Archive
-
Exploring Big Questions – A Principal’s P.O.V. on Inquiry-based Learning
Comments Off on Exploring Big Questions – A Principal’s P.O.V. on Inquiry-based LearningIn 2013, Saint Anne School was recognized with a Ken Spencer Award for its inquiry-based learning community.
https://vimeo.com/79931223
-
Exploring Big Questions
Comments Off on Exploring Big QuestionsSaskatoon parent Megan Babyak remembers when her children brought home report cards stating “no conference required.” The children had no obvious academic or behavioural problems, so there was no need to talk to the teacher.
Even so, her oldest son, Marek, described by Babyak as “the kind of kid who wants to know how everything works,” had lost interest in school. His parents found this alarming, so last year they transferred Marek – now in Grade 6 – and his siblings Burke (Grade 4) and Audra (Grade 2) to St. Anne School.
The Babyaks had “heard good things” about St. Anne, a K-8 school within the Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools (GSCS). In 2011, the school had moved to inquiry-based learning, a change that recharged the learning environment and involved parents more deeply and expansively than before. Though they knew little about the inquiry method, the Babyaks marveled at how all three children began to thrive.
Students “really have ownership of St. Anne,” says Babyak. “The whole learning philosophy is based on sharing ideas and working together and just supporting each other.” For example, her youngest child knows older students in other grades and can describe their projects. Babyak now regularly attends school events, including teacher conferences, and volunteers to read with students.
The school day embraces both open-ended inquiry and structured learning on core subjects. Teachers promote a climate of collaboration that encourages learning by students across grade levels. The new focus came after almost a decade of declining enrolment at a school with about ten percent First Nations and Métis students and 25 percent from outside Canada.
When Darren Fradette arrived as principal four years ago, enrolment was projected to slip further to 140 students. But this year the school population rose to 210 students. That’s due in part to significant population growth in Saskatoon. But the enrolment uptick is also driven by families like the Babyaks who, taking advantage of Saskatoon’s open-enrolment policy, have been attracted to St. Anne’s particular learning environment.
The changes at St. Anne came as the GSCS was looking to strengthen its pre-Kindergarten and Kindergarten early learning programs, which include inquiry-based learning as a core element.
Serendipity played a role too.
The office for the Catholic board’s early learning coordinator, Bonnie Mihalicz, was located in a vacant classroom at St. Anne. Informal conversations between her and Fradette led to a formal proposal for inquiry-based learning in Kindergarten up to Grade 2. When school staff joined the planning process, they lobbied to include all grades. In support, the board allowed release time to facilitate staff planning. Consistent with the school’s recognition of parents as partners, parents were deeply involved in the deliberations through their school council.
In fall 2011, St. Anne introduced inquiry learning on a school-wide basis. The day begins with what Fradette terms “explicit teaching”: blocks of math, guided reading, physical education and religion. Afternoons are quite different: blocks of time are labeled simply “inquiry.”
“When you’re engaged in these authentic [inquiry] learning opportunities, it’s hard to say ‘put away your science and take out your language arts,’ because the science is the language arts oftentimes,” Fradette explains. A “big question” forms the core of an inquiry unit and students, in small groups, decide what they want to learn, what sources they’ll consult for answers and how they want to present their own learning.
In Lorie Newberry’s Grade 1-2 class this past year, the question was: “Where do we hear rhythm in our world?” Students explored environmental music, The Blue Man Group and stomp, poetry, drumming and beatboxing, and presented a rhythmic performance at a school assembly for their finished product. Students in St. Anne’s upper grades probed big questions such as, “What are my rights and responsibilities as a concerned citizen in regards to living conditions of First Nations people?” and “How do natural occurrences and human behaviour affect self, society, and the environment?”
Beyond content, inquiry-based learning as practised at St. Anne accommodates individual differences, including students with learning disabilities. “All students have a talent in some area,” observes teacher Carol Engel. When her Grade 3-4 students decided to write stories about medieval times, “They did reading together, they did research together, they buddied up and worked together,” she says. “So you can meet a lot of needs that way.”
By design, the new program encourages a respectful, open relationship among students, staff and parents. Students present their learning to their teachers and grade-level peers, to other grades and to parents. The collaborative atmosphere has resulted in a sharp reduction in behavioural issues referred to the office, says Fradette. “We also see kids teaching kids.”
What do the students think?
“It’s way easier because instead of raising your hand every time you have a question, you can ask a group member,” says Grade 4 student Sam Fritz. He entered St. Anne in Grade 3 after attending a school where he was “bored and not having a lot of fun,” says his mother, Heather Fritz. In Sam’s mind, she says, “Teachers were there for discipline and for handing out work.” At St. Anne he has regular conversations with his teachers. “I think it’s given him confidence in dealing with adults across the board,” says Fritz.
When Cristin Sawchuk’s daughter, Ella, was in Kindergarten, she proudly told her mother that her teacher had called her a scientist. “From the very beginning, these little Kindergartners were being treated like real learners,” says Sawchuk.
For their part, teachers regularly share with each other what is going on in their classrooms. “You share ideas, you build on ideas, and it develops into something greater than you could do on your own,” says Newberry. “It kind of opens up that classroom door and looks at a community of educators, versus just a teacher in a classroom trying to get the work done.”
Engel, a teacher for 23 years, believes the school’s new approach to teaching and learning will pay dividends for students. They “are going to be really great at working with others and being collaborative partners,” she says. “I think they’ll be really good at questioning things, thinking deeply and knowing how to share their learning.”
The school’s enthusiastic embrace of inquiry-based learning has impressed Joanne Weninger, a superintendent of education with responsibility for St. Anne and 12 other schools, plus child care and early learning. “Every time I go there, I’m amazed at what they’re doing… It’s at a point, and I’m really happy to say it, where I could move Darren and the school would sustain the program.” This is critical, she notes, because parents have a right to expect that the learning environment will be sustained year after year, regardless of staff changes.
Adding to the sense of momentum at St. Anne, the Saskatchewan Ministry of Education last spring licensed a nonprofit organization committed to early learning and inquiry to operate a 30-space daycare in the school.
“I’m starting to see that this isn’t just a Kindergarten-to-Grade 8 school,” says. Fradette. ”This is an 18-month-to-Grade 8 inquiry-based learning environment.”
Photo: Courtesy of St. Anne School
First published in Education Canada, November 2013
EN BREF – Instauré depuis un peu plus de deux ans à l’école St. Anne (maternelle à 8e année, Greater Saskatoon Catholic Schools), l’apprentissage par investigation a transformé cette école dont les effectifs d’élèves diminuent constamment. Le matin, les élèves étudient encore certaines matières en tant qu’unités distinctes; l’après-midi, ils forment de petits groupes et font des recherches sur une « grande question », puis présentent leurs apprentissages à d’autres élèves. L’apprentissage par investigation a engendré une relation de collaboration entre les élèves, ainsi qu’entre les élèves et leurs enseignants. Les parents déclarent que cette façon de faire a ravivé le goût d’apprendre chez leurs enfants.
-
Deirdre Bailey’s Story of Change in Education – CEA Calgary 2013
Comments Off on Deirdre Bailey’s Story of Change in Education – CEA Calgary 2013Deirdre Bailey’s story of change in education from CEA’s groundbreaking Calgary Conference, October 21-22, 2013.
-
Neuromyths are a Barrier to Changing Education
Comments Off on Neuromyths are a Barrier to Changing EducationWhat’s standing in the way of change in education? I believe that one of many other barriers is related to the fact that teachers often have misconceptions about how their students’ brains work. I think that these misconceptions (often called neuromyths) represent a barrier to changing and improving education, because when a change is opposed to a misconception, there is always a natural and expected tendency to resist that change. I also believe that one way to overcome this barrier is to include, in teacher training, a course about neuroeducation, which is an emerging field that tries to improve teaching by knowing more about the brain.
One of the Barriers to Changing Education: Neuromyths
First, let’s talk about misconceptions. You certainly have some ideas or intuitions about how the brain works. Maybe you believe that students learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style (such as auditory, visual, or kinaesthetic); or that students are either “right-brained” or “left-brained”; or perhaps you think that we only use 10% of our brain; or that there are critical periods in childhood after which certain things can no longer be learned.
As you may have guessed, all these claims are, in fact, neuromyths. If you believe in some of these ideas, don’t worry because you are not the only one. A study published last year showed that a majority of teachers believes in these neuromyths and others. For example, more than ninety percent of teachers in the UK and Netherlands believe in the learning style theory, although there is empirical proof that teaching according to learning style of students doesn’t lead to better learning (see, for example, Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119.).One Possible Solution: Offering Neuroeducation Courses
To combat these neuromyths and overcome one of the barriers to changing education, I believe that we should include, in the training of our teachers, a neuroeducation course. Not only would this course help dispel the most common neuromyths but it would also enable teachers to understand a little more about what is going on in the brain of their students.
Some years ago, there was limited significance to focusing on the brain in education. However, in the past several years, knowledge about the brain has greatly advanced thanks to brain imaging. Up to 90 % of our current knowledge about the brain comes from the past 15 or 20 years of research. Three significant discoveries reinforce the relevance of focusing on the brain in education.
The first discovery: learning changes the brain. More specifically, learning changes the connections between neurons in the brain. When a student learns to read or count, his or her brain changes. With the help of brain imaging, it is now possible to observe the effects of academic learning on the brain.The second discovery: the brain’s structure influences learning. In fact, the configuration of the brain prior to learning influences how new learning becomes established in the brain. Thus, gaining a better understanding of the brains of your students means gaining a better understanding of the cerebral constraints inherent to learning and better understanding the difficulties that your students may encounter.
The third discovery, possibly the most significant and certainly the most recent: how someone is taught has an impact on the changes that result from learning. Two different types of teaching do not necessarily bring about the same changes in a student’s brain. Research has demonstrated that teaching reading according to a syllabic or a global approch has a significant impact on how the brain functions. Not only does the brain of a student a change when he or she learns, but teachers can play a key role in the development of their students’ brains.
To summarize, I have tried to highlight the fact that neuromyths can be a barrier to changing and improving education. I also suggested that, to combat these neuromyths, a neuroeducation course should be incorporated into the initial training and professional development of teachers and others working in education. But the interest in including a neuroeducation class as part of teacher training extends beyond overcoming neuromyths. There is now knowledge about the brain that can have concrete pedagogical implications. This knowledge is still widely unknown by teachers, a fact that should be addressed in the coming years since, today, and even more so in the future, a better understanding of the brain will likely help us improve how we learn and how we teach.
Dr. Steve Masson is the co-winner of the 2013 CEA Pat Clifford Award for Early Career Research. For more information about his research, please visit: www.cea-ace.ca/cliffordaward
Photos courtesy of Steve Masson
-
CEA Calgary 2013 – Ron Canuel’s Closing Remarks
Comments Off on CEA Calgary 2013 – Ron Canuel’s Closing RemarksThe closing remarks from CEA’s groundbreaking Calgary Conference, October 21-22, 2013.
-
My Story of Change in Education
Comments Off on My Story of Change in EducationThis content has been re-posted from Deirdre Bailey’s Blog at: http://savouringtheish.blogspot.ca/2013/10/my-story-of-change-in-education-student.html. Photos courtesy of Deirdre Bailey.
-
Greystone Teachers Get Fired Up After CEA Calgary Conference
Comments Off on Greystone Teachers Get Fired Up After CEA Calgary ConferenceThis content has been re-posted from Carolyn Cameron’s Blog at: http://www.psdblogs.ca/greystone/2013/10/26/whats-standing-in-the-way-of-change-in-education/
I love this question! I love it when a great question like this gets me thinking. I am assuming that many other educators from around the country likely feel the same way and perhaps, that’s what drew so many of us to the Canadian Education Association’s“What’s Standing in the Way of Change in Education?” Conference in Calgary last week.
What inspired me from the day and a half that I spent with a number of stakeholders from the Education community (educational researchers, professors, superintendents, school board trustees, administrators, teachers and most importantly – students) was the opportunity that the teachers from Greystone had to share practical examples of what change in Education looks like based on their experiences in our school. These teachers were empowered to share their stories of looping, team teaching, collaborative inquiry, assessment as learning and innovation. Their stories are a reminder of what’s possible in Education when we remove barriers and have the courage to “do school” differently in order to get it right for today’s learners.
Another highlight from this conference, for me, was hearing a teacher from the Calgary Science School, Deidre Bailey, share her story of change with all of us. Recognizing that it is the teacher, in the classroom, who has the power to make a difference in student learning, was a message I shared with my entire staff during our Professional Development Day – which took place a few days after our Greystone team of nine returned from the conference in Calgary. I read Deidre’s story to the Greystone staff – here is part of her message:
This change in our classroom environment was a product of co-designing learning tasks in which student voice had space and validity. Kids are so innately curious and creative. All that is left to us, is to foster an awareness of the possibilities that surround them, to let them ask questions, make decisions and make things different.
Following up from Deidre’s story, I asked staff to reflect privately on their own practice and in particular, what was the evidence they had that they were getting it right for our learners and what could they do to grow? I encouraged staff to share their reflections with each other. They blew me away with their willingness to engage in thoughtful, honest conversation. The staff did not want to stop talking! Several teachers openly admitted to taking a step backward this year in their instructional practice due to some challenges they are experiencing (including a “boxed up” schedule that was implemented to deal with additional homeroom classrooms that were added at each grade level).
So, I asked them this great question from the CEA Conference: “What’s standing in the way of changing this?” They were fired up! The dialogue and debate created more questions, more ideas and a commitment to find a better way to provide our students with more time for deeper learning through cross-curricular inquiry.
We haven’t got this all figured out yet, but I know one thing for sure…our Greystone teachers feel empowered, supported and capable of removing anything that’s standing in the way of doing what’s best for our students. I am looking forward to seeing where this takes us. In the meantime, thank you Canadian Education Association, for the great question which is going to continue to keep our school moving forward in the way we “do school”.
-
Academics. What’s it good for?
Comments Off on Academics. What’s it good for?Academics. Most of our current school system revolves around it, and yet, I think it falls miserably short of what our kids need. To be honest, I think our academic system of education is highly overrated, at best. At worst, it destroys a number of our kids. Now hear me out. I’m not saying that our kids shouldn’t learn to read, or do math, or even a number of other valuable skills. But too often, the focus of our kid’s school day is on content with little connection to why it matters or even with each other. Instead, many of our students spend hours filling in worksheets or copying down lecture notes that they could Google in 30 seconds. Too often what they listen to is boring and irrelevant to their lives. And from my experience, most of this content is simply memorized, spewed out for an exam and then quickly forgotten. But beyond this, there’s often only one right answer, which frequently cultivates in our students a fear of failure.
For the most part, kids who we consider “academic” tend to be good hoop jumpers. They’ve figured out the system and can jump through the hoops. But rarely are they engaged. Rarely are they transformed by their learning. They’re going through the motions. Research shows that some of the least engaged students are the high achievers. They do well because they know how to “do school”. Is this really the best we have to offer them? Or worse, what if you’re not “academic”? Most of these kids live too many years of their young lives feeling like they don’t measure up. Feeling stupid. And for some, it radically alters their trajectory of their lives. Unfortunately, too many students have to recover from school once they graduate. Is this really the best we have to offer them?
In all honesty, I have to admit that I used to believe in this system. For too many years my students sat in straight rows. I asked the questions. I had the answers. I controlled the learning. But the truth is I did this because it’s what I knew. It’s how I’d been taught. It’s what I saw replicated in university and in other teacher’s classrooms. I sincerely believed that good grades mattered. I’m an English teacher, and I subscribed wholeheartedly to the belief that the pinnacle of success in English was the ability to write “the essay”. But I’ve radically changed my position. To be honest, I’ve come to believe it’s one of the most useless things we teach our students. Recently, I’ve started to ask people I know, “Do you ever write an essay?” I’ve never had one person say yes. I wonder how many teachers, except those who are taking university classes, ever write essays. If I may be so bold, I wonder how many English teachers frequently write essays.
In all honesty, I have to admit that I used to believe in this system. For too many years my students sat in straight rows. I asked the questions. I had the answers. I controlled the learning. But the truth is I did this because it’s what I knew. It’s how I’d been taught.
I’m not saying our kids shouldn’t be able to write. On the contrary, I think our students should be able to argue gracefully, and persuade powerfully. And know what they believe and why. I simply think the essay is a medium that has outlived its usefulness, at least in high school.
I’ve come to realize that being academic doesn’t tell you much. It tells you you’re good at school, which is fine if you plan to spend your life in academia, but very few of our students do. It doesn’t indicate whether or not you’ll be successful in your marriage, raising your kids, managing your money, or giving back to your community. Things that matter much more than being good at school.
Instead, school should be a place where kids can discover what they love. They should be able to ask the questions that matter to them and pursue the answers. They should discover what they are passionate about, what truly sets their hearts and souls on fire. They should discover they can make a difference now. But above all, they should leave school knowing what they are good at. And at this point, I think most kids graduate only knowing if they’re good at school or not. Often our students have many talents; they just don’t fit in our current curriculum because they’re likely not considered “real knowledge”.
Yet, oddly, in the Biology curriculum that I’ve taught for the past several years, one of the objectives that my students need to know is earthworm reproduction. Really? Out of all the things we could be teaching a 17-year-old about biology, someone decided earthworm reproduction was essential?
I’ve come to realize that being academic doesn’t tell you much. It tells you you’re good at school, which is fine if you plan to spend your life in academia, but very few of our students do. It doesn’t indicate whether or not you’ll be successful in your marriage, raising your kids, managing your money, or giving back to your community. Things that matter much more than being good at school.
We are born curious. Babies explore their environments to learn; they do it naturally without being told. Three-year-olds constantly, at times annoyingly, ask, “why?” And yet, by the time I get my students in Grade 10, my students have all but lost their curiosity. Consequently, when I get a new class of students, we start by unlearning. We need to begin to imagine what school could be, instead of what they’ve known for ten years. Only then can we begin to do the work that will help them become lifelong learners who truly enjoy the search for answers, rather than the mark on the top of their exam.
Recently I’ve been reading Amanda Lang’s The Power of Why. In it she states:
Curious kids learn how to learn, and how to enjoy it – and that, more than any specific body of knowledge, is what they will need to have in the future. The world is changing so rapidly that by the time a student graduates from university, everything he or she learned may already be headed toward obsolescence. The main thing that students need to know is not what to think but how to think in order to face new challenges and solve new problems (p.14).
Our school system doesn’t need to create kids who are good at school. Instead, we need to create an environment that engages learners, fosters creativity, and puts responsibility for learning where it belongs – with our students. Instead of rote learning, teachers need to use content to teach skills. We need to build environments that allow our students to get messy and build things. Where students learn how to learn, and know how they learn best. Where students engage in significant research, and learn how to identify credible resources amidst a plethora of information that, at times, may seem overwhelming. Furthermore, our students need to be able to problem-solve, innovate and fail over and over again. Throughout all of this, our kids should be collaborating with each other, as well as virtually with students across the globe. They need to be able to communicate powerfully using the mediums of print, photography and video.
As I’ve worked with my students, we’ve come to realize they need to be able to answer three questions, regardless of what we’re researching: What are you going to learn? How are you going to learn it? How are you going to show me you’re learning? How they get there is often their decision. And what they come up with never fails to surprise me.
Our school system doesn’t need to create kids who are good at school. Instead, we need to create an environment that engages learners, fosters creativity, and puts responsibility for learning where it belongs – with our students.
My classroom hasn’t always looked like this. But over the past three years we’ve shifted to a constructivist pedagogy that has transformed not only my thinking, but my students as well. Now we learn in an inquiry, PBL, tech-embedded classroom. The journey at times has been painful and messy, but well worth the work. The biggest lesson I’ve learned is that my students will often exceed my expectations, if only they’re given the chance.
This blog post is part of a series of thoughtful responses to the question: What’s standing in the way of change in education? to help inform CEA’s Calgary Conference on Oct 21-22, (#CEACalgary2013) where education leaders from across Canada will be answering the same question. If you would like to answer this question, please tweet us at: @cea_ace
-
Escape from the Classroom
Comments Off on Escape from the ClassroomThe classroom we know is a small room, crammed with desks and a blackboard, in front of which the teachers pose and explain concepts for us all day. As the 21st century is upon us, however, classes like Gifted Grade 6/7 split of Dalewood Middle School have taken a much more modern approach to learning. Their classrooms have no boundaries. G67 is not confined between the margins of their school building, never withdrawn from that sunny day for their studies. They are free, and their escape is not only the school playground – it is the heart of our city itself.
Into the city
Local university students look up from their cellphones, surprised by the racket we make as we clamber onto our local city bus. It’s almost as if we are shouting, “We are G67! We have escaped our classroom, and we are off to see the world!”
In our learning situation, the average teacher would generally instruct her students to fetch a textbook, read an article and write a response.
However, we have no ordinary teacher; we have Mrs. Pipe. You got it, Zoe Branigan-Pipe, one of the world’s leading educators and, in most of our cases, the only teacher we’ve had who was willing to listen to us and give us what we needed to improve our learning. Believe me, she has.
This is why today, instead of responding to a textbook story, we are responding to community stories and learning social studies at the same time by asking stall owners about fair trade and locally grown foods. We are going to the Hamilton Farmer’s Market and asking stall owners about real events that actually happened to them. We are telling the farmers in our city, Yes! We care about you! We want to learn about your lives and your businesses! We care about our community and we are here to show it!
Best of all, our big projects are more than just oral presentations. They get us involved in community discussions and making a difference in our city. We are currently working on creating a plan, design, and proposal for the Barton-Tiffany area in Hamilton, and in the process responding to many opinions on multiple proposals for this area. This leads us to the Hamilton Public Library, where the archives were made available for our research on these projects.
Influencing 21st century learning is, in turn, influencing the world. The way we teach our students is the way we teach society. Our teaching methods shape the minds of the future, and give learners an opportunity to make a difference now. Our class trip into the community is just one of the many tiny movements taking place around the world and, bit by bit, promoting, advancing and influencing 21st century learning for us. This could eventually lead to kids visiting specialists to learn concepts, and finding examples of where these concepts could be applied in class outings. At some point, classes around the world could collaborate, and students could work on projects that influence society. Let’s face the facts: school is no longer defined as a classroom, where the only tools for our students are a desk, a pen, and paper. School can be everywhere, and students can use anything to learn.
Learning can take you anywhere. You just have to open your eyes to see the way. But do we really have the strength to stand up and take advantage of what’s possible for our learners?
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
-
Culture Re-Booot: Reinvigorating school culture to improve student outcomes by Leslie Kaplan and William Owings
Comments Off on Culture Re-Booot: Reinvigorating school culture to improve student outcomes by Leslie Kaplan and William OwingsA reveiw of Culture Re-Booot: Reinvigorating school culture to improve student outcomes by Leslie Kaplan and William Owings, Corwin, 2013. ISSN: 9781452217321
What can principals and teachers do to generate collective action and transform school culture in efforts to improve student achievement? How can the collective capacity of leadership teams revitalize well-established instructional and leadership practices and learning processes?
Using the analogy of re-booting a computer or application to start afresh, experienced instructional leaders Kaplan and Owings argue that the school environment is an established culture undergoing rapid social and technological change, and that a culture re-boot is possible through transformation of all parts of the interconnected system. Re-boot is defined as “rethinking, redesigning, and enacting new practices in leadership, teaching, ethics and relationships. It means readjusting the student learning environment, working with parents and community in ways that reshape the school culture, and restarting a cycle of positive dynamics that result in improved student outcomes.”
Each chapter begins with focus questions, followed by a discussion of topics with practical action-oriented strategies for developing collaborative school cultures. Relevant research and additional resources complement each chapter. The first chapter provides the framework for understanding the complexity of school culture and change, including the characteristics of a learning organization. The next five chapters are organized around elements of school culture necessary for school improvement: school leadership; ethical behaviour and relational trust; professional capacity for shared influence; a student-centred learning culture; and strong parent-community ties. An entire chapter is devoted to improving relationships with parents in culturally diverse communities and developing school-community partnerships to benefit student learning. The final chapter presents a road map for a five-year plan of action for redesigning school culture.
Despite the authors’ narrow view of technology as a tool to facilitate personalized learning, and the limited discussion of the implications of the digital age on instructional leadership and culture transformation, this is an excellent handbook offering practical strategies for school leadership teams to collaboratively initiate, enact and sustain a culture re-boot.
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
-
In and Of the World
Comments Off on In and Of the WorldThe rain came down in lancing spears of cold. The wind carried the rain forward in great wet sheets. Into this mess, only a day removed from the last of autumn’s sunshine, we trudged – two teachers and ten students from the St. Bonaventure’s College garden and compost program. We came carrying buckets and bags to gather up the bounty from our school garden plot – our first harvest! I looked round, taking in our small garden. Tomatoes clung pluckily to vines. Some had fallen and split, reclaimed by the ground that nourished them, but most were still in good condition. The zucchini had multiplied prodigiously. I had almost convinced myself that it was our collective green thumb that led to such size and quantity, until a friend took the wind from my sails.
“They’re prolific,” she said. “A nuisance really. I mean, who eats that much zucchini?”
I pushed on. The potato plants had largely withered to a deadened brown from the recent cold snaps. I took a pitchfork out, dug them up and found the potatoes hard, golden and plentiful. They quickly washed clean in the exposing rain. The carrots were stubby, orange and deliciously sweet.
As we worked, I found it hard to think of the garden plot as anything besides a garden. Though I had been here when it was nothing but grass edging towards the treeline, it seemed to me it that this place had always been a garden planted over with vegetables. Perched atop the hills that rise away from St. John’s proper, I could see all the way to Cabot Tower and beyond to the blue-grey expanse of ocean that separates Newfoundland from Europe.
To see it worked over, planted, weeded and now harvested was to see the land transformed. We had put our stamp on this place. The swampy heat of summer had given way to the cold lash of autumn’s storms. Through it all we had come, learned and taken away a successful haul of vegetables.
As a student and teacher, I have found some of my most rewarding educational moments happened beyond the walls of the classroom. The garden and compost program is a case in point. When we began it, we did not foresee it as anything beyond an extracurricular program. Yet it grew into something that students, teachers and the wider community became invested in. C. A. Bowers contends, in Revitalizing the Commons,[1] that vegetable garden plots offer an opportunity for intergenerational dialogue, whereby young people see older folks as reservoirs of experience and knowledge. This isn’t curriculum-based learning and teaching, per se. Rather, it is a dialogue, seeped in learning and teaching of the world, that helps buttress a local community. In this way are plant, animal and human communities able to find common ground, a shared space of interaction.
Those of us who have been involved in the garden and compost program have been moved by it. We’ve developed relationships with pioneering organic farmers like Mike and Melba Rabinowitz, who’ve farmed in Newfoundland for over 30 years. They have mentored our students and teachers in the finer points of planting, weeding, and harvesting. Though this work might be described as tedious, it has fostered a dialogue. This narrative, shared between students and the Rabinowitzes and their workers – ranging in age from their 20s to 60s – has allowed young and old, doing the same job, to find common purpose. Students genuinely clamour to help out at the Rabinowitzes’ Organic Farm, as much for the conversation and Melba’s post-labour lunches as for what they learn.
As we move into the Anthropocene Era – the Age of the Humans – we need more opportunities, as students and teachers, to recognize the effect we have had on the world around us and dialogue with the world we live in. In a previous article[2] I noted that the skills of reading a landscape are slowly being lost. The people who needed these skills – fishermen, farmers, loggers, trappers – are finding themselves pushed to the economic periphery, expendable to the demands of profit. Their knowledge of place – of geology, meteorology and culture – is out of touch with the dictates of a global market. The dominant curriculum in our society is one of consumption. Even (and maybe even particularly) here in Newfoundland and Labrador, we are caught in the throes of this trap, enjoying the golden glow of an oil boom. As though no lessons need have been learned from the collapse, after 500 years of extraction, of that previous Newfoundland boom, codfish.
We need to find the courage, as teachers and students, to see beyond the world that we have created. I had thought that the garden and compost program would be a means of access into the commons: a place where students and teachers could find themselves in the world, participate in it, get dirt under their fingernails. In and of itself, the program has been successful. Yet, in being just one of a score of extracurricular activities, our program suffers from attracting only a certain type of student. These students are extraordinarily keen, committed and often see the larger picture. They are the program’s greatest strength. However, when we only reach these students we are preaching to the choir.
Extracurricular programs like ours should not supplement a curriculum that refuses to encourage learning and teaching of the world in the world. Rather, we need to rethink the manner in which curriculum is delivered. Increasingly, I find that the curriculum we teach our students ignores the possibility of economic models beyond consumer capitalism, speaks of climate change barely at all. Students today are asked to be proficient across a broad scope of learning outcomes, learned largely from a textbook or from lectures and notes delivered by a teacher in a classroom. These same students spend most of their leisure time in front of a screen of one sort or another. We need a curriculum that encourages care and love for the communities we live in, by situating the learning-teaching conversation in our lived places. Colin Trudge notes in The Secret Life of Trees that, “when science is done its primary role is not to change the world but to enhance appreciation…”[3] I would extend that over the entire ecology of learning. We need to learn, anew, to appreciate the world we live in.
The day was overcast, but humid. The last of the season’s blueberries, ripe, beckoned with promise for those who would seek them out along the trail. We were walking into Freshwater Bay, an abandoned outport community just beyond the growing sprawl of St. John’s. Once there were a hundred souls living there, alongside cattle and sheep, with vegetable gardens and haying grounds. To this day, an apple tree remains, gnarled but bearing fruit in the lee of the winds that swirl round the island. The community was supported by the inshore fishery, which flourished well into the early 20th century. Then, like so many other outport communities, Freshwater Bay lapsed into a state of abandonment. There were better jobs to be had in St. John’s, with better wages and hours then those of the fishery.
We need more opportunities, as students and teachers, to recognize the effect we have had on the world around us and dialogue with the world we live in.
Which was the reason we were visiting. A class of Grade 8 students were hiking in to explore and document the community. They were looking for what might have allowed people to settle here, of all places. Two other teachers walked in with us – the Science and Literature teachers – to broaden the scope of the day. To see a community for what it might have offered its inhabitants is beyond the capabilities of one academic specialty area.
At one point I stumbled across Ms. Power, the Science teacher, explaining which plants were edible, and which were not. This would have been crucial knowledge for the first pioneers settling Newfoundland’s shoreline – as important as building a shelter, or being able to “see the boat in the trees,” as old boat-builders used to say. In short, knowing what plants were useful was a skill crucial to survival. Seeing her hand around plants for students to try that would, just moments before, have blended into the greenery struck me as a particularly powerful learning moment.
Students spoke in their journal entries of how much they’d enjoyed the day for the hiking, the time out of class, the opportunity to swim in the freshwater pond, which gave the community its name. But they also spoke of being able to better see the outport community. And that, for me, was crucial. To be able to imagine a place beyond the textbook – a place where they had spent a day, experienced the community, explored the ruined house foundations, eaten plants previously unknown to them – is to know a place a little better; to understand its roots. Too often students today are divorced from their history. And once we are removed from the world, it is harder to imagine how we might change it.
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
EN BREF – Tant à titre d’élève que d’enseignant, je constate que certains de mes moments éducatifs les plus enrichissants se sont produits ailleurs qu’en classe. Les élèves et leurs enseignants sont souvent coupés du monde. En effet, nous ne sommes pas suffisamment exposés à la nature pour en apprendre quelque chose, peu importe le sujet. Dans son livre The Secret Life of Trees, Colin Trudge écrit : « lorsqu’on fait des sciences, leur rôle principal ne consiste pas à changer le monde, mais à en rehausser l’appréciation… » [traduction] J’étendrais cet énoncé à toute l’écologie de l’apprentissage. Nous devons réapprendre à apprécier le monde où nous vivons. J’ai tenté, par un programme de jardin d’école et de compostage ainsi que par des voyages enrichissant le curriculum dans des collectivités locales, de combler ce fossé afin que les élèves et les enseignants connaissent mieux le monde où ils vivent – et qu’ils en viennent ainsi à s’en soucier et à en prendre soin.
[1] C. A. Bowers, Revitalizing the Commons: Cultural and educational sites of resistance and affirmation (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2006).
[2] Chris Peters, “Finding Place in Education” Education Canada 50, no. 2 (Spring 2010): 26-29.
[3] Colin Trudge, The Secret Life of Trees: How they live and why they matter (London: Penguin, 2006).
-
Word Play
Comments Off on Word PlayDanielle Workman’s* Grade 3 class loves to play Whirly Word on their iPads. I learned this from interviewing the children as part of a research project on iPad use in Language Arts. Whirly Word is a simple software application (app) involving six scrambled letters, with the purpose being to find as many words as possible with three letters or more. The ultimate goal is to make a six-letter word from the letters given. This reminded me of Patricia Cunningham’s work with Making Words,[1] so I was not surprised that the Grade 3 students found the game appealing.
-
The Teacher I Dream of Being
Comments Off on The Teacher I Dream of BeingEngagement has become a key thread in current educational discourse across Canada and, indeed, around the world. The understanding that the deepest learning occurs when participants are highly invested has led many educators, policy-makers, researchers and parents to become more attuned to what it is that excites, animates and holds the attention of our young people, as well as those things that have quite the opposite effect. Over the past several years, engagement has become an appealing theme for keynote addresses, journal submissions, blog entries, podcasts, professional magazine articles and books. All over the world, we have become truly engaged with the idea of engagement!
And for very good reason. Taking seriously the implications, effects and demands of creating engaging environments and compelling learning tasks for our students could very well be pushing us closer to a tipping point when it comes to the growing desire to see change and transformation in public education.
To be sure, the vast majority of energy around the engagement conversation has focused on the student.[1] It is energy well-spent – important, as far as it goes. The truth is, however, that our conversations about engagement need to go further if they are going to allow us to capture a fuller sense of the dynamic of what actually happens in an engaging learning environment. It was this drive to go further and to understand the challenges and opportunities more deeply that inspired the Canadian Education Association (CEA) to begin shining a light on teacher engagement. Conceived of as an attempt to explore the space between the teacher I dream of being and the teacher that I’m sometimes expected to be, the Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach initiative was developed in an effort to raise the voices of Canadian teachers around the hopes and dreams they have for the work that they do.
For the past two years, the CEA, with the generous support of the Canadian Teachers’ Federation and its affiliates, has crossed Canada leading a series of focus groups designed to get to the heart of engagement from an educator’s perspective. Using an “appreciative inquiry” approach, each of our conversations with teachers began by inviting them to remember the story of a time when they felt they were teaching at their best – a time when they felt strongly connected to that motivational ideal and passion they have for their work. We were looking for times when they felt that they were working in the zone described as flow by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi.[2]
Encouraging participants to explore their stories in a variety of ways, we asked them to consider the conditions that had allowed those experiences of peak performance to take place. In addition to working with them to explore the contributions made by students, colleagues, parents and school leadership, we led them to consider the personal attributes that helped to animate and inspire their stories. Finally we engaged in deep conversations about what might happen if those conditions were in place more often.
Not only did the process, itself, turn out to be extremely engaging, but what we have learned from teachers across the country complements the insights gathered from students in CEA’s What Did You Do In School Today? research, and from other educators in our related professional development sessions. They are insights that can only help to deepen our conception of what it means to be highly engaged.
Rereading classroom context
One powerful insight coming from the Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach project has to do with the idea of context. Quite often when we think of context, our minds shift to the physical environment or the socio-political conditions that might have an impact on what happens in that space. Reflecting on the etymological roots of the word, however, we’re brought to a much more intimate understanding of the term.
Derived from fabric production, the word text originally referred to something that has been woven together. Thus context, quite literally, describes something joined together by weaving.
Classrooms are places of interwoven identities, beliefs, values and practices, and as students and teachers work together in the classroom space, there is a real sense in which context becomes created and recreated, the result being a strong and intimately woven fabric.
In fact, one of the most resounding themes emerging from our work with the Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach focus groups is that the relationship between teacher and student is not only something that takes place in a context, but that, in fact, it is the context that lives at the heart of the teaching and learning dynamic. At its most intimate level, the classroom is a place where individual student lives are interwoven with that of the teacher, creating a mysterious and rich context for learning. The stories of deep engagement that we heard, and the vision statements that we read, revealed a deep moral investment in finding ways to create learning spaces that both honour and nurture this powerful element of the work to which educators aspire:
In the teaching to which I aspire everyone works with the understanding that students will always surprise you with their dedication and enthusiasm when you allow them to extend past the typical assignments… When students learn you are always building toward something, they will believe in the process and engage.[3]
Towards a richer definition of engagement
Most often, definitions of engagement tend to focus on the degree of commitment that an individual makes to a particular context. Our conversations about engagement usually focus on strategies to get someone to make a stronger and more intentional investment in a particular task or role. In this way, our work on engagement often takes place from the outside looking in.
Through the Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach project, however, we developed a more nuanced understanding of the term. The teachers to whom we spoke identified a deep dedication to the work that they do – a commitment that became active and visible as they told the stories of their most aspirational moments. As we encouraged them to take a closer look at their current teaching situations, imagining the conditions that would enable them to feel that way more often, we felt called to rethink our concept of teacher engagement. Instead of focusing on the investment that teachers could be convinced to make in their work, we began to take more of an inside-out perspective: how much of themselves – their knowledge, experience, strengths, talents, passion, humour, curiosity and love for the profession – did their working conditions encourage and permit teachers to bring to the context?
I aspire to be the best I can be, to bring all my knowledge, creativity and commitment to my students – to give to them but also to gain from them – satisfaction, a sense of success and the feeling that what I do matters in the life of a child.
Conditions for engagement
So, what have we learned about the hopes and dreams that teachers have for the work that they do? What did we hear about the conditions that participants believed would enable them to bring more of themselves to their role as teacher?
Prominent among the themes that emerged from our research was time. Teachers longed for more uninterrupted time to spend exploring the curriculum in deeper and more meaningful ways. Class timetables that allowed limited flexibility often bumped up against a daunting number of curriculum expectations, leaving many feeling rushed and struggling to meet the demands for quality teaching assessment. For many, their stories of deep engagement recalled an experience when they were able to spend the time required to slow down, differentiate instruction for a wider selection of learners, or simply feel that they could take the time necessary to develop stronger relationships with their students and to be fully present to them.
Time resources and the ability to be flexible in the process would foster the sense of continual inquiry. When the roadblocks of standardized testing and static expectations are removed, teachers are free to release their creativity in order to reach every student and empower the whole child.
I am part of a collaborative team. Each member is driven to learn and improve and develop. I have time to learn, time to discuss, time to plan.
The theme of time spilled over into another condition that was explored by many. Teachers told us of the importance of having opportunities to work more closely with their professional colleagues and how this could contribute to their feelings of connectedness and confidence. Having the time to plan, assess and reflect with teaching peers was an important element in the aspirations they had for their work. While some envisioned contexts where integrated forms of curriculum teaching and co-teaching would inspire deep levels of collaboration and collegiality, others mused about the importance of having the opportunity to meet with grade or subject level partners on a regular basis. Flexible teaching schedules and agile organizational structures were seen as ways of enabling and supporting new types of professional relationships and were presented as ways of enhancing the work done in the classroom context.
My ideal teaching environment is full of energy and life. It is a place that fosters true collaboration on multiple levels. Teachers are working together to share ideas and improve their programs, always with the best interests of their students in mind… In addition to this, there is also true collaboration between teachers and administrators. Just as teachers value the ideas of their students, principals also value the ideas and expertise of teachers.
Many teachers highlighted the desire for greater autonomy in their work. Responding to an increase in the standardization of various aspects of teacher practice, many participants aspired to a teaching context where their own professional judgments, personal strengths, and knowledge of their students were valued, respected and trusted. The freedom to create learning experiences based on the “here and now” of the classroom emerged as an important theme, while rules and protocols that did not resonate with the needs of their students were seen as unhelpful:
I am a professional who can make decisions about what my students need based on my understanding of them and what they tell me. I am able to do what’s best.
The theme of trust also emerged when participants spoke of the need for supportive leadership. In addition to the familiar forms of hierarchical leadership, many teachers imagined how distributed responsibility right across the school could serve to engage both teachers and students in new and interesting ways. Many teachers described schools where the classroom context was seen as the centre of the organization; it was a vision where top-down control gave way to an authentic culture of caring and attentiveness for their students:
[In the teaching to which I aspire] it is common protocol to view every rule, every lesson, every routine, every decision through the lens of ultimate care: concern for the students.
Why should we care about teacher engagement?
We know that teachers come to the profession with different images of what their ideal work would look and feel like. Although these images are naturally tempered and tested by the authentic experiences that teachers have throughout their careers, it was inspiring for us to recognize that most of the vision statements that we collected were written with the same level of passion, heart and aspiration that one would expect from someone just starting out in the profession.
The relationship between teacher and student… is the context that lives at the heart of the teaching and learning dynamic.
Beyond being inspired, however, our conversations with teachers have led us to a deeper understanding of just why it is so important to take seriously the idea of teacher engagement. Teaching is one of the few professions where client and professional (for want of better terms) are involved in almost constant daily contact, with the relationships that emerge forming the vital core of the teaching and learning dynamic. In this sense, teacher engagement is intimately linked to student engagement and vice versa. As we read through the data collected from our focus groups, we discovered that the conditions that allowed teachers to teach at their best were also the conditions that encouraged students to learn at their best.
Clearly, high levels of committed involvement on the part of teachers can have a significant effect on the way that students approach their work. But the Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach project called us to look beyond the single thread that connects teacher engagement with student progress and achievement. While the relationship between student and teacher is the central context around which everything else moves and takes on meaning, it is a context deeply embedded in a myriad of conditions that profoundly affect the texture of classroom life.
By framing the engagement conversation in terms of how much of themselves educators are permitted to bring to the teaching/learning context, we can begin to see the profound impact that factors outside of this immediate context can have on both teachers and students. The engagement conversation is really a conversation about change and transformation – a conversation that, if it really took root, could have a tremendous effect on this place we call school. In the words of one of our participants from Newfoundland:
In the teaching to which I aspire, teaching has developed into an honourable profession… Teachers have the tools (resources, skills and attitudes) to facilitate learning for all young people – regardless of level of need. All students are seen as capable and worthy. Teaching is a science (requiring specific skills and methods as a basis for facilitation) but is also an art (teachers have the public trust to adjust their facilitating to ensure that all students are authentically engaged in their learning).
An engaging vision, to be sure!
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
EN BREF – Au cours des deux dernières années, l’Association canadienne d’éducation a entrepris d’importantes recherches pour compléter son travail d’avant-garde en matière d’engagement des élèves. L’étude Enseigner selon nos aspirations était destinée à écouter des enseignants d’un bout à l’autre du Canada et a exploré avec eux les anecdotes qui illustraient le summum de l’enseignement. L’article rend compte de cette recherche, se concentrant sur la salle de classe en tant que lieu où les identités et les pratiques des élèves et des enseignants sont tissées ensemble pour créer un contexte réel d’apprentissage. C’est dans ce contexte que nous trouvons les éléments essentiels de l’engagement tant pour les élèves que pour les enseignants. Si toutes les conditions que nos enseignants considèrent importantes dans les contextes d’enseignement auxquels ils aspirent existent effectivement, il est impossible de rompre le lien entre la réussite des élèves et un enseignement reflétant ces aspirations.
[1] CEA’s flagship research project, What Did You Do In School Today?, suggested that student engagement can be observed through three different lenses: social, institutional and intellectual engagement. This multi-dimensional perspective has enabled us to better appreciate the rich opportunities and complex challenges involved as we strive for high levels of engagement in schools throughout Canada.
[2] Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The psychology of optimal experience (New York: Harper & Row, 1990).
[3] All quotes are CEA focus group participants, from locations across Canada.
-
Leading Towards Engagement
Comments Off on Leading Towards EngagementThe role of the principal involves supporting both staff and students, and these tasks are not mutually exclusive. In fact, Robinson states that principals can have the greatest influence on student learning by focusing on teacher development.[1] As a principal myself, I recognize the challenge of helping teachers grow in ways that encourage them to develop their individual passion and engagement. We have many forms of development for systematic movements in schools, but few with the goal of fostering an actively engaged, passionate and innovative teaching staff. Two questions have emerged from my practice: How can I as a school principal support teachers’ intellectual engagement? How can I lead in a way that nurtures the passion of teachers in the school?
During the 2012-2013 school year, I worked with a group of principals on a design-based research project aimed at answering these questions.[2] Our group wanted to understand our role in the process of engagement. We wanted to help teachers to grow in deep and meaningful ways that brought them closer to their vision of great teaching. Our team met initially and set the goal of taking actions throughout the school year that we thought would support teachers’ intellectual engagement. Our understanding of intellectual engagement emerged from the work done by Willms, Friesen and Milton,[3] and we talked about helping teachers experience flow[4] in their work.
At the first meeting, we decided on the actions that would be taken in the schools and planned to meet a few weeks later to evaluate our work. The team took many different actions to meet the needs of the teachers in their schools. We actually could not decide on a single action that would work in every school. Principals were adamant that one size would not fit all; their actions had to suit their respective school. Our team was able to meet a number of times over the five months we carried out the study. Meeting in the midst of the busy school year was, however, one of the greatest challenges for our group of principals. To stay connected, principals wrote and submitted reflective journals throughout the process. The team and I also sent emails, talked on the phone, completed questionnaires and did interviews. Our goal was to continually evaluate how our actions were influencing the school by connecting our experiences. Our process was not only research, but also professional development. We searched for innovative actions that made a difference and shared our collective stories.
As I concluded the research and sorted through the messiness of the process, a number of insights emerged that formed the basis of an engaging leadership framework. I recognized that our personal characteristics, the culture of the schools and specific actions we took had an impact on teachers’ intellectual engagement. By forming a team of principals with the clear goal of supporting teachers through thoughtful and calculated actions, we made a difference. In this article, I share some of the things that worked for our team.
Walking the talk
Although our group of principals wanted to influence teachers, we quickly realized that we had to look in the mirror first. At our first meeting, while setting our direction, it became clear that there were a plethora of potential actions. Some of the actions suggested seemed comfortable for a few principals, but unnerving for the others. One principal suggested a book club would be great for her school, but not everyone felt comfortable with it. Another principal wanted to create a forum for discussion for teachers on staff, but not everyone was encouraged by this strategy. What we discovered quickly was that principals could only confidently support teachers’ intellectual engagement with strategies that they used themselves. For example, a principal who does a tremendous amount of professional reading would be able to support teachers in this area, but might not feel comfortable doing presentations at conventions. This doesn’t mean that principals need to master every form of development – rather that areas of strength for a principal relate to possible development for teachers.
What emerged for our team was the important role of the principal as a role model. One of the principals led a small team of teachers in a process of collaborative planning. The group set goals for the planning, tied them to student need, collected resources, co-taught the material and reflected regularly. The principal communicated values through the process and led the team in a deeply engaging process of designing a learning task.
Another principal identified a need for the school to develop strategies for classroom management. He led the staff in a presentation about effective classroom management, including tools that worked for him. He then invited teachers throughout the year to present their management tools to the staff. The result was not only improved management, but also a school strategy for mobilizing knowledge.
Walking the talk also meant demonstrating a sense of self-efficacy about the potential influence the principal could have for teachers. At the outset of the project, principals wondered how much influence they might have. But by our second meeting, it was evident that they had a great deal of influence. Their actions created change and built momentum that led to future actions. The catalyst for the actions throughout the process was the belief that principals could, indeed, make a difference.
The conditions for engagement
At heart, we were trying to create a culture of engagement in the school. Principals will not be directly involved in every experience of engagement for teachers, but they can work to create an atmosphere in which teachers are more likely to experience engagement and practise engaging teaching. During the study, we identified five key conditions for engagement.
1. Relationship building
Healthy relationships form the foundation of an engaging school culture. Teachers need to feel valued, respected and supported in their work as teachers and as individuals. Our group of principals found that relationship building was critical in their efforts to support intellectual engagement. Clearly teachers can experience engagement without the principal; however, the principal must have developed a relationship if he or she is going to offer any support. Our group of principals found the stronger their relationship with teachers, the greater impact they were able to have. Conversely, if the principal did not interact regularly with the teacher, there was very little direct influence. The value of relationship building came not only from the positive atmosphere in the school, but also from the opportunities to collaborate, have discussions and problem-solve together.
2. Opportunities for collaboration and professional dialogue
Our team quickly recognized the connection between the inherently social nature of many of the teachers we worked with and intellectual engagement. The social element of engagement became one of the cornerstones of our actions. One principal even wondered if the best action he could take was to bring teachers together and get out of the way. This dialogue instigated teacher collaboration, which was strongly connected with positive outcomes. It was often while discussing how to teach a literacy skill, co-planning a unit or debating the merit of a school program that teachers experienced intellectual engagement.
One of the most successful actions was taken early in the project by a principal who created an opportunity for a group of teachers to come together and discuss a new school intervention program. The teachers produced so much energy at the meeting, along with a lot of good ideas, that the group ended up meeting regularly for the entirety of the project. The team was invested in the process and their ideas and collaborative efforts created meaningful change in the school. The principal simply brought the team together and let the process unfold. A core belief of our group was that when a group of teachers have the opportunity to share ideas with others, the growth, development and engagement is remarkable.
3. Time
Our group also found that when a culture of collaboration is realized, it requires formal support – with the most important support being time. It is more difficult for teachers to experience deep engagement at the end of a long day, during the evening or when coming back on the weekend. Teachers spend many extra hours preparing, but our team tried to build time into the school day to collaborate and work on individual passions. We created this support by providing prep time, using administration time to cover for teachers, scheduling professional learning communities during the school day, creating time for discussion at staff meetings and using portions of professional development days to bring teachers together. It was clear to the team that if we wanted to encourage teachers’ intellectual engagement, we should try to support them with the time to do it.
4. Resources
Directing resources to specific areas became a requirement for the group of principals. Although budgets are limited and needs are great, there are ways of using resources in a strategic manner that can make a difference. Principals found it was very effective to allocate a portion of their budget for needs that arose through the year. As they recognized passion and areas of growth, they would provide funding to buy professional books on the topic, send the teacher to a conference, buy the teaching material for the new idea or help individuals gain access to the tools or personnel they needed. Resources were seen partially as responsive to the needs of the school at a specific time.
5. A climate of growth and innovation
It became apparent to us that intellectual engagement tended to thrive in spaces where teachers were excited about possibilities, able to be creative and willing to try something new. This was coupled with a culture of growth that encouraged teachers to strive to better themselves and the school. An inspiring example of this came when a teacher came to the principal with the innovative idea of transforming the outdoor education program at the school. The teacher had a personal passion, a vision of change and a plan to get there. The school principal embraced the opportunity and the two created a proposal to be taken to the superintendent and potentially the board of education. The process of developing the proposal was one of the deepest experiences of engagement that occurred. The teacher wanted to grow and be innovative and the principal nurtured the experience. Although not every engaging experience went to the board level, many of the experiences were rooted in the goal of improving and innovating.
The actions taken by the principals were beneficial for both teachers and principals. Principals reported that teachers in the schools they worked in were having engaging experiences. They saw teachers planning collaboratively, reading professional literature in book clubs, considering graduate work, discussing literacy strategies, presenting to the staff and designing innovative learning experiences for students. What is notable about these experiences is that they were connected with the actions of the principals in creating conditions for engagement in the school. They emerged from the principals trying to lead in an engaging way. Principals found that by carrying out a thoughtful plan, they could support teachers.
The principals also found the research process to be a tremendous professional development experience for themselves. They had the opportunity to be self-reflective while working with a group of other leaders. They were able to work closely with teachers and analyze the influence they had. Perhaps the most welcome result was being able to focus on creating engaging conditions for teachers in school. Making school a wonderful place to work is surely a goal that resonates with many leaders as a worthwhile pursuit.
Characteristics of Effective Actions
As principals planned and implemented specific strategies aimed at leading teachers toward engaging experiences, the group identified a number of characteristics that increased success.
Effective engaging leadership is:
PERSONALIZED: Leaders take actions that respond to the needs of teachers in the school and match their skill set. A variety of tools are necessary for principals to connect with teachers in the school.
RESEARCH-BASED: Leaders take actions that are based in research and tied to a body of literature. The research basis provides a common language and focus to the actions.
LONG TERM: Leaders take actions that are carried out over a period of time. Time enables the action to fully develop and allows teachers to enter deeply into the process.
RELEVANT: Leaders take actions that address the needs and experience of teachers at the given time. Matching actions with the cycle of the school year ensures the action supports the current needs of the teacher.
TIMELY: Leaders take actions in response to opportunities that are presented. There are key times when a principal can respond to teachers’ needs that are neither planned nor predictable.
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
EN BREF – Lors d’une étude réalisée selon l’approche de la recherche-design, un groupe de directions d’école a voulu répondre à la question suivante : « Que pouvons-nous faire, en tant que directions d’école, pour appuyer l’engagement intellectuel du personnel enseignant des écoles où nous travaillons? » En soutenant l’engagement intellectuel des enseignants, les directions d’école favorisent leur développement. Pour ce faire, les directions peuvent mettre l’accent sur leurs pratiques de leadership, engendrer dans l’école des conditions favorisant l’engagement et prendre des mesures soutenant le perfectionnement des enseignants. Les directions doivent également savoir combler les besoins des enseignants au fur et à mesure qu’ils se manifestent pendant l’année scolaire.
[1] Viviane Robinson, Student-Centered Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2011).
[2] Davin Hildebrand, “The Influence of Interventions Used by Principals on Teachers’ Intellectual Engagement” (doctoral dissertation in progress, Calgary, AB: University of Calgary, 2013).
[3] J. D. Willms, S. Friesen and P. Milton, What did you do in school today? Transforming classrooms through social, academic, and intellectual engagement (First national report, Toronto: Canadian Education Association, 2009).
[4] M. Cskiszentmihalyi, Flow: The psychology of optimal experience (New York: HarperCollins, 1990).
-
After the Happily Ever After
Comments Off on After the Happily Ever AfterOnce upon a time Gay-Straight Alliances were granted in Ontario Catholic secondary schools…
It’s been one full school year since the passing of the Accepting Schools Act, Bill 13, which legally enables students to form Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) and name them such in Ontario Catholic (and public) schools. However, it is difficult to gauge how the new legislation is impacting school communities. Are students attempting to create these clubs, now that they are legally able to? If so, are school boards, administrative staff, and educators supporting GSA creation and development? Are they working with students to facilitate GSAs’ growth in school communities? Does this story have a “gay” ending after all?
And they all lived happily ever after?
In the fall of 2010, the Ontario Ministry of Education introduced an equity and inclusion policy that referenced homophobia and required school boards to support GSA establishment if students requested these groups.[1] Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) trustees disagreed with some aspects of this policy and decided to edit the document by removing references to “sexual orientation” and “gender,”[2] and vetoed students’ rights to create GSAs.[3] Likewise, many Ontario Catholic schools, such as St. Joseph’s Catholic Secondary School in Mississauga, banned GSAs. Student activists and leaders confronted this human rights violation and persuaded politicians to develop Bill 13. Once Bill 13 passed, media reports on GSAs in Catholic schools stopped, and this inadvertently created a “happily-ever-after” story that left viewers with the impression that there would be no more resistance.
Although it may seem that the fight for GSAs is over, it is not safe to assume that students are successfully creating and running these clubs on their own terms. If history (the former banning of GSAs) is any indication, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer/questioning (LGBTQ) youth and their allies may still be lobbying for student-led groups. With the limited information available on GSAs in Catholic schools, there is no way of knowing for certain whether all Catholic school boards and schools are playing by the new rules and if GSA development is happening at a “just” pace. Some Catholic school boards and schools may very well be finding loopholes they can work around.
Within an educational context, it is obvious that ideological tensions exist between the provision of religious freedom and the legislative guarantee of LGBTQ rights. These seemingly oppositional freedoms both need to be respected, but make it difficult to discern exactly what just education is, seeing as “just” means something different to every stakeholder. Some people argue that Section 93 of the Constitution Act (1867) not only permits Catholic people to establish faith-based schools, but it also affords them the “right to maintain the religious character of the schools and to function according to Catholic philosophy and tenets.”[4] These beliefs and rights may make it difficult for many teachers and administrators to support the development of GSAs in Ontario Catholic schools and provide a just education for LGBTQ students.
Adult/student relationships and “supports”
With few exceptions, such as the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association, media reports have documented adults’ opposition and resistance to GSA development in Catholic schooling. See, for example, accounts of religious and educational leaders’ responses to GSAs.[5] It is extremely rare, if not impossible, to find media depictions of students resisting GSA formation. But if students did not contest GSAs, why did adults think it was necessary to hinder their development? Adults, as they often do, position themselves as knowing what is best for youth, which masks students’ voices, stifles their agency, and trivializes their independence. The banning of GSAs illuminates the unequal power dynamics that exist between adults and youth in education. It is clear that the education system is rooted in a powerful hierarchy, where adults’ insights, experiences, and voices are privileged over those of students.
The publicized banning of GSAs in Ontario Catholic schools has helped expose the politics of sexuality in schooling and has directed attention to how adults impose limitations on student-directed clubs. This adult/youth dichotomy underpins documents that are used to guide GSA formation and development in Ontario Catholic secondary schools, for example:
“Adolescent students are not always the best judges of their own sexual orientation . . . Teachers and others entrusted with the pastoral care of students experiencing same-sex attraction should also keep in mind the different stages in a student’s life and his or her ability to absorb Teachings.”[6]
The text, Pastoral Guidelines to Assist Students of Same-sex Orientation, positions youth as vulnerable and in need of guidance from adults about their sexuality. In this document, stable same-sex attraction is depicted as “abnormal”: “Adolescents are in the process of discovering their sexual identities, and a homosexual inclination may be quite normal when it occurs only for a period of time and is not firmly fixed.” When these types of beliefs are projected onto GSA members, can we say that just education is being provided? Another document, “Respecting Difference”: A resource guide for Catholic schools in the province of Ontario regarding the establishment and running of activities or organizations promoting equity and respect for all students, has been created to influence the conduct and content of GSAs, although these clubs are supposed to be student-directed. This text is troubling because it does not include information on the root cause of homophobia: heteronormativity. Heteronomativity assumes heterosexuality as what is “normal” and “natural” in society. If one of the priorities of GSAs is to address homophobic bullying, drawing on heterosexist documents will certainly not help solve the problem.
In September 2012, an Ontario Catholic school board distributed a letter to parents and guardians regarding Bill 13 and GSAs, which read:
“The Respecting Difference approach will continue to be an invaluable resource to ensure that student-led groups reflect Catholic values and adhere to Ontario Education Ministry guidelines … Our concern has always been about the content more so than the term [GSA], therefore we want to assure you that this law [Bill 13] does not remove the right of our principals to ensure the appropriateness of materials used in the school, and clubs will continue to strongly reflect and promote Catholic values and traditions.”[7]
It appears as although the fairytale does not have a happy ending, because this loophole further constrains LGBTQ students and their allies in their club activities. The roles and purposes of GSAs fall under four broad categories: providing safe spaces, support, education, and advocacy. The resources created to “support” GSA development in Ontario Catholic secondary schools appear to dissuade students from engaging in at least two of four categories: educating the school community about LGBTQ issues and engaging in advocacy-based work. For example, the Respecting Difference document states, “Student Activities or Organizations are not intended as fora for activism, protest or advocacy of anything that is not in accord with the Catholic faith foundation of the school.”[8] Another document developed to clarify this states: for “issues/topics that call for action or advocacy on positions that may be contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church… The presence of a caring adult to listen and to facilitate, as needed, provides a healthy and open forum for discussion.”[9] Once again, students are positioned as incapable of discussing issues that impact them without the help of adults who are assumed to be the knowledge keepers. Unfortunately, these resources may be uniformly used to keep GSAs and their members in check with religious doctrine and to regulate group activities and initiatives, despite the needs and desires of group members. GSAs are student-led, non-curricular groups that are there to meet the needs of students and not the visions of adults who believe they know best.
Most recently, in May, 2013, two Toronto Catholic District School Board (TDCSB) trustees put forth a motion to ban GSAs despite provincial legislation, which specifically indicates that school boards and principals cannot veto students’ rights to form these clubs.[10] The board’s chair, Ann Andrachuck, did not believe the motion would pass and declared that, “This board does support the legislation,” but she also stated that, “We [the TDCSB] don’t particularly like GSAs from our Catholic perspective …“[11] Although the motion failed with a vote of seven to four, Erin Edghill, a GSA member at a Catholic high school, was quoted as saying, “I think this motion is a step backwards from what we worked so hard to get to.”[12] It is obvious that this motion has negatively impacted many students because they had to revisit their fight for GSAs. The implicit message of this motion is that if the board had a choice, GSAs would not exist, but since it is out of their hands they begrudgingly tolerate them. If this is not evidence that some Catholic boards need to clean up their act in order to provide safe and supportive educational environments for LGBTQ youth, what else is out there to convince us otherwise?
Rewriting an underwhelming ending
It’s clear that some Catholic schools have provided good support for the development of GSAs. But for Catholic school boards that are doing their job, where is the celebration? For those that are not, where is the whistle blowing? Legislation that protects LGBTQ students’ human rights is one step towards more equitable education, but what is the next step? Catholic schools boards, administrators, and teachers must work with students and support their ideas, initiatives, and activities. GSAs should not be treated differently from other school-based clubs and their purposes or goals should not be censored to fit a particular religious framework. For Catholic schools to provide just education for LGBTQ students, GSAs and the diversity of their members should be acknowledged and celebrated in schools. Granting students GSAs will not automatically eradicate homophobia and it will not disrupt the heteronormative school systems that make GSAs necessary in the first place. The safety net needs time to grow and strengthen in order to reach the whole school community; the story needs a sequel. It’s time for adults to match student commitment to social justice and look beyond the neatly packaged fairytale ending to what happens after the “happily ever after.”
Facts about GSAs
- GSAs do not put LGBTQ students at further risk for marginalization. LGBTQ youth seem to be more vulnerable when their needs are ignored and the school system fails to support them in the ways they ask to be.
- Clubs are safe havens where students belong to a community of like-minded people. GSAs enable LGBTQ students and their allies to feel supported and empowered to create positive change in their school communities. GSAs hold schools accountable when the education system fails to do so. Rampant homophobia exists and sexuality and gender “norms” are taught (usually indirectly) and reinforced in schooling. GSAs are often the only place where LGBTQ students can talk about their experiences as minorities and collaborate with peers and staff to make things better.
- GSAs develop student leadership skills similar to other school-related clubs, such as planning, organizing, communication, and teamwork. If there is a GSA-related risk, it involves denying students opportunities to lead in their own clubs.
One School’s Success
By Holly Bennett
Rochelle Witter attends a Catholic high school in southwestern Ontario. She shares this experience with their GSA:
“Our oldest members have told me that before this year, getting the GSA started was a challenge. Not many teachers or students were open to the idea. This year, however, was a success. Our school has actually been supportive of the program, and the teacher that supervises our GSA is very supportive and caring. Freedom of speech and a hand to hold is what she gives us. She helped give us ideas for posters to put around the school.
“The student body has been very accepting and now knows you do not have to be gay or lesbian to join our club. This past March the school helped four of us to attend “Outshine,” a gathering in Toronto of GSAs across Canada. My fellow members and I had a great time learning about different sexual identities, how to be an ally to someone who needs sticking up for, and much more. We plan to share these newfound facts with next year’s GSA team.”
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
EN BREF – Cet article examine la loi 13 de 2012 sur les écoles sécuritaires et tolérantes en Ontario, ainsi que ses implications pour les alliances gai-hétéro (AGH) dans les écoles secondaires catholiques ontariennes. Il peut sembler que l’adoption de cette loi ait clos la lutte des élèves pour obtenir des AGH. Toutefois, comme il existe peu d’information sur les AGH dans ces écoles, il est impossible de savoir si tous les conseils scolaires et toutes les écoles catholiques respectent les nouvelles règles et si les AGH peuvent se développer à un rythme équitable. On discute encore des tensions découlant de l’opposition entre la liberté religieuse et la protection des droits des LGBTQ. Enfin, des suggestions sont présentées afin d’aider les écoles secondaires catholiques ontariennes à soutenir l’établissement et l’épanouissement des AGH.
[1] Kate Hammer, “Halton Catholic School Board Under Fire for Banning Gay-Straight Alliances,” The Globe and Mail, August 24, 2012. http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/halton-catholic-school-board-under-fire-for-banning-gay-straight-alliances/article1864793/?service=mobile
[2] Andrea Houston, “Halton Catholic Policy and GSA Ban Remains in Effect. ‘I don’t think sex clubs should be in school’: trustee,” XTRA!: Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News, January 11, 2011. http://www.xtra.ca/public/toronto/halton_catholic_policy_and_gsa_ban_remains_in_effect-9626.aspx
[3] Andrea Houston, “Halton Catholic Schools Ban Gay-straight Alliance Groups: ‘We don’t have Nazi groups either.’,” XTRA!: Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News, January 6, 2011. http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/Halton_Catholic_schools_ban_gaystraight_alliance_groups-9611.aspx
[4] Steven Chase, “Constitutional Challenge Threatens Ontario’s Anti-bullying Law,” The Globe and Mail, September 26, 2012. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/constitutional-challenge-threatens-ontarios-anti-bullying-law/article4571147/
[5] Andrea Houston, “Mississauga Catholic Students Demand GSA: NEWS/Told supports already exist, such as group that ‘cures gayness,” XTRA!: Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News, March 16, 2011, http://www.xtra.ca/public/toronto/mississauga_catholic_students_demand_gsa-9888.aspx ; Keith Leslie, “Cardinal Thomas Collins Opposes Students Calling Clubs ‘Gay-straight Alliances’,” The Globe and Mail, May 28, 2012, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/cardinal-thomas-collins-opposes-students-calling-clubs-gay-straight-alliances/article4216548/
[6] Ontario Conference of Catholic Bishops, Pastoral Guidelines To Assist Students Of Same-Sex Orientation, PDF, 2004. http://acbo.on.ca/englishdocs/Pastoral%20Guidelines.pdf
[7] Ann Andrachuk and Bruce Rodrigues, Untitled, PDF, September 12, 2013, https://www.tcdsb.org/Board/EIE/Documents/Parents%20re%20Bill13%20-%20Gay%20Straight%20Alliances%20Clubs,%20September%2012,%202012.pdf
[8] Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association, “Respecting Difference”: A resource guide for Catholic schools in the province of Ontario regarding the establishment and running of activities or organizations promoting equity and respect for all students, PDF, January 25, 2012. http://www.archtoronto.org/pdf/RespectingDifference.pdf
[9] Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association, Respecting Difference Resource for Catholic School Boards, undated PDF. http://www.tcdsb.org/Board/EIE/Documents/Clarification%20for%20Respecting%20Difference%20Resource%20for%20Catholic%20School%20Boards.pdf
[10] Andrea Houston, “Toronto Catholic School Board Moves to Ban GSAs,” Xtra! Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News, May 16, 2013. http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/Toronto_Catholic_school_board_moves_to_ban_GSAs-13586.aspx
[11] Moira MacDonald, “Trustees Prepared to Ban GSAs: Catholic schools,” National Post, May 17, 2013, A9.
[12] Andrea Houston, “Toronto Catholic School Board Rejects GSA Ban: ONTARIO NEWS / Education Minister Liz Sandals says all schools must follow Accepting Schools Act,” Xtra! Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News, May 24, 2013. http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/Toronto_Catholic_school_board_rejects_GSA_ban-13618.aspx
-
Seeking the Heart of Teaching
Comments Off on Seeking the Heart of TeachingFor teachers, professors and students, September is the real start to the year. It seemed to us the perfect season to explore this issue’s theme of teacher engagement. What keeps teachers passionate about their role, eager to learn new skills, excited about their students’ learning?
The Canadian Education Association’s own research initiative, Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach, provides an inspiring window into the passion and dedication teachers bring to their work, and the conditions that sustain their engagement. In “The Teacher I Dream of Being” (p. 26), Stephen Hurley reflects on what we learned – and why it matters. But that’s only the starting point. In this issue, authors from B.C. to P.E.I. add their perspectives on what makes teachers tick.
If anyone doubts the direct link from teacher engagement to student engagement, I can think of nothing more persuasive than this issue’s Voice of Experience (“Escape from the Classroom,” p. 62), written by Grade 7 student Nicola Lawford. In this delightful essay, the contagion of enthusiasm from teacher to student is palpable. For the students in Nicola’s classroom, learning is an adventure, and the remarkable quality of her writing suggests that no rigour has been lost along the way.
Nicola’s testimony to the value of getting beyond the classroom – whether physically or virtually – is echoed by teacher Chris Peters in his essay “In and Of the World” (p. 57). The message from both is that schooling needs to be connected to “real life,” whether that’s the local community, the global community or the earth itself. “Let’s face the facts,” Nicola writes. “School is no longer defined as a classroom, where the only tools for our students are a desk, a pen, and paper. School can be everywhere, and students can use anything to learn.”
As the world changes, so, inevitably (though sometimes more slowly!), does education. But committed, skilled teachers – engaged teachers – and the relationships they build with their students, are still the heart and soul of good education. I, for one, hope that never changes.
P.S. This month we are launching a brief reader survey and I’d like to implore you to take a few minutes to complete it. If we know more about what articles interest and challenge you, our readers, we can ensure that Education Canada continues to be a valuable and thought-provoking resource. Go to to www.cea-ace.ca/edcansurvey to start the survey!
Write to us!
Send your letters or article proposals to editor@cea-ace.ca, or post your comments on the online version of Education Canada at www.cea-ace.ca/educationcanada.
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
-
What Engages Teachers?
Comments Off on What Engages Teachers?IN 2009, the B.C. Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) Research Department conducted a teacher worklife study[i] which offered some insights into the issue of teacher engagement. We asked teachers what gave them satisfaction in teaching. There was a huge outpouring of fascinating and emotional responses to this question, which showed not just satisfaction but passion for, and engagement in, teaching. From these and other data we have found that many teachers report both great satisfaction and significant stress in their work lives, both of which change at different times of the school year and at different career stages.
What most satisfied teachers and engaged them most deeply?
It’s the students, of course!
The top two areas of greatest satisfaction came from teachers’ engagement with students.
Our first and most dominant finding was that teachers want to engage students in learning, and gain considerable satisfaction when it occurs – especially the “Aha” moment when a student understands an idea or can solve a problem:
“I still get tremendous satisfaction working with the kids. I love when I get to experience their ‘ah-ha’ moments.”
This and many other comments spoke to teachers’ positive engagement when they saw themselves as instrumental in developing their students’ learning.
The second key finding was that teachers gain satisfaction when they feel that they are a positive influence on students’ development and lives. This reflects satisfaction over time, as they experience and support the growth of a young learner. Consider some of the following comments from BC teachers:
I love teaching and making a difference in the kids’ lives most of all.
The most satisfying aspect of my jobs is getting to interact with the students at my school and in particular to get to know my 30 students and create strong, trusting relationships with them where they feel free to talk to me about anything they need to and they know I am there to listen and support them no matter what the issue is.
Other teachers are important, too
A third finding revealed the importance of a community of adults, including interactions with peers, to teacher engagement. Teachers reported satisfaction when they had positive and productive relations with colleagues:
“I find the atmosphere of working and collaborating with colleagues to be an intense source of satisfaction. I take pride in being a member of a profession where members are strong in their convictions, vocal and self-assured. The dedication I see on a daily basis is very rewarding and inspirational.”
This finding suggests that when teaching is centred in a community where teachers give and feel respect, and when the community of peers engages in positive communication and collaboration, then teacher engagement is high. Hargreaves and Fullan made a similar argument when they stated: “Teachers who can sustain their commitment notice when they are surrounded by excellent colleagues . . . Primary or elementary teachers especially valued teamwork, someone to talk to when things went wrong, and a feeling that everyone was pulling in the same direction.”[ii]
Autonomy is crucial
Our study found that for many teachers, satisfaction comes from having autonomy. The desire for and the satisfaction with a significant degree of autonomy was highly valued by many respondents:
I have freedom to teach . . . with a great deal of autonomy in regard to subject and curriculum focus, lots of freedom in how to deliver, what to deliver within the curriculum, how to support students in need.
I greatly enjoy the variety of the work I do: working with principals, vice principals, teachers, students, parents, agencies . . . I have a lot of autonomy. I am glad that the work I do is with people, helping students and families. This is very satisfying.
Teachers’ autonomy is a sensitive issue in British Columbia’s public education system, and is at the centre of a dispute between the BCTF and the BC Public School Employers’ Association (BCPSEA), with the BCTF advocating for strong levels of teacher autonomy and BCPSEA attempting to limit or curtail it. While this article is not the place for a major debate on autonomy, it seems from our Worklife data and from our review of the literature[iii] that autonomy contributes to teachers’ sense of professionalism and promotes greater engagement. The research also suggests that limiting teacher autonomy increases teacher attrition,[iv] as it removes one key factor (autonomy as a reflection of professionalism) which attracts people into teaching.
It’s not just a job
Many teachers who responded to our question about satisfaction in their work were incredibly passionate about teaching, so that teaching, for many respondents, was more about passion for their vocation than about satisfaction with work.
“I love it every day, collaborating with my colleagues, knowing that what I do every day is important; constantly learning.”
“I love working with my students and can’t imagine doing anything else, even though it is a very challenging job. I love knowing that I have made a difference in my students’ lives and helped them to view themselves as capable and successful individuals.”
This repeated expression of passion is perhaps the most fundamental indication of engagement. While it clearly sustained many teachers, there is evidence that such passion can be lost if the work intensifies and becomes unmanageable.
Why and when do teachers disengage?
While few Canadian studies have explored this in any depth, Clandinin et al in Alberta stated: “A problem of concern in Alberta is that a very large number of beginning teachers (approximately 40%) are leaving teaching within their first five years with the highest number leaving between years four and five.”[v]
Eight factors were considered as pertinent to why teachers disengaged, and at first sight at least one of those factors appear to contradict the ideas expressed by Hargreaves and Fullan in Professional Capital:
The teachers in the intentions study and the teachers who left had complex feelings of belonging with colleagues and administrators. As noted above, support from colleagues was not enough to sustain them. Relationships with colleagues were fraught as they often found themselves feeling unsure of who they were, and were becoming, in these landscapes. Mentoring and induction programs were often not seen as safe places to explore their more authentic concerns.[vi]
Achinstein also addressed this issue of conflict in school communities: “The study challenges current thinking on community by showing that conflict is not only central to community, but how teachers manage conflicts, whether they suppress or embrace their differences, defines the community borders and ultimately the potential for organizational learning and change.”[vii]
These different perceptions of community are not contradictory – where school staff interactions are positive, teacher engagement in both community and in teaching is high; but if there is greater conflict than collaboration, then disengagement is the more likely outcome. Simply put, for some teachers who disengaged, the community of school was not the supportive environment described by some in the BCTF Worklife study.
The Alberta study continues the discussion about finding balance between teachers’ work and private lives, suggesting that work-life balance is needed if teacher engagement is to be maintained. Teachers in this study spoke of how they struggled to not let teaching consume them as they tried to maintain health and relationships while facing the pressures of teaching. This and other studies remind us that it may be important to consider both working conditions and career stages when we think about teacher engagement – and especially to consider what Clandinin et al identified when considering the disengagement of new teachers:
There was a misalignment between the needs of the system and the schools in relation to the lives of the teachers. They frequently had to “do anything” in order to obtain contracts and teaching assignments. They frequently took on extra responsibilities at the expense of personal well being and familial needs in order to try to receive contracts and continuing assignments.[viii]
Final thoughts
Teachers are highly engaged in educative processes when they are instrumental to students’ learning and development. They enjoy and benefit from a positive and supportive community of peers. For many teachers, autonomy creates the space for them to find the right teaching approach and to feel that they are trusted as professionals. But for teachers to be optimally engaged and productive, workloads need to be manageable, interactions need to be positive and sustaining, and autonomy needs to be respected and maintained.
First published in Education Canada, September 2013
[i] C. Naylor and M. White, The Worklife of BC Teachers in 2009: A BCTF study of working and learning conditions (Vancouver, BC: BC Teachers‘ Federation, 2010). http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Issues/WorklifeWorkload/2009/FullReport.pdf
[ii] A. Hargreaves, and M. Fullan, Professional Capital: Transforming teaching in every school (New York: Teachers’ College Press, 2012), 60.
[iii] C. Naylor, The Rights and Responsibilities of Teacher Professional Autonomy: A BCTF discussion paper (Vancouver: B.C. Teachers‘ Federation, 2011). http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/ResearchReports/2011-EI-03.pdf
[iv] R. M. Ingersoll, “Short on Power, Long on Responsibility,” Educational Leadership 65, no. 1 (2007): 20–25.
[v] D. J. Clandinin, L. Schaefer, J. S. Long, P. Steeves, S. McKenzie-Robblee, E. Pinnegar, S. Wnuk, Early Career Teacher Attrition: Problems, possibilities, potentials – final report (Edmonton: University of Alberta, April 2012), 3.
[vi] Clandenin et al., Early Career Teacher Attrition, 6.
[vii] B. Achinstein, Community, Diversity, and Conflict among Schoolteachers: The ties that bind (New York: Teachers’ College Press, Columbia University, 2002), 421.
[viii] Clandenin et al., Early Career Teacher Attrition, 6.
-
‘Twas the Night Before School Starts and All Through the House
Comments Off on ‘Twas the Night Before School Starts and All Through the HouseFor most Canadian students, teachers and parents, the Labour Day weekend is a mix of emotions. As the calendar is—reluctantly, for some— flipped from August to September, this three-day weekend is often filled with attempts to tie together the experiences of the preceding couple of months: family trips together, that summer romance, that summer job, playing outside until after dark, those special adventures that are made possible by the extended hours of relative leisure. All of this suddenly bumps up against the reality that, on the other side of the weekend, lies the First Day of School. In many households, the Night Before School Starts has all the markings of a religious vigil. There may be a special meal, special clothes laid out for the next day, some special storytelling and even a special bed time. And accompanying these external signs that mark the occasion, there are often internal cues as well. For many students excitement, anxiety, fear, hope, and anticipation are combined in various ratios to create a soup of emotion that is hard to explain but very easy to recognize. And if you happen to be part of a household led by one or more teachers, then the wonder of this weekend is even richer!
Labour Day has always reminded me of the highest elevation on a roller coaster—that point where everything seems to stop for a very brief time. It’s a moment of anticipatory exhilaration. Although in that tiny moment in time, you’re able to get a brief glimpse of some of the ups and downs, the curves and the loops that lie ahead, you also know that there is so much about what is going to take place that is out of your control. Physicists will tell you that this brief pause occurs just before the potential energy that has been stored during the coaster’s long climb up the hill is tranlated into the kinetic energy that drives the thrilling descent that is about to occur! There’s a rather ironic sense in which Labour Day represents that mystical transition between building energy and putting it to work!
For the Hurley family, we try to keep as much of our Labour Day to ourselves, resisting those invitations for dinner, a swim or a visit that were so freely extended and accepted during the rest of the summer. We have a special breakfast, try to get out into the woods for a walk, go and see a movie (it’s Planes, this year) and head home for a simple dinner and a bath before heading for an early bed. The early bed is important because we know that at least one of us will be awake during the week with the First Day Jitters. (In the past, that has usually been me!)
But just like you rarely look behind you on a roller coaster, Labour Day is mostly a time of hopeful anticipation. As I drag my body to bed, after a day of trying to squeeze that make the most of the last remnants of summer, and as my head finally hits the pillow, the sugarplums that dance through my head are almost always sweet. Tonight, they will be thoughts of the many educators that I have met over the past year in my travels across the country. They will be dreams of renewed conversations about transformation and change in our schools, of more powerful forms of engagement for both students and teachers. They will be hopes for strong connections between community and school. They will be inspired by SIr Ken Robinson’s continued plea for imagination and creativity and Ron Canuel’s consistent message of courage and conviction.
And just before I nod off to sleep, my final thoughts will likely be of Merrill Mathews, Mary Marshall and the staff of Irma Coulson Public School in Milton, Ontario. They have been working tirelessly all summer to get a brand new school ready for tomorrow’s opening. And they’ve spent their entire Labour Day weekend putting the final touches on the place where my family and I will be living, learning and growing for the next several years! On the one hand, it’s a rather personal example, but it’s also a metaphor for what I have come to understand about Labour Day: a time to think about brand new starts, new hopes and new challenges.
‘Twas the Night Before School Starts and All Through the House…
I would love to hear about your Labour Day rituals and some of the things that may be going through your mind as you and your family begin another school year? What are your hopes and dreams for 2013/2014? As an educator, are you using any new approaches or strategies this year? As a parent, is there a new program or initiative that you’re interested in tackling? As a student, is there a new challenge that you’re planning on taking on?
-
What is a Teacher’s Expertise?
Comments Off on What is a Teacher’s Expertise?What exactly do teachers do that justifies the claim to be a professional? What is the body of unique expertise that defines a teacher? If you ask that question of most teachers—or parents or students—you are liable to get a rambling response that makes reference to training or experience, and perhaps to some specific disciplinary expertise or personal charisma, but never really answers the question.
-
What Leads to Engagement?
Comments Off on What Leads to Engagement?In my last post I noted that student learning depends upon intellectual engagement and that a teacher’s task was to evoke that engagement. This begs the question of what it is that causes students to be engaged.
By this I mean not what a teacher does towards this end—that is the subject of my next blog—but rather what thoughts and feelings within the student lead to engagement in learning. How to get there is, of course, an important question, but first we need to clear about what response we aim to create within the student that will result in engagement.
The big message from the CEA research on the topic of engagement (What Did You Do In School Today? or WDYIST and the various subsequent reports) is that student engagement depends upon their perception of meaning. The first report on this research, in 2009, comments that:
… the work students undertake also needs to be relevant, meaningful and authentic—in other words, it needs to be worthy of their time and attention. Too frequently, the work students are asked to do does not allow them to use their minds well or to experience the life and vitality of real, intellectually rigorous work. Once fragmented, school work loses its intrinsic, disciplinary and intellectual meaning. In this form, the work cannot have any meaning or value to students beyond the achievement of high marks. (p. 34)
When students find what they are learning to be “worthy of their time” they are much more likely to have a genuine intellectual and emotional commitment to the process. Thus, the first aspect of student response that is liable to lead to engagement is Connection—the sense that the questions being explored and the understandings being developed are relevant and meaningful for them. Curiosity is useful, but not sufficient; without a sense that the topic is also significant, curiosity wanes quickly. This, of course, is entirely a matter of personal perception. The teacher can, and should, present material in ways that invite students to appreciate its relevance, but you can’t argue them into that perception.
Connection is a good, probably necessary, beginning but it is not sufficient. In addition, engagement requires the student to have the perception of Self-Efficacy–the belief that s/he is capable of success in the tasks at hand. This doesn’t mean it has to be easy, just that it has to be within potential reach. In fact, the WDYDIST research suggests that challenging tasks are more engaging, but the level of challenge must be consistent with the level of skill. Students should as often as possible be asked to work at the limits of their ability, where they are not yet quite capable of independent work but require some guidance and assistance (aka scaffolding) and yet not frustrated by inability. If they have the sense that what they are asked to do is meaningful and, with effort and support, achievable, students are more likely to find it engaging.
The potential for engagement increases further if students have the perception of Agency—the sense that they can exercise some control over their learning and thus are able to shape it to their interests to at least a reasonable degree. This does not mean that they can simply do what they like and learn what they wish—there is, after all, a curriculum—but within the scope of the learning task and consistent with its design, students should have as much control as is practically possible over how to focus their efforts and what means to use in completing the task.
The experienced curriculum is never the same as the intended curriculum, and there is always more going on in student’s minds than we know—which can be good or bad. When students can influence the focus and the means of their learning, this inescapable variation in student experience can serve to increase alignment with individual interests, needs and abilities. It becomes a means of “personalization” that deepens engagement and thus enriches learning.
If students have the perception of Connection to a learning task, Self-Efficacy in relation to it successful completion, and Agency in regards to how it is conducted there is a good likelihood that they will choose to engage with it in a genuinely committed manner rather than merely completing it to invite praise and/or avoid criticism from the teacher.
Students can motivated externally through various combinations of carrots and sticks but such a behaviourist approach to the teacher-student relationship does not lead to engagement, only compliance at best. Engagement must be internally motivated, and that depends upon student perceptions that ignite the desire to learn and the willingness to undertake the struggle that learning requires. In the end, teachers cannot engage students, they must engage themselves, but the teacher is responsible for creating the conditions under which this is liable to occur.
In my next blog, I will consider the expertise that teachers bring to bear in order to evoke these generative perceptions in their students.
Previous Blog – What is Good Teaching?Next Blog – What is a Teacher’s Expertise?
IDEAS TO SUPPORT EDUCATORS : Subscribe to the EdCan e-Newsletter
Quality research, reports, and professional learning opportunities.