Phew, I feel like I'm on a roll today, so I won't stop now!
The final session that I attended was 'High impact peer mentoring' by James Simpson (@2ndary_Source). I think a lot of people missed the dissemination of some really great knowledge by leaving the session before it began. When I first entered the room, it was almost full, but by the time James put his presentation on the board, people seemed to decide it wasn't for them. I felt it was rather rude that people left, some mid-way through the opening five minutes! I understand that there are a lot of options available, but the polite thing to do is to stick with your choice once the speaker has begun! Perhaps this is the the overly-polite Canadian in me speaking, who knows, but I certainly felt some sympathy for James as people started to leave after he'd started speaking, and I applaud his ability to persevere despite that!
Anyways, as mentioned above, those who left missed out on hearing about some wonderful research and practice. The scope and scale of the peer mentoring project undertaken by James and his grammar school is nothing short of amazing. I think the results, much like that generated by my own research, suggest that such cross-age peer mentor schemes have largely positive repercussions for all involved, staff and students alike.
Listening to James talk about the project immediately got my mind whirring about the possibilities for cross-age mentoring at my school. Already we have a system of peer mentors, whereby Year 10 students are trained (at the end of Year 9) to become mentors to a group of Year 7 students. Each form is allocated 2 or 3 older students who aid in Year 6 induction programmes and are a visible presence in the Year 7 forms once students start at the college. However, this process doesn't usually last beyond the first half term, and the peer mentors often drop off as a presence in the classroom. It seems a shame that these relationships should be forgotten so easily. What I'd like to consider doing (among my many other possible projects) is adapting the mentoring scheme to be something that happens year-round.
Once the initial transition period is over, specific students within each form could be chosen for more one-to-one, ongoing mentoring. As a starting point, these could be Pupil Premium students or students who suffer from anxiety or other emotional issues. In doing this, the school could potentially tackle these key areas of school development at minimal cost; they've already paid to train the peer mentors, after all!
In order to make this work effectively though, I need to do a lot more reading. I'll definitely be in touch with James, as I recognise that (despite him saying that he's a 'nobody') he's got a wealth of knowledge and experience in this area. Even if this isn't a project which I undertake myself, I'm always eager to expand my knowledge and facilitate someone else in my school developing their own little 'bug bear'.
(NOTE: This post forms the third part of my blogs about researchEd
2015. Please make sure to check out the first post, available here, the second available here and the third available here)
Sunday, 6 September 2015
researchED 2015: Part 3
The third session of the day was when I presented with the SUPER Network (which I will blog about last), so I will move on to the fourth and fifth sessions of the day.
For the fourth slot, I was a bit unsure of where to go; there were so many different options that appealed. However, a cheeky Tweet from a fellow conference attendee alerted me to the option of biscuits at Beth Greville-Giddings (@bethgg) Journal Club session, so I decided to attend (how very shallow of me, right?). That being said, I was really pleased with my choice, biscuits or no!
The whole idea of Journal Club is that staff (I loved how inclusive the whole idea was - opening it up to all staff is such a simple, yet rarely done, option) meet regularly to discuss research (hence the name Journal Club) articles, much like a Book Club discusses books. What a great way to make educational research more accessible to teachers! I know first hand how hard it can be for teachers to get access to educational research journals, but with a Journal Club schools would really only need one person to be able to download, print and distribute a journal article every now and again for reading and debate. Nowadays this can be done via Google Scholar as well; as Beth said, there are a variety of ways to get access to journal articles without needing academic access.
It's a fantastic way to keep everyone involved in education up to date, teachers and support staff alike. I also think, much like Beth suggested, that it's an excellent way for staff to become more familiar with the research that's out there on topics affecting schools. Making research more accessible is a huge step towards debunking the idea that educational research isn't useful to classroom teachers. A lot of the conversations around the conference were about how to make teaching a more 'evidence based practice', so any and all engagement with academic research is helpful.
I am definitely going to take the Journal Club idea away to my own school. We've recently advertised for new Pedagogy Leader (PL) roles within the school. The exact remit of this group isn't written in stone yet (because no one has been appointed), but I believe that the PLs will be instrumental in helping our Research Lesson Study (RLS) become truly research based; this year we're adding the requirement that each group has a research question to address. My thinking is that a Journal Club could be created by the PLs, with attendance being opened up to the rest of the staff as well. That way, staff could identify topics of interest, the PLs could go away and choose journal articles, and discussions could be had which would naturally aid in the RLS process.
Of minor note is the fact that Beth herself is a TA; this really did astounded me. I may be wrong, but my own impression of the TAs at my school (as lovely and knowledgeable as they are) is that they rarely attend staff meetings or whole staff CPD training. I'm sure (hope!) that they do their own CPD training, but I never see them at teacher training CPD sessions. Realistically, I think this is tied to their contracted working hours; teachers are contractually obliged to stay to 4:30pm for CPD, whereas the day ends at 3pm for TAs. I can understand why they wouldn't want to stay later for additional training, especially if they don't feel that it applies to them. However, there's an argument in there somewhere about how anything that goes on in the classroom should be of benefit to ALL staff involved in teaching and learning. Just thinking about this could open up a whole other can of worms, so I think I'll stop this particular ramble here...
The fifth session that I attended was 'Reclaiming the profession', a lecture given by David Weston (@informed_edu). Having previously watched David's TED talk, I was very excited to see him speak. If I'm honest, it was probably the session I was most looking forward to in the entire day, and it certainly didn't disappoint. David has a way of speaking that is thoroughly engaging, entertaining and informative.
He started off by talking about how 'research in education isn't normal' and that it can often be seen as 'avant-garde'. This is definitely the case, as most people balk when I tell them that I completed a research-Masters degree while working full-time in teaching. The very fact that people questioned my sanity shows what research is, as David suggested, NOT part of the profession at the moment. However, like almost everyone at the conference, David firmly believes that it should be.
He then went on to make a very nice analogy using steak. While he joked often that he was stretching the analogy too far, I think it was spot-on. To summarise, he suggested that CPD can be likened to cooking steak. I'm going to attempt to whittle his analogy down to the basics here, so apologies to David if I've butchered your idea...
When you first set out to cook a steak, you might decide to follow a recipe set out by someone else. However, following a recipe (as my cooking can attest to) does not a great chef make; you're just doing what someone else has already proven can be done with passable results.
The next step, then, is to observe a chef; the hope here is that by watching the chef cook, you can emulate some of what they do. I've done this countless times, watching Gordon or Jamie cook on one of Channel 4's many cookery special. By no means will this make me a cook on their level, but I'll certainly make some (perhaps surface) improvements.
So then you might decide to go on a cookery course which will inspire you, provide you with some excellent ideas, but often, as we all know about day courses that we attend, be largely forgotten after a few weeks time. Your ability to cook steak may improve, but you'll by no means be at chef-level proficiency after a one-off course, will you?
Another way to improve your cooking ability is to go 'in house' and ask the people around you. I've consulted my dad on countless occassions, and he's always able to provide me with good advice. However, by doing that, I'm simply learning how to cook steak my dad's way, and he's no professional either.
A wise person might then decide to approach it scientifically. If you want to learn how to cook the BEST steak ever, then you could read all the evidence available about cooking steak and try to incorporate some of this evidence-based learning. By this point, you'll be very knowledgeable about how it's done, based on your extensive reading, and you might use this knowledge to create your own 'SEF Steak Toolkit', as David put it. It is here, he suggests, where the problem lies.
Throughout this entire cooking experiment, not once have you done anything which sustained your development as a cook. You've made superficial attempts to become better at cooking, but none of it has elevate your ability to cook like that of a chef. That takes years of practice, training and experience. Mimicry is not the answer, better education and training is!
Much like the audience at David's talk, I'm sure you can make the connection between steak cooking and CPD. Currently, much of teacher CPD is shallow and involves surface level solutions and mimicry. There is no engagement with the 'why' of things. It is here where his 'renaissance of educational scholarship' lies. He suggested that by embedding evidence into our every day job, we can learn to become not just practitioners but scholars as well. What a novel idea!
The idea that I will most try to push forward at my school is that of making PM observations more than just a one-off lesson observation. David suggested that observations should require more than looking at a lesson; they should involve in depth conversations about the lessons that came before the observation, the lessons that will come after, the planning that informed the observed lesson, and the growth and performance of the group throughout time. Lesson observations shouldn't be a snap-shot look at what goes on in a class, but instead a detailed discussion of ongoing work being done throughout.
I've often felt that lesson observations were unfair in this regard. Let's take a group I taught last year; they were an extremely challenging group and presented me with a lot of difficulties. They were a wild bunch who struggled to follow instructions and work independently. They were loud, rowdy and often off task. I was sent on a costly external CPD course on behaviour management (which DID help, but don't ask me where the notes and resources I came home with went), watched other teachers teach, and I listened to advice from other teachers on how to manage the unmanageable. I suppose some of this helped, but it wasn't exactly what I needed to improve. It was all very superficial.
However, as the year progressed, I worked with them to change their bad habits, trying different techniques until I figured out what worked best for me. I gauged their levels of understanding, adapted my teaching, and by the end of the year saw the highest level of performance improvement (compared to all my other classes) from this group. However, these strengths were not addressed during my PM review of an observation with this class. Instead, it was suggested that in order to improve I 'step back' and allow the class more freedom and independence. It was recognised that the group had made 'excellent progress' and that it was 'understandable' that I exercise more control over classroom activities, it would be better if I could let go of the reins, so to speak. Doing this, I was told, would take me from a level 2 (Good) teacher to level 1(Outstanding).
I feel like, as David suggested in his speech, that my line manager is missing the point here. While we addressed the improvements I had made, we failed to have a detailed discussion about what came before the lesson, what was going to come after, and explore the real reason behind why behaviour with this group was so challenging for me. For me, it came down to the fact that despite all my efforts, and despite a recognition of how 'good' the lesson was, it wasn't good enough. I wasn't good enough. The lesson itself, and the buildup towards it, wasn't considered the way that it should be; instead, a judgement was made on that individual lesson (and as most teachers feel, on myself). It's no wonder that morale in the teaching profession is so low.
Moving forward, I recognise, from surveys I had each of my classes complete at the end of the year, that behaviour management is an area I should focus on. I plan to ensure that this becomes a PM focus for me in the upcoming year, but I refuse to go down the same path I went down last year. I no longer want to watch, read or mimic what other people have done. I need to look at the evidence that is out there and make a variety of changes to my teaching, working with someone who can coach or mentor me (a subject specialist, as David suggested), helping me along the way. Judgement is not supportive, so I want to move away from that, as I think most teachers would too.
The session ended with David listing a number of steps that teachers can take in order to, as I like to think of it, 'join the enlightenment'. These include:
- joining subject associations
- learning to ask 'why' about issues that affect teaching and learning
- be critical of what you read
- welcome professional debate by looking at the viewpoints of others
- keep coming to researchEd events
- get involved in system change
- look out for the 'Call to Evidence' which will be coming on Monday
Ultimately, it's down to teachers and school leaders to begin to view teacher development differently, with more focus on 'skill mastery' instead of 'performance mastery'. If the literature on AfL is anything to go by, the way we expect staff to progress should be no different to how we expect students to progress.
(NOTE: This post forms the third part of my blogs about researchEd 2015. Please make sure to check out the first post, available here and the second available here.)
For the fourth slot, I was a bit unsure of where to go; there were so many different options that appealed. However, a cheeky Tweet from a fellow conference attendee alerted me to the option of biscuits at Beth Greville-Giddings (@bethgg) Journal Club session, so I decided to attend (how very shallow of me, right?). That being said, I was really pleased with my choice, biscuits or no!
The whole idea of Journal Club is that staff (I loved how inclusive the whole idea was - opening it up to all staff is such a simple, yet rarely done, option) meet regularly to discuss research (hence the name Journal Club) articles, much like a Book Club discusses books. What a great way to make educational research more accessible to teachers! I know first hand how hard it can be for teachers to get access to educational research journals, but with a Journal Club schools would really only need one person to be able to download, print and distribute a journal article every now and again for reading and debate. Nowadays this can be done via Google Scholar as well; as Beth said, there are a variety of ways to get access to journal articles without needing academic access.
It's a fantastic way to keep everyone involved in education up to date, teachers and support staff alike. I also think, much like Beth suggested, that it's an excellent way for staff to become more familiar with the research that's out there on topics affecting schools. Making research more accessible is a huge step towards debunking the idea that educational research isn't useful to classroom teachers. A lot of the conversations around the conference were about how to make teaching a more 'evidence based practice', so any and all engagement with academic research is helpful.
I am definitely going to take the Journal Club idea away to my own school. We've recently advertised for new Pedagogy Leader (PL) roles within the school. The exact remit of this group isn't written in stone yet (because no one has been appointed), but I believe that the PLs will be instrumental in helping our Research Lesson Study (RLS) become truly research based; this year we're adding the requirement that each group has a research question to address. My thinking is that a Journal Club could be created by the PLs, with attendance being opened up to the rest of the staff as well. That way, staff could identify topics of interest, the PLs could go away and choose journal articles, and discussions could be had which would naturally aid in the RLS process.
Of minor note is the fact that Beth herself is a TA; this really did astounded me. I may be wrong, but my own impression of the TAs at my school (as lovely and knowledgeable as they are) is that they rarely attend staff meetings or whole staff CPD training. I'm sure (hope!) that they do their own CPD training, but I never see them at teacher training CPD sessions. Realistically, I think this is tied to their contracted working hours; teachers are contractually obliged to stay to 4:30pm for CPD, whereas the day ends at 3pm for TAs. I can understand why they wouldn't want to stay later for additional training, especially if they don't feel that it applies to them. However, there's an argument in there somewhere about how anything that goes on in the classroom should be of benefit to ALL staff involved in teaching and learning. Just thinking about this could open up a whole other can of worms, so I think I'll stop this particular ramble here...
The fifth session that I attended was 'Reclaiming the profession', a lecture given by David Weston (@informed_edu). Having previously watched David's TED talk, I was very excited to see him speak. If I'm honest, it was probably the session I was most looking forward to in the entire day, and it certainly didn't disappoint. David has a way of speaking that is thoroughly engaging, entertaining and informative.
He started off by talking about how 'research in education isn't normal' and that it can often be seen as 'avant-garde'. This is definitely the case, as most people balk when I tell them that I completed a research-Masters degree while working full-time in teaching. The very fact that people questioned my sanity shows what research is, as David suggested, NOT part of the profession at the moment. However, like almost everyone at the conference, David firmly believes that it should be.
He then went on to make a very nice analogy using steak. While he joked often that he was stretching the analogy too far, I think it was spot-on. To summarise, he suggested that CPD can be likened to cooking steak. I'm going to attempt to whittle his analogy down to the basics here, so apologies to David if I've butchered your idea...
When you first set out to cook a steak, you might decide to follow a recipe set out by someone else. However, following a recipe (as my cooking can attest to) does not a great chef make; you're just doing what someone else has already proven can be done with passable results.
The next step, then, is to observe a chef; the hope here is that by watching the chef cook, you can emulate some of what they do. I've done this countless times, watching Gordon or Jamie cook on one of Channel 4's many cookery special. By no means will this make me a cook on their level, but I'll certainly make some (perhaps surface) improvements.
So then you might decide to go on a cookery course which will inspire you, provide you with some excellent ideas, but often, as we all know about day courses that we attend, be largely forgotten after a few weeks time. Your ability to cook steak may improve, but you'll by no means be at chef-level proficiency after a one-off course, will you?
Another way to improve your cooking ability is to go 'in house' and ask the people around you. I've consulted my dad on countless occassions, and he's always able to provide me with good advice. However, by doing that, I'm simply learning how to cook steak my dad's way, and he's no professional either.
A wise person might then decide to approach it scientifically. If you want to learn how to cook the BEST steak ever, then you could read all the evidence available about cooking steak and try to incorporate some of this evidence-based learning. By this point, you'll be very knowledgeable about how it's done, based on your extensive reading, and you might use this knowledge to create your own 'SEF Steak Toolkit', as David put it. It is here, he suggests, where the problem lies.
Throughout this entire cooking experiment, not once have you done anything which sustained your development as a cook. You've made superficial attempts to become better at cooking, but none of it has elevate your ability to cook like that of a chef. That takes years of practice, training and experience. Mimicry is not the answer, better education and training is!
Much like the audience at David's talk, I'm sure you can make the connection between steak cooking and CPD. Currently, much of teacher CPD is shallow and involves surface level solutions and mimicry. There is no engagement with the 'why' of things. It is here where his 'renaissance of educational scholarship' lies. He suggested that by embedding evidence into our every day job, we can learn to become not just practitioners but scholars as well. What a novel idea!
The idea that I will most try to push forward at my school is that of making PM observations more than just a one-off lesson observation. David suggested that observations should require more than looking at a lesson; they should involve in depth conversations about the lessons that came before the observation, the lessons that will come after, the planning that informed the observed lesson, and the growth and performance of the group throughout time. Lesson observations shouldn't be a snap-shot look at what goes on in a class, but instead a detailed discussion of ongoing work being done throughout.
I've often felt that lesson observations were unfair in this regard. Let's take a group I taught last year; they were an extremely challenging group and presented me with a lot of difficulties. They were a wild bunch who struggled to follow instructions and work independently. They were loud, rowdy and often off task. I was sent on a costly external CPD course on behaviour management (which DID help, but don't ask me where the notes and resources I came home with went), watched other teachers teach, and I listened to advice from other teachers on how to manage the unmanageable. I suppose some of this helped, but it wasn't exactly what I needed to improve. It was all very superficial.
However, as the year progressed, I worked with them to change their bad habits, trying different techniques until I figured out what worked best for me. I gauged their levels of understanding, adapted my teaching, and by the end of the year saw the highest level of performance improvement (compared to all my other classes) from this group. However, these strengths were not addressed during my PM review of an observation with this class. Instead, it was suggested that in order to improve I 'step back' and allow the class more freedom and independence. It was recognised that the group had made 'excellent progress' and that it was 'understandable' that I exercise more control over classroom activities, it would be better if I could let go of the reins, so to speak. Doing this, I was told, would take me from a level 2 (Good) teacher to level 1(Outstanding).
I feel like, as David suggested in his speech, that my line manager is missing the point here. While we addressed the improvements I had made, we failed to have a detailed discussion about what came before the lesson, what was going to come after, and explore the real reason behind why behaviour with this group was so challenging for me. For me, it came down to the fact that despite all my efforts, and despite a recognition of how 'good' the lesson was, it wasn't good enough. I wasn't good enough. The lesson itself, and the buildup towards it, wasn't considered the way that it should be; instead, a judgement was made on that individual lesson (and as most teachers feel, on myself). It's no wonder that morale in the teaching profession is so low.
Moving forward, I recognise, from surveys I had each of my classes complete at the end of the year, that behaviour management is an area I should focus on. I plan to ensure that this becomes a PM focus for me in the upcoming year, but I refuse to go down the same path I went down last year. I no longer want to watch, read or mimic what other people have done. I need to look at the evidence that is out there and make a variety of changes to my teaching, working with someone who can coach or mentor me (a subject specialist, as David suggested), helping me along the way. Judgement is not supportive, so I want to move away from that, as I think most teachers would too.
The session ended with David listing a number of steps that teachers can take in order to, as I like to think of it, 'join the enlightenment'. These include:
- joining subject associations
- learning to ask 'why' about issues that affect teaching and learning
- be critical of what you read
- welcome professional debate by looking at the viewpoints of others
- keep coming to researchEd events
- get involved in system change
- look out for the 'Call to Evidence' which will be coming on Monday
Ultimately, it's down to teachers and school leaders to begin to view teacher development differently, with more focus on 'skill mastery' instead of 'performance mastery'. If the literature on AfL is anything to go by, the way we expect staff to progress should be no different to how we expect students to progress.
(NOTE: This post forms the third part of my blogs about researchEd 2015. Please make sure to check out the first post, available here and the second available here.)
researchED 2015: Part 2
The second session that I attended was 'Hack your own teacher-researcher career' by Becky Allen (@drbeckyallen). My reasons for attending this session were quite selfish, in that I entertain lofty ambitions of pursuing a career (part-time or otherwise) in educational research at some point. I like to think that I've got an 'exit plan' in case I decide that classroom teaching isn't for me. To be honest, if you'd have asked me before I started my Masters degree if I planned to teach my entire life, or even beyond two years, I can guarantee I'd have said 'Hell no!' (the actual words would have been much worse, but I'll save you from that). There was a period back then where I became really depressed about teaching - I often came home in tears, adament that I was going to quit and that the joy had been taken out of the job. Luckily, my passion for teaching was reinvigorated by my Masters; I want to remain in teaching in some capacity for the rest of my life, although I'm unsure that it will always be at the secondary level.
Anyways, I (once again) digress.
I attended Becky's session in the hopes that she'd provide me with some interesting insight into how I might make my 'pipe-dream' of being a teacher-researcher a reality. I can honestly say that she DID do that, but it wasn't necessarily in the encouraging way I'd thought it would be.
She started off by saying that nowadays you don't have to quit teaching to get involved in educational research. This was welcome news, as I don't want to leave the classroom entirely. In fact, I think that people who DO leave the classroom instantly lose some amount of relevance with the profession; I don't mean this to sound negative, although I realise that perhaps it comes across that way. What I mean is that teaching is a constantly changing profession. I've seen more policy and curriculum changes in my seven year career than I can shake a stick at. Not a year has gone by where I can teach the same curriculum more than once. For example, within those seven years the GCSE English specification has changed three times, with more change likely to come. While I agree that adaptation is important, it would be nice to not have to reinvent the wheel every year.
It's for this reason, the constant evolution of teaching and education, that I don't want to have to give up teaching entirely to pursue my research aspirations. Plus I know how hard it is to get access to schools as a researcher; if I remain a teacher, I've at least got lots of connections and ease of access!
However, I did take issue with her suggestion that teachers don't have to do research to do their job well. I'd argue this isn't necessarily true. While I agree that it isn't necessary for teachers to conduct reserach, it certainly does have it's place in fostering better teaching and learning. Lawrence Stenhouse and Donald McIntyre (among others) would agree. I felt it was rather condescending of her to suggest that teacher-research is fine for performance management or professional development, but that it lacks any wider uses. She described how it 'lacks reliability' and generalisability.
Linked to this argument is the idea that teachers are 'piffling around' with action research, a statement Becky made in the course of her presentation. This immediately got my back up; as someone who spent the greater part of a year learning about various methods and methodologies, read extensively the literature around feedback, student voice and students as researchers, and then put together and conducted an admittedly small scale research project, I found it hugely offensive for that work to be described as 'piffling'. As @SUPER_Network Tweeted: 'Our teachers who have just finished their MEds certainly not 'piffling around''.
I recongnise whole-heartedly that my research cannot be generalised, a fact which I admit to in my thesis. However, I subscribe to Bassey's idea of fuzzy generalisations and firmly believe that my study could be replicated in other schools and could return similar results; surely that should account for something. To think that my research is of little value to anyone other than myself because of its lack of reliability or generalisability is depressing.
Personally, I believe that there was a bit of 'elitism' coming out in the session. While I recognise that large scale studies do have the ability to affect change much more easily, it's unfair to discount small scale, teacher-researcher projects as 'piffling' bits of action research. It's this mentality that is perpetuating the gap between teachers and researchers. If the academic world isn't more open to action-research conducted in classrooms by teachers, then I'm afraid things will never change. What's the point of holding researchEd conferences if teacher-research isn't taken seriously?
Anyways, I could argue on and on about this for ages, but I think it best to move on to what I enjoyed about the presentation; it wasn't all negative, I assure you.
The ten tips that Becky provided on how to 'hack' a career in research were very helpful. I found that I was able to 'tick' the first seven tips! To summarise, they are:
1) Create a Twitter identity (@ReflectiveRambl)
2) Start blogging (Hello, reader!)
3) Learn about research methods (done)
4)Become a research lead (I've applied to be a Pedagogy Leader)
5) Engage with others (build a team) interested in your topic (SUPER Network has provided me with access to many like minded educators)
6) Find researchers interested in your topic (Again, I owe a lot of thanks to the Cambridge Student Voice conference for allowing me to meet and interact with THE key voices on student voice and students as researchers)
7) Get research experience (done)
8) Work to develop your ideas
9) Get funding
10) Negotiate to reduce your teaching hours
*according to Bassey (2001), a fuzzy generalisation is 'one that is neither likely to be true in every case, nor likely to be untrue in every case: it is simply something that may be true...A fuzzy generalisation is expressed in a tentative way: if x happens in y circumstances, z may occur' (pp 10).
(NOTE: This post forms the second part of my blogs about researchEd 2015. Please make sure to check out the first post, available here.)
Reference
Bassey, Michael A. (2001) 'A solution to the problem of generalisation in educational research'. Oxford Review of Education. Vol 27, No. 1. pp. 5 - 22
Anyways, I (once again) digress.
I attended Becky's session in the hopes that she'd provide me with some interesting insight into how I might make my 'pipe-dream' of being a teacher-researcher a reality. I can honestly say that she DID do that, but it wasn't necessarily in the encouraging way I'd thought it would be.
She started off by saying that nowadays you don't have to quit teaching to get involved in educational research. This was welcome news, as I don't want to leave the classroom entirely. In fact, I think that people who DO leave the classroom instantly lose some amount of relevance with the profession; I don't mean this to sound negative, although I realise that perhaps it comes across that way. What I mean is that teaching is a constantly changing profession. I've seen more policy and curriculum changes in my seven year career than I can shake a stick at. Not a year has gone by where I can teach the same curriculum more than once. For example, within those seven years the GCSE English specification has changed three times, with more change likely to come. While I agree that adaptation is important, it would be nice to not have to reinvent the wheel every year.
It's for this reason, the constant evolution of teaching and education, that I don't want to have to give up teaching entirely to pursue my research aspirations. Plus I know how hard it is to get access to schools as a researcher; if I remain a teacher, I've at least got lots of connections and ease of access!
However, I did take issue with her suggestion that teachers don't have to do research to do their job well. I'd argue this isn't necessarily true. While I agree that it isn't necessary for teachers to conduct reserach, it certainly does have it's place in fostering better teaching and learning. Lawrence Stenhouse and Donald McIntyre (among others) would agree. I felt it was rather condescending of her to suggest that teacher-research is fine for performance management or professional development, but that it lacks any wider uses. She described how it 'lacks reliability' and generalisability.
In response to this I'd like to point to the writing of Michael Bassey (2001). In the article, Bassey refers to his previous belief that educational research should focus on 'the value of reliability' and about how 'the merit of a study of singularities lies in the extent to which teachers reading the report of the study can relate it to their own teaching' (pp 5), suggesting that teacher-research was of no value to anyone other than select groups of teachers experiencing similar phenomenons. However, he then goes on to say that he'd changed his mind, stating that 'it is possible to formulate outcomes of empirical research as fuzzy generalisations*, and these can be useful to both practitioners and to policy-makers in education and probably in other fields of social research' (pp 6). He goes on to say that 'While I am amazed that this simple, but powerful, distinction eluded me for 20 years, I note that it also eluded many others who have written about generalisation...' (pp 6). I would suggest that perhaps it still continues to elude researchers.
I recongnise whole-heartedly that my research cannot be generalised, a fact which I admit to in my thesis. However, I subscribe to Bassey's idea of fuzzy generalisations and firmly believe that my study could be replicated in other schools and could return similar results; surely that should account for something. To think that my research is of little value to anyone other than myself because of its lack of reliability or generalisability is depressing.
Personally, I believe that there was a bit of 'elitism' coming out in the session. While I recognise that large scale studies do have the ability to affect change much more easily, it's unfair to discount small scale, teacher-researcher projects as 'piffling' bits of action research. It's this mentality that is perpetuating the gap between teachers and researchers. If the academic world isn't more open to action-research conducted in classrooms by teachers, then I'm afraid things will never change. What's the point of holding researchEd conferences if teacher-research isn't taken seriously?
Anyways, I could argue on and on about this for ages, but I think it best to move on to what I enjoyed about the presentation; it wasn't all negative, I assure you.
The ten tips that Becky provided on how to 'hack' a career in research were very helpful. I found that I was able to 'tick' the first seven tips! To summarise, they are:
1) Create a Twitter identity (@ReflectiveRambl)
2) Start blogging (Hello, reader!)
3) Learn about research methods (done)
4)Become a research lead (I've applied to be a Pedagogy Leader)
5) Engage with others (build a team) interested in your topic (SUPER Network has provided me with access to many like minded educators)
6) Find researchers interested in your topic (Again, I owe a lot of thanks to the Cambridge Student Voice conference for allowing me to meet and interact with THE key voices on student voice and students as researchers)
7) Get research experience (done)
8) Work to develop your ideas
9) Get funding
10) Negotiate to reduce your teaching hours
I'm even getting my feet wet and starting my own pilot project this year, which was yet another piece of advice she offered. By engaging my form in a students-as-researchers project I hope to be able to set myself up for further study of the effect of student-research projects on achievement, etc.
Overall, despite some of what she said grating on me, I did leave the session feeling quite positive about my own ability to become a teacher-researcher. Here's to hoping I can make it!
(NOTE: This post forms the second part of my blogs about researchEd 2015. Please make sure to check out the first post, available here.)
Reference
Bassey, Michael A. (2001) 'A solution to the problem of generalisation in educational research'. Oxford Review of Education. Vol 27, No. 1. pp. 5 - 22
Saturday, 5 September 2015
researchED 2015: Part 1
About a month ago I received an e-mail from one of my course supervisors asking me if I'd like to attend the researcherED (@researchED1) conference in London, not just as an attendee, but as part of a SUPER Network (@SUPER_Network) group of presenters. I was absolutely gob-smacked to have even been considered, so of course I jumped at the opportunity. The fact that it was on a Saturday didn't even register as an issue with me. Neither did the fact that I'd have to arrange my own transport there - not like getting to London from Cambridgeshire is a big deal anyways.
I was told that my schools CPD budget might cover the costs of transportation, but I felt that paying for it (not that it was a large sum) was something I wanted to do myself; I believe in my OWN professional development enough to fund myself. In fact, I didn't make my attendance at the conference public knowledge to my school; I couldn't really think of a way to broach the subject without coming off as a bit of a bragger - in Canada we're brought up to abhor that type of behaviour. Now I have the ability to go back to my school and (surprise!) share some of the excellent ideas and practice that I heard about yesterday. With minimal bragging.
As such, today's post will consist of a summary of the days learnings, with more than a little critique (debate is always a good thing, right?) along the way. I'll try to include Twitter handles for anyone interested in getting more information from the presenters. I do apologise in advance if I misinterpret anything that was said in the sessions I attended - I'm happy to debate or clarify these on Twitter (@ReflectiveRambl), so don't hesitate to get in touch!
I'm going to break the post up into small chunks; while typing, I realised that if I tried to discuss all of the sessions in one large post, I'd likely lose readers - I don't want to bore people with an insanely long and daunting post. Instead, I will tackle a few sessions per post, and hope that you dip in for a read as and when the mood strikes you.
The day started with a lovely, and thankfully brief, because the seating was rather uncomfortable for uninitiated bottoms, opening speech from Tom Bennett (@tombennett71). His comments really set the tone for the day; he described how 'the future is open', that there is now an 'appetite to reclaim the profession' and that it is an 'exciting time to be in education'.
I couldn't agree more with what he said. It does sometimes feel to me that there's a bit of what David Weston (@informed_edu) referred to as a 'renaissance of educational scholarship' happening. Perhaps I'm privy to this 'early enlightenment' as a result of completing my Masters. There are days that I wonder if I'd be where I am now (or, more specifically, was yesterday) if I hadn't started my Masters journey. The whole process of completing my Masters really opened my eyes to the world of educational research; as I said in my own presentation, I've caught the research bug and there's no turning back.
However, I don't think it's realistic or even feasible to suggest that all teachers complete a Masters degree - at least not once they've started their teaching career. I know from experience how time consuming it can be to work full time and complete a degree. It's worth it, definitely, but it takes a certain type of person to make it through.
I'm a huge proponent of suggesting that PGCE students complete a research-based Masters course as part of their quest to become a teacher - I think it would be amazing if teaching became a 'Masters profession'. I realise that this might raise some hackles, but in terms of my own professional development, doing a research degree has made me a MUCH better teacher. I was forced to learn things that I might not have learnt in the classroom alone. I adapted my teaching based on the evidence out there, and think that more teachers should access this evidence-based research in order to make changes to their own practice. I just hope that I can make a difference at my school, however small, in ensuring this 'enlightenment' and subsequent 'renaissance' happens; I definitely think we're on the right track, but there's still a lot of work to do. After all, you can't change a culture overnight!
Anyways, I've gone a bit off topic - this blog is called 'Reflective Rambles' for a reason, in case you're a first-time reader.
The first session that I attended was entitled 'CPD that works' by Philippa Cordingley (@PhilippaCcuree). I attended this session because I, like many teachers, feel that CPD can often be a bit dull and unhelpful. However, the fact that the room was jam-packed (people had to actually sit on the floor to attend) is testament to the fact that there are enough of us out there who want to help change things!
The very first point Philippa made which really struck me was her addition of 'L' to CPD; the 'L' (naturally) refers to 'learning'. What a novel idea! Teachers using professional development to LEARN? It seems so ridiculously simple, and yet her starter activity really highlighted that many of us felt that the CPD we're currently offered doesn't help us to learn. I know great strides have been made in this regard at my school, but I must admit that I did sit through some CPD sessions last year thinking they weren't telling me anything I didn't already know.
Philippa instead suggested that the very way we teach students to learn should be used with teachers as well. She suggested that school leaders view staff as their 'class'. This idea is, again, so simple in it's aims! You can't imagine how many times I've wished I could receive the type of feedback on teaching that I give my students. Or how I wish someone would sit down and show me practical examples of good practice, working through it with me, providing me with exemplars or scaffolds and prompts. If we know this is how students make good progress, why aren't we doing it for ourselves?
Her argument was that schools should 'create personal professional coherence'. School leaders need to be able to facilitate environments where this can take place. She really stressed the idea of adding depth to CPDL. Instead of highlighting an issue, for example feedback, and talking at staff about how to improve it, schools should instead look at the 'how and why' of issues. What are the current issues with feedback? Why are these issues arising? How can they be addressed? By taking risks and trying new things, evaluating their successes and failures, teachers can LEARN what makes good feedback for themselves, and therefore much more easily embed changes into their practice.
Another thing she stressed was that CPDL needs to focus on 'our aspirations for pupils'. Most teachers want to do good by their students, and this should be at the forefront of CPDL. We need to ask ourselves how our own learning will affect student learning. If you can't see an effect between the two, then I'd suggest something isn't working, and that's okay! The literature behind AfL suggests that mistakes should always be celebrated, because these are the places where learning takes place; the same should stand to reason with teacher-learning as well. Taking risks and celebrating our 'mistakes' should be encouraged, so long as aim is to enhance our learning for the benefit of our students.
In order to make this type of teacher-learning feasible, Philippa suggested that it be done in 'bite size episodes' instead of 'intense hits'. This allows for multiple opportunities to try things out, adapt them, and try again. This is a wonderful bit of advice, and one I've given teachers before in terms of how to give effective feedback.
To extend the analogy, imagine you've got a class of 30 students. You're looking to provide them with feedback in order to improve. You can go about this in one of two ways. One option is to get them to produce a long, time-consuming piece of work. You devote large chunks of class time working on the project, and in the end produce a very weighty piece of work. When you take it in to mark, you'll have to spend a long time reading, assessing, and commenting on the work. You might be able to get through one of these types of assignments a term, which means that students will only receive one bit of feedback after each large attempt.
The second option is to divide the task in to small, manageable chunks. At various stages throughout the process, you stop, collect work in, mark it and provide feedback which informs the next stage of the project. Students therefore receive lots of feedback, make numerous changes and adaptations to their work, and are more than likely produce something that's much better than if they'd received no feedback until the very end of the project. The amount of time that you've taken to mark each tiny section of the work is likely to be the same as what you'd devote to marking the large, weighty piece, but the end result is much better.
We know that teaching students the second way works better, yet we don't provide training to teachers in this manner. Teacher sit through CPD sessions, whether internal or external, are given a weighty project to complete, and are provided feedback only at the end, usually in the form of a (sometimes scary) performance management observation. To me, it seems obvious why this system doesn't work! It wouldn't work with students, and it doesn't work with staff.
As Philippa suggested, this type of change requires a large amount of support from schools. It won't be easy to change the existing system of CPD, but no one expects these changes to take place over night. Instead, small steps should be taken to ensure that the 'lessons' offered to teachers are individual, they're extended, and they provide teachers with the opportunity to adapt, change and reflect on how their learning will affect their own practice and their aspirations for their students. We talk a lot about enhancing the metacognitive abilities of our students, and I think the same should be done for staff. Better models of professional learning are needed in order to ensure teachers have access to CPDL that will help them really embed what they learn.
I was told that my schools CPD budget might cover the costs of transportation, but I felt that paying for it (not that it was a large sum) was something I wanted to do myself; I believe in my OWN professional development enough to fund myself. In fact, I didn't make my attendance at the conference public knowledge to my school; I couldn't really think of a way to broach the subject without coming off as a bit of a bragger - in Canada we're brought up to abhor that type of behaviour. Now I have the ability to go back to my school and (surprise!) share some of the excellent ideas and practice that I heard about yesterday. With minimal bragging.
As such, today's post will consist of a summary of the days learnings, with more than a little critique (debate is always a good thing, right?) along the way. I'll try to include Twitter handles for anyone interested in getting more information from the presenters. I do apologise in advance if I misinterpret anything that was said in the sessions I attended - I'm happy to debate or clarify these on Twitter (@ReflectiveRambl), so don't hesitate to get in touch!
I'm going to break the post up into small chunks; while typing, I realised that if I tried to discuss all of the sessions in one large post, I'd likely lose readers - I don't want to bore people with an insanely long and daunting post. Instead, I will tackle a few sessions per post, and hope that you dip in for a read as and when the mood strikes you.
The day started with a lovely, and thankfully brief, because the seating was rather uncomfortable for uninitiated bottoms, opening speech from Tom Bennett (@tombennett71). His comments really set the tone for the day; he described how 'the future is open', that there is now an 'appetite to reclaim the profession' and that it is an 'exciting time to be in education'.
I couldn't agree more with what he said. It does sometimes feel to me that there's a bit of what David Weston (@informed_edu) referred to as a 'renaissance of educational scholarship' happening. Perhaps I'm privy to this 'early enlightenment' as a result of completing my Masters. There are days that I wonder if I'd be where I am now (or, more specifically, was yesterday) if I hadn't started my Masters journey. The whole process of completing my Masters really opened my eyes to the world of educational research; as I said in my own presentation, I've caught the research bug and there's no turning back.
However, I don't think it's realistic or even feasible to suggest that all teachers complete a Masters degree - at least not once they've started their teaching career. I know from experience how time consuming it can be to work full time and complete a degree. It's worth it, definitely, but it takes a certain type of person to make it through.
I'm a huge proponent of suggesting that PGCE students complete a research-based Masters course as part of their quest to become a teacher - I think it would be amazing if teaching became a 'Masters profession'. I realise that this might raise some hackles, but in terms of my own professional development, doing a research degree has made me a MUCH better teacher. I was forced to learn things that I might not have learnt in the classroom alone. I adapted my teaching based on the evidence out there, and think that more teachers should access this evidence-based research in order to make changes to their own practice. I just hope that I can make a difference at my school, however small, in ensuring this 'enlightenment' and subsequent 'renaissance' happens; I definitely think we're on the right track, but there's still a lot of work to do. After all, you can't change a culture overnight!
Anyways, I've gone a bit off topic - this blog is called 'Reflective Rambles' for a reason, in case you're a first-time reader.
The first session that I attended was entitled 'CPD that works' by Philippa Cordingley (@PhilippaCcuree). I attended this session because I, like many teachers, feel that CPD can often be a bit dull and unhelpful. However, the fact that the room was jam-packed (people had to actually sit on the floor to attend) is testament to the fact that there are enough of us out there who want to help change things!
The very first point Philippa made which really struck me was her addition of 'L' to CPD; the 'L' (naturally) refers to 'learning'. What a novel idea! Teachers using professional development to LEARN? It seems so ridiculously simple, and yet her starter activity really highlighted that many of us felt that the CPD we're currently offered doesn't help us to learn. I know great strides have been made in this regard at my school, but I must admit that I did sit through some CPD sessions last year thinking they weren't telling me anything I didn't already know.
Philippa instead suggested that the very way we teach students to learn should be used with teachers as well. She suggested that school leaders view staff as their 'class'. This idea is, again, so simple in it's aims! You can't imagine how many times I've wished I could receive the type of feedback on teaching that I give my students. Or how I wish someone would sit down and show me practical examples of good practice, working through it with me, providing me with exemplars or scaffolds and prompts. If we know this is how students make good progress, why aren't we doing it for ourselves?
Her argument was that schools should 'create personal professional coherence'. School leaders need to be able to facilitate environments where this can take place. She really stressed the idea of adding depth to CPDL. Instead of highlighting an issue, for example feedback, and talking at staff about how to improve it, schools should instead look at the 'how and why' of issues. What are the current issues with feedback? Why are these issues arising? How can they be addressed? By taking risks and trying new things, evaluating their successes and failures, teachers can LEARN what makes good feedback for themselves, and therefore much more easily embed changes into their practice.
Another thing she stressed was that CPDL needs to focus on 'our aspirations for pupils'. Most teachers want to do good by their students, and this should be at the forefront of CPDL. We need to ask ourselves how our own learning will affect student learning. If you can't see an effect between the two, then I'd suggest something isn't working, and that's okay! The literature behind AfL suggests that mistakes should always be celebrated, because these are the places where learning takes place; the same should stand to reason with teacher-learning as well. Taking risks and celebrating our 'mistakes' should be encouraged, so long as aim is to enhance our learning for the benefit of our students.
In order to make this type of teacher-learning feasible, Philippa suggested that it be done in 'bite size episodes' instead of 'intense hits'. This allows for multiple opportunities to try things out, adapt them, and try again. This is a wonderful bit of advice, and one I've given teachers before in terms of how to give effective feedback.
To extend the analogy, imagine you've got a class of 30 students. You're looking to provide them with feedback in order to improve. You can go about this in one of two ways. One option is to get them to produce a long, time-consuming piece of work. You devote large chunks of class time working on the project, and in the end produce a very weighty piece of work. When you take it in to mark, you'll have to spend a long time reading, assessing, and commenting on the work. You might be able to get through one of these types of assignments a term, which means that students will only receive one bit of feedback after each large attempt.
The second option is to divide the task in to small, manageable chunks. At various stages throughout the process, you stop, collect work in, mark it and provide feedback which informs the next stage of the project. Students therefore receive lots of feedback, make numerous changes and adaptations to their work, and are more than likely produce something that's much better than if they'd received no feedback until the very end of the project. The amount of time that you've taken to mark each tiny section of the work is likely to be the same as what you'd devote to marking the large, weighty piece, but the end result is much better.
We know that teaching students the second way works better, yet we don't provide training to teachers in this manner. Teacher sit through CPD sessions, whether internal or external, are given a weighty project to complete, and are provided feedback only at the end, usually in the form of a (sometimes scary) performance management observation. To me, it seems obvious why this system doesn't work! It wouldn't work with students, and it doesn't work with staff.
As Philippa suggested, this type of change requires a large amount of support from schools. It won't be easy to change the existing system of CPD, but no one expects these changes to take place over night. Instead, small steps should be taken to ensure that the 'lessons' offered to teachers are individual, they're extended, and they provide teachers with the opportunity to adapt, change and reflect on how their learning will affect their own practice and their aspirations for their students. We talk a lot about enhancing the metacognitive abilities of our students, and I think the same should be done for staff. Better models of professional learning are needed in order to ensure teachers have access to CPDL that will help them really embed what they learn.
Monday, 10 August 2015
LEARNING from the Student's Perspectives
At the start of the summer I took a look (rather late, I must admit) at Cook-Sather's 2009 text 'LEARNING from the Student's Perspective: A Sourcebook for Effective Teaching'. I think it's a wonderful text, full of ideas for practicing teachers to use when attempting to incorporate the use of more student voice into their practice. I'm going to attempt to explore some of the ideas presented in the text below, for those who want a quick snap-shot of the text.
The book starts with a very powerful introduction, where she responds to the question 'Why This Book Now?'. She quotes Nieto (1994, pp. 395-396) who says that one way to begin changing schools is to listen to students' views about them; as such, the books provides evidence towards supporting student engagement with educators at all levels. The ideas explored within the text are ones that influenced my own Master's project re: student's perceptions of feedback; I completely agree that students should be given more agency when it comes to policies and practice that affect their education. As Cook-Sather says in the text, 'it will only be through learning from the student perspective that schools, teachers and students will succeed not only according to standardised measures but, more importantly, in terms of their own commitment and capacity to become critical thinkers, engaged human beings, and responsible participants in the world' (pp. 2). The idea that students' perspectives should be consulted and used alongside the perspectives of teachers and researchers is the main reason I started my MEd in the first place.
One argument which Cook-Sather makes, which comes up a lot in the literature around student voice, is that education is one of the only public-service sectors that rarely consults the opinion of the consumer; in this case, the students. Students are the reason we produce the 'product', so it makes sense that customer satisfaction should be taken into account; their needs should drive everything that we do. Unfortunately, I don't think that's always the case, especially in the current political climate. The amount of stress placed on students, especially those at GCSE and A-level, is not done for the well-being of the students - it's done so that they can 'complete' on a global scale, an objective set out not by the students themselves, but by government bodies. If we want to decrease the stress placed on students, we need to consult them on ways to do this; they're the only ones who truly know what their experiences are like!
That being said, it can often be hard to hear what students have to say, another point that Cook-Sather acknowledges. However, I think any good practitioner should be open to constructive criticism. After all, we give constructive criticism to students on an almost daily basis. It seems fair that the process should go two ways. My own research has shown me that student opinion often aligns with a lot of what educational researchers have already said, though with some minor differences that deserve further exploration. Teachers and school leaders shouldn't fear what students have to say; they should welcome it, as it will often confirm things they already knew or suspected. In my own experience, consulting the students about feedback has helped me pinpoint my own strengths and weaknesses, making me a better teacher for it!
The relationships that I gained with my student-researchers was also one of the most rewarding parts of the experience. It was really nice to work collaboratively with students, exploring what other students thought and comparing it to their own experiences. The depth of the data gathered in this way was astounding. This is yet another area that Cook-Sather highlights in her introduction - my own experience shows that the ideas and perspectives she explores are true!
However, she does acknowledge that 'no teacher ever learns once and for all what the student perspective is and what works for learners' (pp. 6). The idea of working with and consulting pupils should be ongoing; I can attest to this fact. No cultural phenomenon exists forever - the very nature of humanity is that we're constantly growing and adapting. What one group of students thought one year will naturally change as the years progress. As such, much like Cook-Sather states, it's important that teachers and researchers continue to create ongoing relationships with students. Student voice initiative shouldn't be on-off opportunities; they should become well established parts of schools. This is exactly what I hope to do as my career progresses.
The text then goes on to offer 'Guiding Principles for Consulting Students', including things like:
1) being committed to listening and responding,
2) being prepared to explain your purpose and focus,
3) creating conditions for dialogue,
4) choosing methods that focus on deepening understanding,
5) giving students feedback on the process
and
6) being realistic.
Since I read this text after the completion of my MEd research, it was heartening to me to see that I had followed these principles myself. I can concur with each of these criteria and agree that you must be able to achieve all of these in order for a student-voice initiative to work.
The text then moves on to provide some contextual information on things like how to know your students, creating positive classroom environments (which are essential for establishing good relationships with students), designing engaging lessons and instilling a sense of respect and responsibility in classrooms. I think the text is a must-read for Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs) in this respect, as each section covers a lot of the literature and provides realistic insight into how student voice can be used to develop greater practice inside everyday classrooms.
The second section looks at various strategies that have been used to learn through the perspective of students, specifically focusing on consultation and the use of questionnaires. As someone who has used both of these methods, I found the information contained very helpful and encouraging. I would highly recommend anyone who is looking to do a formal research project using student voice or even students-as-researchers should give the chapters a read.
The third section provides a variety of case-studies in which student voice was consulted for a variety of purposes. I found each chapter an interesting read; it was great to see how different schools, at different levels, approached student voice.
I haven't gone into too much detail in this blog, as I don't want to give too much away; I think anyone interested in making use of student voice in their school should read the text for themselves. You won't regret it!
Reference
Cook-Sather, Alison. (2009) LEARNING from the Student's Perspective: A Sourcebook for Effective Teaching. Paradigm Publishing: Colorado
The book starts with a very powerful introduction, where she responds to the question 'Why This Book Now?'. She quotes Nieto (1994, pp. 395-396) who says that one way to begin changing schools is to listen to students' views about them; as such, the books provides evidence towards supporting student engagement with educators at all levels. The ideas explored within the text are ones that influenced my own Master's project re: student's perceptions of feedback; I completely agree that students should be given more agency when it comes to policies and practice that affect their education. As Cook-Sather says in the text, 'it will only be through learning from the student perspective that schools, teachers and students will succeed not only according to standardised measures but, more importantly, in terms of their own commitment and capacity to become critical thinkers, engaged human beings, and responsible participants in the world' (pp. 2). The idea that students' perspectives should be consulted and used alongside the perspectives of teachers and researchers is the main reason I started my MEd in the first place.
One argument which Cook-Sather makes, which comes up a lot in the literature around student voice, is that education is one of the only public-service sectors that rarely consults the opinion of the consumer; in this case, the students. Students are the reason we produce the 'product', so it makes sense that customer satisfaction should be taken into account; their needs should drive everything that we do. Unfortunately, I don't think that's always the case, especially in the current political climate. The amount of stress placed on students, especially those at GCSE and A-level, is not done for the well-being of the students - it's done so that they can 'complete' on a global scale, an objective set out not by the students themselves, but by government bodies. If we want to decrease the stress placed on students, we need to consult them on ways to do this; they're the only ones who truly know what their experiences are like!
That being said, it can often be hard to hear what students have to say, another point that Cook-Sather acknowledges. However, I think any good practitioner should be open to constructive criticism. After all, we give constructive criticism to students on an almost daily basis. It seems fair that the process should go two ways. My own research has shown me that student opinion often aligns with a lot of what educational researchers have already said, though with some minor differences that deserve further exploration. Teachers and school leaders shouldn't fear what students have to say; they should welcome it, as it will often confirm things they already knew or suspected. In my own experience, consulting the students about feedback has helped me pinpoint my own strengths and weaknesses, making me a better teacher for it!
The relationships that I gained with my student-researchers was also one of the most rewarding parts of the experience. It was really nice to work collaboratively with students, exploring what other students thought and comparing it to their own experiences. The depth of the data gathered in this way was astounding. This is yet another area that Cook-Sather highlights in her introduction - my own experience shows that the ideas and perspectives she explores are true!
However, she does acknowledge that 'no teacher ever learns once and for all what the student perspective is and what works for learners' (pp. 6). The idea of working with and consulting pupils should be ongoing; I can attest to this fact. No cultural phenomenon exists forever - the very nature of humanity is that we're constantly growing and adapting. What one group of students thought one year will naturally change as the years progress. As such, much like Cook-Sather states, it's important that teachers and researchers continue to create ongoing relationships with students. Student voice initiative shouldn't be on-off opportunities; they should become well established parts of schools. This is exactly what I hope to do as my career progresses.
The text then goes on to offer 'Guiding Principles for Consulting Students', including things like:
1) being committed to listening and responding,
2) being prepared to explain your purpose and focus,
3) creating conditions for dialogue,
4) choosing methods that focus on deepening understanding,
5) giving students feedback on the process
and
6) being realistic.
Since I read this text after the completion of my MEd research, it was heartening to me to see that I had followed these principles myself. I can concur with each of these criteria and agree that you must be able to achieve all of these in order for a student-voice initiative to work.
The text then moves on to provide some contextual information on things like how to know your students, creating positive classroom environments (which are essential for establishing good relationships with students), designing engaging lessons and instilling a sense of respect and responsibility in classrooms. I think the text is a must-read for Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs) in this respect, as each section covers a lot of the literature and provides realistic insight into how student voice can be used to develop greater practice inside everyday classrooms.
The second section looks at various strategies that have been used to learn through the perspective of students, specifically focusing on consultation and the use of questionnaires. As someone who has used both of these methods, I found the information contained very helpful and encouraging. I would highly recommend anyone who is looking to do a formal research project using student voice or even students-as-researchers should give the chapters a read.
The third section provides a variety of case-studies in which student voice was consulted for a variety of purposes. I found each chapter an interesting read; it was great to see how different schools, at different levels, approached student voice.
I haven't gone into too much detail in this blog, as I don't want to give too much away; I think anyone interested in making use of student voice in their school should read the text for themselves. You won't regret it!
Reference
Cook-Sather, Alison. (2009) LEARNING from the Student's Perspective: A Sourcebook for Effective Teaching. Paradigm Publishing: Colorado
Monday, 6 July 2015
Escaping Perfectionism
Today's blog post has a slightly less 'scientific' basis than some of my others, although it still revolves around education. Specifically, it has to do with what myself and many other teachers suffer from: a problem of perfectionism. I know I'm not the only teacher out there who has struggled with, or is currently struggling with, issues concerning workload. 
Anyways, I was reading through the February 2015 edition of Psychologies magazine when I came across an article by Oliver Burkeman entitled 'Escape the curse of perfectionism'. Now, a bit of personal background information is needed here: a few months ago I was having cognitive behavioural therapy, where we focused on my tendency towards 'perfectionism'. The counsellor felt that many of my struggles were based on a ridiculous desire to be an 'Outstanding' teacher (I use a capital letter O to signify that I've based much of what it means to be outstanding on Ofsted standards). She told me that I needed to learn how to 'do less' and accept that being 'good enough' is, in fact, good enough. I'm sure many of you might agree with me that this is easier said than done.
As I was saying, I stumbled upon this article, and many of my counsellor's words seemed to come back to me. First of all, I liked that it described (but didn't cite, tisk tisk) research which 'shows it's detrimental to productivity and creativity' to strive for perfection. It also said that perfectionism leads to 'unhappiness' and 'higher rates of suicide'. Even more reason for me to kick the habit; I do enjoy living.
It then went on to describe how perfectionism itself is rooted not in the desire to be perfect, but to 'protect yourself from feelings of inadequacy'. Yes, I thought, that does sound quite a bit like why I struggle to be so 'Outstanding' all the time; I'd hate to be seen as 'Inadequate' (again, intentional links to Ofsted implied here). However, the article goes on to say that 'by trying not to feel inadequate, perfectionists condemn themselves to feeling that way all the time'. Again, that's me all over.
What does the article suggest by way of 'escaping' this 'curse'? Well...this is where I start to have some issues with its suggestions. First of all, Burkeman suggests that it's all about training the subconscious to 'realise that it's OK to do 'good-enough' work; the world won't collapse when you stop straining for a perfect outcome'. While this may be true, it doesn't really take into consideration the standards that I'm held to. If I were to 'do less', I have a pretty strong feeling that the quality of my lessons and resources would drop. If those things drop, then my lesson observations won't go so well, my rates of progress might very well drop, and students might not achieve as well. It seems a slippery slope.
Burkeman then goes on to cite David Burns' self help book Feeling Good, by saying that to 'have a deliberately mediocre day, in which you try to operate at only 60 percent of your ability' is a good thing. I'm sure it might be, in any other 'business' than teaching. If I only put in 60% effort, on any given day, I can guarantee that chaos would ensure in my lessons. As mentioned in my analysis of student feedback, for some of my challenging groups, it takes 100% of my effort to control them, and they STILL don't think that I'm doing a good enough job. Imagine if I decided to only put in 60% effort? It'd be a disaster! I don't think teachers are able to have 'mediocre' days. Mediocre lessons happen, on occasion, but I certainly don't think it would be professionally wise to suggest teachers specifically plan for mediocre days.
Some tips provided suggest that you should 'split work into 'private' and 'public' in order to cut the risk of people judging you. Sadly, I don't think this would work in teaching; everything we do is judged and evaluated, from lessons to results! There's no 'hiding' in the world of teaching (and I'm not suggesting this is necessarily a bad thing, by the way).
One thing it does suggest that I can take on board is the creation of a 'done' list instead of a 'to do' list. Often, I can start to feel bogged down by all the things that I have to do; it might make a nice change to list the things I have accomplished every now and then, just for that little boost of encouragement. I don't think teachers get the chance to consider their strengths very often; there's too much on the line to waste time with self-praise, after all.
So ultimately, I'm not sure what to make of the article. I think it's well intentioned, but somehow I don't think it took into account the extreme demands us teachers face, day in and day out!
Anyways, I was reading through the February 2015 edition of Psychologies magazine when I came across an article by Oliver Burkeman entitled 'Escape the curse of perfectionism'. Now, a bit of personal background information is needed here: a few months ago I was having cognitive behavioural therapy, where we focused on my tendency towards 'perfectionism'. The counsellor felt that many of my struggles were based on a ridiculous desire to be an 'Outstanding' teacher (I use a capital letter O to signify that I've based much of what it means to be outstanding on Ofsted standards). She told me that I needed to learn how to 'do less' and accept that being 'good enough' is, in fact, good enough. I'm sure many of you might agree with me that this is easier said than done.
As I was saying, I stumbled upon this article, and many of my counsellor's words seemed to come back to me. First of all, I liked that it described (but didn't cite, tisk tisk) research which 'shows it's detrimental to productivity and creativity' to strive for perfection. It also said that perfectionism leads to 'unhappiness' and 'higher rates of suicide'. Even more reason for me to kick the habit; I do enjoy living.
It then went on to describe how perfectionism itself is rooted not in the desire to be perfect, but to 'protect yourself from feelings of inadequacy'. Yes, I thought, that does sound quite a bit like why I struggle to be so 'Outstanding' all the time; I'd hate to be seen as 'Inadequate' (again, intentional links to Ofsted implied here). However, the article goes on to say that 'by trying not to feel inadequate, perfectionists condemn themselves to feeling that way all the time'. Again, that's me all over.
What does the article suggest by way of 'escaping' this 'curse'? Well...this is where I start to have some issues with its suggestions. First of all, Burkeman suggests that it's all about training the subconscious to 'realise that it's OK to do 'good-enough' work; the world won't collapse when you stop straining for a perfect outcome'. While this may be true, it doesn't really take into consideration the standards that I'm held to. If I were to 'do less', I have a pretty strong feeling that the quality of my lessons and resources would drop. If those things drop, then my lesson observations won't go so well, my rates of progress might very well drop, and students might not achieve as well. It seems a slippery slope.
Burkeman then goes on to cite David Burns' self help book Feeling Good, by saying that to 'have a deliberately mediocre day, in which you try to operate at only 60 percent of your ability' is a good thing. I'm sure it might be, in any other 'business' than teaching. If I only put in 60% effort, on any given day, I can guarantee that chaos would ensure in my lessons. As mentioned in my analysis of student feedback, for some of my challenging groups, it takes 100% of my effort to control them, and they STILL don't think that I'm doing a good enough job. Imagine if I decided to only put in 60% effort? It'd be a disaster! I don't think teachers are able to have 'mediocre' days. Mediocre lessons happen, on occasion, but I certainly don't think it would be professionally wise to suggest teachers specifically plan for mediocre days.
Some tips provided suggest that you should 'split work into 'private' and 'public' in order to cut the risk of people judging you. Sadly, I don't think this would work in teaching; everything we do is judged and evaluated, from lessons to results! There's no 'hiding' in the world of teaching (and I'm not suggesting this is necessarily a bad thing, by the way).
One thing it does suggest that I can take on board is the creation of a 'done' list instead of a 'to do' list. Often, I can start to feel bogged down by all the things that I have to do; it might make a nice change to list the things I have accomplished every now and then, just for that little boost of encouragement. I don't think teachers get the chance to consider their strengths very often; there's too much on the line to waste time with self-praise, after all.
So ultimately, I'm not sure what to make of the article. I think it's well intentioned, but somehow I don't think it took into account the extreme demands us teachers face, day in and day out!
Thursday, 2 July 2015
Year 7 Student Feedback results
As I expected, the results from my Year 7 groups have been much more favourable. Behaviour didn't come up as an issue, with the majority of students feeling that I am able to control the class. They also stated that most students act as I would expect them to. Generally, these groups ARE better behaved and I can deal with their low-level disruption well.
I was really pleased to see that 95-100% of my Year 7 students felt that:
- they learnt something in every lesson;
- I explained things in ways that made sense;
- I tried to explain things in more than one way;
- they learn from their mistakes in lesson;
- I make learning enjoyable and interesting;
- my comments help them to improve;
- I give them feedback in a timely manner;
- I want them to share their thoughts;
- I respect their suggestions and ideas; and
- I check to make sure they understand what we're doing.
All of these results are outstanding, and I'm really glad that the effort that I've put into my teaching, especially in terms of feedback and engaging student voice, has paid off.
I was still lower than I would like on identifying what we've learnt at the end of each lesson - this corresponds with what my Year 8 and 9 groups have said. I'm already looking into texts and ideas to improve my plenaries, so no problems there!
I was really pleased to see that 95-100% of my Year 7 students felt that:
- they learnt something in every lesson;
- I explained things in ways that made sense;
- I tried to explain things in more than one way;
- they learn from their mistakes in lesson;
- I make learning enjoyable and interesting;
- my comments help them to improve;
- I give them feedback in a timely manner;
- I want them to share their thoughts;
- I respect their suggestions and ideas; and
- I check to make sure they understand what we're doing.
All of these results are outstanding, and I'm really glad that the effort that I've put into my teaching, especially in terms of feedback and engaging student voice, has paid off.
I was still lower than I would like on identifying what we've learnt at the end of each lesson - this corresponds with what my Year 8 and 9 groups have said. I'm already looking into texts and ideas to improve my plenaries, so no problems there!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)