Archive

• A District Wide Blueprint for Change

  December 13, 2012 7:49 PM Comments Off on A District Wide Blueprint for Change

  Four years ago, our district focused on “TechEd”, or Technology in Education. Today our focus has shifted to  “EdTech”, Education enhanced by Technology. 

  This strategic movement meant that the focus was no longer on equipment – gone was the tech plan, gone was the laptop implementation plan, and gone was the focus on computer to student ratios. The Tech Plan was replaced with an interdepartmental discussion paper – BluePrint for Change – “Towards 2020 Connecting with our Students”.  Symbolically, gone was the Information Technology Department and replaced by the Learning Technologies Department, where the focus would remain on learning, not on equipment. The title, Superintendent of IT, was replaced by Superintendent of Student Success – Learning Technologies. The term ‘21^st Century Learning’ was replaced in our Board Priorities with ‘Learning in the 21^st Century’. 

  We believe that the most important factor in student success is the classroom teacher and the professional relationship with each student in the classroom. As Michael Fullan points out in his book “Stratosphere”, the essential combination of: changes in pedagogy, knowledge of the change process, and technology, will help move an entire district rather than just having a few technology stars staggered across the district. True innovation means doing things differently and not just adding SmartBoards and Wireless infrastructure to an existing instructional model. We don’t want to use 21^st Century tools with a 20^th Century pedagogy. Content posted on a SmartBoard for students to take notes on their iPad – is not the type of change that we proposed for our Board.  

  Content posted on a SmartBoard for students to take notes on their iPad – is not the type of change that we proposed for our Board.  

  Our innovative practice included transitioning a traditional central library, to a web 2.0 library management system, and revamping the libraries from quiet locations that focused on the storage of books, to vibrant learning commons that focused on inquiry and student learning with flexible furniture and the availability of high interest print resources and rich digital media via mobile devices.

  Changing practice also meant cancelling projects that were not aligned with our key Board priorities of Success for Students, Success for Staff, and Stewardship of Resources. Cancelled was the award winning robotics program, cancelled was the LeadIT laptop cart project, cancelled was the traditional refresh of computer labs. When we opened a new elementary school this past year, innovation meant that we ordered no desks, no reference books, no TVs, no VCR/DVDs, and no blackboards. In their place instead you will find, flexible modular furniture grouped for collaboration, digital resources, SmartBoards, iPads and Netbooks, and most importantly, a staff involved in a professional learning network to improve their teaching practice. Staff use web 2.0 tools to co-construct rubrics and to display exemplars, mobile devices to record student voice and to provide feedback, Google Docs to allow for collaborative writing, Google hangouts and Skype to connect with others around the Board and around the World.  The result is a high level of engagement for both staff and students.

  Our District transformation included changing policies to allow the use of social media by staff and students. Significantly decreased filtering practices occurred to allow the use of rich teaching sites including YouTube. Policies were changed to allow students to bring their own devices to school to assist with their learning. Inquiry learning for principals, superintendents, and teachers, focused on areas such as assessment, numeracy, or literacy. Within each of the inquiry questions there was a role for technology to support the change in teacher practice.

  Our district of 37,000 students has over 28,000 mobile devices connecting to the wireless network each day. This statistic on its own is meaningless; however, a learning walk through classrooms will witness students using a variety of devices to focus on collaboration, to communicate, and to creatively problem solve.

  Our district of 37,000 students has over 28,000 mobile devices connecting to the wireless network each day. This statistic on its own is meaningless; however, a learning walk through classrooms will witness students using a variety of devices to focus on collaboration, to communicate, and to creatively problem solve. Learning in the 21^st Century is a vibrant and engaging process – one that requires much more than the investment in equipment.

• Designing Creative Confidence

  December 12, 2012 3:34 PM Comments Off on Designing Creative Confidence

   

  So whenever I am asked a question, my response is to ask several questions back. Why do we need innovation in education NOW? What is innovation in education? What is the purpose of innovation in education? What is innovation?

  At this point, with the knowledge I have, I would describe innovation as the use of insights to create ideas to implement systemic change. Let me go even deeper into what I mean about that. There are many ways in which you could activate on innovation, and I will describe just one of the ways.

  As a designer and social entrepreneur, it is my job to be a multi-disciplinary thinker; I thrive on finding intersections from alternative spaces to start to explore opportunities, generate connections, and facilitate the process of taking ideas to action. I am a huge advocate for how design thinking for educators is the way forward. Design thinking understands the process of how we make decisions, collaborate across sectors, survey the true landscape of what is going on, view things from other perspectives, prototype ideas, learn from mistakes and build confidence in creativity. If schools kill creativity, let’s look at why? It is time to reclaim your creative confidence and get over the four fears that are stopping us, “fear of the messy unknown, fear of being judged, fear of the first step, and fear of losing control”, Tom and David Kelley, of IDEO.

  The number one thing stopping innovation from happening is; ideas are nothing without execution.

  I bet you are thinking, first you need an idea before there can be execution. You are right. Ideas in innovation in education have been floating around for a long time. Did you know that Sir Ken Robinson’s first report “Learning Through Drama: Report of The Schools Council Drama Teaching Project” was produced in 1977? How did I know that? Well, Wikipedia of course! There is more information accessible now then there ever has been before. Ideas are simply everywhere. But who is taking those ideas to action? Who is going to make that big jump?

  I am going to take a stance; the ideas are out there and we are being asked for a revolution, according to Sir Ken, but I think the revolution is going to come in small waves; from the ground up, from the corners of the system, from the fringes, from the Islands of Excellence. It is the swell of good stuff that pushes the edges, that inspires more, and lets us learn!

  I am going to take a stance; the ideas are out there and we are being asked for a revolution, according to Sir Ken, but I think the revolution is going to come in small waves; from the ground up, from the corners of the system, from the fringes, from the Islands of Excellence. It is the swell of good stuff that pushes the edges, that inspires more, and lets us learn!

  Innovation is going to feel uncomfortable. It is entering the unknown, testing out an assumption, relying on the tingly senses deep in your intuition, asking for help, sometimes making a fool of yourself but then persevering through the trenches of nerves and finally being able to look back and say “Wow!”

  That “Wow!” means so much. It means you did it, it means you put yourself out there just a bit more, you experienced the thrill of the unknown, imagined a different future, and most importantly put an idea into action.

  We are all part of the future of education,. We have to rise above the fear and challenge our relationship with failure. Not only is it time to reclaim our creative confidence, it is time to reclaim failure too. For too long, failure has had a bad reputation and it is time for a comeback. Admitting failure is the first step to embracing all that can be learned from mistakes.

  Innovation in education is going to come from every level of the system. It is not going to be easy. It is going to take time and it will be substantially worth it.

  Call to Action: Go out there and try out an idea you have been thinking about for a long time or even a short time, find people to help you out, talk about your idea, make a plan of attack, don’t worry about failing – it will be great! And don’t forget to share on #IOE2012

• Striking the Right Balance Between Innovation and Improvement

  December 11, 2012 5:20 PM Comments Off on Striking the Right Balance Between Innovation and Improvement

  Writing in Education Canada last year, Ben Levin made an interesting distinction between innovation and improvement as they relate to education. Noting that “too much focus on innovation could distract us from what is both possible and desirable in order to pursue goals that may be desirable but are not very possible”, he suggested a balance between the two, erring on the side of exploiting what we know (improvement) versus exploring what we don’t know (innovation).

  Striking the right balance between innovation and improvement is important for a host of reasons – advances in the science of learning with corresponding implications for pedagogy; finding ways to meet varied and complex student needs, and adapting teaching to the learning styles of an increasingly diverse student population; preparing students to meet the challenges of a complex, diverse, uncertain global world.

  Many factors can hinder education innovation. For example, compliance with externally imposed data-driven accountability mandates favouring short-term gains on narrow measures of performance is not conducive to allowing teachers to explore different pedagogical approaches in their classrooms.

  In general, being innovative is equated with new technology in the business world – designing a new application for the growing number of digital devices on the market. It seems that innovation today is all about the quest for the next big App.

  Similarly, innovation in education, tied to vague notions of 21st century learning, is often viewed as the use of technology in schools. As innovations go, technology in schools does not have a stellar track record.

  Many factors can hinder education innovation. For example, compliance with externally imposed data-driven accountability mandates favouring short-term gains on narrow measures of performance is not conducive to allowing teachers to explore different pedagogical approaches in their classrooms.

  This may be because, as Ron Canuel observes in his blog post, efforts to use new technologies in the classroom have focused on equipment and infrastructure at the expense of the inter-relationship among pedagogy, curriculum and technology. For example, since 1998, Alberta has spent nearly $2 billion on technology for schools, mostly for hardware with a small percentage of these investments allocated for teacher professional development.

  Ensuring optimal conditions of professional practice are in place to allow teachers to effectively use new technologies to truly enhance teaching and learning is critically important. This includes providing access to up-to-date equipment and other technological resources, ensuring equitable student access to technology, increased technical support, and provision of appropriate, ongoing and timely professional development and training to enable teachers to keep up with the rapid pace of technological change and utilize new technology to effectively support learning.

  Teachers also need time to experiment with technology, and they must be supported in using their professional autonomy and judgment to determine the best use of new technology to support learning. And as Hargreaves and Fullan put it in Professional Capital, we need to focus on curriculum and pedagogy as the “drivers” for learning, with technology as the “accelerator”.

  Teachers also need time to experiment with technology, and they must be supported in using their professional autonomy and judgment to determine the best use of new technology to support learning. And as Hargreaves and Fullan put it in Professional Capital, we need to focus on curriculum and pedagogy as the “drivers” for learning, with technology as the “accelerator”.

  All of this needs to be grounded in a bold vision of the future of public education in Canada – what kind of Canada do we want, and what kind of education system will get us there?

  I recently heard Stephen Murgatroyd speak on the subject of technology in the classroom. He summed up the challenges we face in this way: How do we leverage current and rapidly emerging technologies to increase the quality, depth and meaning of adult-student interactions in education, and to increase student engagement with learning, knowledge and understanding so as to encourage their passion for learning?

  Perhaps it’s time the debate about how we create the conditions for educational success for all students – through both innovation and improvement – became itself a little more innovative.

• Innovation is the Beautiful Chaos that 28 Young Learners Create

  December 10, 2012 8:20 PM Comments Off on Innovation is the Beautiful Chaos that 28 Young Learners Create

  “When we are no longer to change a situation; we are challenged to change ourselves.”  Victor Frankl

  Imagine the beautiful chaos that a class full of 4- and 5-year-old learners can create as they hypothesize, inquire and explore their way through a full day of learning. In early October, I was talking about that very thing with the teacher and early childhood educator from one of our Full Day Kindergarten teams. They articulated the challenges of capturing this learning and expressed how the tools that they had believed they would be using in their classrooms were not quite up to the task. Together we wondered how to document, share and connect this rich, varied and deep learning?

  That’s the thing about learning when it happens in an authentic context that is driven by the learner; it’s difficult to capture, synthesize and share the magic – so difficult that we tend to manage the chaos by regulating the learning and confining it to tasks and tools that are easier for us to control and measure. It’s not done with malice; after all, how many of us were trained to lead classrooms where individual learners are asking their own questions and engaging in their own inquiries? Or, how many schools or systems are designed to provide the resources and support for teachers use their own questions to guide their professional inquiries?

  That’s the thing about learning when it happens in an authentic context that is driven by the learner; it’s difficult to capture, synthesize and share the magic – so difficult that we tend to manage the chaos by regulating the learning and confining it to tasks and tools that are easier for us to control and measure.

  Innovation involves assessing the current reality and changing aspects of that reality so improvement and efficiency can occur. That is why, for me, innovation in education is so important. Our children are challenging us to think and act differently about learning; the ways we design learning spaces, the tools we use and how we mobilize our professional knowledge. They are inviting us to join them and shift our beliefs on how we plan for learning, how we document learning and how we connect this learning with the world of ‘school’ and beyond.

  Let’s return to the classroom. The beautiful chaos of our 28 young learners has opened an inquiry for the two young educators who posed the problem of practice back in the fall. They are exploring the ways they can use iPads to document the learning process in the classroom; through video, photos and audio they share this learning with each other, the students and their families. They are watching more and talking less, asking more questions and giving fewer directions; there is less whole group teaching time on the carpet and more small-group and one-on-one instruction at the learning centres – still beautiful, but with less chaos.

  

  CC photo courtesy of: MikeOliveri

  Public schools must be places of inclusion where each child’s talents and assets are known and acted upon and where the questions of the learner are the starting point for inquiry. These are ideas that challenge each of us involved in public education to change and innovate. It is the most important work we need to do and many of us have already begun – have you?

• Classroom Innovation Means Giving Up Control

  December 7, 2012 6:55 PM Comments Off on Classroom Innovation Means Giving Up Control

  Newton’s First Law of Motion:

  An object at rest will remain at rest unless acted on by an unbalanced force. An object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

   This law is often called “the law of inertia”.

  (more…)

• Innovation in Education Through Failing

  December 6, 2012 8:32 PM Comments Off on Innovation in Education Through Failing

  We are indeed living in interesting times. Never before have we seen such widespread agreement across countries around the globe that the key lever for their economic futures is education; just not the type of education we currently have. Such a paradox must surely challenge our long held beliefs in upholding the status quo. Indeed it would seem the question is no longer should we change the education our young people are currently receiving, to rather, by how much should the change happen.

  Indeed it would seem the question is no longer should we change the education our young people are currently receiving, to rather, by how much should the change happen.

  To date, it’s fair to suggest incremental would be the most optimistic way of describing the change that has taken place in a limited number of schools to date, rather than anything fundamental, radical or disruptive. Yet as we let the years go by, debating the nature of change, its virtue and the possibilities, legions of young people continue to march their way through our schools, tolerating traditions that have long lost both their meaning and purpose.

  So now we see a new entry point to the dilemma, called Innovation. While it is largely semantics to review to what extent change, innovation, reimagining, rethinking et al are targeting similar end points, though taking different journeys, it seems that innovation is the most palatable to educators and educational leaders.

  I recently asked a global audience of teachers, ‘when was your last failure?’, and was met with largely blank stares. At the recent New York Maker Fair, Seth Godin referred to the value of ‘learning by doing things wrong’…which after all is the way that most of us learn, most of the time? Not just in an academic sense but even more so in physical sports or crafts, cooking or trades we are continually learning by doing things wrong, because…we take risks; we try something out to see if it works; to see if we can do it well…yet how often do we see that practice encouraged within our schools?

  So now we see a new entry point to the dilemma, called Innovation. While it is largely semantics to review to what extent change, innovation, reimagining, rethinking et al are targeting similar end points, though taking different journeys, it seems that innovation is the most palatable to educators and educational leaders.

  In such presentations I like to talk about one of our best-known ‘failers’, James Dyson. While vacuuming his home, he became frustrated with the lousy suction of his vacuum cleaner. The bag and filter clogged too quickly, reducing the suction to the point where it didn’t work. Over 15 years, he built 5,126 prototypes before he found the one that worked – 15 years and 5,126 failures. How did he find the solution? “Wrong doing.” His mantra… fail fast, and iterate to another possibility; be agile, don’t spend all your time planning something that might be based on wrong design assumptions; develop a Minimum Viable Product and try it out. Do we ever think that way about innovation in our schools?… because that is the way large companies today develop new ideas, new products and new services. I wonder if Dyson had reflected on his school experience as being lousy, would he have innovated for a better solution 5,000+ times until he found one ‘that worked’? No he wouldn’t, and none of us ever do… not 5,000 times, but sadly for most, not even once… and yet we generally agree too much of what we offer is lousy.

  If you work at Valve, one of the largest online gaming companies in the world, they state very clearly in their New Employees Manual…”No-one has ever been fired at Valve for making mistakes. It wouldn’t make sense for us to operate that way. Providing the freedom to fail is an important trait within the company. We couldn’t expect so much of our individuals if we penalized people for errors. “ Could it be that our loathing of failure within schools results not so much in high standards, but rather low ones?

  You see, I think any discussion around innovation in our schools, across any dimension, within the projects, pedagogy, or whole school reform, but first embrace the concept of learning from failure, from doing things wrong. Building a culture that supports risk-taking – an anathema to many school leaders. Until we can do that, we will continue to be limited to marginal instrumentalism, which will aggravate the problem rather than solve it

• Maybe I’m In an Innovation Echo Chamber

  December 5, 2012 1:50 PM Comments Off on Maybe I’m In an Innovation Echo Chamber

  A confession: I get really excited when I read about innovation in education and innovative teachers.  I get excited about things like the CEA’s What Did You Do in School Today? initiative.

  Some people turn cartwheels when the latest real estate stats come out. Not me – I’m an education innovation junkie and I can stand up and shout it from the rooftops.

  Ron Canuel’s question, “Why Do We Need Innovation in Education” is just the sort of thing that gets me pacing the floorboards.

  When I thought about writing this post, I also thought a lot about definitions, and how mine might be different than yours. What is innovation??

  MAYBE innovation is using and experimenting with new tools that can improve the education experience for students, teachers and parents. The new tools might be technologies – like blogging platforms as a way to promote literacy, communicate with the world outside the classroom, and build a digital profile in a world where that online footprint is a critical piece.  The new tools might be better-designed spaces that respect learners’ physical and psychological needs, their safety, and environmental considerations. The new tools might be platforms for collaboration & self-improvement; for establishing real-time/anytime Personal Learning Networks beyond the standard monthly meeting format so that learning happens when we’re ready and when we have time, and with people beyond our usual geographical reach. These platforms are open and available whether you are a parent, teacher, or student. They are available whether you’re in rural B.C., inner city Regina, or suburban Montreal.

  MAYBE innovation is putting new, good research into practice. Taking what we now know, and reflecting it in the way we perform our jobs, treat professionals, and design programming for our learners. Things like emerging neuroscience that begins to unlock the mysteries of the teenage brain, and reveals the specific needs of learners at that critical age. The impact of exercise on the brain, and how that relates to the amount of time that students spend moving vs. sitting in a day. New thinking on creativity, and how to encourage it. Language acquisition. Careers and guidance support that opens up futures rather than closing doors and building silos.

  MAYBE innovation is being open to hear important new voices. I think about the student voice – the actual “user” who sits through the day of classes, uses the resources provided, and is ultimately accountable for his/her performance. The community voice – where there may be a goldmine of perspectives, skills, and services that can support schools and teachers and students when resources are scant, and when they have something important to contribute. Integrating the voice of new creators beyond the established school network of publishing giants, where board resource decisions can be cemented during yearly golf tournaments. And last but not least, the voice of the new teachers who come out of their training fresh, ready, and keen, and are then quashed by stubborn school structures and superiors who feel threatened, resistant, and unwilling to listen.

  If we know that the current standardized testing methods don’t lead to student achievement and engagement, then why can’t we change it? Why can’t we knock tired, old paradigms off their lofty pillars and try something new?

  MAYBE innovation is planting the seeds for the future and setting up systems that push the status quo, that force questioning, and that intend to disrupt the things that we know don’t work because they aren’t working, aren’t meeting the needs of students, and we need to do something better. If we know that the current standardized testing methods don’t lead to student achievement and engagement, then why can’t we change it? Why can’t we knock tired, old paradigms off their lofty pillars and try something new? We don’t have to accept what we have the power to change, if we think in terms of innovation and openness. Why do we feel that we are locked down? If we really take a look at the world and how our learners will make a place in it, we can’t resist change to protect our egos and our jobs and to avoid feeling uncomfortable because the change is really hard.

  I like shiny things. I like change, movement, innovation, being uncomfortable and doing something about it. A good friend of mine recently changed jobs, surprisingly, because he wanted to feel that discomfort that comes with new learning, like an itch that can actually be scratched by inserting oneself in a totally new environment.

  I spend a lot of time on Twitter, looking for information and connecting with people. I am in an echo chamber, but that’s how I like it, because I see such good stuff and I feel part of a movement that takes innovation in education seriously. I see my colleagues and connections wax extremely elegantly in blogs, in presentations, and in conversations.

  However, it takes me away from reality and what is actually happening, and then I get frustrated when the new, the change, the movement isn’t happening where I am. As a parent I am involved, and as a child, sister, niece, and friend of teachers I feel like I have some inside information, but I have deeply invested myself in education and in dedicating my work to pushing the agenda.

  We ask students to approach a math problem from a variety of positions, to explore, to estimate, to talk it out, to work together, and to use new strategies. Can we, as parents, teachers, and school leaders, tackle what needs to change in our school system in the same way?

  We ask students to approach a math problem from a variety of positions, to explore, to estimate, to talk it out, to work together, and to use new strategies. Can we, as parents, teachers, and school leaders, tackle what needs to change in our school system in the same way?

  So in my real life, my own kid brings home homework like writing a sentence a day. Memorizing a list of spelling words – a giant project that will require me to spend $50 in supplies from the art store and the hardware store. Things that suspiciously look like busy work.

  In my digital life, I see teachers setting up Minecraft servers, or writing about their students’ digital portfolios. Connecting globally on collaboration projects.

  In my real life, I have an agenda book to sign every day. In the past, I’ve been unable to email a teacher because that teacher has decided not to learn how to use email.

  In my digital life, I see systems that bring together schools, students, and parents in communication portals. I see teachers who participate in weekly Twitter chats to enhance their knowledge of their subject areas.

  How do I support innovation in my own backyard without being a nag, and a thorn in someone’s side? Do I have the right to push as I do? To call people out? To ask why, and why not? Why do I have to keep asking, and asking again why Alfie Kohn’s research on homework doesn’t manage to trickle down into the practices in schools, and not get an answer, and home come the worksheets?

  Why can schools and teachers opt out of innovation?

  When will we see an end to the disparity?

• CEA Blog Focus on Innovation: Week One

  December 3, 2012 7:09 PM Comments Off on CEA Blog Focus on Innovation: Week One

  As expected, the first week of CEA’s blog campaign related to innovation in public education presented an interesting mix of voices, with each author offering a perspective steeped in their own set of unique experiences, values and passions. Although each this contributor admitted an awareness of the systemic challenges inherent in attempting to build an innovative spirit within Canada’s public schools, each entry presented a different angle and a unique opportunity to view this moment in time a little differently.

  Bruce Beairsto started things off with a recognition that, while the freedom to innovate has always been part of the individual life of teaching professionals, systemic barriers often prevent these ideas and approaches from spilling out of individual classrooms to affect a whole lot beyond the local school. Beairsto calls for a disruption of some of what makes school practices so comfortable, so familiar and so resistant to substantial change. The support of stronger cultures of collaborative practice, coupled with a systemic recognition that professionals need time built in to their work—time for professional reflection and learning, and grounded in a stronger, more dynamic connection between the classroom and the university are three important structural changes that, according to Beairsto, would result in greater support for an innovative spirit.

  The call for systemic change was echoed later in the week by Sandi Urban-Hall, current President of the Canadian School Boards Association. Urban-Hall shoots an arrow directly into the heart of the conversation by grounding her call for systemic change in the demand that educational opportunities not be a function of geography or social standing, but the right of all students. Ultimately, this is going to require that elected school boards be given the resources and authority necessary to respond courageously to the needs of their individual communities and contexts. Only then will our school systems be able to match the type of innovation that is occurring in most other arenas of the Canadian social life.

  David Price has a proven track record as a persistent and radical innovator, and believes strongly that the moral imperative to discover and offer the best to each of our students is too strong to be diminished by systemic resistance. In Price’s mind (and experience) innovation provides an important source of engagement for both students and educators, involving participants in something compelling and exciting. It is clear to him that current models of education are lacking in this regard, and are quickly being overshadowed by resources, approaches and technologies now readily available beyond the schoolhouse. For David Price, the fact that innovation does not appear to be well-supported in public education should not serve as an excuse or a reason not to pursue it!

  Finally, Ben Levin admits that, while all organizations need a certain degree of innovation, the number of failed initiatives scattered across the history public education demand of us a greater sense of caution and thoughtfulness when considering what should be supported by our systems. In particular, there needs to be a reasonable expectation that an innovation will be likely to succeed before jumping in with both feet. Research-based evidence, professional wisdom and good theoretical grounding are presented as three of the prime criteria for evaluating potential initiatives. Just as important for Levin, however, (and this will resonate with many) is the idea that, once the effectiveness of an idea has been proven, it should be adopted and supported system-wide.

  There is a great deal of wisdom in each of these responses. From the tempered and somewhat cautious approach of Ben Levin to the spirited and dogged attitude of David Price, the week’s contributions lay some important groundwork for the conversations that will follow during the month of December. For me, some of the essential questions that need to be asked have to do with the type of system that is going to provide the best chance of attaining the ideals of equitable opportunity expressed by both Sandi and David.

  And while talk of structural change is important what ends are being best served by this change? Higher achievement scores? Increased graduation rates? Greater levels of engagement? A more democratic society? Happier citizens?

  So, as we move into week two of the discussion, I invite you to consider a few questions that might act as a way of connecting some of the threads presented by our authors over the past week. You may feel compelled to jump in with some responses, or you may have your own emerging questions that could be even more helpful in moving the conversation forward.

  Here are some of the ideas going through my own mind:

  1. What “modern” examples of educational innovation-that-has-taken-root are you able to identify? What has enabled these to find a home?
  2. What have been some of the most promising innovations with which you have been involved? As an educator, a parent, a student, an administrator?
  3. What one change to the structure/organization of schools would have the most impact on encouraging the type of innovation that you might like to see?
  4. What is standing in the way of that one change being made?
  5. In your mind, what is the essential difference between innovation and improvement? Is it an important distinction to make?

• Innovation requires the understanding that learning takes place every day; everywhere.

  November 30, 2012 3:48 PM Comments Off on Innovation requires the understanding that learning takes place every day; everywhere.

  Depending on whom you ask, innovation will mean drastically different things. When discussing “education innovation” you will elicit, at minimum, a public debate if not one rooted in longstanding organizational or political “positions”. There lies the rub. We, collectively, need to get past our territorial positions and examine the purpose of public education and how we ensure that students will aspire to reach high standards. Starting with the belief that “all students feel safe and are safe; that they have similar opportunities to dream; to learn and to achieve regardless of where the live or their personal circumstance” – demonstrates that the publically funded education system must look at how education is delivered. By accepting that belief, you accept that we cannot deliver education in the “same old way”. Reflect on the education system when you were a student – how many students dropped out; how many students requiring intensive supports were in your classroom? It was acceptable for the education system to forget about the students who didn’t fit the model of instruction.

  When you walk into a classroom, does it look or feel much different than when you attended? Now look around your home, what has changed? How have you embraced innovation in your home and lifestyle? What has changed since you were a kid? I’m forty-something and the changes within my lifetime are staggering. Yet, over the same period, what systematic changes have we seen in the classroom?

  When you walk into a classroom, does it look or feel much different than when you attended? Now look around your home, what has changed? How have you embraced innovation in your home and lifestyle? What has changed since you were a kid? I’m forty-something and the changes within my lifetime are staggering. Yet, over the same period, what systematic changes have we seen in the classroom?

  There are individuals who are very innovative in their teaching practices – but why hasn’t there been systematic change? When I ask my colleagues and other educational leaders, I hear the litany of constraints. Disagreements surrounding assessment practices; organizational positions; public expectations; dependency on provincial governments for funding; media “shock and awe”; fear of change and the “when I went to school” mentality ties the system in knots and throws the brakes on real change .

  Innovation is more than technology. Innovation includes the teaching of the 3 R’s and embraces the 7 C’s (Creativity, Innovation & Entrepreneurship; Critical Thinking, Collaboration, Communication, Character, Culture & Ethical Citizenship, and Computer & Digital Technologies). It requires the understanding that learning takes place every day; everywhere. It is the acceptance that we all grow and learn in our own way in our own time. It is the acceptance that what served us well in 1950, 1980 or 2000 may not serve us well today. Innovation is the ability to wrap kids in a safe learning environment that inspires and challenges them; a learning environment that prepares them for a future we can’t imagine. Innovation is happening in individual classrooms and in small geographic pockets throughout our country. For real change – dramatic change – systemic change – change has to happen at the policy level – with the elected – at all levels.

  I have witnessed Boards of Education demonstrating courageous leadership and making foundational changes within their system only to be pulled through the courts of public opinion and forced back to the traditional education model.

  I have witnessed Boards of Education demonstrating courageous leadership and making foundational changes within their system only to be pulled through the courts of public opinion and forced back to the traditional education model. Education needs the help of community and business leaders to press government to allow education to evolve to meet today and tomorrow’s needs. Governments must return the reigns of education back to boards of education rather than continue the slow and methodical strangulation that increasing centralization is imposing. Boards require the ability to build a climate that encourages and supports innovation; a system that responds to the needs of individual students and communities. Incremental tweaking of the current system will not work.

  Boards of Education cannot wait for Government; we must do what we were elected to do – to Lead. So how do we kick start this level of change? By Embracing It! Through Advocacy! Through Leadership! By defining outcomes not outputs. Student engagement and success depends on it.

  n.b. The opinions expressed in this blog post are those of Sandi Urban-Hall and not of the CSBA.

• Innovation in Education: Why Don’t The Game Changers Change The Game?

  November 28, 2012 4:36 PM Comments Off on Innovation in Education: Why Don’t The Game Changers Change The Game?

  Ron Canuel recently asked ‘why do we need innovation in education?’ I’m an Editorial Board Member of CEA’s flagship publication, Education Canada, so I have to declare an interest in blogging about this. But it’s a perfectly valid, if surprising, question to ask. Surprising, because it’s hard to imagine captains of industry asking themselves ‘do we need more innovation in (say) manufacturing? Or medicine, or technology?  But it’s valid to ask, because so few education innovations seem to stick, and scale-up. The ‘game changers’ rarely seem to change the game.

  Ron, himself, gives one good reason for the comparative lack of innovation: that accountability frameworks don’t recognize innovation as a yardstick to be measured. So, education systems tend to value compliance , conformity, even complacency, above experimentation.

  He’s right, of course, though just because we’re not being rewarded for innovation, is insufficient reason not to do it. Educators have a moral purpose – to strive to find the best learning for each individual in their care – and that should always trump keeping governments off our backs. That takes courage, of course, and school leaders, especially the less experienced ones, need time to build their courage. A Head Teacher of a highly innovative school in England, was taking a bunch of visitors around the school this week. He was asked ‘what progress have you made this year against the targets from the last OFSTED (our national inspections agency) visit?’ ‘None’, came the reply to a confused silence. ‘We haven’t tried to – it’s not important’. If only we had more school leaders who showed such determination not to be blown off-course by the constantly shifting winds of government. School leaders have a lot more autonomy than they often claim to have. But because it’s  such a tough job, it’s sometimes frankly easier to work to the targets and priorities someone else has set for you, and blame them when it doesn’t work.

  There are, however, another couple of explanations for the lack of innovation. 

  First, there’s the dreaded ‘guinea-pig’ syndrome, where any attempt to try something new is met with ‘so you’re going to use these children as guinea-pigs in your experiment, are you?’  I’m baffled by this reaction (and parents and politicians are equally guilty here) for two reasons: First, how many medical breakthroughs would we have missed if people had refused to take part in clinical trials? More accurately, it’s not the patients who are refusing the clinical trial. Kids generally enjoy being part of a new initiative. It’s the guardians of their interests who resist.

  Second,  there’s the ‘not-invented here-syndrome’ . Most of the truly exciting innovations in education are trialled on the ‘terminally ill’: the students for whom nothing seems to be working.  But the treatment would work just as well on other students. The CEA have recently rewarded one such initiative: The Oasis Skateboard Factory. This is an alternative school in Toronto for kids for whom mainstream schooling just doesn’t work. I urge you to take a little time to watch it. Listen to Craig, the founder of the school, and listen to the students. And then tell me, what is it about this innovation that wouldn’t work in mainstream schooling?

  It’s such a compelling argument for offering some kids (if not most) a more authentic, project and enterprise-based approach to learning. My experience of showing new models of learning to educators, or policy makers, usually gets the same reaction Ron Canuel refers to: ‘that’s interesting, but it wouldn’t work in our school’. When the Musical Futures model I helped develop was drawing attention from schools in other countries, I did the politically correct thing by saying that cultural contexts would need different approaches, and that student outcomes would probably be different. But, inside I was thinking, ‘kids are not that different all over the world, so this should work just the same, wherever you are’. The reality has been just that. In seven countries the impact on kids is pretty much the same, wherever you go, for the reasons stated so elequently in the Oasis video.

  I’ve been researching business models of innovation for the book I’m writing, and it’s fascinating to observe the ‘innovation gap’ which blocks change. Sometimes it’s structural/cultural – disciplinary silos, circling the waggons with’professional standards’ (most innovations come from outside), specialists viewing attempts to change their established ways as implied criticism). Sometimes it’s managerial – CEOs of innovative companies (think Steve Jobs) spend twice as much time personally involved in innovation, than their counterparts in less innovative companies. You have to model the change you wish to see.

  So, there are some long-standing reasons why innovation gets blocked, or fails to transfer. But these aren’t as insurmountable as we often proclaim, and we can’t let them get in the way. As to the orginal question being posed, here are my five top reasons why we need innovation in education:

  1. Because student outcomes are flatlining in countries where the ‘do more, work harder’ dictat,  combined with market-driven approaches from governments, drove innovation out of the sector and replaced it with fear. We need some new ideas.

  2. Because, as educators, we’re in direct competition with the learning young people access socially, informally – and, right now, we’re coming off second best.

  3. Because we need to constantly engage in respectful, challenging, professional discourse about our practice (and we need to spend rather less time providing pointless information to satisfy demands for accountability)

  4. Because children, far from considering themselves ‘guinea pigs’ actually enjoy being part of something new. They well understand that being part of an innovation that doesn’t ultimately work isn’t going to have a critical effect on their education – not least because of (2) above. But the critical point is ‘being part of’, being active co-designers of learning innovations.

  5. Because the one-size model of schooling never did fit all students, and it certainly won’t now. The school of the future needs to be an amalgamation of many different learning models, which students and teachers can try out to find what works best for them. 

  But what are yours? Please let me know your reasons for demanding more innovation in education.

  Please note that this is a slightly edited version of David’s original blog post that can be accessed here. 

• Do Schools Have the Appetite to Innovate?

  November 27, 2012 3:25 PM Comments Off on Do Schools Have the Appetite to Innovate?

  Rapid, pervasive change is the current and future norm, whether it be the ongoing explosion in technology, the stunning disruption of the Arab Spring or the relentless multicultural transition in communities.  So what about schools?  Can they innovate fast enough keep up with the world around them or will they be outpaced and replaced by alternative learning modes?  

  

  CC Photo by: PhOtOnQuAnTiQue

  (more…)

• Caution: Children Playing

  November 26, 2012 1:38 PM Comments Off on Caution: Children Playing

  A great deal of the impetus and inspiration for conversations about transformational change in our modern school systems (in most cases, we are still at the conversational level) comes from the new realities presented to us by advances in digital technology. Exciting new possibilities for engagement with content, with context, as well as with new forms of role and relationship are all part of the suite of possibilities now being presented to us. And in framing these new frontiers, there are many who would have us believe that children growing up in these initial decades of the 21st century bring dispositions, attitudes and skills to the schoolhouse that should force us to seriously reconsider the structures, strategies and even the learning theories that have been at the heart of public schooling for the past century and a half.

  I don’t disagree with many aspects of the conversation. I do, however, begin to raise my eyebrows a little when claims are made that today’s young learners are substantially different than when I was a child. A chill runs down my spine when those claims are pushed to the limit, suggesting that young people are somehow wired differently than they used to be. While I understand the metaphorical nature of these assertions I, nevertheless, cringe when I hear them.

  Recently, I’ve been very aware of the way my two young boys move through the world, especially as they approach the beginning of their own formal schooling. What excites them? What gets them asking questions about the world: patterns, relationships, how things work, and why things are the way they are. What inspires their sense of discovery?

  I’ve come to the strong (but not unshakeable) conclusion that things really haven’t changed that much in terms of the how, why, when and where of learning.

  Some examples:

  Luke and Liam have both loved “reading” for years. When Liam was 2, he could always be seen with a book in his hand. For both children, the foundations of their reading lives have been built on the family couch, in the chaise lounge upstairs and in those very special pre-bedtime moments. Word games have been a part of our dinner time and road trip conversations for the past few years, many times initiated by the boys themselves. We have learned to love playing with language, both in its discrete and granular forms and recently we have started to play with language as a gateway to humour.

  We spend a great deal of time in the many conservation areas surrounding our town. More often than not, the boys will come home with souvenirs from our walks: coloured leaves, pieces of birch bark and even the occasional bug bite or two.

  Both boys revel in being able to be outside on their bikes, racing up and down the street, saving the neighbourhood from fires and the bad guys (never bad girls) that started them.

  Treehouse TV is a popular Saturday morning activity and now that they are old enough to control television remote themselves, its a ritual that affords Mom and Dad a little sleep-in time on the weekends.

  Toy train sets, electric race cars, Lego and Tinker Toys have outlasted the electronic games in terms of engagement power and, I would argue, learning potential. As I write this Luke is now working on a 70-piece puzzle, while Liam plays with his farm set. All three of us are wearing fire helmets!

  I love big picture, system-level conversations–I really do! I’m hoping, however, that as our discussions here and elsewhere turn to the topic of change through innovation, we don’t lose sight of the essential things that we have known for years about our children—the way that they come to the world with what appears to be an innate sense of curiosity, discovery and adventure. Perhaps the lives of our youngest pre-school children can provide the keys to unlocking some of the most confounding problems that we face on today’s education landscape.

  CC Photo by: Kevin H.

• Why do we need innovation in education?

  November 21, 2012 7:04 PM Comments Off on Why do we need innovation in education?

  So why do we need innovation in education? This is not such a straightforward question when many school districts still consider installing interactive whiteboards in front of the classrooms as the way forward. These technology “solutions” have to do with the belief that simply putting “tech equipment” into classrooms is going to improve teaching and learning. We haven’t worked very hard to get to the heart of the pedagogical approaches required to make these pieces of equipment hum!

  Seymour Papert illustrated this thinking with a stagecoach that had two rocket boosters strapped on the sides with the caption: “Technology being applied to an old model of learning and teaching simply doesn’t work.” There are a lot of well-intentioned educators who still think that if we keep refurbishing the stagecoach, we’ll prepare students for what they need to learn to thrive in this world. Perhaps we need to abandon this “not having to reinvent the wheel” mindset. In fact, I think that we need to get rid of the wheel altogether!

  Now keep in mind as well that the accountability indicators for school districts in Canada are heavily focused on student achievement results and do not reflect any mention of innovation. Sadly, our education system tends to value compliance, conformity, and complacency over innovation.

  No one innovative approach is the magic bullet. Our Ken Spencer Award Winners – featured in our recently released special Theme Issue of Education Canada – show how teachers, principals, superintendents, and community leaders work together to push the boundaries and redefine the structures of teaching and learning. And more often than not, when these types of initiatives are pitched to decision-makers to scale up, they respond: “that’s really interesting”, and promptly get back to work doing the same thing. I’ve been asking for quite some time: how do we move people from merely being impressed, to being convinced that they have to radically change their practice? Now.

  CEA wants you to contribute your stories in the form of a guest blog post to help us define why we need innovation. We want to lead a discussion to start building some form of consensus of our collective expectations for what innovation is needed in education. How do we come to an agreement?

  Questions for students, parents, administrators, policymakers, researchers, and anyone else concerned about innovation in education:

  • Do you think that we have the appetite to innovate?
  • Why is innovation in education so important?
  • How do we best spread innovative ideas?

  Questions for teachers:

  • What has been your best teaching moment?
  • What was in place to make that happen?
  • When did you feel that you had it right?
  • When was your classroom humming? Tell us about these optimal learning and teaching moments.

  We need you to “ground” our thinking in actual practice – examples of educators taking their visions and insights into what school could be and being given the space to work with them.

  • What personal and institutional assumptions and traditions did you challenge to move your innovation forward?
  • What didn’t work?

  For teachers like Kelowna Flipped Classroom proponent Graham Johnson, the insights came gradually. For others like Oasis Skateboard Factory founder Craig Morrison, he seemed to know from the beginning what would work, and how he wanted to do it. How is it unfolding for you?

  Inspire us with your insights and ideas.

• The EdCamp Explosion

  November 14, 2012 5:47 AM Comments Off on The EdCamp Explosion

  EdCamps are a great way for the Twitteratti to meet face-to-face for a good old fashioned dialogue and to cement their PLN relationships, but is that all there is?  In my last post I expressed some concerns about the quality, continuity and cumulative impact of this exciting new movement.  How can the potential be consolidated so that EdCamps can take it to the next level rather than plateau and fade like so many promising innovations before them?

  [ibimage==4605==edcan_article_image_670x360==none==self==null]

  CC photo by: kjarrett

  I don’t profess to have the magic sauce – that needs to come from the participants themselves – and I do realize that there is no prototypical EdCamp – they vary greatly – but I do want to venture some modest proposals based on my own experience.  Perhaps they would be good discussion starters for EdCamps!

  If a teacher were planning for a discussion in class s/he would generally not just leave it to chance, but rather use some strategy intended to focus and deepen it.  This probably happens in some EdCamp discussions but it really should be the norm.  Of course, a wide open exploration can also be productive, but as a steady diet it generally fails to make progress.  How about a debate, perhaps structured something like an Academic Controversy (as in Beyond Manet) or something modeled on the Final Word strategy in which every participant has a chance to speak prior to the open forum.  Why not break into four small groups and then reform in the middle of the session into 4 groups representing all the originals for a report from each participant on the first half discussion in order to spark a second half that extends from the first?  Or Think-Pair-Share perhaps.

  These are random examples.  Teachers have many more, probably better, ways to make sure that all participants are heard and that the discussion is neither dominated by strong voices nor prematurely channeled.  Almost anything is better than just letting ‘er rip.

  Moreover, even an illuminating and energizing discussion can lose steam when it starts going in circles, so it might also be useful to think about how EdCamps can build on previous discussions rather than repeating them in essentially similar form?  My fellow blogger, Stephen Hurley, tells me that he has been to an EdCamp that had an identified “harvesting committee” to gather ideas from the discussions and report on the essence.  Perhaps this could be archived in some manner; maybe a Wiki that allows the discussion to extend to those who could not attend and provides a foundation for the next EdCamp.

  Might there be a #chat, or perhaps several, prior to an EdCamp to get the conversation going and then some sessions at the EdCamp that used those chats as fodder for more in depth discussion.

  In the absence of discussion strategies that deepen the dialogue and provide for some continuity over time, I fear that EdCamps will continue to be popular social gatherings but not have the cumulative impact that they might – and should.  It would be a shame to stop here, so what do you think might be done to build on this promising beginning to a more democratic approach to professional development?

  And, I suppose the corollary question is, what is it about traditional approaches to pro-d that fail to meet some teachers’ needs, which is what has led to the spontaneous emergence of this new “flatter” form of discourse?  Perhaps while we innovate to enhance EdCamps we can also learn from them and apply those lessons to improve our traditional practices.

  Previous – The EdCamp Explosion: Is crowdsourcing pro-d really a good idea?

• Performance Anxiety: A Personal Story

  November 12, 2012 4:27 PM Comments Off on Performance Anxiety: A Personal Story

  I clearly recall beginning to feel very uneasy at school soon after starting Grade Seven. A year earlier, in 1969, our school district had decided that it would be a good idea to congregate all of the 12-14 year olds in the region in one building. I was too young to know about any of the community conversations that went on in advance of the decision or what the philosophical underpinnings of the project would have been, but I do know that September 8, 1970 was the first day in my life that I ever stayed at school for lunch!

  Beyond the social adjustments to my new learning environment–adjustments that I never did fully make–I recall that my biggest challenges in heading to Junior High were academic in nature. Despite my desire to bring home the same high marks that my older brother seemed to effortlessly garner, I remember struggling in most aspects of the program. In particular, math and science presented the highest hurdles.

  Although my parents noticed that their normally happy-go-lucky, cooperative child was quickly becoming more serious, and somewhat more anxious, I think they just chalked it up the natural movement from childhood to adolescence. Actually, I think that I was the one who was most concerned about the change. I secretly made an appointment with our school guidance counsellor and let him know that I was worrying about everything: strange sounds in the night, doing well in school, traveling on the school bus. His remedy was to have me go to the library every lunch hour, put on a set of headphones, and listen to a series of records outlining the facts of life. That’s right, it was obvious to him that I needed to know about Sex! Although this daily ritual drew a growing crowd of other student-listeners, I recall that the information only served to make me more anxious!

  In Grade Eight, I began to dread going to school, not for fear of being teased or bullied (though that was not an uncommon experience for me) but for fear of not being able to do the work. I had fallen so far behind that I felt completely lost in many of my courses. Although my teachers tried to help, I could tell that they were getting frustrated by my lack of understanding of some of the basic, foundational ideas that would have helped me in handling the more advanced work.

  In February of 1972, I stayed home from school for three whole weeks. During that time,  I was poked and prodded by doctors, nurses and other adults who couldn’t seem to get to the bottom of the illness that mysteriously emerged during the Wonderful World of Disney each Sunday night and seemed to, just as mysteriously, disappear in time for the Brady Bunch on Friday evening. Save for my grandmother who inuitively understood everything, not one adult in my life seemed to be able to connect the change to a type of performance anxiety!

  The second of three reports on the the What Did You Do In School Today focuses on the gap between intellectual challenge and the skill sets that students call upon in order to meet those challenges. While the report offers another lens through which to examine the complex issues related to student engagement, it also offers adults like me a way of understanding their own school experience. The enormous impact created by not attending to the gap between what we demand of students, and the skills that they bring to meet those demands cannot be overlooked.

  For me, the system provided a way to mitigate the emotional and social impact by allowing me to gradually “drop out” of various programs. In looking back, however, I’m not sure whether this approach served me that well.

  WDYDIST Research Series Report Two:  The Relationship Between Instructional Challenge and Student Engagement is worth a good look, and then worth a good conversation. If the what of our transformation agenda is still looking for a compelling why, I sense that this report might hold some important clues.

   

  CC Photo by: massdistraction

• Cdn EdWire – Making the Link Between Bullying and Boredom

  November 9, 2012 4:47 PM Comments Off on Cdn EdWire – Making the Link Between Bullying and Boredom

  

  CC photo by: eltpics

  Opinion: Improving education system to end bullying – Montreal Gazette

  (more…)

• 5 Psychologists, One Philosopher and the Conversations That Could Emerge

  November 5, 2012 2:42 PM Comments Off on 5 Psychologists, One Philosopher and the Conversations That Could Emerge

  The elevator door opened on the third floor of our board office last Monday and I stepped aside to allow an enthusiastic group of binder-toting, suitcase-dragging, coffee-carrying folks to clear the car. I recognized some of the group and quickly determined that everyone on the elevator was part of our district psychology team, obviously gathering for a day of work together. After unsuccessfully trying to come up with a witty comment that might be appropriate to frame the scene, I simply said, “Have fun”, and boarded the elevator.
  (more…)

• Déja, Déja Vu

  November 2, 2012 3:42 PM Comments Off on Déja, Déja Vu

  So I recently attended yet another conference on ….21^st Century Learning.  I heard the keynotes and attended the workshops. I listened attentively to what delegates were saying and of course, it all led to the issue of integrating technology in education. I remain concerned that the discourse has not changed in decades and the new “corps” of my technology-in-education colleagues are doing their best to convince decision-makers that the time is now using old strategies that have simply not worked.

  As I said to my colleague Bruce Dixon of the Anywhere Anytime Learning Foundation, who was one of the keynote speakers, “Remember Bruce, the conference you organized in June 2010, in Maine, in which you assembled a representative group of the past “leaders” in technology in education? The focus of the conference was simple and pragmatic: Why have we failed to convince more people of the need to effectively integrate technology into the classroom?”  Bruce just looked at me and smiled appreciatively.

  In 2012, the school district leaders and trustees who make a move to introduce system wide technology integration are still embarking upon a very lonely path.

  So, as I listen to the next generation trying their best to convince decision-makers of the need to invest in and integrate technology into the classroom, here are some cautionary notes for these “new” presentations.

  1. Telling delegates that they are out of touch with the youth of today won’t convince.
  2. Showing demonstrations of how technology is evolving, especially social media, won’t convince.
  3. Stating to delegates that the pedagogy currently being used in schools is out of touch won’t convince.
  4. Showing impressive works and creativity of today’s youth won’t convince.
  5. Using phraseology that was used in the late 1980’s like it’s current thinking won’t convince.
  6. Believing that Early Adaptors convince, won’t convince.
  7. Organizing events being surrounded with like-minded delegates won’t convince.

  And here are a few other realities:

  1. By now, 2012, if technology is not any further ahead in being integrated into the classroom, there are definitely other issues that are simply not being addressed, or rather, being given more lip service.  Leadership is most definitely the first and foremost critical element. In attending one workshop, hosted by a district leader and a school principal (designated the 21^st Century Principal or something similar), I immediately noticed how impressed the delegates were with the latter’s comprehension and appreciation of the significance, potential, and critical role that technology can play in classrooms. But towards the end of the workshop, the most critical question was posed to the principal, “How did it happen in his district?”  And the answer was that the superintendent and the trustees made it happen, first and foremost. Leadership, Leadership, Leadership.  And as I have stated on and on and on, “No Courage, No Change.” In 2012, the school district leaders and trustees who make a move to introduce system wide technology integration are still embarking upon a very lonely path.
  2. Since I talk mostly about Courage and Passion, technology conferences aren’t really keen on this message since hearing the impressive results of technology in the classroom is much more enticing for sponsors. Showing how some talented students have become maestro entrepreneurs, agents of social change, etc., is very appealing and noteworthy. However, that too fails to convince decision-makers to change.
  3. Enhancing the classroom environment remains and should be the critical focus of our efforts. Every teacher wants the best tools available to ensure that students are getting the best education possible. Supporting teachers in classrooms is critical. Changing outdated and poor professional development models has never been so urgent.
  4. Engaging students, especially in the domain of intellectual engagement, is a must for all classrooms. This can be attained with a caring, passionate teacher, plain and simple.

  So, you may now understand the title of this blog.

• Evidence of Teaching, Evidence of Learning

  November 1, 2012 1:11 AM Comments Off on Evidence of Teaching, Evidence of Learning

  As the school year began, I ordered two books with the intent of learning and implementing practices designed to Enhance Professional Practice.  Charlotte Danielson has written a couple of editions of The Handbook for Enhancing Professional Practice and these were the books I would guide my learning with.

  

   

  As I started into the the first book, it began with Evidence of Teaching.  Danielson believes three sources of information comprise evidence of teaching: observation, conversation, and artifacts.  She goes on to describe each of these sources and how they contribute to evidence of teaching,

  As I read the chapter, I could not help but think about using this framework in a different way;

  … as Evidence of Learning

  Over the past year, as a school staff we have worked to understand Formative Assessment.  We have looked at the components and values and worked on ways to use Formative Assessment in the classroom.

  Using the framework created by Danielson, it was clear that evidence of teaching, could also be used to describe evidence of learning through formative assessment.

  That is,

  Evidence of Learning is comprised of Observation, Conversation, and Artifacts.

  Together with the amazing staff at Erin Woods School and AISI Learning Leader Angie F., we then worked to understand each of these sources.  We sat together as a staff and talked about each of these sources of evidence and what they looked like in the elementary classroom.

  OBSERVATION – while observing students engaged in meaningful tasks, look for:

  • Are they staying on topic?
  • Is re-teaching required?
  • Do you often re-direct?
  • Can they extend further? Or in a different way?
  • Should you provide resources?
  • Are they using prev. learned skills? Or personal connections?
  • Do they demonstrate understanding?

  CONVERSATION – as you talk to students about there learning, listen for:

  • Do they use specific content vocabulary?
  • Are the students asking relevant questions?
  • Can they explain why?
  • Expressions/language demonstrates understanding.
  • Can they express connections to previous or personal knowledge?
  • Are they expressing additional interests or viewpoints about the topic?

  ARTIFACTS – as you collect documents or student work, look for:

  • Compare to rubrics.
  • Did they know and meet criteria?
  • Demonstrate understanding
  • Is re-teaching required? for who? for what?
  • Did they edit/fix up based on feedback?

  To support our thinking, a visual was created with the above information.

  

  As we developed our understanding of the three sources of data, it became evident that in order to make a thorough, well-rounded assessment of a students progress all three sources or data are required.  Simply using one or two of the sources is not truly sufficient to fully understand the learner and assess progress.

  As we move along in our professional development in this area remains:

  What will we do with all of this data we have collected?

  What do you do with all the data you collect?

• The EdCamp Explosion

  October 28, 2012 9:11 PM Comments Off on The EdCamp Explosion

  EdCamps are all the rage, but is crowdsourcing of pro-d really such a good idea?  The world abounds with conspiracy theorists, holocaust deniers and alien abduction survivors masquerading as normal folks, and they don’t hesitate to jump into public discourse – see the comments section of any online newspaper for example.  A surprising number of fanatics even get themselves elected to public office.  I’m not naming names here because I don’t want to be sued, but I bet we can all think of several examples.  Do we really think that the educational sphere is devoid of such fervent but wrongheaded beliefs.  Zeroes anyone?  How is it then that an open forum like EdCamp is supposed to find its way forward to innovative practices that will improve student learning rather than just reinforcing prejudices and replicating favourite strategies from the past?  Is the Twittersphere immune to the human preference for the familiar, the inclination to rose-coloured self-protective wishful thinking about one’s own effectiveness and plain old zealotry?

  [ibimage==4487==edcan_article_image_670x360==none==self==null]

  CC Photo by aforgrave

  The idea behind crowdsourcing is that a transparent public process can tap into the “wisdom of the crowd,” which Surowiecki claims has the potential to exceed the intelligence of any one expert.  That sounds good, and I think we all appreciate that grounded experience in the classroom has much to offer that teachers cannot get from theoretical musings with weak linkage to actual practice, but blind faith in collective wisdom may simply lead to a self-referencing spiral of conservative conventionality spiced with random excursions into novelty that quickly return to base camp.  Where do the new ideas come from and how are they evaluated?  Is enthusiastic and confident declaration by an advocate to be taken as an indication of merit?  How can constructive critique be brought into the mix and how can we ensure that each EdCamp builds on the last rather than always starting from scratch?

  In the world of research there is a structured process of peer review to support publications intended as a running record of learning.  Unfortunately, as Kuhn has shown in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the recognized elite can be a conservative force whose vested interest inhibits innovation and gives prominence to incremental embellishment of current orthodoxies.  This generally arises not from malevolent intent, but rather from what Chris Argyris has termed “the defensiveness of experts” – an inclination to project confident understanding and suppress uncertainty in order to protect their reputation as an expert.  The establishment always tends to perpetuate itself.

  If those who think that disruptive transformation is required in order for school systems to keep pace with the hectic rate of change in the world at large and successfully prepare students for an unknown and rapidly evolving future are correct – and I am one of them – then we need EdCamps and other mechanisms for broad-based dialogue, bold innovation and rapid sharing of ideas.  Virtual communities that enable richly connected networks which extend the power of individual minds are essential, but this new horizon begs questions of quality, continuity and cumulative impact.  Hierarchically credentialed authority in education and academia has many shortcomings, but so do the new technologically mediated democratic structures of participatory culture.  Our enthusiasm for them has to be tempered with healthy skepticism and a wide-awake willingness to encounter the underbelly of crowdsourcing reduced to enthusiastic but cacophonous opining and groupthink.

  In Surowiecki’s thesis, the wisdom of the crowd can emerge if there is a diverse array of informed individuals with complementary perspectives on an issue and an effective way of compiling and consolidating their opinions.  An EdCamp meets some of these criteria, but not all of them.  In continuing to develop this promising new practice, how can we enhance the experience by encouraging diverse participation and developing better methods of consolidating the information and experience inherent in it?  Can it move beyond early adopters to include and influence the mainstream majority?

  In a recent presentation at the CEA Annual Conference, Bruce Dixon proclaimed that “diversity trumps curation,” and cited Wikipedia as an example, but that potential is neither automatic nor guaranteed without the right scaffolding.  Social networking ensures that there will be diversity and makes curation impossible in its realm.  This can be a good thing, and even a great thing, but it all depends on how we use it.

  Next: The EdCamp Explosion: Taking it to the next level
  Previous: Does a PLC Need Research?

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

Quality research, reports, and professional learning opportunities.

Subscribe with your information: Veuillez indiquer les informations suivantes :

Language Preference Langue de correspondance EnglishFrançais EnglishFrançais

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

CloseFermer

Leave this field empty if you're human: