After watching Rory Gallagher present at the Cambridge Student Voice Conference, I decided that I was open to allowing students to critically assess my teaching. As a proponent of student voice, I felt it would hypocritical if I didn't allow them to comment openly on my teaching. Ultimately, they're the ones I teach for, so it makes sense that I take into consideration how they feel about what I do.
I started by creating an online survey (using Survey Monkey), incorperating the 35 questions Rory provides on his blog. I organised the questions into seven sections, each one reflecting the seven 'C's' as outlined in Rory's dissertation; care, control, clarify, challenge, captivate, confer and consolidate. Within each section there were a variety of questions, all of which required students to rank their response on a Likert scale from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'. I won't go too much into the nitty-gritty behind these choices, as I conducted this research in a very informal capacity. If you'd like to read all about the methodology and reasoning behind the survey questions, please read Rory's dissertation (linked above in his blog).
Once the survey was complete, I e-mailed it to all of the students within my Year 8 and Year 9 classes (I teach one group within each year group). These classes are both low-to-middle ability, and provide me with challenging behaviour. However, in terms of progress, they are two of my top performing groups; my residuals for both groups are just below zero (which means only one or two students are off target by one sub-level). From the outset, I was expecting the questions focusing on behaviour management to be quite poor - I already see behaviour management of 'more challenging' students to be an area I need to improve on.
The survey return rate was very high for both groups, as I allowed students time to complete the survey using the PCs at that back of my classroom. 19 out of 21 Year 8s and 15 out of 23 Year 9s competed the survey. All missed responses were a result of student absence on the day the survey was given.
While analysing the results, much like Rory did in his dissertation, I focused mainly on the 'strongly agree' and 'agree' categories or the 'strongly disagree' and 'disagree' categories, depending on the direction of the question asked. I will now briefly go through an analysis of the results:
NOTE: I have decided to delete much of my analysis, as it was too long winded and unnecessary. Instead, I will just share some of the findings that the survey made me consider, in terms of my own practice:
1) I need to ensure that I manage challenging behaviour in a more consistent way.
2) I need to make sure that my plenaries, where I summarise student learning at the end of the lesson, are much clearer.
3) I need to allow students to have a say in how we learn in lessons
Overall, I have found the process of asking students to provide me with feedback on my teaching very eye-opening. They were able to back up some of the things I knew about myself already, while providing me with interesting insight into other areas for development. I am yet to survey my two Year 7 groups, and will do so over the next coming weeks.
I encourage other teachers to engage in a similar process, as it can really help to determine PM targets for the future. I have no doubts that my teaching practice will improve as a result of these surveys.
Sunday 28 June 2015
Saturday 27 June 2015
SUPER Conference 2015
I know I'm a few days behind, but it's been one of those weeks where I don't feel like I've been given time to catch up! However, they do say that it's better late than never, so below I'll try to summarise some of my thoughts from the SUPER Conference 2015. Luckily for me, I've recently re-joined Twitter (in a purely academic capacity - @ReflectiveRambl), which is how I will subtly 'remind' myself of my thoughts at the time.
To start, Dr Frank Cornelissen opened the conference with a really inspiring and interesting KeyNote Speech about networking between schools and universities, building a research network between the two and throughout schools. This is an area which I am already passionate about, so listening to him speak was like having many of my own thoughts confirmed. I strongly believe that schools and universities should work to build and maintain relationships, especially if we want teachers to become more engaged with the research around their own practice. Universities should find ways to encourage these types of partnerships in ways which are practical and financially viable for schools, especially in today's economic climate.
What struck me throughout Dr Cornelissen's speech was the similarities that exist between school-uni partnerships and staff-student partnerships within schools themselves. As you know, student voice and partnership is a huge 'hobby horse' for me. I think that it's really important to empower students as 'agents of change' within schools, just as I think it's important to empower teachers in the same way. It wouldn't make sense to get students actively involved in a research culture without first getting teachers involved themselves. I think it would be a sad state of affairs to have more students involved in research than teachers; this is something I hope we can change in the next few years, at least at my own school.
One 'hurdle' that Dr Cornelissen really highlighted was the issue of communication within schools. Through his own study, he was able to highlight the fact that teachers don't seek each other out enough for advice. While I agree with this statement, I think the issue behind the lack of communication is that many teachers are unsure of where the knowledge exists. For example, I don't know how many other teachers in my school have completed an MEd or even EdD; I have a rough idea, based on those teachers who engage in the (now defunct) Research Enquiry Group, or who go by 'Doctor' in school. However, while I might be able to identify these teachers, I most certainly do NOT know what they studied for their thesis/dissertations!
I think that we're missing a huge trick here. Teachers with this type of knowledge, past or present, should be given the opportunity to share their knowledge with other teachers. We should be aware of who knows what within a school; for example, who specialises in group talk, or feedback, or building independence in lessons. This type of knowledge shouldn't be written up once into a paper and then left to stagnate; it should be widely advertised, shared, and built upon! If we want students to become lifelong learners, then surely we need to model the same practice ourselves.
Dr Cornellissen spoke of communication in schools as being that of an echo chamber, or worse, isolation chambers. Teachers regularly engage in conversations with members of their own department or faculty, but how often do they seek advice from teachers in other areas of the school? Reflecting on my own practice, I realised that I do this very infrequently.
Part of the problem at my school is space; it's a very fragmented school site, with Maths and English located on one side of a public pathway while Art and Drama are tucked away in their own new builds, Languages and Science are housed in their own separate buildings, and the Humanities and Technology are grouped together on 'the other side'. While we do have whole staff meetings, we often sit with members of our own faculty, which only makes the problem worse. The occasions where we're forced to mix are, in my opinion, the most beneficial - but how often does this happen? I would argue that it doesn't happen often enough.
Another issue is that, in whole staff meetings or even workshops, we're often bunged into groups where someone (or a group of someones) talks at us. There is little engagement or communication, and certainly very little opportunity to practice. While it might be seen as a 'sharing of good practice' it's often a one way conversation in which we're given loads of ideas, but not given the chance to work with them, to truly embed them in our practice. How many of these ideas get put on top of a pile of 'things to try later'? I know that I've got a desk drawer full of these types of ideas.
What we need to do, what many schools need to do, is to open up the pathways of communication. We need to get teachers to really share not only their practice, but the evidence behind why it works. Stealing from David Weston's metaphor, surgeons don't just go to meetings and watch other surgeons do an operation before repeating the operation themselves. They might watch, then get involved, with support and help of others, then try it multiple times. We should expect no less of teachers. If we want to embed practice, it needs to be discussed and used often; it needs to be seen to work.
This linked well with the other sessions that I attended, namely that given by Samuel Whitbread, where they shared not only their Research Lesson Study programme, but also the way that they embed research into their daily practice. Their system is something that many school should aim to emulate, and one that I am very envious of myself.
One thing that we discussed was how incentives can be used to encourage teachers to engage with research. I don't think that this is a bad thing; we provide our students with incentives to learn, so it makes sense that we should have them ourselves. Incentives don't have to be monetary either (in fact, I would argue that monetary incentive should be the last thing offered, or at least the least important one). If teachers aren't motivated by a desire to better themselves, in terms of their knowledge and practice, then I'd argue that they're in the profession for the wrong reasons.
The biggest incentive that I think senior leaders can offer teachers is time. Time can come in the form of additional PPAs or even just allotted time after school or during training days. The number one complaint I hear from teachers is that we don't have the time to do all the things expected of us; many teachers might be initially resistant to engaging in research, but if they were given the time to do it, I think their argument would lose a lot of steam. Even just one hour a fortnight would be viewed favourably by many teachers (or at least myself!).
By linking research with performance management, I think a lot of the issues about 'time' and 'pressure' would really drop. Sam Whit require each teacher to develop a research question as one of their PM targets; I think this is fantastic. Often, teachers complain about 'unattainable' targets which focus on results - while I understand why these exist, I don't think they challenge teachers to consider ways to ensure their own practice facilitates 'good' results. Instead, these types of targets can feel burdensome and unfair. They are statements of goals to achieve, and don't provide teachers with a way of thinking about HOW they could be achieved beyond 'I'll just have to work harder'. If teachers were asked to consider WAYS they could reach these types of targets, and then conduct research into various strategies to get there, I think they'd find results based targets much less threatening.
For example, one of my PM targets this year is that 90% of Year 11 students need to achieve at least 3 levels of progress. To link this to research, what I could do, in a meeting with my line manager, is sit down and look at the results from my previous year and try to identify some trends or patterns. Maybe it was mostly boys who held me back from reaching this target, or perhaps it was the Pupil Premiums students. Either of these would provide me with an interesting area to research; How can I better engage boys, or Pupil Premium students, in English? What strategies would work to help ensure these students made progress? Already, by looking at things in this way, I've established a research question that could drive my PM which focuses on attainment, but is much less threatening then saying '90% of Year 11 students need to achieve......'
By exploring the literature behind these issues, and conducting action research in my own classroom, I would not only be developing my own pedagogical knowledge, but by default I SHOULD be making changes in practice which would lead to better teaching and ultimately better results! Win win, in my opinion.
Developing greater practice SHOULD be high on every teachers list of priorities, and it certainly should be encouraged by school through performance management and pay progression. Engaging in research will, without a doubt, develop each and every teacher who engages with it. By making it part of PM, you instantly embed it into everyday teaching. This is what makes a research culture.
To start, Dr Frank Cornelissen opened the conference with a really inspiring and interesting KeyNote Speech about networking between schools and universities, building a research network between the two and throughout schools. This is an area which I am already passionate about, so listening to him speak was like having many of my own thoughts confirmed. I strongly believe that schools and universities should work to build and maintain relationships, especially if we want teachers to become more engaged with the research around their own practice. Universities should find ways to encourage these types of partnerships in ways which are practical and financially viable for schools, especially in today's economic climate.
What struck me throughout Dr Cornelissen's speech was the similarities that exist between school-uni partnerships and staff-student partnerships within schools themselves. As you know, student voice and partnership is a huge 'hobby horse' for me. I think that it's really important to empower students as 'agents of change' within schools, just as I think it's important to empower teachers in the same way. It wouldn't make sense to get students actively involved in a research culture without first getting teachers involved themselves. I think it would be a sad state of affairs to have more students involved in research than teachers; this is something I hope we can change in the next few years, at least at my own school.
One 'hurdle' that Dr Cornelissen really highlighted was the issue of communication within schools. Through his own study, he was able to highlight the fact that teachers don't seek each other out enough for advice. While I agree with this statement, I think the issue behind the lack of communication is that many teachers are unsure of where the knowledge exists. For example, I don't know how many other teachers in my school have completed an MEd or even EdD; I have a rough idea, based on those teachers who engage in the (now defunct) Research Enquiry Group, or who go by 'Doctor' in school. However, while I might be able to identify these teachers, I most certainly do NOT know what they studied for their thesis/dissertations!
I think that we're missing a huge trick here. Teachers with this type of knowledge, past or present, should be given the opportunity to share their knowledge with other teachers. We should be aware of who knows what within a school; for example, who specialises in group talk, or feedback, or building independence in lessons. This type of knowledge shouldn't be written up once into a paper and then left to stagnate; it should be widely advertised, shared, and built upon! If we want students to become lifelong learners, then surely we need to model the same practice ourselves.
Dr Cornellissen spoke of communication in schools as being that of an echo chamber, or worse, isolation chambers. Teachers regularly engage in conversations with members of their own department or faculty, but how often do they seek advice from teachers in other areas of the school? Reflecting on my own practice, I realised that I do this very infrequently.
Part of the problem at my school is space; it's a very fragmented school site, with Maths and English located on one side of a public pathway while Art and Drama are tucked away in their own new builds, Languages and Science are housed in their own separate buildings, and the Humanities and Technology are grouped together on 'the other side'. While we do have whole staff meetings, we often sit with members of our own faculty, which only makes the problem worse. The occasions where we're forced to mix are, in my opinion, the most beneficial - but how often does this happen? I would argue that it doesn't happen often enough.
Another issue is that, in whole staff meetings or even workshops, we're often bunged into groups where someone (or a group of someones) talks at us. There is little engagement or communication, and certainly very little opportunity to practice. While it might be seen as a 'sharing of good practice' it's often a one way conversation in which we're given loads of ideas, but not given the chance to work with them, to truly embed them in our practice. How many of these ideas get put on top of a pile of 'things to try later'? I know that I've got a desk drawer full of these types of ideas.
What we need to do, what many schools need to do, is to open up the pathways of communication. We need to get teachers to really share not only their practice, but the evidence behind why it works. Stealing from David Weston's metaphor, surgeons don't just go to meetings and watch other surgeons do an operation before repeating the operation themselves. They might watch, then get involved, with support and help of others, then try it multiple times. We should expect no less of teachers. If we want to embed practice, it needs to be discussed and used often; it needs to be seen to work.
This linked well with the other sessions that I attended, namely that given by Samuel Whitbread, where they shared not only their Research Lesson Study programme, but also the way that they embed research into their daily practice. Their system is something that many school should aim to emulate, and one that I am very envious of myself.
One thing that we discussed was how incentives can be used to encourage teachers to engage with research. I don't think that this is a bad thing; we provide our students with incentives to learn, so it makes sense that we should have them ourselves. Incentives don't have to be monetary either (in fact, I would argue that monetary incentive should be the last thing offered, or at least the least important one). If teachers aren't motivated by a desire to better themselves, in terms of their knowledge and practice, then I'd argue that they're in the profession for the wrong reasons.
The biggest incentive that I think senior leaders can offer teachers is time. Time can come in the form of additional PPAs or even just allotted time after school or during training days. The number one complaint I hear from teachers is that we don't have the time to do all the things expected of us; many teachers might be initially resistant to engaging in research, but if they were given the time to do it, I think their argument would lose a lot of steam. Even just one hour a fortnight would be viewed favourably by many teachers (or at least myself!).
By linking research with performance management, I think a lot of the issues about 'time' and 'pressure' would really drop. Sam Whit require each teacher to develop a research question as one of their PM targets; I think this is fantastic. Often, teachers complain about 'unattainable' targets which focus on results - while I understand why these exist, I don't think they challenge teachers to consider ways to ensure their own practice facilitates 'good' results. Instead, these types of targets can feel burdensome and unfair. They are statements of goals to achieve, and don't provide teachers with a way of thinking about HOW they could be achieved beyond 'I'll just have to work harder'. If teachers were asked to consider WAYS they could reach these types of targets, and then conduct research into various strategies to get there, I think they'd find results based targets much less threatening.
For example, one of my PM targets this year is that 90% of Year 11 students need to achieve at least 3 levels of progress. To link this to research, what I could do, in a meeting with my line manager, is sit down and look at the results from my previous year and try to identify some trends or patterns. Maybe it was mostly boys who held me back from reaching this target, or perhaps it was the Pupil Premiums students. Either of these would provide me with an interesting area to research; How can I better engage boys, or Pupil Premium students, in English? What strategies would work to help ensure these students made progress? Already, by looking at things in this way, I've established a research question that could drive my PM which focuses on attainment, but is much less threatening then saying '90% of Year 11 students need to achieve......'
By exploring the literature behind these issues, and conducting action research in my own classroom, I would not only be developing my own pedagogical knowledge, but by default I SHOULD be making changes in practice which would lead to better teaching and ultimately better results! Win win, in my opinion.
Developing greater practice SHOULD be high on every teachers list of priorities, and it certainly should be encouraged by school through performance management and pay progression. Engaging in research will, without a doubt, develop each and every teacher who engages with it. By making it part of PM, you instantly embed it into everyday teaching. This is what makes a research culture.
Wednesday 24 June 2015
Day Three: Filling Our Toolbox
To start, fellow participants shared some of their resources, which I will link to here, where applicable.
Roger Holdsworth mentioned his own website, where he has a Student Action Team resources (2003). These resources can help teachers who are looking to get into training student researchers. The next thing he referred to 'teach the teacher', which provides 7 steps by which students are taken through and supported to run an after school CPD activity for teachers around an issue that they (the students) define. Registration is free, which allows access to all 7 steps.
Alison Cook-Sather provided some extracts from her book with Bovill and Felton (2014) - these contained information on the steps to building partnerships with students in higher education. Personally, I have already purchased and read the book (which has been discussed in previous blog posts here and here).
Kate Wall also referred us to her academia.edu website, which has access to some of her articles and works.
Susan Groundwater-Smith put forth her text with Nicole Mockler, 'Learning to Listen: Listening to learn'
We then broke into groups, depending on our interests. I went and sat with a group based around Roger Holdsworth, as he was speaking about how to encourage student researchers.
Within his Student Action Team resources, he discussed how the PDF file (linked above) contained information on how to choose a team, choosing a topic, basing it on the curriculum, collecting data, etc. - the text itself contains worksheets and information that can be used by teachers and students. While the text was produced in 2003, Roger feels that it's still relevant, although he has admitted that it does need updating.
Roger suggested having a forum where students can report to each other about their research, as this builds a sense of power and ownership over their research. I think this is a good idea, and will try to make sure that if I successful pilot a student research project with my own form that we're given time to feedback and share our findings with each other, if not with other students in the school as well. It would also be nice to have the students present their findings to parents and teachers; yet another option to consider.
I've been thinking about this for the past few days now, and I think I will make use of ClassDojo with my form, in terms of using it to evaluate their engagement and participation in the research project. It seems to me that the App works mainly as a behaviour monitor, although it can also be used as a way to speak with parents directly. I think it might be interesting to use it with my form alone, as a way to keep parents updated on the progress that their children are making whilst we engage in research. I know that we use the Go 4 Schools behaviour module at my school, but I think that for the purposes of this project it would be better to have criteria that is more directly linked to research skills and their abilities to work in groups or independently on a very specific project.
Roger also discussed the use of the word 'investigator' instead of 'researcher', especially when trying to engage young students in research. He described how in the past he's set the research project out like a 'case' which needs to be 'solved'. He gave examples of researching school values, such as honesty and respect, much like solving a crime: 'Who killed honesty in our school?'. Personally, I feel like this approach isn't one that I'd like to use, because I don't want to cheapen the research process, nor do I want to try to 'dumb down' what it means to become a researcher. However, I can see it's validity when engaging younger students, or those who might struggle with more challenging research concepts.
Another thing that came up as a result of creating student-researcher cultures in a school was that sometimes certain groups or agencies, be it universities, researchers, private companies, local councils etc., have come into schools and 'commissioned' student researchers to undertake research projects based on a topic which they have identified. In some cases, schools were even able to secure funding for these research projects to take place. For example, Roger mentioned how a local council had approached an Australian school with a request for a research project on road safety around the school. I found this an interesting concept, though it worries me slightly that the students become 'used' in research situations like this. In my mind, any true student research project should be chosen by the students themselves.
The tension between 'me' and 'we' is another idea that came up, specifically regarding who will benefit from engaging in student research or greater student voice; will individual students (me) benefit or will the school community (we)?
On a fairly similar note, Roger said that in his own work, he had to really focus on providing students with guidance on how to work effectively in a team, because often students fall into bad habits of being selfish. I think this is an excellent point, and I will definitely make use of team building exercises before we begin any research. It's also important to give the students time to reflect on and evaluate their team-work skills so that they learn from and remember what working in an effective team is like. For example, after each task, you could ask each student to reflect on the purpose of each role - that way, they engage much more deeply with the purpose behind each person's contribution.
The focus of these team-building activities should be on 'productivity' - being able to produce something together as a team; the task itself has be to carefully chosen so that all students must assume a role and work together, not simply relying on one person take charge.
The question of who structures the groups naturally led on from this; do we allow students to choose their own groups, or do we carefully structure them to better enable success (as determined by the teacher). I don't think there is any right or wrong way to do this - it depends on how well you know your class and what you want out of the project. Roger said that if he were to run a project, he'd set time aside at the start of the year to discuss what group work is, exploring how we work well in groups. Again, this is another good idea, and one that I will be sure to work into my 'training' programme.
One thing I've really taken away from this session was that I need to start slowly, working with the students to discuss our ideas and expectations, first in terms of what it means to work well together, then looking at how we can build a respectful environment where our research can be discussed, conducted and shared in a friendly, supportive environment.
 |
| Roger Holdsworth's 'Student Action Teams' text |
Alison Cook-Sather provided some extracts from her book with Bovill and Felton (2014) - these contained information on the steps to building partnerships with students in higher education. Personally, I have already purchased and read the book (which has been discussed in previous blog posts here and here).
Kate Wall also referred us to her academia.edu website, which has access to some of her articles and works.
 |
| Susan Groundwater-Smith & Nicole Mockler text |
We then broke into groups, depending on our interests. I went and sat with a group based around Roger Holdsworth, as he was speaking about how to encourage student researchers.
Within his Student Action Team resources, he discussed how the PDF file (linked above) contained information on how to choose a team, choosing a topic, basing it on the curriculum, collecting data, etc. - the text itself contains worksheets and information that can be used by teachers and students. While the text was produced in 2003, Roger feels that it's still relevant, although he has admitted that it does need updating.
Roger suggested having a forum where students can report to each other about their research, as this builds a sense of power and ownership over their research. I think this is a good idea, and will try to make sure that if I successful pilot a student research project with my own form that we're given time to feedback and share our findings with each other, if not with other students in the school as well. It would also be nice to have the students present their findings to parents and teachers; yet another option to consider.
I've been thinking about this for the past few days now, and I think I will make use of ClassDojo with my form, in terms of using it to evaluate their engagement and participation in the research project. It seems to me that the App works mainly as a behaviour monitor, although it can also be used as a way to speak with parents directly. I think it might be interesting to use it with my form alone, as a way to keep parents updated on the progress that their children are making whilst we engage in research. I know that we use the Go 4 Schools behaviour module at my school, but I think that for the purposes of this project it would be better to have criteria that is more directly linked to research skills and their abilities to work in groups or independently on a very specific project.
Roger also discussed the use of the word 'investigator' instead of 'researcher', especially when trying to engage young students in research. He described how in the past he's set the research project out like a 'case' which needs to be 'solved'. He gave examples of researching school values, such as honesty and respect, much like solving a crime: 'Who killed honesty in our school?'. Personally, I feel like this approach isn't one that I'd like to use, because I don't want to cheapen the research process, nor do I want to try to 'dumb down' what it means to become a researcher. However, I can see it's validity when engaging younger students, or those who might struggle with more challenging research concepts.
Another thing that came up as a result of creating student-researcher cultures in a school was that sometimes certain groups or agencies, be it universities, researchers, private companies, local councils etc., have come into schools and 'commissioned' student researchers to undertake research projects based on a topic which they have identified. In some cases, schools were even able to secure funding for these research projects to take place. For example, Roger mentioned how a local council had approached an Australian school with a request for a research project on road safety around the school. I found this an interesting concept, though it worries me slightly that the students become 'used' in research situations like this. In my mind, any true student research project should be chosen by the students themselves.
The tension between 'me' and 'we' is another idea that came up, specifically regarding who will benefit from engaging in student research or greater student voice; will individual students (me) benefit or will the school community (we)?
On a fairly similar note, Roger said that in his own work, he had to really focus on providing students with guidance on how to work effectively in a team, because often students fall into bad habits of being selfish. I think this is an excellent point, and I will definitely make use of team building exercises before we begin any research. It's also important to give the students time to reflect on and evaluate their team-work skills so that they learn from and remember what working in an effective team is like. For example, after each task, you could ask each student to reflect on the purpose of each role - that way, they engage much more deeply with the purpose behind each person's contribution.
The focus of these team-building activities should be on 'productivity' - being able to produce something together as a team; the task itself has be to carefully chosen so that all students must assume a role and work together, not simply relying on one person take charge.
The question of who structures the groups naturally led on from this; do we allow students to choose their own groups, or do we carefully structure them to better enable success (as determined by the teacher). I don't think there is any right or wrong way to do this - it depends on how well you know your class and what you want out of the project. Roger said that if he were to run a project, he'd set time aside at the start of the year to discuss what group work is, exploring how we work well in groups. Again, this is another good idea, and one that I will be sure to work into my 'training' programme.
One thing I've really taken away from this session was that I need to start slowly, working with the students to discuss our ideas and expectations, first in terms of what it means to work well together, then looking at how we can build a respectful environment where our research can be discussed, conducted and shared in a friendly, supportive environment.
Tuesday 23 June 2015
Day Two: Carrying Student Voice Forward - How to Have an Impact
Colleagues were posed the following question and told to write their initial thoughts down. Below you will find my own response, which, in typical 'me' fashion, is very rambling:
What strategies or approaches have you used or could you imagine that would help to ensure that student voice work is carried forward?
In my own classroom, I want to begin to create a students-as-researcher culture, in which students are trained in research methods and techniques and then create their own research questions and pursue their own investigations. I envision my own role as that of a 'guide' or 'facilitator' (although I'm not sure if these words actually describe my role)...perhaps 'critical friend' is a better word.
After listening to Rory speak this morning, I feel like it's really important to be able to explain WHY I want to set up this type of programme. I honestly don't see it as something I am doing for myself, or for my own professional gain. Instead, I feel like I'm doing it for the students (as cliche as that may sound). I want to empower them. I want them to build their critical thinking skills. I want them to consider what affects them in school and begin to question how things are done.
I think the education system in the UK needs to be re-structured; at the minute it's very top down, with government authorities, exam board, etc. dictating what goes on in classrooms, disregarding completely what the consumers of the product (the students themselves) actually feel or want. Educators, and people involved in education (including government ministers, policy makers, external agencies, etc.), need to work in partnership with students to design ways of teaching and learning that are mutually beneficial for society.
If I were living in an ideal world, in which I was given free reign to do as a pleased, then I would try to roll out a student-as-researcher scheme within my whole school. However, I think starting small is key; the work I do with my form next year could serve as a pilot of a more large-scale project.
I think time and resources need to be devoted to developing student-as-researcher skills. Engaging students in research projects will, in my opinion, provide them will skills that will make them better members of society, ones who question and explore the world around them instead of accepting things as they are presented to them. Surely these types of skills are necessary in our ever-changing world. If the UK ever hopes to compete with other countries, in terms of academic prowess, then we need to encourage a society in which people are creative, critical thinkers. I guess it all depends on the type of people we want to encourage in the UK; people who work to respond to tests and exams, memorising responses that are 'correct' or people who challenge, think and consider things independently.
Finally, I think that teachers should seize the movement themselves and carry out student voice work regardless of whether or not they get support 'from the top'. If anything, I've learnt throughout this conference that I've got to pursue my own passions and beliefs; at least that way I can positively affect change in a few students, which is better than none!
Note: Listening to Dr Lena Bahou give her speech on Alison Cook-Sather has given me an interesting idea re: my proposed project with student researchers - could the students' findings be put together as a magazine? This way, their findings could be disseminated to the wider school community, and provide a way of recognising the work the students complete. It would give them the power to 'author' their own work.
What strategies or approaches have you used or could you imagine that would help to ensure that student voice work is carried forward?
In my own classroom, I want to begin to create a students-as-researcher culture, in which students are trained in research methods and techniques and then create their own research questions and pursue their own investigations. I envision my own role as that of a 'guide' or 'facilitator' (although I'm not sure if these words actually describe my role)...perhaps 'critical friend' is a better word.
After listening to Rory speak this morning, I feel like it's really important to be able to explain WHY I want to set up this type of programme. I honestly don't see it as something I am doing for myself, or for my own professional gain. Instead, I feel like I'm doing it for the students (as cliche as that may sound). I want to empower them. I want them to build their critical thinking skills. I want them to consider what affects them in school and begin to question how things are done.
I think the education system in the UK needs to be re-structured; at the minute it's very top down, with government authorities, exam board, etc. dictating what goes on in classrooms, disregarding completely what the consumers of the product (the students themselves) actually feel or want. Educators, and people involved in education (including government ministers, policy makers, external agencies, etc.), need to work in partnership with students to design ways of teaching and learning that are mutually beneficial for society.
If I were living in an ideal world, in which I was given free reign to do as a pleased, then I would try to roll out a student-as-researcher scheme within my whole school. However, I think starting small is key; the work I do with my form next year could serve as a pilot of a more large-scale project.
I think time and resources need to be devoted to developing student-as-researcher skills. Engaging students in research projects will, in my opinion, provide them will skills that will make them better members of society, ones who question and explore the world around them instead of accepting things as they are presented to them. Surely these types of skills are necessary in our ever-changing world. If the UK ever hopes to compete with other countries, in terms of academic prowess, then we need to encourage a society in which people are creative, critical thinkers. I guess it all depends on the type of people we want to encourage in the UK; people who work to respond to tests and exams, memorising responses that are 'correct' or people who challenge, think and consider things independently.
Finally, I think that teachers should seize the movement themselves and carry out student voice work regardless of whether or not they get support 'from the top'. If anything, I've learnt throughout this conference that I've got to pursue my own passions and beliefs; at least that way I can positively affect change in a few students, which is better than none!
Note: Listening to Dr Lena Bahou give her speech on Alison Cook-Sather has given me an interesting idea re: my proposed project with student researchers - could the students' findings be put together as a magazine? This way, their findings could be disseminated to the wider school community, and provide a way of recognising the work the students complete. It would give them the power to 'author' their own work.
Day Two: Children as Researchers
Session three
Chae-Young Kim - The Open University
Kim focused on 'What is children's research for?'. For her, it's about children as 'primary investigators' who make the key decisions and do most of the research themselves from the initial choice of the topic to the dissemination of the findings. The main issues are whether children's research is for participation or pedagogy.
She identified four different positions re: children's research:
- only for participation-related reasons
- mainly for participation but also for additional learning benefits
- Mainly for educational/learning benefits - (note: for me, I think this is why I am interested in getting students involved in educational research)
- depends on the objective of the project which adult facilitators determine
She also made links to inquiry-based learning, where there are four different categories as well: Pursuing, Authoring, Identifying and Producing research. This made me think about my own aims - I want students to identify and pursue topics that are of interest to them, produce planning and conduct research themselves and then author the results, disseminating their findings to the wider school community.
Kim quoted Hemmersley, 2000, quite frequently in the session. She quoted him as saying [on the topic of research]'Its knowledge claims are evaluated by a research community on the basis of both the body of knowledge this community takes to be valid and the evidence offered in support of them'. This was challenged by colleagues in the session, who quoted Stenhouse - 'research is systematic inquiry made public' where 'public' could be the school public, not necessarily the 'greater' public.
Moving on, discussion went to why children's research is regarded as mainly for educational benefit might be to do with the ambiguous status of children as researchers - some academics would tend to agree with this. Their role isn't as wide ranging as academic researchers, because they have a limited or partial role. The require additional support, so they can't engage in large scale research.
It all depends on different research paradigms; participatory research, etc. Whether research benefits the people that it concerns in terms of their 'empowerment' and/or social change is an important criterion.
Nind & Vinha, 2012 - a source to consider - 'Inclusive research as social science requires more than just satisfying inclusive conditions to be 'quality' research'
Melanie Nind - has a book out which might be of interest - 'What is inclusive research'
Research is about producing knowledge. Hammersley (2003): research can be informative but cannot be educative. Kim suggested that Hammersley is quite critical of research being used as educative. He suggests that research should be rigorous, but I think she was uncomfortable with his viewpoint, leaning away from his opinions.
She went on to consider that children's research might be classed as 'practical' research. According to Hammersley (2000), the immediate audience of practical research are people with a practical interest in the issue under investigation. Kim suggests then that children's research is 'practical' because it aims to produce knowledge which is of immediate practical use; children's research often produces findings that can inform practices that concern them.
Finally, she ended by looking at a study conducted in a middle-class area of a city in England. Kim wanted to test a teacher-facilitation model of children's research and training and research projects. Kim, along with another researcher (with a different perspective on children's research) held 14 sessions of social research training and 8 sessions where children worked on their projects individually and gave feedback on each other's work-in-progress. Data was collected via video data of 22 sessions, individual interview data (semi-structured) with the children, the head teacher and the teacher, as well as observation notes that were kept throughout the process.
The topics that the children studied varied greatly, from 'Do children in Key Stage 2 at my school play age appropriate video games' to 'What do children in my maths group think about the level of difficulty in their work?' to 'Do children want to go to University and why?'. These are helpful starting points for me, because I can use these ideas as suggestions for my own students in the autumn term.
All of the students in Kim's study were able to complete their research, but the quality of their research was not up to the standard of scholars or scientific research. This could be down to the quality of the training they provided, but Kim doesn't think this was the issue. Instead, it seems to me that this might be down to maturity and the skill level the students had themselves. For example, Kim said that when they were designing their research questions, they couldn't think of a full range of research questions. Similarly, when analysing their data, they addressed it quite superficially; they weren't able to go into detail like other researchers might. Kim seemed to suggest that this lack of development wasn't down to insufficient training, but instead reflected their own levels of literacy or competence. However, Kim said that children are competent enough to conduct their own research, but she seemed to suggest that disseminating their knowledge wasn't as high quality as they'd have wanted. Perhaps this suggests an area to focus on in my own project.
It will be interesting to see if working with older students will be easier or harder; Kim worked with Year 4,5 and 6 students, whereas I am planning to work with Year 7 students (hopefully progressing with them throughout their stay at the college, building their research skills as they progress through the years). I don't want their research to end after we complete the project; my hope is that they will build on their research in Year 7 into Year 8 and beyond.
Kim admitted that the students in her project all decided to use questionnaires, despite being taught about all of the other research methods. For example, interviews were discounted by the students because they would 'take too long'. This is an interesting problem!
The study that Kim conducted is of some interest to me, because I want to do something fairly similar with my new Year 7 tutor group. I am going to have to train them as researchers and will allow them to choose their own research topics as well. I was initially thinking of working on ONE research question as a class, but I think it would be more interesting (and perhaps beneficial) to have the students work either individually or in groups on topics that they determine themselves. I will definitely have a look at the resources they used to train their students as researchers, as they may be helpful to me next year.
Kim also explored the head teacher's views for allowing the children to become researchers. His views were that 'research skills are life skills fit for a knowledge-based economy, which the children were given the opportunity to acquire early'. She also said that involvement in research 'complemented his beliefs in some cognitive benefits: e.g. applying research skills in investigating an actual topic cultivates higher order thinking skills'. I would tend to agree with these views. The reasons I want to engage my own students as researchers is to build these skills.
I was also given some pause for consideration. When conducting my own project, I need to consider how my own views might influence the topics that the students choose to study. I will have to work out a way to ensure that my own views don't influence the topics that the students chose to study. I will also have to carefully consider how I deliver my teaching of research skills and how I support their projects. More reading will definitely have to be done before I make a start with the project (which I kind of knew, anyways - roll on summer!)
Ultimately, Kim suggested that 'children's research as practical research can produce locally useful and practical knowledge'. However, she says that 'given that their research is vulnerable to be seen as an educational activity...it seems important to ensure that children's research achieves its participatory purpose by engaging with its findings and actively exploring with them on how it could inform relevant current practices'.
I've just come back to this after a few minutes reflection and searching on the internet; I've managed to find a website which goes through some ways to teach students about research methods, available via the Open University at the following link: http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/childrens-research-centre/resources/teaching-sessions
Much of what is recorded here is quoted directly from Chae-Young Kim. All efforts have been made to make this evident, but some errors might exist. Apologies for anything that has been improperly cited or quoted out of context.
Chae-Young Kim - The Open University
Kim focused on 'What is children's research for?'. For her, it's about children as 'primary investigators' who make the key decisions and do most of the research themselves from the initial choice of the topic to the dissemination of the findings. The main issues are whether children's research is for participation or pedagogy.
She identified four different positions re: children's research:
- only for participation-related reasons
- mainly for participation but also for additional learning benefits
- Mainly for educational/learning benefits - (note: for me, I think this is why I am interested in getting students involved in educational research)
- depends on the objective of the project which adult facilitators determine
She also made links to inquiry-based learning, where there are four different categories as well: Pursuing, Authoring, Identifying and Producing research. This made me think about my own aims - I want students to identify and pursue topics that are of interest to them, produce planning and conduct research themselves and then author the results, disseminating their findings to the wider school community.
Kim quoted Hemmersley, 2000, quite frequently in the session. She quoted him as saying [on the topic of research]'Its knowledge claims are evaluated by a research community on the basis of both the body of knowledge this community takes to be valid and the evidence offered in support of them'. This was challenged by colleagues in the session, who quoted Stenhouse - 'research is systematic inquiry made public' where 'public' could be the school public, not necessarily the 'greater' public.
Moving on, discussion went to why children's research is regarded as mainly for educational benefit might be to do with the ambiguous status of children as researchers - some academics would tend to agree with this. Their role isn't as wide ranging as academic researchers, because they have a limited or partial role. The require additional support, so they can't engage in large scale research.
It all depends on different research paradigms; participatory research, etc. Whether research benefits the people that it concerns in terms of their 'empowerment' and/or social change is an important criterion.
Nind & Vinha, 2012 - a source to consider - 'Inclusive research as social science requires more than just satisfying inclusive conditions to be 'quality' research'
Melanie Nind - has a book out which might be of interest - 'What is inclusive research'
Research is about producing knowledge. Hammersley (2003): research can be informative but cannot be educative. Kim suggested that Hammersley is quite critical of research being used as educative. He suggests that research should be rigorous, but I think she was uncomfortable with his viewpoint, leaning away from his opinions.
She went on to consider that children's research might be classed as 'practical' research. According to Hammersley (2000), the immediate audience of practical research are people with a practical interest in the issue under investigation. Kim suggests then that children's research is 'practical' because it aims to produce knowledge which is of immediate practical use; children's research often produces findings that can inform practices that concern them.
Finally, she ended by looking at a study conducted in a middle-class area of a city in England. Kim wanted to test a teacher-facilitation model of children's research and training and research projects. Kim, along with another researcher (with a different perspective on children's research) held 14 sessions of social research training and 8 sessions where children worked on their projects individually and gave feedback on each other's work-in-progress. Data was collected via video data of 22 sessions, individual interview data (semi-structured) with the children, the head teacher and the teacher, as well as observation notes that were kept throughout the process.
The topics that the children studied varied greatly, from 'Do children in Key Stage 2 at my school play age appropriate video games' to 'What do children in my maths group think about the level of difficulty in their work?' to 'Do children want to go to University and why?'. These are helpful starting points for me, because I can use these ideas as suggestions for my own students in the autumn term.
All of the students in Kim's study were able to complete their research, but the quality of their research was not up to the standard of scholars or scientific research. This could be down to the quality of the training they provided, but Kim doesn't think this was the issue. Instead, it seems to me that this might be down to maturity and the skill level the students had themselves. For example, Kim said that when they were designing their research questions, they couldn't think of a full range of research questions. Similarly, when analysing their data, they addressed it quite superficially; they weren't able to go into detail like other researchers might. Kim seemed to suggest that this lack of development wasn't down to insufficient training, but instead reflected their own levels of literacy or competence. However, Kim said that children are competent enough to conduct their own research, but she seemed to suggest that disseminating their knowledge wasn't as high quality as they'd have wanted. Perhaps this suggests an area to focus on in my own project.
It will be interesting to see if working with older students will be easier or harder; Kim worked with Year 4,5 and 6 students, whereas I am planning to work with Year 7 students (hopefully progressing with them throughout their stay at the college, building their research skills as they progress through the years). I don't want their research to end after we complete the project; my hope is that they will build on their research in Year 7 into Year 8 and beyond.
Kim admitted that the students in her project all decided to use questionnaires, despite being taught about all of the other research methods. For example, interviews were discounted by the students because they would 'take too long'. This is an interesting problem!
The study that Kim conducted is of some interest to me, because I want to do something fairly similar with my new Year 7 tutor group. I am going to have to train them as researchers and will allow them to choose their own research topics as well. I was initially thinking of working on ONE research question as a class, but I think it would be more interesting (and perhaps beneficial) to have the students work either individually or in groups on topics that they determine themselves. I will definitely have a look at the resources they used to train their students as researchers, as they may be helpful to me next year.
Kim also explored the head teacher's views for allowing the children to become researchers. His views were that 'research skills are life skills fit for a knowledge-based economy, which the children were given the opportunity to acquire early'. She also said that involvement in research 'complemented his beliefs in some cognitive benefits: e.g. applying research skills in investigating an actual topic cultivates higher order thinking skills'. I would tend to agree with these views. The reasons I want to engage my own students as researchers is to build these skills.
I was also given some pause for consideration. When conducting my own project, I need to consider how my own views might influence the topics that the students choose to study. I will have to work out a way to ensure that my own views don't influence the topics that the students chose to study. I will also have to carefully consider how I deliver my teaching of research skills and how I support their projects. More reading will definitely have to be done before I make a start with the project (which I kind of knew, anyways - roll on summer!)
Ultimately, Kim suggested that 'children's research as practical research can produce locally useful and practical knowledge'. However, she says that 'given that their research is vulnerable to be seen as an educational activity...it seems important to ensure that children's research achieves its participatory purpose by engaging with its findings and actively exploring with them on how it could inform relevant current practices'.
I've just come back to this after a few minutes reflection and searching on the internet; I've managed to find a website which goes through some ways to teach students about research methods, available via the Open University at the following link: http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/childrens-research-centre/resources/teaching-sessions
Much of what is recorded here is quoted directly from Chae-Young Kim. All efforts have been made to make this evident, but some errors might exist. Apologies for anything that has been improperly cited or quoted out of context.
Day Two: Understanding Praxis in the Context of Cultural Institutions: A Tribute to Jean Rudduck
Again, I am just going to publish the notes I took during today's Keynote speech. I may go back and flesh these points out at a later date, or I may leave them as a stream of consciousness. Much of what I recorded here are direct quotes from Susan Groundwater-Smith and are not necessarily my own thoughts. I have tried to indicate my own interpretations in italics:
Susan Groundwater-Smith - Keynote speech
Susan started by saying that she was/is primarily interested in emotional responses of students. She suggested that they are often underestimated and overlooked. Straight away, she acknowledged that it was/is because of Jean she can see profound messages from youth. The following points are brief summaries of what she said throughout her presentation:
How she came to know Jean
- In the speech, she didn't refer to Jean as 'Rudduck' but as 'Jean', to emphasis the familiarity between them and present the warmth of the person that she was.
- 'Jean saw Lawrence Stenhouse had a vision of teacher and pupil and learning that went on between the two that exceeded the norms of the day'
- She discussed an argument that she had with Jean regarding the use in UK of the word 'pupils' and 'students' - this was an argument that they never resolved, but this wasn't necessarily a bad thing. Susan stated that she felt that the word 'pupils' positions them as having less agency, though Jean didn't agree with that.
- Together, they wanted to expand assumptions of what a pupil 'is' - essential from a young persons perspective that the conditions of learning needed to satisfy six criteria: respect, fairness, autonomy, intellectual challenge, social support and security.
- Susan then familiarised self with Stenhouse and going behind the case study - look at the data that informed the case study - an 'edited primary source' (quoting Stenhouse)
- Jean encouraged her to 'think about the relationship between information and knowledge'
- Case record vs case study - something to look into in more detail at a later date
- Jack Hexter and the second record
Using 'case records' as a fulcrum for learning
-cited Elliot, J. & Norris, N. (2012) The Stenhouse Legacy in J.Elliot & N. Norris (Eds.) Curriculum, Pedagogy and Educational Research. London: Routledge, pp 137-152
Might be an interesting article to seek out and read.
Branching out - an understanding of praxis
This section went quite quickly! I wasn't able to get much down.
Principles for participative engagement
I will try to get access to the 8 points that Susan discussed, and post them here at a later date. I couldn't type quickly enough to get them down ^_^ I think many of them are reflected in current BERA standards regarding students and research.
Working with cultural institutions -emotional engagement, two narratives
First discussed the impact of the Yiwarra Kuju exhibition - National Museum at Canberra. Based on a stock route to the north, where the environment was alienated in order to move cattle. Students went to see the exhibition, reflected on it, and pondered what had taken place in Australian history. Saw it as a metaphor of their own learning journey; students who went to the exhibition researched their encounter with the exhibition and with each other. The paintings and stories really influenced the students - use that to express their experience through their own painting and extracts.
They had to construct visual and verbal narratives, map the development of their learning space, among other things. They had to draw on their past, present and future of how they saw themselves as learners. Emotional experiences and responses were drawn on the most.
I think it would be beneficial to read this paper - which I think Susan has said will be made available to those who wish to read it. I will definitely give it a read, as I am very interested in seeing how students respond to their learning.
Why does emotional engagement matter? It provides us with insight!
Strengthening participation beyond the classroom
Again, I wasn't able to get much down at this point, as I was listening too hard!
Apologies again for the extreme 'rambling' nature of these notes. I find it helpful for me to jot down interesting ideas that I hear, but often these might not make sense to an outsider.
Susan Groundwater-Smith - Keynote speech
Susan started by saying that she was/is primarily interested in emotional responses of students. She suggested that they are often underestimated and overlooked. Straight away, she acknowledged that it was/is because of Jean she can see profound messages from youth. The following points are brief summaries of what she said throughout her presentation:
How she came to know Jean
- In the speech, she didn't refer to Jean as 'Rudduck' but as 'Jean', to emphasis the familiarity between them and present the warmth of the person that she was.
- 'Jean saw Lawrence Stenhouse had a vision of teacher and pupil and learning that went on between the two that exceeded the norms of the day'
- She discussed an argument that she had with Jean regarding the use in UK of the word 'pupils' and 'students' - this was an argument that they never resolved, but this wasn't necessarily a bad thing. Susan stated that she felt that the word 'pupils' positions them as having less agency, though Jean didn't agree with that.
- Together, they wanted to expand assumptions of what a pupil 'is' - essential from a young persons perspective that the conditions of learning needed to satisfy six criteria: respect, fairness, autonomy, intellectual challenge, social support and security.
- Susan then familiarised self with Stenhouse and going behind the case study - look at the data that informed the case study - an 'edited primary source' (quoting Stenhouse)
- Jean encouraged her to 'think about the relationship between information and knowledge'
- Case record vs case study - something to look into in more detail at a later date
- Jack Hexter and the second record
Using 'case records' as a fulcrum for learning
-cited Elliot, J. & Norris, N. (2012) The Stenhouse Legacy in J.Elliot & N. Norris (Eds.) Curriculum, Pedagogy and Educational Research. London: Routledge, pp 137-152
Might be an interesting article to seek out and read.
Branching out - an understanding of praxis
This section went quite quickly! I wasn't able to get much down.
Principles for participative engagement
I will try to get access to the 8 points that Susan discussed, and post them here at a later date. I couldn't type quickly enough to get them down ^_^ I think many of them are reflected in current BERA standards regarding students and research.
Working with cultural institutions -emotional engagement, two narratives
First discussed the impact of the Yiwarra Kuju exhibition - National Museum at Canberra. Based on a stock route to the north, where the environment was alienated in order to move cattle. Students went to see the exhibition, reflected on it, and pondered what had taken place in Australian history. Saw it as a metaphor of their own learning journey; students who went to the exhibition researched their encounter with the exhibition and with each other. The paintings and stories really influenced the students - use that to express their experience through their own painting and extracts.
They had to construct visual and verbal narratives, map the development of their learning space, among other things. They had to draw on their past, present and future of how they saw themselves as learners. Emotional experiences and responses were drawn on the most.
I think it would be beneficial to read this paper - which I think Susan has said will be made available to those who wish to read it. I will definitely give it a read, as I am very interested in seeing how students respond to their learning.
Why does emotional engagement matter? It provides us with insight!
Strengthening participation beyond the classroom
Again, I wasn't able to get much down at this point, as I was listening too hard!
Apologies again for the extreme 'rambling' nature of these notes. I find it helpful for me to jot down interesting ideas that I hear, but often these might not make sense to an outsider.
Day Two: An 'unstructured' discussion of how to support students as researchers within a school
Session Two - An 'unstructured' discussion on how to support students as researchers within a school
The following notes are very much a 'stream of thought' based on the second session of the day. I do apologise if my thoughts don't come across clearly.
To begin, there was a lot of discussion about ethics in the second session, with many links between how teachers were initially brought into educational research. The suggestion was that now we're at the stage where we're attempting to bring students into the process.
Bethan brought up the idea of a 'proliferation' of toolkits and marketing agencies who work on Student Voice, and the idea that these groups are 'branding' student voice. Does this take away then value of student voice in schools? Is there a correct way to engage in student voice? She feels (and I tend to agree) that these things should be made available for free to schools - but in that case, how do schools choose a toolkit that works?
Below are a few different resources that we discussed, which are all available free for download or, in the case of some of the texts, purchase:
Chad-Young Kim - Open University - started off by talking about how she has developed a toolkit to help young children acquire key concepts of research and principles. There are a list of resources that are useful here - http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/childrens-research-centre/resources
I have consulted many of these in my own research, and will make use of the texts by Bucknall (2012) and Kellett (2005) when I begin to train my Year 7 form as student researchers.
ASKAIDS toolkit - available here - http://oer.educ.cam.ac.uk/wiki/ASKAIDS
EduGains/Speak Up resources from the Ontario Ministry of Education - http://www.edugains.ca/newsite/studentVoice/student_inquirers/students_as_researchers.html, which includes some ethics activities that can be used by people training students as researchers.
Helen Beattie's work on Students at the Centre - http://www.studentsatthecenter.org
There's also the Sutton Trust Teaching and Learning toolkit, which shows that large gains can be made at small costs if we give students a voice within a school. http://www.suttontrust.com/about-us/education-endowment-foundation/teaching-learning-toolkit/
Many of these resources are found on the CSVS website/blog, so do check the full lot out here:
https://cambridgestudentvoiceseminars.wordpress.com/our-resources/
One fundamental issue we discussed was democracy within schools. This sprang from a discussion of what happens in Denmark, where the students are really empowered to make change within the education system. However, I brought up the fact that I often feel that, as a teacher in the UK, I don't have a voice in what goes on in my own school, let alone in the government; if I don't have a voice, then how can we expect students to have a voice? It's a very tricky concept, and one that needs development. I think the way forward is to create my own voice and to 'speak up' (fittingly, this echoes the title of the student voice programme established in Ontario), meaning to speak to the people above me, 'speak as an activist that is speaking upwards to secure resources'.
Another issue that came up is that 'Enquiry is the most powerful way to learn'. We talked about how this can be used in CPD, and I think, from my brief talks with the current research coordinator at my school, this IS the pathway that we're trying to go down at my school. I just hope that I can be involved in this process. Teacher research could and should be used more in CPD in order to engage people and get them to take it seriously. As one of my colleagues suggested, we're looking for a 'mind shift' in schools.
What it all came back to was that we can't really encourage student voice until teachers are given their own voice and proper support within schools. We need to change the research culture in schools so that it's tightly linked to pedagogy and improvement, and not seen as a 'chore'.
The following notes are very much a 'stream of thought' based on the second session of the day. I do apologise if my thoughts don't come across clearly.
To begin, there was a lot of discussion about ethics in the second session, with many links between how teachers were initially brought into educational research. The suggestion was that now we're at the stage where we're attempting to bring students into the process.
Bethan brought up the idea of a 'proliferation' of toolkits and marketing agencies who work on Student Voice, and the idea that these groups are 'branding' student voice. Does this take away then value of student voice in schools? Is there a correct way to engage in student voice? She feels (and I tend to agree) that these things should be made available for free to schools - but in that case, how do schools choose a toolkit that works?
Below are a few different resources that we discussed, which are all available free for download or, in the case of some of the texts, purchase:
Chad-Young Kim - Open University - started off by talking about how she has developed a toolkit to help young children acquire key concepts of research and principles. There are a list of resources that are useful here - http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/childrens-research-centre/resources
I have consulted many of these in my own research, and will make use of the texts by Bucknall (2012) and Kellett (2005) when I begin to train my Year 7 form as student researchers.
ASKAIDS toolkit - available here - http://oer.educ.cam.ac.uk/wiki/ASKAIDS
EduGains/Speak Up resources from the Ontario Ministry of Education - http://www.edugains.ca/newsite/studentVoice/student_inquirers/students_as_researchers.html, which includes some ethics activities that can be used by people training students as researchers.
Helen Beattie's work on Students at the Centre - http://www.studentsatthecenter.org
There's also the Sutton Trust Teaching and Learning toolkit, which shows that large gains can be made at small costs if we give students a voice within a school. http://www.suttontrust.com/about-us/education-endowment-foundation/teaching-learning-toolkit/
Many of these resources are found on the CSVS website/blog, so do check the full lot out here:
https://cambridgestudentvoiceseminars.wordpress.com/our-resources/
One fundamental issue we discussed was democracy within schools. This sprang from a discussion of what happens in Denmark, where the students are really empowered to make change within the education system. However, I brought up the fact that I often feel that, as a teacher in the UK, I don't have a voice in what goes on in my own school, let alone in the government; if I don't have a voice, then how can we expect students to have a voice? It's a very tricky concept, and one that needs development. I think the way forward is to create my own voice and to 'speak up' (fittingly, this echoes the title of the student voice programme established in Ontario), meaning to speak to the people above me, 'speak as an activist that is speaking upwards to secure resources'.
Another issue that came up is that 'Enquiry is the most powerful way to learn'. We talked about how this can be used in CPD, and I think, from my brief talks with the current research coordinator at my school, this IS the pathway that we're trying to go down at my school. I just hope that I can be involved in this process. Teacher research could and should be used more in CPD in order to engage people and get them to take it seriously. As one of my colleagues suggested, we're looking for a 'mind shift' in schools.
What it all came back to was that we can't really encourage student voice until teachers are given their own voice and proper support within schools. We need to change the research culture in schools so that it's tightly linked to pedagogy and improvement, and not seen as a 'chore'.
Day Two: Reflecting on 'Student Feedback'.
Okay, so I am currently one session in on my second day at the conference, and already I feel like I've got another new project for next year. I think it's going to be a busy one for me! I am so full of enthusiasm right now, being around these people who are as interested and engaged in bettering student engagement as I am (perhaps more so, as they all seem so much more academic than me!) is really inspiring.
I'm going to include a link here to a Guardian article about Rory Gallagher, whom I just saw speak. His focus today as on building use of Student Feedback - having students evaluate teachers in order to help improve practice.
http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2014/jun/29/learning-from-learners-hone-teaching-skills
I'm going to post the 'notes' which I took during his presentation below. If I have time later, I may come back and clean this up a bit:
I think this is an amazing idea, and one which I plan to use within my own classroom. I've asked him for access to his 'toolkit' so that I can try to get access to an online version of the survey. I think it would be worth booking a PC room for my remaining KS3 classes, allowing them some time to reflect on my teaching. I have no issue with receiving criticism from students about my teaching, although I know that some teachers might be hostile to the idea of students 'judging' them. However, students are our 'consumers', so it makes perfect sense to ask the consumers how they feel about the product that they receive!
For access to the survey in which Rory based his initial study on, check out the website here: http://www.metproject.org/resources.php
I'll post more later!
I'm going to include a link here to a Guardian article about Rory Gallagher, whom I just saw speak. His focus today as on building use of Student Feedback - having students evaluate teachers in order to help improve practice.
http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2014/jun/29/learning-from-learners-hone-teaching-skills
I'm going to post the 'notes' which I took during his presentation below. If I have time later, I may come back and clean this up a bit:
-
did Masters degree focusing on
feedback, and then this led him to focus on student and staff voice, etc.
-
can be forbidding and
intimidating at first
-
listening – how we listen to
each other, not just students
-
listening to ourselves
-
teacher voice – our own
narrative – understanding ourselves before we can listen to students
-
Who I am? What I do? What do I
want to be? Where do I want to be? – start by writing that – say a lot about
yourself – might be interesting idea to do with students! First lesson thing.
-
Need to then consider what
you’re looking for –what’s the point of asking students? What do you want to
find out? Are you open to finding faults, etc?
-
Are we actually listening to
students? What is STUDENT feedback?
-
More formal feedback – written
-
Informal is ‘mostly’ verbal or
non-written
-
What are the barriers to
implementing student voice?
-
Measures of Effective Teaching
programme – questionnaire borrowed to do own Masters (American)
-
Why are we not getting feedback
from students? Why are we not in discussion with students about how we teach?
-
Survey online – did survey at
school - put it on Twitter and got more results as well
-
Primary teachers more engaged with
student feedback and more open to it (findings)
-
Most teachers get informal
feedback from students (according to survey results)
-
Survey suggested that teachers
think students SHOULD evaluate their teachers – so why don’t we do it more
often?
-
Survey suggests that some
teachers are afraid of getting negative feedback – for most this isn’t an issue
– why is it an issue for some?
-
Dialogue itself is as important
as the results
-
Do we: care, control, challenge,
confer, clarify, captivate, consolidate – interesting to use this as a CPD
platform
I think this is an amazing idea, and one which I plan to use within my own classroom. I've asked him for access to his 'toolkit' so that I can try to get access to an online version of the survey. I think it would be worth booking a PC room for my remaining KS3 classes, allowing them some time to reflect on my teaching. I have no issue with receiving criticism from students about my teaching, although I know that some teachers might be hostile to the idea of students 'judging' them. However, students are our 'consumers', so it makes perfect sense to ask the consumers how they feel about the product that they receive!
For access to the survey in which Rory based his initial study on, check out the website here: http://www.metproject.org/resources.php
I'll post more later!
Thoughts on Day One of the Cambridge Student Voice Conference 2015
Well, I don't have loads of time to go in depth into my thoughts on the first day, but I do want to make a few points while they are still fresh in my mind.
First of all, I was absolutely blown away by the way student voice is conducted in Denmark. A groups called The Association of Danish Pupils (DSE), which is a non-governmental organisation of 30 employees – half who are adults and half who are teenagers - came to do a presentation and tell us about how student voice works in their country. It really put the level of student voice use here in the UK to shame, and made me realise how 'backwards' we are in some regards. The students at the conference were so confident and so assured that their voices would be heard. The whole country seems to value democracy at such a different level than we do here.
Being a part of the DSE, students are able to take a year off before going to
college, where they all live together in house, working from 8am – 4pm each day, unpaid. Primarily, they work with student
councils, educating them on the laws and rights that they have, or how to get an
active pupil council which works with different layers of
education. For example, the president of the DSE, a 16 year old girl, meets with Minister of Education every two months, does work
with the ministry, and oversees regional work amongst the different branches of the DSE – there is a branch in each of the 5 regions of Denmark.
Some of the things they discuss with students across the country are school reforms – they go around
informing pupils about the new government reforms regarding education. The students told us about how last year they visited 700 schools to share
information with the students; this is such a huge feat, and something that is unheard of in my own professional experience.
They also operate a Pupil Hotline, where students can call and speak
to other students about things that bother them. All of the people who work at the hotline are volunteers between the ages of 15-18 and have been properly trained to deal with tough situations.
Essentially, schools have a choice on
whether to buy into the DSE – it costs roughly £400 a year – and many public schools take
part (about half of the schools in Denmark are currently part of the DSE, which amounts to roughly 900 member schools). Students can be personal
members as well for £10 a year. This is for if individual schools don't want to be involved.
I just found the whole concept so amazing. I'd really love to learn more about it!
I also, very briefly, want to mention how proud I am of my own student research team. They came to the conference not sure of what to expect, and to be fair neither did I. When Michael Fielding opened the conference up with his Keynote speech, I found myself looking to the students to see how they were taking it all in; I must admit, they looked a little out of their depth. I was a bit worried that they wouldn't be able to access some of the information they heard throughout the day.
However, immediately after Michael's speech (which I found thoroughly enjoyable, by the way!), Roger Holdsworth broke the ice with a little activity which got everyone up and about, talking and engaging with each other. The students were a bit hesitant to mill about at first, but after getting over their initial shyness they spent the rest of the day actively talking and participating with various people at the conference. During two separate sessions they were called upon directly to share their ideas, perspectives and experiences, and they handled themselves with maturity and intelligence beyond my expectations. I was truly proud of them and felt thankful for having had the opportunity to work alongside such a lovely bunch of students.
Anyways, that's all for now.
I just found the whole concept so amazing. I'd really love to learn more about it!
I also, very briefly, want to mention how proud I am of my own student research team. They came to the conference not sure of what to expect, and to be fair neither did I. When Michael Fielding opened the conference up with his Keynote speech, I found myself looking to the students to see how they were taking it all in; I must admit, they looked a little out of their depth. I was a bit worried that they wouldn't be able to access some of the information they heard throughout the day.
However, immediately after Michael's speech (which I found thoroughly enjoyable, by the way!), Roger Holdsworth broke the ice with a little activity which got everyone up and about, talking and engaging with each other. The students were a bit hesitant to mill about at first, but after getting over their initial shyness they spent the rest of the day actively talking and participating with various people at the conference. During two separate sessions they were called upon directly to share their ideas, perspectives and experiences, and they handled themselves with maturity and intelligence beyond my expectations. I was truly proud of them and felt thankful for having had the opportunity to work alongside such a lovely bunch of students.
Anyways, that's all for now.
Thursday 18 June 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)