the freedom to innovate is more important to managing creative work than any of the traditional models of management and planning.⁶ Similarly, Netflix works under the mantra that great results from creative talent come from “setting the appropriate context, rather than trying to control people.”⁷ Author Dan Pink cites studies finding that creative, intellectual work thrives in a block of completely unstructured time.⁸

  Instead of harnessing creativity, many school systems repress it… Many of our teachers may not feel safe trying new things.

  No matter where we look for recent evidence and best practice, it seems like traditional targets and parameters are the opposite of what works. What does work is protecting the freedom to think and experiment. Across many organizations and industries we find that the most efficient innovative culture is set by mobilizing the people who are ready to innovate (and choose to do so), having them work under conditions that foster innovation (rather than hinder it), and empowering them (by getting out of their way). Two key strategies emerge: protect those willing to innovate from doubt, and protect them from fear. 

  Protection from doubt

  When it comes to change in schools, it’s natural for school leaders to announce their inspiration to everyone. But they tend to try to get every staff member on board before they start moving, falling into the trap that Harvard professor and change guru John Kotter describes in his book Buy-In: Saving your good idea from getting shot down.

  Even well-intentioned educators can delay a good idea by seeking answers to too many questions. An open meeting where stakeholders, including parents and students, give feedback on something that is still just an idea – not fully formed, not ready for criticism – can open the door to doubt.⁹

  What we often don’t realize is that innovation and new ideas are fragile things – so fragile that keeping them safe from early criticism is a cornerstone of artist therapy.¹⁰ Typically we respond to new ideas by thinking either “yes, but…” or “yes, and…” Saying “yes, but…” is how we express doubt: “Yes, this learning model might work, but how can we know for sure?” “Yes, it’s a great idea, but how will we do it on budget?” This time spent in deliberation is time spent saturated by doubt.

  And these doubts justify resistance, which makes us slow when we most need to be fast. We can’t realize concrete changes if we spend all of our time justifying ideas, allaying fears, and winning over the most resistant. And we especially can’t silence the skeptics by demonstrating the efficacy of a learning model that hasn’t been tried in our context yet.

  When we protect those who are willing to innovate, we open the way for what Jim Collins calls the “genius of the and.” Saying “yes, and…” is how we build the momentum of innovation. It comes from a sense that just because new things are possible, this does not mean that everything established is under threat. It affirms the current system by suggesting it can become better. “Yes, and…” means there is something to add, not something to delay.¹¹

  Protection from fear

  Our inherited hierarchies challenge innovation in our schools. Consider an innovative History teacher, whose students are encouraged to investigate the origins of historical narrative and critique the interests it represents (an example of several models of what we tend to refer to as 21st century pedagogy, including inquiry-based and personalized learning). He can only go so far if his colleagues teach history tradi-tionally, and want things to be kept that way. Not only is he isolated in his department, but his lone idea also has little strength against the collective weight of the set of ideas that his colleagues have believed in for years. Consider what it would be like for him to be told by school policy that innovation is encouraged, but still have to approach his department head for permission. Once parents and teachers are concerned for their own careers and children, enthusiasm dwindles and with it, any chance for success.¹²

  Creativity hasn’t always been sanctioned by the systems within which our teachers have had to work. Nor were many of the broadly acknowledged principles of 21st century learning. Engaging students as equals, for instance, by facilitating their investigative critique of the curriculum (and whose interests it represents), can be a shining example of 21st century learning and teaching talent in any classroom. In a diverse classroom it can be exactly what students need for their learning to be meaningful and engaging.

  Regardless of the needs of the students in the classroom to understand why they are learning what they are learning, it is entirely up to school leadership to decide if engaging students as equals is seen as insubordination or talent. Many of our teachers may come from a place where the repressive was the norm, and may not feel safe trying new things. Working off the record and setting a culture of experimentation and observation can be a fantastic way for school leaders to reduce the amount of bravery required to try new things. 

  Cultivating the roots of change

  The key to leading innovative change in schools is to empower innovators within classrooms by supporting a new identity that harnesses teachers’ creative talent. Cultivating these learning designers through a culture that protects and promotes creative thinking will generate changes in the work itself. By fostering dynamic thinking and removing the inhibitions to experimentation, school leaders can create the culture and conditions needed to see tangible innovations to real-world teaching practice. Systematically empowering educators to learn and try new things can cause promising practices to proliferate and spread through the system.

  The spread of promising practices

  Fostering an open culture can help innovative practices spread naturally through the system. Good tactics to achieve this include instructional rounds, learning walks, and peer teaching. By just walking through the school, speaking with colleagues, observing how they teach, and seeing the results of their teaching on the walls, teachers will learn from each other. Professional learning and sharing is embedded into the everyday experience of the school.

   

  En Bref: Pour favoriser l’innovation systémique, nous devons soutenir les éducateurs dans l’adoption de nouvelles identités en tant que concepteurs d’apprentissage. Les idées et les innovations les plus utiles proviennent souvent de la base, c’est-à-dire des personnes travaillant dans un environnement réel qui peuvent faire concrètement l’expérience de l’évolution de l’apprentissage et des besoins des élèves. Les enseignants sont des sources très sous-utilisées de talent intellectuel et créatif. Il est donc possible d’apporter le changement en transformant la culture et les conditions d’enseignement afin d’habiliter les enseignants en tant que concepteurs et innovateurs en apprentissage.

  ---

  Photo: iStock

  First published in Education Canada, December 2015

  1 Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class (New York: Basic Books, 2012), 38.

  2 Tom Sherrington, “What’s the incentive? Systems and culture in a school context,” Licensed to Create (London: RSA, 2014), 56. 

  3 Charles Leadbeater, “Learning to Make a Difference: School as creative community,” World Innovation Summit for Education (2009). www.wise-qatar.org/sites/default/files/wise_matters_learning_to_make_a_difference.pdf

  4 Eric Schmidt and Jonathan Rosenberg, “How Google Works” (Slideshare, October 12, 2014). www.slideshare.net/ericschmidt/how-google-works-final-1

  5 Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class, 118.

  6 Schmidt and Rosenberg, “How Google Works.”

  7 Reed Hastings, “Netflix Culture: Freedom and responsibility” (Slideshare, August 1, 2009). www.slideshare.net/reed2001/culture-1798664 

  8 Daniel Pink, “The Puzzle of Motivation” (TED, July 2009). www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation?language=en 

  9 John Kotter, “Four Ways to Kill a Good Idea,” Harvard Business School (October 6, 2010). http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6471.html

  10 Many therapists focus on recovering a sense of creative potential for blocked or frustrated artists.

  11 Jim Collins, Built to Last: The Successful Habits of Visionary Companies (New York: Harper Collins, 2002), 43-46.

  12 Kotter, “Four Ways to Kill a Good Idea.”

• Neuroscience Can Teach Us a Lot About Why Students Drop Out

  October 21, 2015 3:34 PM Comments Off on Neuroscience Can Teach Us a Lot About Why Students Drop Out

  Despite the fact that provincial education systems have made great strides in dropout prevention, too many young people continue to leave school early and abandon their education. When CEA asked educators from across the country to identify the most significant barriers to change in education, 17%[1] of them thought it was the deeply entrenched mindsets and assumptions about education and schooling. This compelled me to explore how CEA could host an event that would encourage educators to begin to question their own belief sets about teaching and learning and the systems that they work in. I feel that the largely untapped potential of emerging neuroscience research to demonstrate how a student’s brain learns best will help define a new set of teaching practices that could positively effect student engagement, achievement – and ultimately – staying in school.

  A longstanding crucial support role for CEA has been to ensure that educators receive as much useful evidence-based information as possible that they can link to practice, and with our upcoming symposium in Quebec City – Dropping Out – What Neuroscience Can Teach Us – we will examine our understanding of the workings and development of the human brain and how we can apply new scientific knowledge to the classroom. New brain imaging techniques are disproving many of the traditional beliefs about how we think that children learn. These discoveries, combined with applying neuroscience research to tackling low levels of literacy and numeracy and poor physical condition – key predictors for dropping out – could change the way we support students with learning difficulties and heighten teaching effectiveness.

  Steve Masson will present a controversial set of ‘neuromyths’, which poke holes in many commonly held misconceptions about how the brain works and how children learn. If you believe that there are visual, auditory and hands-on learners, left-right brain learners, or if you receive constant pitches about educational games, products, and websites that claim to build intelligence or enhance learning using principles of neuroscience, you might be surprised to learn what the latest research has uncovered. These neuromyths can actually bias the way students perceive themselves as learners.

  We tend to overlook the fact that students with low literacy levels typically don’t do well in math either. Ensuring that our students develop lifelong math capacity is a major challenge for our education systems. Dr. Daniel Ansari will mute the noise caused by biased opinions and beliefs about what works to refocus the polarizing new math vs. old math debate on a solid psychology and neuroscience evidence base to confirm which forms of teaching enable increased student achievement in math for all learners.

  We all know that students need plenty of exercise and sleep, and proper nutrition to help them pay attention and to learn (and I would suggest that the same principles apply to educators). There is a direct correlation between good physical condition and mental health – two factors that lead to students dropping out. Drs. Lindsay Thornton, Alex Thornton, and Chris Gilbert will share just how much exercise – and other outside factors such as sleep – influence the brain, and its effects on students’ capacity to be focused and engaged in the classroom.

  These three evidence-based angles on how we can address the stubbornly high number of early school leavers provides an excellent learning opportunity for district leaders, principals and teachers alike because everyone will be challenged to rethink their notions of how students’ brains work. Symposium participants will come away with new methods of supporting students, particularly those at risk of dropping out of school. I hope that you can join us.

   

  ---

  [1] Hurley, Stephen. The Challenge to Change – From Vision to Action in Canadian Education. Canadian Education Association. 2014. http://www.cea-ace.ca/sites/cea-ace.ca/files/cea_action_to_vision_report_final_en.pdf

• Roll for Initiative

  October 7, 2015 3:46 PM Comments Off on Roll for Initiative

  The last decade has seen increased efforts to bring cognitive neuroscience and education together in dialogue. This may be due to anxieties over the “parallel world” of pseudo-neuroscience,¹but it may also be because of new insights arising from neuroscience with genuine value for education.² Indeed, neuroscientists appear increasingly willing to speculate on the possible relevance of their work to “real-world” learning, albeit from a vantage point on its peripheries.³ However, seeking meaningful relationships between neural processes and the types of complex everyday learning behaviours we can observe in classrooms presents a challenge. One thing that appears clear from the outset is that a simple transmission model (in which neuroscientists advise educators on their practice, or developers on their products) is unlikely to be effective. Neuroscientists are rarely experienced in considering classroom practice, and neuroscience cannot provide instant solutions for teachers. Instead, research is needed to bridge the gap between laboratory and classroom. To emphasize the key role of educational values and thinking in the design and execution of such a venture, researchers at the University of Bristol have used the term “neuroeducational research.”

  One of the key challenges of using neuroscience in the classroom lies in connecting neurobiology, which can illuminate processes that happen in the brain at unconscious and conscious levels, and the behaviour of students in the classroom. It can therefore be helpful to think of learning as a series of interactions between the brain, the mind (made up of conscious and unconscious thoughts and feelings), and behaviour. While it seems obvious that the brain can influence the mind, and that the mind can dictate behaviour, it is less easy to imagine that the behaviour of a learner may influence how the brain functions. Surprisingly, cognitive neuroscience tells us that experiences – including those of students in the classroom – can change the connectivity, function, and even structure of the brain. This research gained public attention when a study of London taxi drivers showed that the longer a driver had spent navigating London’s streets, the larger the volume of the driver’s posterior hippocampus (a part of the brain thought to be involved in the “laying down” of information to be learned).⁴ The plasticity of the brain therefore puts teachers in an influential position, as their lessons have the potential to change the biology that supports how their students think.

  Technology and the “flow” state

  Technology-enhanced learning (TEL) is one area where neuroscience may offer accessible insights into classroom practice.⁵ Children already have daily interaction with technologies designed to teach new skills, in the form of video games. The state of focus that players enter when participating in such games has been referred to as “flow,” and can be thought of as an optimal state of concentration and productivity. In order to stimulate the feeling of flow, a task needs to provide immediate feedback, a sense of an achievable (but not too easy) challenge, and be intrinsically enjoyable. Meeting these criteria in the classroom can have a significant effect on student attitudes and behaviour, with a study of high-school students showing that those experiencing a specially designed flow condition (high challenge and high student skill level) reported significantly higher levels of engagement, attention, intensity, mood, and motivation when compared to an apathy condition (low challenge, low student skill level). Significantly for teachers, students reported responding to instruction 73 percent of the time in the flow condition, compared with 42 percent of the time in the apathy condition. When combined with initiatives designed to introduce technology such as tablet computers and interactive whiteboards into the classroom, the concept of using the flow state generated by games as a learning tool is becoming increasingly possible.⁶

  Video games can induce the flow state by providing feedback after each move the player makes (such as scores and level progress), an appropriate challenge (by playing against the computer or other players) and an intrinsic feeling of fun (games that aren’t fun tend not to be played – although veterans of family board-game nights may disagree!). Adaptation of video games to enable their use as a TEL tool is not entirely straightforward, however, as the “learning objectives” of most games do not overlap with the material that students learn in schools. One potential route to introducing games into classroom practice is to uncover the neurocognitive processes involved in game playing, and then design teaching tools to stimulate these processes directly. Recent research into the brains of learners has led to a more complete understanding of the neuroscience of game-playing, and is being used as a basis for the design of new, neuroscience-inspired approaches to TEL.

  What do we know about the brains of gamers?

  The mechanisms underlying engagement with games have been illuminated by recent neuroscience research, and have been found to include one of our most fundamental neural pathways: the dopamine reward pathway (DRP). The DRP is activated when we desire something, whether it be chocolate or winning a game, causing a “spike” in the activity of dopaminergic neurons (neurons that use dopamine as a neurotransmitter). These dopamine “spikes” are correlated with activity in an area of the brain known as the nucleus accumbens, which is thought to process reward, pleasure and motivation in the brain. Players of video games have been shown to have elevated levels of activity in the nucleus accumbens, suggesting that whatever glues our noses to games consoles during game-playing may be related to increased dopamine activity in this region of the brain.⁷

  Sci-napse: Neuroscience-informed teaching

  One way in which playing a game differs from traditional teaching is in the inclusion of an element of unpredictability or chance, such as the roll of dice or the behaviour of a competitor. The element of chance may be fundamental to our enjoyment of games, as the levels of activity in the DRP have been found to be elevated in the primate brain when presented with an uncertain reward. An increase in activity related to increased midbrain dopamine occurs when primates observe a stimulus alerting them to imminent “certain” rewards (e.g. a visual pattern is seen that has always preceded a drop of honey being dispensed) or when they receive an unexpected reward (a drop of honey with no prior visual warning). However, when a stimulus is seen that has preceded a reward on 50 percent of prior occasions, there is a brief burst of activity when the visual pattern is seen, as with the certain reward, but then activity ramps up until the outcome is known and the reward is received (or not).⁸ This suggests there is more midbrain dopamine, which is associated with motivation, for uncertain rewards than for either wholly expected or wholly unexpected rewards. The presence of high levels of midbrain dopamine activity in the brain has been linked to improved learning, so this research suggests that the time leading up to an anticipated but uncertain reward could be a very valuable teachable moment, in which the brain is in a state that is receptive to learning.

  Although this research suggests that uncertain rewards may be a useful tool in teaching and learning, the classroom environment is traditionally a place where reward is designed to be “certain”: hard work or correct answers should always be rewarded. This ideal of fairness is enshrined as a gold standard of teaching practice, with U.K. teacher standards stipulating that a teacher must use “praise, sanctions and rewards consistently and fairly.”⁹ While this approach appears logical, recent research suggests that students may not find it as engaging as an approach that allows for the inclusion of uncertainty. In a study by Howard-Jones et al, U.K. primary school students were asked whether they preferred to receive a question from “Mr. Certain,” from whom they always received a point when they correctly answered a question, or from “Mr. Uncertain,” who would spin a wheel and allocate either 0 points or 2 points for a correct answer.¹⁰ The majority of students expressed a preference for Mr. Uncertain, suggesting that students were experiencing a similar increase in dopamine activity as was found in the primate study.

  With the aim of investigating the potential of uncertain reward in the classroom further, Howard-Jones and his colleagues used pedagogical feedback from teachers to develop a game “app” that can be used in everyday teaching practice. This app is available for free at www.zondle.com, and uses an optional “wheel of fortune” to allow the teams with correct answers to choose whether they want to sacrifice points for the opportunity to “double-or-nothing.” As you might expect, the introduction of a competitive gaming environment has resulted in some exciting and dramatic lessons in the test classes. Teachers found that students became more animated, and “sport talk” began to break out among the teams – with winning teams joyously exclaiming “we’re just too good!” and losing teams commiserating that “we just haven’t had any good rolls.” One notable difference from the usual classroom environment was the tendency of winning teams to attribute success to skill, and losing teams to blame their failures on chance.¹¹ This is an encouraging sign that the games-based classroom is one where students can fail “safely,” without damaging their self-esteem. Overall, classroom trials have suggested that the competitive desire to beat classmates at the game induces high levels of motivation and engagement.

  The results from small-scale trials of games-based learning have been very promising, but we do not yet know if it will be as successful when used on a large scale, or over a long period of time. In order to find out, a large-scale project called “Sci-napse” (NeuroSCience-INformed APproaches to Science Education) has begun, backed by funding from the Educational Endowment Fund (EEF) and Wellcome Trust. Sci-napse will involve testing a games-based approach similar to zondle team play in the science classrooms of over 70 U.K. schools, involving over 10,000 Year 8 pupils (aged 12-13). In the final part of the project, classes in the games-based group will be taught an entire year of science using the approach, in order to provide a true test of the effectiveness of uncertain rewards in the classroom. While the project is only open to U.K. schools, we would encourage all teachers to try zondle team play in their own classrooms, and experience the fun and excitement that games-based learning can bring to the classroom.

  En Bref – Bien qu’actuellement sous-utilisé, le domaine de la neuroscience a beaucoup à offrir au monde de l’enseignement. L’une des façons d’intégrer les principes neuroscientifiques à l’enseignement en classe consiste à utiliser des jeux de hasard. Les humains peuvent parvenir à un état de grande concentration, appelé « flux », lorsqu’ils sont absorbés dans des jeux. Il a été démontré qu’il s’agit d’un bon outil en classe. La recherche a également établi que des récompenses « incertaines » (par exemple, l’attribution de points en fonction d’un lancer de dés) prolongent l’activité de la dopamine dans les régions du cerveau qui traitent les récompenses, la motivation et le plaisir. L’activité accrue de la dopamine a été liée à un codage plus efficace de l’information, ce qui laisse supposer un meilleur apprentissage. Pour vérifier le potentiel des jeux de hasard en classe, le projet Sci-napse, auquel participent 10 000 élèves du secondaire du Royaume-Uni, vient d’être amorcé.

  ---

  Illustration: iStock

  First published in Education Canada, September 2015

  1 Misconceptions about the brain or “neuromyths” remain a persistent problem in education – see P. A. Howard-Jones, “Neuroscience and Education: Myths and messages,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience (2014).

  2 For a good summary of some promising developments in Neuroscience and Education in the past decade, see OECD, Understanding the Brain: Birth of a new learning science (Paris: OECD, 2007). 

  3 Howard-Jones, Neuroscience and Education.

  4 E. A. Maguire, et al., “Navigation Related Structural Change in the Hippocampi of Taxi Drivers,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 97, no. 8 (2000): 4398-4403. 

  5 For a summary of the potential applications of neuroscience and technology in education, see P. Howard-Jones et al., “The Potential Relevance of Cognitive Neuroscience for the Development and Use of Technology-enhanced Learning,” Learning Media and Technology 40, no. 2 (2015): 131-151.

  6 For more information about the “flow” state and its application in the classroom, see M. Csikszentmihalyi and I. S. Csikszentmihalyi, Optimal Experience (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1988); and D. Shernoff et al., “Student Engagement in High School Classrooms from the Perspective of Flow Theory,” School Psychology Quarterly 18, no. 2 (2003): 18.

  7 A follow-up study of game-playing adults: C. H. Ko et al., “Brain Activities Associated with Gaming Urge of Online Gaming Addiction,” Journal of Psychiatric Research 43, no. 7 (2009): 739-747. 

  8 The original experiment involving chimpanzees: C. D. Fiorillo, P. N. Tobler, and W. Schultz, “Discrete Coding of Reward Probability and Uncertainty by Dopamine Neurons” Science 299 (2003): 1898-1902.

  9 Teacher’s Standards: Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies (U. K. Dept. for Education, 2011).

  10 For a full summary of the experiments using games in the classroom: P. A. Howard-Jones and S. Demetriou, “Uncertainty and Engagement with Learning Games,” Instructional Science37, no. 6 (2009): 519-536. 

  11 Howard-Jones and Demetriou, “Uncertainty and Engagement with Learning Games.”

• Google Apps for Education: The promise and peril of tech in the classroom.

  October 2, 2015 4:00 PM Comments Off on Google Apps for Education: The promise and peril of tech in the classroom.

  This past Sunday started out to be a fairly unremarkable one for our household. I got up early to do some writing, my wife had her coffee on our upstairs patio, my daughter lolled in her room reading a book. As is our usual Sunday tradition, breakfast was a fairly haphazard and lazy affair, and all too soon the pressure of Monday morning began to assert itself as we all made ready to tackle that ever-present list of weekend chores that had been put off until the last possible moment.

  (more…)

• Making a Difference in Our Schools

  May 29, 2015 3:21 PM Comments Off on Making a Difference in Our Schools

  I first met Ron Canuel when Reader’s Digest named him 2008’s Hero in Education. As director general of the Eastern Townships School Board in Quebec, he was an architect of Canada’s first system- wide one-to-one laptop deployment for students. The results of the program were astounding: absenteeism declined by 26 per cent, behavioural problems by 34 per cent.

  I was so pleased when our paths crossed again. In 2014, the Reader’s Digest Foundation of Canada decided to launch a new awards program to celebrate and promote teachers who are improving our education system in meaningful ways. The foundation was looking for a partner to help us develop this initiative, and one of our researchers drew up a list of organizations to consider. At the top was the Canadian Education Association (CEA), which seeks to transform our education system by supporting innovations and fostering dialogue among its stakeholders. Ron is now its president.

  It didn’t take long to convince Ron to collaborate on the new Canadian Innovators in Education Awards. Given out to educators who can demonstrate  their work’s lasting impact, the first prize is a sizable $25,000. The second and third  prizes are $10,000 and $5,000, respectively.Winners will be chosen by a jury of CEA and Reader’s Digest representatives and announced in November. For details, visit our website at rd.ca/education.

  Please help us make this program successful by spread- ing the word and encouraging suitable candidates to ap-ply. Together we can maintain our school system as one of the best in the world.

  ---

  This content was originally published in the May 2015 edition of Reader’s Digest Magazine and republished with permission from Reader’s Digest Canada.

• Putting an End to Combined Grade Thinking

  May 28, 2015 10:47 AM Comments Off on Putting an End to Combined Grade Thinking

  There was a time in my teaching career when I would happily volunteer for split grade assignments­, mainly because they offered two of the elements that I appreciated most about my job: the room to be creative and a sense of professional autonomy. I clearly understood that the reasons for combining grades were purely administrative but, personally, I saw them as a type of “call to adventure”.

  “I’ll accept this grade assignment,” I would tell my principal, “but I would like to have the freedom to try out some new approaches or structures.” I understood the nods of approval that I usually (!) received in response as a combination of relief and trust on the part of the administrator. In most cases, I would end up leveraging both at some point during the year!

  Although the challenges of teaching in a combined grade classroom have become decidedly greater as education systems are now more keyed to policies and approaches that demand attention to specific grade level curriculum expectations, provincial testing and greater levels of standardization, there doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of conversation about alternatives. And, clearly, there are no signs that split grade configurations are diminishing in numbers. In fact, in communities where low and declining enrolment is becoming the norm, we’re likely to see an increase in the number of schools forced to combine grades.

  CEA latest Facts on Education is out and it delves into the variety of research that has been done on the efficacy and effectiveness of split grade classrooms. The fact sheet is clear: in the presence of good levels of communication, quality professional development and effective strategies for differentiation, combined grade configurations can work.

  And while the question of how split grade classrooms can be made to work is an important one in the short term, I believe that there are more exciting questions that could serve to propel us into some longer term thinking. Some of the ones that are bouncing around in my own mind:

  Why are we still thinking in terms of age-based grading at all—especially in the earliest years of school? What assumptions hold our thinking in place about the way we organize our schools and assign students to particular classrooms? What might happen if we were to revisit how we move children through their elementary years? What are the alternatives?

  First, the whole idea of combined grades is a bit misleading. Any teacher can tell you that, even in a straight grade classroom, there are usually marked differences in ability levels, maturity and experience of the world. While the existence of specific grade level expectations belies an assumption that all students in a given year should be developmentally similar, we know that a space of a whole year exists between students born in January and those born in December. Yet, in most cases, they are grouped together as one unit. In reality, every elementary class is, more or less, a split!  

  Second, not everything that is learned in school needs to be placed on a developmental trajectory. To be sure, there are parts of the curriculum where children benefit from careful scaffolding, but there are many others that accept, if not invite, different points of entry. Mathematics, for example, would very likely fall into the former category but think of how the natural curiosity of children can drive learning in other areas that make up a traditional school curriculum.

  Third, take a careful look at how children organize themselves outside of the classroom. When left to their own devices, they tend to gravitate to activities and groups of other children involved in things that interest them. No one is standing on the street corner asking for birth certificates before someone is allowed to join a road hockey game. Mixed age groupings can be found all over the place, from the schoolyard to the local park; from the sports centre to the community theatre group. All sites for powerful multi-age learning!

  I find it more than a little confounding that, in an era where creativity and innovation are on the lips of most system leaders, our restrictive thinking around age and learning still renders the combined grade configuration something of an anomaly.

  I’ll share some of the ideas that I have percolating in my own headspace but, for now, I would like to leave you with some questions for consideration and conversation.

  What creative thinking has your school system brought to the conversation about age-based schooling? What do you see as the areas of the curriculum that lend themselves to alternative ways of thinking about age and learning? What areas of learning demand more attention to ages and stages of development? Where are the spaces for some work at challenging our assumptions about the contexts in which children (and adults) learn best?

• Moving Beyond “Sit’n’Git” Pro-D

  April 9, 2015 5:10 PM Comments Off on Moving Beyond “Sit’n’Git” Pro-D

  I often wonder if what we see as teaching at professional learning events would be acceptable in a high school classroom. If the purpose of professional development (Pro-D) is professional learning, then what is our evidence that learning does, in fact, occur? Are we using effective teaching practices in Pro-D?

  Although Pro-D is evolving, the “Sit‘n’Git” way of learning seems to still be alive and well in many conferences and workshops throughout Canada and the U.S. In the past five years, I cannot tell you how many times I’ve sat in a large conference room for a number of hours with hundreds of other dedicated educators and not been provided with the opportunity to even talk to the person beside me. People are spending hundreds and thousands of dollars to attend these events to listen to a series of lengthy lectures without the opportunity to network and wrestle with the presented ideas. I’m not opposed to a keynote address to start off the day with some inspiring, thought-provoking ideas; however, if there is no opportunity to take these ideas and move deeper, many of the thoughts that are initiated in the keynote get lost as I move on to the next session or listen to the next presenter. It’s no secret that in order for deeper learning to occur, we must DO something with a new concept; we must apply new learning to take it from an idea to implementation. Our current typical model of Pro-D makes deeper learning a challenge and often only leaves participants with a few ideas that are unfortunately left on the shelf with the many glossy white binders from workshops of years past. At some point we need to stand up and say that a high volume of “Sit‘n’Git” style of Pro-D is no longer acceptable and is an insult to those who have spent money, time, and effort to attend. While doing this, we also need to rethink the conference model and professional learning so that it better aligns with what we want to see in classrooms.

  There are many articles written about rethinking professional learning (for example – http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/20/is-the-pd-day-broken/ and http://www.cea-ace.ca/sites/cea-ace.ca/files/cea_fone_teacherpd.pdf) For me, the experience needs to be relevant, continual, and collaborative. As educators, we need time to take an idea, wrestle with it, discuss it, and then plan for implementation. Ideally, there should also be time for follow up with reflective dialogue either as a staff or as a group.

  In B.C., the current learning model for teachers is five to six separate (often not aligned, surface level) PD days, monthly staff meetings, and (optional) after school workshops. Is this the best we can do? We know the importance of professional autonomy, so how do we offer this and also ensure that professional learning moves beyond surface level workshops or lectures that give participants the chance to mentally opt out? What is our collective responsibility as schools and districts to create the conditions for deeper learning that affects positive change?

  It will likely be some time before we completely rethink Pro-D, so how do we make the best use of our current model?

  One of the most effective ways to create change is to focus on the bright spots and build from there. There is a powerful movement of professional learning opportunities that have moved away from the “Sit’n’Git” model to one that taps into the strengths of participants and creates more opportunities for networking. All of these require TIME and it is important for us to change the question from “CAN we provide time for Pro-D?” to “HOW CAN we provide more time for effective, ongoing professional learning?”. 

  Here are eight ideas to move us beyond the “Sit’n’Git”: 

  1. NETWORKING/COLLABORATION TIME AT CONFERENCES – We don’t have to blow up our system; we can start small and ensure that there is important “blank” space in between workshops or following keynotes for teams or groups of people to move the learning deeper. Within workshops, always provide time for participants to DO something with their learning; move from the “sit’n’git” to the “make’n’take”. We can use models that encourage inspiring ideas (keynote, workshop) as well as the time to take the WHY of ideas and move to the WHAT and HOW.

  2. TEACHER ACTION RESEARCH – B.C. teacher, Jennifer Delvecchio, shared a grassroots concept of a “growing learners/pedagogy from within” group of teachers that used some of the allocated Pro-D days – along with school supported time (and some of their own time) – to take a concept and spiral deeper over time. Teachers looked at published research and then reflected on their own practices to question and implement change to benefit student learning. By continually analyzing practice in their own classrooms and making the time to meet a priority, they were able to use the published research in a way that actually created positive change in their classrooms. By tapping into teachers’ curiosity and providing small bits of time for reflective dialogue based on gathered evidence of student learning, we can drive powerful professional learning forward.

  3. COLLABORATIVE TIME AND INQUIRY – This year in the Langley School District, time that was previously allocated into two learning days in the year has been spread out over the year in the form of six collaboration mornings (80 minutes each). This model is more organic and teacher-driven than the typical professional learning community (PLC) model as educators are encouraged to choose an inquiry question with a small group of colleagues and then take the time to spiral deeper into their inquiry (see Spirals of Inquiry by Halbert and Kaser). Another example of providing small bits of collaboration time at a school level (based on the passions and curiosities of staff) can be read here. 

  4. IGNITE EVENTS – Ignite sessions can feel kind of like an “underground” professional learning experience where a number of people meet and listen to others share a story, an idea, or an experience through a short series of slides (20 slides, 15 seconds per slide). There is some sit’n’git but the best part about the events is the networking that occurs before, during, and after the series of five-minute presentations that plant seeds of conversations. 

  5. EDCAMPS – More and more districts and even some schools are offering Edcamps as a way to tap into the strengths and knowledge of participants. With no formal set agenda and no formal lectures, participants bring their topics to the day and help facilitate conversation on participants’ areas of interest. The challenge with Edcamp, along with many of these participant-driven events, is keeping the passionate dialogue going beyond the event.

  6. RETHINKING STAFF MEETINGS – Many schools are making professional learning the focus of staff and department meetings. If information can be sent out in a memo/email, leave it off the agenda and free up time for engaging discussions and reflections on student learning. Something as simple as “what have you tried since the last workshop/conference/collaboration that has had an impact (small or large) on student learning?” should be discussed at staff meetings.

  7. INSTRUCTIONAL ROUNDS – The Kamloops School District has been exploring the use of Instructional Rounds (based on the work out of Harvard as a way to provide ongoing dialogue and reflections based on non-judgmental observations of educators by educators). The challenge is providing release time for rounds to take place but if a district is willing to consider HOW money is spent on professional learning, instructional rounds should be on the table.

  8. SOCIAL MEDIA – There are many different platforms (Twitter, blogging, etc.) that can continue conversations past the event (and also help with the sharing of good ideas). Social media can help to connect people in areas of passion or curiosity who can have conversation that can lead to deeper dialogue in other platforms. Dean Shareski challenges us to connect with one person at an event and keep the conversation going beyond that event.

  The Sit’n’Git, single event idea of Pro-D does not align with what we know about teaching, nor about professional learning. We need a sense of urgency to create change in this area. Start small. Build on what is working. Let’s work together to making professional learning more relevant and continual so it leads to deeper change in education.

  ---

  This blog post is part of CEA’s focus on the state of Teacher PD in Canada, which is also connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Teachers as Learners theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, What is Effective Teacher Professional Development? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.

   

• Meeting the Challenge of Infusing Relevant PD in Schools

  April 2, 2015 7:21 PM Comments Off on Meeting the Challenge of Infusing Relevant PD in Schools

  We believe professional learning is highly valued by educators and school-based leaders. However, infusing relevant and focused PD in schools is often a cumbersome task for school-based and district leaders given the time constraints and costs associated to day-to-day realities at the school level. Educators in schools who meet once per month for their professional learning may not be able to sustain a common purpose and ongoing dialogue and may be prone to dismiss or forget key ideas from their sessions if they don’t meet more frequently. Ironically, districts that have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, the professional learning community (PLC) model may discover other barriers confronting them[1] [2].

  Elsewhere, we have been critical of the timing of PLCs in schools[3]. Imagine being an educator and getting up each week during a Canadian winter and travelling into a PLC session for a 7:00 a.m. meeting prior to preparing to teach all day. Or perhaps even more exhausting for educators is attending a session for one hour each week after they have finished teaching all day. This adds minimal value to the pedagogy of the educator; instead, it potentially creates mild to major anxiety and toxicity among staff and affects the school culture negatively, especially in busy schools where teachers are already performing multiple roles (i.e. coaching and leadership activities) in conjunction with their planning, teaching and assessment practices. It becomes even more problematic for educators and leaders if their district adopts this professional learning format in a vertical top-driven manner while offering limited choice, voice and opportunities for collaboration among teachers to engage in deep, dialogical and meaningful professional learning. If this is the case, and I have learned that it is in many districts in Canada, PD is then “contrived” and educators will not engage in the PD no matter how robust and clearly articulated the topic is laid out for them[4]. In our view, teacher energy and wisdom can be shared much more effectively, which may then improve the educational lives of the students they are working with. We would like to present another PD option for educators in Canada to consider. 

  How can school leaders provide relevant, flexible and personalized learning opportunities for both new and experienced teachers?

  Teachers and administration teams are trapped in an educational era of pressing immediacy where “(T)here are always things to be done, decisions to be made, children’s needs to be met, not just every day, but every minute, every second”[5]. And this is a major reason why weekly PD sessions within the PLC framework may not be relevant or even the best fit for many schools in our country.

  In our work, we have been considering alternate professional learning models for busy Canadian educators[6]. As technology become increasingly available, we believe that this may be the game changers for school districts and allow educators a chance to invent PD frameworks that may be better suited and infused into their professional lives. Using the Desire2Learn Learning Management System (D2L LMS) as our teaching and learning model, we believe it’s a viable application that may be used by teachers in schools across Canada. As we have nearly 800 graduate students in our masters and Doctorate programs, many who are learning through the D2L platform, we have to ask the question, can teachers in school districts across this large country learn the same way for the time they must devote to their professional learning in schools? Or, could a combination of face-to-face learning with online engagement help educators meet the diverse needs of their diverse student populations in Canada?

  Our belief is that yes, they can. We are stretched across different climates, cultures and time zones. One of the many benefits of online learning management systems like D2L is that the technology has the potential to break down the barriers of time and location. Using D2L provides the learner with the ability to be educated whenever and wherever it fits into their busy schedules. Imagine dropping a child off at hockey practice in the morning and while waiting at the rink the learner is able to log into an online professional development course or professional learning session with other educators from their school, district or even with educators from across Canada. The networking possibilities are endless.

  In this professional learning format, the learner is able to continuously build their educational and networking capacities by reading over professional development content and articles. They may contribute to and read discussions where many participants engaged in the topic share ideas and experiences. Key ideas can then be brought back to their own schools to share with colleagues and additional community educational stakeholders such as parents.

  Many of us are presently using these online learning management systems to help educate our students at the university level; we believe it is entirely possible and cost-efficient for public school teachers to take advantage of these digital tools to educate themselves and help their students navigate their world. We feel educators can construct relevant and timely topics for professional learning that will change the way PD is viewed by educators throughout the country. We have reported elsewhere that “online teacher communities provide an opportunity to exchange ideas and experiences beyond the classroom walls”[7]. This PD format may provide school districts greater flexibility to provide important learning topics for Canadian teachers, while also inviting them to engage more deeply in their learning. We believe that “with commitment educators can feel connected through the relationships they form on the D2L platform and can create district, provincial, national and even international teacher networks, which otherwise, they might not do or get a chance to do in a face to face context”[8]. We believe this format for professional learning is worth considering.

  ---

  [1] DuFour, R. (2007, September). Professional Learning Communities: A bandwagon, an idea worth considering, or our best hope for high levels of learning? Middle School Journal, 4-8.
  [2] Fullan, M. (2007). Change theory as a force for school improvement. In J. M. Burger, C. Webber & P. Klinck (Eds.), Intelligent Leadership (pp. 27-39). The Netherlands: Dordrect.
  [3] Hamm, L. (2009). “I’m just glad I’m here: Stakeholder perceptions from one School in a community undergoing demographic changes on the Alberta grasslands. Unpublished dissertation from the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
  http://search.proquest.com/pqdtft/docview/734411063/A20B4679350496EPQ/1?accountid=14611
  [4] Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
  [5] Ibid.
  [6] Hamm, L. D. & Cormier, K. (2014, Spring). Building instructional capacity: The new face of professional development. Canadian Association of Principals. http://marketzone.ca/ebooks/CAP/CAP_T0214_EBOOK_SPRING_2014/index.html
  [7] ibid
  [8] ibid

  ---

  This blog post is part of CEA’s focus on the state of Teacher PD in Canada, which is also connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Teachers as Learners theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, What is Effective Teacher Professional Development? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.

• My Two PD Hats

  March 30, 2015 3:02 PM Comments Off on My Two PD Hats

  As a school climate lead teacher, I often find myself wearing two hats. I receive both formal ongoing professional development (PD) opportunities alongside school board personnel and at board functions and provide the PD to my colleagues at staff meetings and on P.A. Days. Playing dress up with both hats simultaneously has in my opinion, placed me at the perfect vantage point.

  When I am wearing my ‘’learner’’ hat, I have found myself metamorphosing from the once passive listener at formal functions like board conferences into an engaged learner-participant using a backchannel such as Twitter, which is 21^st century ‘’note passing’’ for teachers. I can take pictures, write down direct quotes, share my thoughts and feelings and “pass’’ my note in a mere matter of seconds! If only this approach was used when I was in elementary school, I wouldn’t have been Ms. Chatty Cathy of the 8^th grade! What could have turned into me not learning, growing or even networking, has suddenly become a place where I connect to anyone in my school board (regardless of their position) and pore over the material being presented, reflect on my teaching practice and refine my skill-set.

  This brings me into my next point: Teachers won’t learn when you tell them to learn, they learn when they want and are ready to! A designated day for when all teachers board wide, shall or must learn, seems the tired days of our past. Almost any teacher you talk to, would prefer being an active voice in the process of deciding when and how they best learn (just like our students)! To add to this, I would argue that most teachers would choose an informal means of developing their pedagogy by way of independent book studies, release time to work with grade partner(s), blogging and reading blogs, taking part in regular Twitter chats, taking an additional qualification course, meeting with a mentor, taking part in a 4Cs model and so on and so forth.

  Also, from what we know of our students and selves, it’s best to study in short segments rather than long drawn out mornings or days full of all the ‘’latest’’ teaching methodology. So, as someone who provides PD, I’m trying to take what I know from my observations as a learner and apply it to when I’m wearing my “lead teacher cap’’. I try to use games and activities that are engaging, memorable, quick and applicable for the classroom. I follow up the games and activities with a brief reflection and share further information through Google Docs. This allows teachers to decide if they like or need the information presented and when and where they will be open to receiving it. By doing this, I am intentionally respecting my colleagues’ time. I am also mindful of who I’m sharing information with. I’m not a university professor teaching a masters level course. As much as I believe in research guiding my teachers practice, I’m not about to print out full psychological studies to share with my colleagues at staff meetings and asking them to read such studies aloud paragraph by paragraph. I’m realistic about the amount of content and the information that I provide.

  If there is anything that I take away from wearing my decorative hats, it is the imperative notion of building both choice and trust into PD opportunities. Choice, being given back to the teacher-learners to decide what, when and where learning should happen and trust, in each teacher-learner having the desire to improve their teaching practice and the means for that matter to select the best fit, for themselves.

  ---

  This blog post is part of CEA’s focus on the state of Teacher PD in Canada, which is also connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Teachers as Learners theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, What is Effective Teacher Professional Development? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.

• Developing Teacher Candidates in a Networked World

  March 25, 2015 5:47 PM Comments Off on Developing Teacher Candidates in a Networked World

  Recently, pre-service teachers in two of our classes at the Faculty of Education, University Regina, participated in #saskedchat, a weekly Twitter chat hosted by and for Saskatchewan educators. Although the chat typically runs on Thursday nights, organizers scheduled a “special edition” of the chat on the topic of supporting new teachers. Almost instantly, our students were immersed in a global discussion about education – and what’s more, they were instantly connected to a large network of practicing teachers who were able to provide them with advice and tips for success. But while the Twitter chat was an enriching experience for our students, participation in events like these is only a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to preparing new teachers to learn and flourish in a digital world.

  As the field of education changes rapidly, it’s no longer enough for faculties of education to deliver static, technical courses on the methods of teaching. Instead, we need to help pre-service teachers develop the skills and understandings that will allow them to navigate and succeed in today’s global classrooms. And perhaps even more importantly, we need to help future teachers build the personal learning networks that will provide both the support system and continuous professional development opportunities needed to become and remain successful educators.

  As instructors tasked to take on these challenges, we have focused on a number of key areas that support students’ successful entry into these new digital spaces. We’ve shared and described a few of these considerations below.

  1. BUILD AN UNDERSTANDING OF OUR DIGITAL WORLD

  Today’s young people are growing up in a media-rich and connected culture that is fundamentally different than it was even a decade ago. Thanks to the growing trend of posting ultrasound pictures and pregnancy selfies, a staggering 30% of children have a digital footprint before they are even born, and the average digital birth of children is at six months of age. Technology has altered every stage of life: it shapes the way we meet, how we communicate, our intimate relationships, the way we mourn, even our deaths.

  If technology has shaped and altered every aspect of society, then learning is no different. Unfortunately, much of what we do in schools hasn’t changed to respond to these shifts in culture – many educators continue to teach the way they were taught and try to keep the digital world out of the classroom. But for today’s students, online and offline life is inseparable. Teachers need to understand the reality of students’ digital lives in order to make education relevant and engaging for today’s young people by bringing the digital into the classroom. 

  2. MODEL APPROPRIATE INTERACTIONS IN DIGITAL SPACES

  If we want teachers to open their classrooms to the world, we need to model effective and appropriate uses of connected spaces: both new and experienced teachers should have opportunities to see how lead learners interact in networks for professional learning. For instructors working with pre-service teachers, this means demonstrating appropriate interactions in spaces such as Twitter (as in our introductory #saskedchat example) or modeling the curation of a professional digital identity through an About.Me page or an academic blog. In the field, principals can model appropriate digital presence through the creation and maintenance of a professional social media presence, like Chris Lehmann’s Twitter account or Tony Sinanis’ weekly video updates.

  Even those in the upper levels of educational leadership should be modeling what it looks like to learn and lead online; for example, Chris Kennedy, Superintendent of West Vancouver School District, uses blogging to model transparency, open leadership, and lifelong learning.

  Of course, in order to demonstrate high levels of connected learning, instructors (and other lead learners) must be able to leverage their own existing online networks. For example, in order to support our students and practicing teachers, we were able to tap into Alec’s considerable personal learning network to create a collaborative document of writing prompts for pre- and in-service educators. This means that lead learners must actively work to build their own networks so that they can be effective role models and collaborators. 

  3. DEMONSTRATE THE PEDAGOGICAL VALUE OF NETWORKS AND TOOLS

  Just as instructors and other lead learners must demonstrate appropriate online interactions, they must also help new and experienced teachers understand the pedagogical value of networks and tools. In our classes, pre-service teachers research, create resource sites for, and present on various apps and programs, being sure to tie them into the curriculum (for instance, this site that discusses several apps to support language arts and this one that explores the use of iPads for inclusive education). These future teachers also have the chance to experience what it’s like to learn in a connected environment through our own use of various social media platforms and other tools in our post-secondary courses. For instance, we model the use of open learning and connected teaching through course blog hubs and class Twitter hashtags, through the use of Google Plus communities and course sites for communication, and through the incorporation of Google Docs for professional collaboration.

  Pre-service teachers must also be provided with rich exemplars from the field, showing practicing teachers’ innovative uses of technology to create connected classrooms that support 21st century learning. For instance, we introduce our students to the Global Read Aloud, Quadblogging, and Mystery Skype. We also discuss the pedagogical possibilities of Twitter and point to hashtags like #comments4kids (where teachers can post student blogs and ask for feedback from their online networks) or teacher-created resources that support the use of technology in the classroom (like this tweet about how to comment on blogs, shared by one of our graduate students).

  4. DEVELOP PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ DIGITAL LITERACIES AND NETWORKED LITERACIES AND GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR ONLINE IDENTITIES

  Along with these examples of great digital pedagogy and online interaction, we need to prepare pre-service teachers to be great connected leaders themselves by helping them learn and create using different elements of digital literacies and pedagogies. In our classes, students explore what it means to take part in “anytime, anywhere” digital-age education by undertaking a Learning Project where they choose a skill to learn entirely online. They also create summaries of learning that highlight the skills and networked literacies they have learned throughout the semester. Additionally, since we want these new teachers to model appropriate online presence in their future classrooms, we ask our students to build professional e-portfolios in order to take control of their digital identities (some students even choose to buy their own domains) as they work to become digital residents rather than simply digital visitors.

  5. UNPACK ISSUES OF POWER AND PRIVILEGE IN ONLINE SPACES

  As we encourage pre-service and practicing teachers to bring the digital world into their classrooms, we must be sure to address oppression and inequity as they play out in online spaces. On a technical level, we need to help educators understand the legal aspects of terms of service agreements and the implications of big data when asking students to enter online worlds in their school work. Additionally, pre-service teachers are often hesitant to speak out about “touchy” subjects online, fearing that it might affect their future careers, but this type of silence on the part of educators creates a dangerous hidden curriculum that announces that these topics are unimportant. We need to have frank and open discussions about how gender or racial inequity can be both reinscribed and deconstructed online (for example, interrogating the GamerGate hashtag, discussing the events in Ferguson and the subsequent Black Twitter movements like #BlackLivesMatter, or examining the rise of #IdleNoMore). We also need to provide opportunities for students to reflect on these topics in digital spaces both through course assignments and by providing support for student initiatives (such as the StarsRegina site set up by pre-service teachers to create a hub for information about anti-oppressive education). And as lead learners, we need to model the importance of having these discussions out in the open. 

  Clearly, there’s a lot of work to be done if we want to prepare both new and existing educators to teach in ways that take up the incredible affordances of our global community and digital spaces. But there are also so many inspiring examples of teachers, principals, and other lead learners doing great things online – we’ve only scratched the surface of what’s already being done around the world. What amazing things have you seen in your own learning community, and how are you helping the next generation of educators to be connected future leaders in our field?   

  ---

  This blog post is part of CEA’s focus on the state of Teacher PD in Canada, which is also connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Teachers as Learners theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, What is Effective Teacher Professional Development? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.

• 21st Century Learning: What’s Good for Students is Good for Teachers

  March 23, 2015 2:37 PM Comments Off on 21st Century Learning: What’s Good for Students is Good for Teachers

  Today’s teachers and teacher candidates are caught in an educational quagmire. They are being asked to implement instructional strategies that support 21^st century learning, but they’ve had few opportunities to partake in these types of learning experiences themselves. 

  The typical classroom in 2015 is more academically and culturally diverse than classes before the turn of the millennium. Unlike their own experience, where students with special needs were often isolated in ‘special’ classes, teachers today are being asked to differentiate learning and personalize the educational experiences of students with a wide array of individual learning needs and abilities. Unfortunately, the academic, linguistic, economic and cultural diversity found in most K-12 classrooms is rarely replicated in the staff room or teacher education programs, leaving teachers with limited personal experience of being part of a diverse community of learners. Compounding this challenge is the cookie-cutter nature of most teacher education programs, additional qualification courses and professional development (PD) sessions, leaving teachers with limited first-hand exposure to having their own learning experience differentiated or personalized.

  Just as the student population has become increasingly diverse and complex, so has the curriculum resources and assessment tools used in the 21st century classroom. Most educators would have been lucky to have had weekly access to a computer lab when they were students, whereas current teachers have to be prepared to teach in 1:1 classrooms with ubiquitous Wi-Fi, where each student may be carrying more computing power in their pocket than most pre-millennial school computers.

  In contrast to the simple set of textbooks that were the primary source of information in the classroom of the 1990’s, the 21st century classroom is inundated with web resources that teachers have to be able to quickly discern the educational value and academic appropriateness of each resource.

  Unlike the occasional quiz or end of term summative test that pre-millennium students studied for, teachers today are being asked to assess for and of learning while providing formative feedback that responds to daily learning goals and success criteria.  

  Essential to preparing teachers to overcome these increasingly complex challenges is ensuring that their initial training and ongoing PD replicates the context of the current classroom. Thus, if authentic, inquiry-based, tech-enabled, 21^st century learning is good for K-12 students, it should be good for teacher and teacher candidates as well. 

  In an attempt to avoid the narrow scope of learning and regurgitation of facts that was often the result of rote lessons and teacher-centred teaching, authentic and inquiry-based learning has been proposed to engage learners and foster critical thinking. Research has found that in addition to increasing student learning, an inquiry-based approach can motivate students to learn and advance their problem solving and critical thinking skills[1].Thus, in contrast to the passive nature of many teacher training sessions,

  [Professional development should] create learning contexts that allow [teachers] to make decisions about their learning processes and about how they will demonstrate their learning. [Professional development] should encourage collaborative learning and create intellectual spaces for [teachers] to engage in rich talk about their thinking and learning. They create a [professional] ethos that fosters respect for others’ ideas and opinions and encourages risk-taking.

  [Preservice programs should provide] opportunities to seek answers to questions that are interesting, important and relevant to [teacher candidates that enable] them to address curriculum content in integrated and “real world” ways and to develop – and practise – the higher-order thinking skills and habits of mind that lead to deep learning. [2]

   

  (See appendix for original paragraphs)

  With a few minor changes, the above paragraphs are excerpts from the Ontario Ministry of Education guide to ”Getting Started with Student Inquiry” document. The ease with which these paragraphs can be revised with references to students replaced with teachers, teacher candidates, PD and preservice programs highlights the need to have teacher learning replicate what takes place in the contemporary classroom. It is also important to note that these modified descriptions are closely aligned with the research regarding effective PD that suggests that learning opportunities that are ongoing, practical, collaborative, and participant driven[3] can be considered to effectively support teacher PD and are associated with instructional improvements and improved student achievement.[4]

  The need to prepare students for a rapidly changing and digital world has resulted in calls to support the development of the 21st century skills of creativity, communication, creativity and critical thinking. If teachers are to be effective in supporting the development of the 21st century skills of their students, they must be well versed in these skills themselves. For this to occur, education systems must offer more effective professional learning than has traditionally been available.[5]  Consequently, holistic opportunities to use technology to support 21^st century skills should be infused throughout preservice and in-service training programs so that educators have authentic opportunities to develop these skills themselves[6].

  Just as traditional forms of testing and evaluation have been shown to be inadequate in capturing the dynamic nature of 21st century skills and ineffective in supporting student learning, traditional forms of teacher evaluation may be equally poorly suited to document successful teaching or foster professional growth. While an emphasis on assessment for and of learning has been found to increase student learning while also enhancing engagement and motivation, many teachers are failing to utilize the full cadre of formative assessment practices available to them[7]. This divide may be the result of the lack of experience teachers have in personally benefiting from formative assessment and being the recipient of this type of feedback. Consequently, just as formative assessment has been found to have a positive impact on student learning,[8] opportunities for teachers to receive ongoing and timely feedback, in addition to engaging in self and peer evaluation, may improve their ability to use these types of strategies to assess their students while also directly supporting professional growth.

  Proponents of formative assessment, authentic, inquiry-based, and tech-enabled learning advocate for these types of instructional strategies not just because they are innovative, but because they have the potential to enhance learning – student and teacher learning. Thus, as life-long learners, it should be evident that teachers can also benefit from participating in learning strategies that mirror those of the 21^st century classroom. Reinforcing the notion that if it is good for students, it can be good for teachers.

  Appendix
  Teachers create learning contexts that allow students to make decisions about their learning processes and about how they will demonstrate their learning. They encourage collaborative learning and create intellectual spaces for students to engage in rich talk about their thinking and learning. They create a classroom ethos that fosters respect for others’ ideas and opinions and encourages risk-taking (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2011).

  As teachers give students opportunities to seek answers to questions that are interesting, important and relevant to them, they are enabling them to address curriculum content in integrated and “real world” ways and to develop – and practise – the higher-order thinking skills and habits of mind that lead to deep learning (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2011).

  ---

  [1] Nesbit, J., & Liu, Q. (2014). The Facts on Education: Is Inquiry-Based Learning Effective?
  http://www.cea-ace.ca/blog/john-nesbit-and-liu-qing/2014/12/3/facts-education-inquiry-based-learning-effective
  [2] Ontario Ministry of Education. (2011). Getting Started with Student Inquiry.
  http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/cbs_studentinquiry.pdf
  [3] Borko, 2004; Hirsh, 2004; Nord, 2004; Smylie et al., 2001; Warren-Little, 2006; Wei et al., 2009 as cited in Rutherford, C. (2010). Facebook as a source of informal teacher professional development. in education, 16(1). 
  http://ineducation.ca/ineducation/article/view/76/512
  [4] Smylie et al., 2001; Wayne et al., 2008 as cited in Rutherford, C. (2010). Facebook as a source of informal teacher professional development in education, 16(1). http://ineducation.ca/ineducation/article/view/76/512
  [5] Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Teacher Learning What Matters. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46–53.
  http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb09/vol66/num05/Teacher-Learning@-What-Matters%C2%A2.aspx
  [6] Rutherford, C. (2013). Bringing Preservice Education into the 21st Century. Proceeding  of the 2013 Conference of the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA
  [7] Beckett, D., Volante, L., & Drake, S. (2010). Formative Assessment: Bridging the Research–Practice Divide. Education Canada, 50(3), no 3.
  http://www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/formative-assessment-bridging-research-practice-divide
  [8] William, 2007 as cited in Beckett, D., Volante, L., & Drake, S. (2010). Formative Assessment: Bridging the Research–Practice Divide. Education Canada, 50(3), no 3.
  http://www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/formative-assessment-bridging-research-practice-divide

  ---

  This blog post is part of CEA’s focus on the state of Teacher PD in Canada, which is also connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Teachers as Learners theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, What is Effective Teacher Professional Development? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.

• Five Ways for Teachers To Take Charge of Their Own Learning

  March 16, 2015 3:29 PM Comments Off on Five Ways for Teachers To Take Charge of Their Own Learning

  In Manitoba there are traditionally five provincially mandated PD days per year. This year the topics for the first four of my school’s PD days were ‘Cultural Proficiency’ (a division sponsored event), an ‘EdCamp’ (facilitated by division coordinators), a day where teachers work with other teachers from around the province in their teaching area, and a school-based session on ‘Deeper Learning and Critical Thinking’ with support from a division coordinator. Our final day will be on the topic of ‘Positive Behaviour Interventions and Supports’. We will join one of our feeder elementary schools, and the day will be facilitated by divisional educational support services staff.

  Although these sessions have all been of great value, and have resulted in many thoughtful conversations, the days are somewhat disjointed. The topics for each day are chosen by divisional administration or school-based administrators, without the input of the teachers that will ‘benefit’ from the PD sessions. To make these PD days more valuable, teachers need to keep the conversations going on these important topics for deep learning to occur, or this ‘one size fits all’ model needs to be abandoned for a more teacher directed PD model. If teachers are in charge of the topic of their personal PD, they will be more likely to own this time and use the division sponsored PD days as a catalyst to deeper learning and connections to other professionals within their own building and beyond. Teachers need going beyond the four or five division sponsored PD days to ensure personal and professional growth.

  HERE ARE FIVE WAYS THAT I FEEL THAT TEACHERS CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN: 

  1. LEVERAGE TECHNOLOGY TO PERSONALIZE YOUR PD

  PD for teachers need to be relevant, flexible and personalized for sustainable growth to occur for both new and experienced teachers. Technology can and should be a major driver of relevant and real time PD. There should be an expectation that teachers are in control of, and responsible for, enhancing their practice during and after the school day. Administrators can set up schedules to encourage sharing and collaboration. No longer can teachers be isolated in their own classroom and keep up with the demands of teaching in today’s world. PD needs to be ongoing, job-embedded, and connected in a significant way and happen more frequently than the four or five division or school sponsored PD Days.

  Teachers, as professionals and learners, need to be in charge of, and responsible for, their own learning. Opportunities can be provided by division and school-based administrators for teachers to work together, learn together, and solve problems together. Technology is key to help connect teachers locally and globally. Using social platforms like Twitter can provide teachers the opportunity and flexibility to collaborate in real time with educators from around the world in real time.

  2. CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR HANDS-ON PD WITH YOUR PEERS

  To foster a culture of learning in a school, strong relationships need to be built, which includes teacher-to-teacher relationships. New pedagogies for deep learning is a focus for many schools across Canada. Deep learning happens when teachers focus on skills like character education, citizenship, communication, critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration, and finally creativity and imagination. The same goes for teachers too. If teachers aren’t proficient in these areas, it’s hard to expect them to teach or assess students who are expected to learn these important skills as well. According to Evangeline Harris Stefanakis, “The word assess comes from the Latin assidere, which means to sit beside. Literally then, to assess means to sit beside the learner.” Teachers need to able to ‘sit beside’ the learner and model these expected skills. Connected teachers, in effective Personal Learning Communities (PLCs), are more likely to grow their practice and attain a higher level of practice. 

  Using technology and social media are not silver bullets for teacher PD – it can and should happen within the school day as well. Scheduled times for teachers to meet, co-teach, visit other classrooms and schools are important aspects of professional growth. Encouraging teachers to share and collaborate will enhance teaching and learning in the classroom especially if it is done within a family of schools. This hands-on approach while working directly with colleagues encourages further development of the skills that are being taught to students in the classroom.

  3. CULTIVATE YOUR PERSONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY (PLC)

  For teachers entering the profession, building a strong PLC and collaborating is the best advice I can give. Getting connected through the use of social media is an easy and effective way to consistently learn and grow, stay relevant and have fun. An example is by taking part in ‘edchats’ on Twitter is a great way to build a PLC. There are so many smart people out there, constantly doing innovative things. What I’ve come to understand is that someone else is probably already doing it and seeing their ideas and adapting them to fit my situation is far more practical than inventing new ways to support and engage students.

  Taking care of and engaging kids in deep learning is our job and finding ways to become a champion for their students is vital. This is a great video for all beginning teachers (and ones who have experience) as well. I suggest that this video be watched on an ‘as needed basis. It’s a great reminder of what good teachers do every day.

   

  Building strong relationships with all of students is rewarding work and can be, at times, extremely difficult. New teachers need a support system to develop skills to be able to do this well. Supporting teachers new to the profession and encouraging them to build their own PLC will help them meet the demands of their important job.

  4. BE ‘SOCIALLY’ CONNECTED WITH YOUR PEERS

  Social platforms like Twitter don’t provide the PD. Social platforms provide the opportunity to build strong relationships with people, which, in turn, provide the opportunity for real professional growth to occur. Twitter is the gateway to find articles, blogs, have discussions build relationships with other professionals with like (or unlike) views on similar topics.

  Learning is social. It begins when a strong relationship is formed. The quote ‘You can’t take care of the Bloom’s stuff until you take care of the Maslow’s stuff’ also applies to teachers. Learning occurs when people feel safe. A teacher who is connected feels safe and therefore will likely be more open to and adept at taking chances allowing them to navigate the confusing and often times uncomfortable seas associated with professional growth.

  5. BE A MODEL LEARNER IN YOUR SCHOOL

  PD for teachers should look similar to what good teaching looks like for students. It needs to be personalized, hands-on, relevant, and provide opportunities to build strong relationships with colleagues. Technology and social media can play a huge role in having all teachers build strong relationships with people within their own school and all over the world. Having a school filled with a group of connected teachers who are modelling learning, and continually sharing, helps to build a school’s culture of learning for everyone. 

  ---

  This blog post is part of CEA’s focus on the state of Teacher PD in Canada, which is also connected to Education Canada Magazine’s Teachers as Learners theme issue and The Facts on Education fact sheet, What is Effective Teacher Professional Development? Please contact info@cea-ace.ca if you would like to contribute a blog post to this series.

• “Daddy, I Want You To Come To Shark School”

  March 2, 2015 3:35 PM Comments Off on “Daddy, I Want You To Come To Shark School”

  My cell phone rang yesterday morning at about 8:00, just as I was making Sunday breakfast for the kids. My display indicated that the call was coming from an upstairs extension in my own home. Curious, I answered and was surprised to hear the voice of my five year-old on the other end of the conversation.

  “Daddy, it’s your son. I want you to come to Shark School today at 12:35. Here’s what you need to bring: your backpack, something to write with and a snack!”

  (more…)

• Sir, Can We Have Free Time?

  February 2, 2015 12:07 PM Comments Off on Sir, Can We Have Free Time?

  I just poked my head outside the front door. It’s a little too early to tell but, judging by the size of the snow drifts on our street, I’m pretty sure that this will be one of those days when, at the very least, the “buses are cancelled but the schools are open”. One step below an official Snow Day, it will be one of those surreal days where the level of attendance is down but, in my experience, the level of excitement is up!
  (more…)

IDEAS TO SUPPORT EDUCATORS : Subscribe to the EdCan e-Newsletter

Quality research, reports, and professional learning opportunities.

Subscribe with your information: Veuillez indiquer les informations suivantes :

Language Preference Langue de correspondance EnglishFrançais EnglishFrançais

Organization: Organisation : Public educational institution Établissement d'enseignement publique Private educational institution Établissement d'enseignement privé University Université College Cégep Ministries Ministères Federation or professional association Fédération ou association professionnel Union Syndicat Non-profit organization Organisation sans but lucratif Educational organization Organisation en éducation Other Autre I am interested inJe suis intéressé-e aux Research-Informed Tools and ResourcesOutils et ressources fondés sur la recherche Workplace Wellbeing StrategiesStratégies sur le bien-être au travail

CloseFermer

Leave this field empty if you're human: