#pedagogybingo

Posted on 21 March, 2016 by David

Let’s say you have the chance to design a University module on learning and teaching; which terms, pedagogues, theories would you include as part of the content? What would your ideal reading list look like? Would you focus on things like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, would you try to include some e-learning, or would you go as far as including anarcho pedagogy?

A few weeks ago, I attended a two-day Introduction to Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (ILTHE) workshop that was facilitated by Sarah Chesney. Throughout the two day event, I tweeted my thoughts, notes, and opinions using #ilthenu

With interactions like these, Sarah and I started a little joke: #PedagogyBingo was born!

After the workshop finished, Sarah and I stayed in touch on twitter, continued our joke for a bit, but then got serious after the following interaction occurred:

After this, I e-mailed Sarah my thoughts on the project and she responded, quite enthusiastically, that we should make this happen.

Together, we developed an action plan to figure out how we could go about crowdsourcing #PedagogyBingo, and now we need your help!

The concept

The idea we had was to crowdsource key terms that should be included in a perfect learning and teaching module at university. This will happen publically on twitter where (hopefully) lots of people will get involved to share ideas, theories, and resources with us and the rest of the world using #PedagogyBingo.

Benefits

This is not only a fun activity to do to get some insight into the traditional and novel pedagogies and theories out there, but it will hopefully also be beneficial to us and the larger education community on twitter. Some of the benefits of bringing together twitter experts on the topic include:

Discovering new practitioners to follow and grow our own networks
Discovering new resources and possibly new/emerging learning and teaching terms
We will learn something new about Twitter and crowdsourcing

When the list is compiled and published it will hopefully be a useful resource for:

Educational Developers who want to cross check their own key terms with the list
Lecturers, tutors and professionals supporting student learning who want to informally develop their practice
Applicants for HEA Fellowship who are assembling their claim for recognition
Participants on ‘Learning and Teaching in HE’ courses
Students studying Education at any level trying to get an overview of important terms, theories, and pedagogies

Taking part

Since this is a crowdsourced effort, this will only work if people take part!

Step 1: Tweet, tweet, tweet about your thoughts and ideas, share theories and resources, and don’t forget to use #PedagogyBingo.

Step 2: ‘Like’ and ‘Retweet’ any tweets that you see in the hashtag. Reply to tweets that you want to respond to and/or add any resources you have on the specific idea expressed in the tweet.

Sarah and I will collate a list of interesting resources, names, theories and share our results in a number of places (primarily over at flourishlearning.co.uk though). We aim to start collating the responses in the week beginning the 10th of April, so there’s lots of time for you to get involved!

(We’re thinking about what to do with this list beyond simply collecting and collating it – there are thoughts and conversations about creating an app, interactive website, or even trying this out in a course at some point!)

Both Sarah and I are really excited about this project, so please help us out in this hopefully valuable and fun activity.

Cheers,

Angelika x

Sarah Chesney is a guest tutor for Newcastle University’s Staff Development Unit. She is one of the ILTHE workshop facilitators and a tutor for CASAP.

Angelika Strohmayer is a PhD student interested in digital technologies, informal critical pedagogy, and participatory research methods and methodologies. She is registered in ECLS but is based in Open Lab, working on various projects related to homelessness, sex work, and informal peer sharing for learning and support.

Teacher peer coaching; a story of trust, agency and enablers

Posted on 10 March, 2016 by David

This blog is a good news story in terms of teacher collaboration from The Hermitage Academy, a North-East Teaching School. The Academy has deliberately and steadily built a culture of teacher collaboration. It is not perfect, but it is tangible. In this blog we focus on the contribution of teacher coaching to the collaborative culture. At Hermitage teacher peer-coaching is in its third year with a coaching development programme running to support each cohort of new coaches and coachees. All participants are volunteers and each coaching partnership involves teachers working across subjects. Our roles (the blog authors, a university-based educational researcher and a senior leader in the school) are to design and facilitate the coaching development programme, to ensure coaching becomes operational in the school and to create meaningful opportunities for formative evaluation and coaching development. Most recently this has been achieved through an interim review to which all current participants contributed. It is this evidence that we draw upon to suggest some of the reasons for the successes so far.

Coaching at Hermitage seems to be a ‘feel good’ activity, and this is not to be sniffed at. Coaching has been established in such a way that it builds on and further enhances the trust that exists between colleagues. This was highlighted by the teachers as a note-worthy characteristic. Megan Tschannen-Moran makes a strong case for trust as critical for building healthy relationships and positive school climates, and suggests that between teachers this can evolve from a stance of ‘empathy and inquiry’. Coaching conversations at Hermitage have been framed around this stance – participants are asked to engage in non-judgemental professional dialogue and appreciate that this may be different from many other episodes of observation and feedback. In their review the teachers stated that they were “not frightened to make mistakes” are willingly “more experimental” and work in a “problem-solving mode, with a focus on teaching and learning and trying to do what is best for the students”.

The coaching relationships produced a growing collective sense of where expertise and areas of interest resided in the staff

In busy school environments it is easy to find reasons not to engage in something new or voluntary, so how coaching feels matters as without enjoyment resistance would develop. In their review teachers reported enjoying building relationships through coaching, getting to know people in other departments and knowing more about their work. Coaches stated that they felt good about having learned more about teaching and learning by acting as a coach and were taking this learning into their own practice. The coaching relationships produced a growing collective sense of where expertise and areas of interest resided in the staff. This is reported as having spin-off benefits, with new and productive collaborations in teaching and learning emerging organically.

At even this basic level it could be said that coaching is contributing to teacher agency. Mark Priestley has written about this in his BERA blog post, reminding us that a focus on the individual capacity of teachers might overlook the significance of the ‘social context for teachers’ professional work’. The teachers were keen to extend this further, by actively bringing coaching participants together more often as a group to share what was being learned and developed in practice. In 2015 The Sutton Trust produced a report called ‘Developing Teachers; Improving professional development for teachers’. One of their conclusions was the significance of collaboration at two levels – between schools in a school-led self-improving system, and also between individual teachers engaging in professional learning activities. Recent research into teachers’ experiences of collaboration(Lofthouse and Thomas, 2015) reveals why collaboration might be so valuable. Collaboration for the development of their teaching practices allowed teachers and student teachers to engage in informed decision-making and to construct a shared understanding of the nature of desired learning outcomes for students and how these might be achieved in their own contexts.

As evidenced in an earlier BERA blog coaching does not always live up to its promise, but so far Hermitage seem to resolving tensions that can exist in managerial systems. In our review we considered the extent to which the practice was supported by enablers for effective professional conversations as described by Helen Timperley. She described the importance of resources, processes, knowledge, relationships and culture in enabling teachers to ‘examine the effectiveness of their practice and be committed to appropriate changes for improvement’. This might best be summed up by a group in our review who stated that the vision for coaching at the school was to create a “collaborative problem-solving culture to enable all teachers and pupils to be successful”.

Taken from BERA

Written by:

Dr RACHEL LOFTHOUSE is the Head of Education in the School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences at Newcastle University. She is also partnership development director for the Research Centre for Learning and Teaching (CfLaT). She has a specific interest in professional learning for teachers and educators, based on innovative pedagogies and curriculum design and practices for coaching and mentoring. These support her learners in building their workplace expertise while developing critical reflection and their ability to contribute to, and draw productively on, the evidence base for teaching and learning. She works with student teachers and their school-based mentors, fulltime teachers as part-time Master’s students, international postgraduate students and school leaders. Rachel has published in peer-reviewed journals on the subjects of coaching and mentoring, the innovative use of video to support practice development, practitioner enquiry and professional learning. You can find more information here.

You can follow Rachel on twitter @rmlofthouse

Emma Bulmer – Always an English teacher at heart with a specific love for English Language and all things David Crystal. My love of English most definitely stemmed from Anne of Green Gables as a child and it’s fair to say I never looked back. After studying the subject at Newcastle University it has been my pleasure to embark on a career which encourages me to learn and reflect on English and pedagogy every single day. I have just taken on the role of Assistant Vice Principal at the Academy with a responsibility for Teaching and Learning. This has given me the opportunity to work with institutions such as Newcastle University to continue developing programmes like the coaching programme within the school as well as lots of other exciting opportunities.

Thinking about the purpose of education

Posted on 9 March, 2016 by David

Recently the UK Government’s Education Select Committee opened an inquiry into the purpose and quality of education in England. Evidence was invited and all 167 written contributions are now published on their website. This blog captures some of the evidence that I submitted. My first comment was that it is not possible to identify a single purpose of education, as education has many desired outcomes. So of course, the question is a complex one, but as such it is deserving of an inquiry.

Earlier this year I used the same question as part of a Secondary PGCE lecture and the post-it notes that were sent to the front of the room and displayed using the visualiser illustrated the diversity of student teachers’ responses. When I responded to the select committee I wanted to acknowledge this complexity but also highlight that in my opinion there should be no purpose of education which in itself undermines a determination that education creates positive changes for social justice. I wanted to stress this because it is so much more than an ideal. It matters for individual pupils and students, their families, their communities and the wider society (national and international).

I believe that social justice through good education means that all children and young people should be able to become enthusiastic and capable learners and that they should experience success based on a curriculum which challenges them but also engages them. As a parent and educator I want children and young people to develop healthy and affirming relationships with peers and adults that they encounter through education, which means that they should be treated with tolerance, understanding and respect and learn why they should offer the same for others.

Demonstrating learning matters so I would expect that all young people should be able to gain qualifications which are multi-faceted and recognised for their value by employers, education providers and society. However there is growing evidence of the physical, mental and emotional strain being placed on many students by our current examination systems and the repercussions at school level, so I would also emphasis that children and young people should be taught, learn and assessed in a way that is not detrimental to their mental or physical health.

Fairness matters to children and young people and it is not sufficient to argue that ‘life’s not fair’ when we are considering their experiences and their life chances. I would hope that all children and young people could state that their education was ‘fair’, that their achievements were deserved and their ability to make their way in life had not been hampered by injustice in their educational offer or experience. As a response to a fair education it is reasonable that all children and young people should be enabled to make a positive contribution to society and the resources it depends on (environment, economy, community) before they have left formal education in order to develop the traits and skills which will help them to continue to do so into their futures.

One of the roles of universities, through their research, teaching and engagement is, in my opinion, to support the development of education systems which deliberately and continually adapt to ensure social justice. In the School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences we have projects, programmes, colleagues and students who are part of this contribution. The spaces, dialogues and activities that result may not change the world alone, but they do help us to make a difference.

A blog by Dr Rachel Lofthouse

April 26th 2016: Newcastle University is hosting joint BERA and BELMAS event; How to research critical conversations in educational leadership

Posted on 4 March, 2016 by David

Newcastle University is hosting joint BERA and BELMAS event on April 26th in which we will ask the question; How to research critical conversations in educational leadership?

For more information on how to contribute and participate click here.

The aim of the event is to define leadership widely then talk about the methods of researching it. We want to explore narrative, auto-ethnography, experiment, testimonial, ethnography, survey and more. Leadership can mean how do you go about getting people to co-create, collaborate? It does mean school effectiveness and headship but it is far far wider than this. How do you take leadership in education in relation to issues such as gender, language, ethnicity, sexuality etc? Leadership means.. pupil voice and more. It means… collaborative working. What does teacher leadership mean? What does it require to take leadership in education outside schools – i.e. rethinking education? It means rethinking the means of leadership – i.e. What is the role of digital technology in leadership? What theory tools are important in thinking about this area?

An architectural perspective on educational challenges – Jesmond Garden Primary School experience

Posted on 3 March, 2016 by David

Paula Cardellino is an academic colleague from Uruguay who has been visiting CfLaT and ECLS. Here she reflects on a visit to an unusual local School.

My name is Paula Cardellino, and I am an architect and a lecturer at the Faculty of Architecture, Universidad ORT Uruguay, Montevideo. Through the financial support of the British Embassy in Montevideo, Pam Woolner and myself have had the opportunity to work together in the development of future projects that will, hopefully, continue to build on the fundamental idea that school physical environments are intimately related to pedagogical approaches. From very different angles, we both argue for the importance of reaching a balance between the design of physical learning environments and the educational agenda.

During my 2 weeks visit to ECLS I had the chance to visit Jesmond Garden Primary School in Hartlepool together with Pam. The school facility was built 6 years ago with the Headtheacher´s ultimate aim to make it into a transformational school, not only in terms of innovative pedagogical ideas but also its physical environment. As she explained, “we didn´t want a new old building”..

The school has a distinctive design. With 3 cylinders popping out from the rooftop it stands out from the surrounding streets of houses, and suggests that something different is happening inside. Indeed, getting to see the old school before the new one, an old Victorian building, made it clear that the transformational educational agenda that the Headteacher aimed for needed parallel changes to the physical environment.

Upon arrival, we are greeted by Jane Loomes, the school´s Headteacher, a lively, very determined person, eager to show and tell us all about the design and building process. During the conversation she tells us that previous to the start of the school design they visited various schools in the UK to get a better idea of what could be done in terms of building design. She felt, though, that some foundational ideas were clear from the very start of the process: flexibility of use of the learning spaces and the instrumentation of the superclass philosophy – units for 90 children with a team of teachers. This not only meant making best use of the staff resources (staffing) but also implementing innovative ideas to the school project such as acoustic solutions. Added to these challenges, there was a need to make it exceedingly comfortable. She, particularly, wanted the school to feel very warm, natural, airy, calm, relaxing; a cocoon from the outside world.

During the design process, that took around 8 months, a number of meetings and discussions took place between the stakeholders (staff, pupils, parents) and the designer. Many topics were discussed during these meetings, but the main idea continued to be around the transformation of the educational agenda within the school building, touching on concepts such as ´sense of belonging´, ´school as a home´ and enjoyment of learning.

From the walk around the school it is noticeable that from the heart of the school the use of curved shapes allow for the teaching-classroom areas to become real; though not welcomed at first, the use of curves enabled the inclusion of flexible arrangements within the learning spaces: even the toilets have an unusual circular shape. Three circles that can host up to 90 children compose the not very traditional classroom space. Separated by acoustic curtains the areas can become different teaching environments or turn into smaller places.

As I leave you now with my views on this very different school building you can consider if this is something that you would enjoy as a student, a parent or a teacher. It certainly felt to us that a transformation of the culture, practices and setting for learning has occurred at Jesmond Gardens.

Hear more from Paula and Pam when they speak at an interdisciplinary discussion this Thursday: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/ecls/news/item/a-space-for-learning-developing-interdisciplinary-understandings-to-improve-school-premises

A new direction for gifted education studies?

Posted on 25 February, 2016 by David

Research on ‘giftedness’ and ‘gifted education’ often feels like a marginalised endeavour, one which is quite rightly viewed by many as elitist. We have ample evidence to demonstrate that those with the most cultural capital are also those most likely to appear on registers of gifted and talented pupils (Campbell et al 2007), despite a National Strategy (1997-2011) designed in large part to disrupt this pattern of cultural reproduction. Why then do we continue to label individual students as ‘gifted and talented’? The terminology of giftedness has no agreed definition (Freeman 1998), was not recommended by the Select Committee (1999) advising the New Labour government, and essentialises ability in a particularly unhelpful way, carrying overtones of something bestowed on a lucky few. Why are we seemingly trapped in an essentialist logic of natural difference, despite a professional community ambivalent to such practices at best and resistant at worst (Radnor et al 2007), and a wealth of educational research based on a social justice agenda providing ample critiques (e.g. Borland 2005).

There are a variety of possible reasons why we are where we are, but I have suggested that the theoretical and disciplinary divide in research in the field contributes to the lack of progress (Mazzoli Smith 2014). Whilst sociological work on giftedness has done much to critique the normative thinking in educational and differential psychology, its impact only goes so far. Tending to adopt a constructivist stance, sociological approaches are largely conceived around critiques of the construct of giftedness rather than the lived experiences of pupils, parents and teachers. Meanwhile the research base on which the testing and identification movement rests tends to be the preserve of psychologists of education and/or those who advocate on behalf of ‘gifted pupils’. This body of scholarship uses largely empiricist methods and tends to hold to a positivist worldview, often invoking arguments which link gifted youth to future national prosperity (e.g. Eyre 2011). I see little dialogue between the approaches and few studies which fall outside of their parameters.

It is this impasse between the main bodies of research on giftedness, which I argue contributes to the entrenchment of the status quo. Engagement with the more progressive aspects of the field, focused on contexts that foster optimal development for all learners, rather than colluding with the practicies of elitism, may constitute a step away from them (Mazzoli Smith and Campbell 2016). A greater number of educational researchers could support the growing calls to dispense with such anachronistic terminology and the practice of individual labelling (e.g. Matthews and Dai 2014). A wider set of research methods could give voice to a wider range of stakeholders on these issues, not least students themselves. This in turn would enable a more nuanced understanding of the place of values and beliefs in embedding practices which differentiate (Mazzoli Smith and Campbell 2012). To my mind such understanding is crucial for progress, since what is needed is the kind of research impact that not only changes policy and practice in this area, but discourses and cultures around giftedness too.

My research has yielded narratives about being labelled ‘gifted and talented’ which, analysed on a number of different levels, reveal deeply felt, normative, contradictory and contingent beliefs and values which cannot be adequately explained through either a constructivist or an individualistic lens. To bring such patterns into view requires a wider set of research methods than are currently the norm in this area. A more diverse body of research could also play its part in mitigating the increasingly instrumental discourses of individual achievement which continue to assail the educational landscape, through recourse to a broader and richer dialogue about human flourishing. By remaining a marginal endeavour however, the field is polarised around particular arguments, which limit the tools we give ourselves to effect a much needed sea change in this area. As Michael Apple (1996) says, we should invest in a process of participation in the creation of meanings and values and nowhere is this more needed that in the field of gifted education studies.

Taken from BERA

Written by Laura Mazzoli Smith who is currently a member of the Research Centre for Learning and Teaching at Newcastle University, where her research interests are in the areas of social justice, widening participation and access to HE, out-of-school learning, and the potential of narrative and life story research to reveal and disrupt deficit discourses in education.

References

Apple, M. W. (1996). Cultural politics and education. The John Dewey lecture series. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Borland, J. H. (2005). Gifted education without gifted children: The case for no conception of giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg and J. E. Davidson (Eds.)Conceptions of Giftedness (2nd ed), 1 – 19. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell, R. J., Muijs, R. D., Neelands, J. G. A., Robinson, W., Eyre, D. and Hewston, R. (2007). The social origins of students identified as gifted and talented in England: a geo‐demographic analysis. Oxford Review of Education, 33(1), 103-120.

Eyre, D. (2011). Room at the top: Inclusive education for high performance. Policy Exchange.

Freeman, J. (1998). Educating the very able: Current international research.London: The Stationery Office.

Matthews, D. J. and Dai, D. Y. (2014). Gifted Education: changing conceptions, emphases and practice. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 24(4), 335-353.

Mazzoli Smith, L. and Campbell, R. J. (2016). So-called giftedness and teacher education: issues of equity and inclusion. Teachers and Teaching, 22(2), 1-13.

Mazzoli Smith, L. (2014). Extending sociological theorising on high ability: the significance of values and lived experience. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 24(4), 354-371.

Mazzoli Smith, L. and Campbell, R. J. (2012) Families, education and giftedness: case studies in the construction of high achievement. Rotterdam and New York: Sense.

Radnor, H., Koshy, V. & Taylor, A. (2007). Gifts, talents and meritocracy.Journal of Educational Policy, 22(3), 283-299.

‘Teaching maths for mastery in ITE: Raise the water, raise the boats’

Posted on 16 February, 2016 by David

In December staff from ITE providers gathered in London for the ‘Teaching Mathematics for Mastery’ conference, jointly organised by the Universities’ Council for the Education of Teachers (UCET), the National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics (NCETM) and the National Association of School-Based Teacher Trainers (NASBTT).

Speakers from NCETM presented information on what trainee teachers need to know and understand about teaching for mastery, while ITE providers’ shared approaches for embedding teaching for mastery within ITE programmes. The role of Maths Hubs working in partnership with ITE providers was also presented.

The mastery of mathematics is the desired outcome for all pupils, so that learners develop a deep, long-term, secure and adaptable understanding of the subject.

This is in line with the vision of the 2014 national curriculum for mathematics with the aims that all pupils:

become fluent in the fundamentals of mathematics, including through varied and frequent practice with increasingly complex problems over time, so that pupils develop conceptual understanding and the ability to recall and apply knowledge rapidly and accurately.
reason mathematically by following a line of enquiry, conjecturing relationships and generalisations, and developing an argument, justification or proof using mathematical language.
can solve problems by applying their mathematics to a variety of routine and non-routine problems with increasing sophistication, including breaking down problems into a series of simpler steps and persevering in seeking solutions.

The expectation is that the majority of pupils will move through the national curriculum programmes of study at broadly the same pace but those who are not sufficiently fluent with earlier material should consolidate their understanding, including through additional practice, before moving on.

The content and principles underpinning the new mathematics curriculum reflect those found in high performing education systems internationally, particularly those of east and south-east Asian countries such as Singapore, Japan, South Korea and

China. Though there are many differences between the education systems of England and those of east and south-east Asia, the suggestion is that we learn from the mastery approach to teaching commonly followed in these countries.

Principles of Teaching Maths for Mastery

The approach based on mastery is characterised by certain principles:

The use of mathematical representations that expose the underlying structure of the mathematics;
Children are helped to make sense of concepts and achieve fluency through carefully structured questions, exercises and problems that use conceptual and procedural variation to provide ‘intelligent practice’, which develops conceptual understanding and procedural fluency in parallel;
Whole class discussion, precise questioning and intelligent practice, are blended, where necessary, with individual support.

Pupils will have developed mastery when they demonstrate:

procedural fluency, factual knowledge and conceptual understanding (rapid and accurate recall and application of facts and concepts)
a growing confidence to reason mathematically
the ability to apply mathematics to solve problems, to conjecture and to test hypotheses.

There’s nothing particularly new about this but the widespread use of the word ‘mastery’ in relation to mathematics teaching and mathematics learning is relatively new. Some of the implications of implementing and embedding teaching for mastery approaches to teaching mathematics are also new and have required some schools and ITE providers to make changes to their practice.

Reviewing Practice – Meeting the needs of all pupils

One of the changes requires a shift away from labelling pupils as ‘high ability’ or ‘low ability’. NCETM’s Director, Charlie Stripp states, “it may well be the case that one of the most common ways we use differentiation in primary school mathematics… has had, and continues to have, a very negative effect on the mathematical attainment of our children at primary school and throughout their education.”

Standard approaches to differentiation commonly used in primary school maths lessons involve some children being identified as ‘mathematically weak’ and being taught a reduced curriculum with ‘easier’ work to do, whilst others are identified as ‘mathematically able’ and given extension tasks. Stripp argues that terms such as ‘weaker’ and ‘able’ are subjective, and imply that children’s ability in maths is fixed and this may be very damaging in several ways:

For the children identified as ‘mathematically weak’:

They are aware that they are being given less-demanding tasks, and this helps to fix them in a negative ‘I’m no good at maths’ mindset that will blight their mathematical futures.
Because they are missing out on some of the curriculum, their access to the knowledge and understanding they need to make progress is restricted, so they get further and further behind, which reinforces their negative view of maths and their sense of exclusion.
Being challenged (at a level appropriate to the individual) is a vital part of learning. With low challenge, children can get used to not thinking hard about ideas and persevering to achieve success.

For the children identified as ‘mathematically able’:

Extension work, unless very skilfully managed, can encourage the idea that success in maths is like a race, with a constant need to rush ahead, or it can involve unfocused investigative work that contributes little to pupils’ understanding. This means extension work can often result in superficial learning. Secure progress in learning maths is based on developing procedural fluency and a deep understanding of concepts in parallel, enabling connections to be made between mathematical ideas. Without deep learning that develops both of these aspects, progress cannot be sustained.
Being identified as ‘able’ can limit pupils’ future progress by making them unwilling to tackle maths they find demanding because they don’t want to challenge their perception of themselves as being ‘clever’ and therefore finding maths easy.

In the mastery approach teachers reinforce an expectation that all pupils are capable of achieving high standards in mathematics. The large majority of pupils progress through the curriculum content at the same pace. Differentiation is achieved by emphasising deep knowledge and through individual support and intervention. The use of whole class teaching is a move away from giving pupils different tasks. Teachers who employ a mastery approach to teaching mathematics do not differentiate their maths teaching by restricting the mathematics that ‘weaker’ children experience, whilst encouraging ‘able’ children to ‘get ahead’ through extension tasks. Instead, teachers employing a mastery approach expose almost all of the children to the same curriculum content at the same pace, providing differentiation by offering rapid support and intervention to address each individual pupil’s needs. Teachers use precise questioning in class to test conceptual and procedural knowledge, and assess pupils regularly to identify those requiring intervention so that all pupils keep up. This requires time for the teacher to think carefully about the concepts – to choose questions for conceptual reasons and carefully prepare models and representations which support generalisation.

In the early primary years, the amount of mathematical topics handled in class is reduced, but more time is spent dealing with each topic, so that early understanding is cemented. Teaching is underpinned by methodical curriculum design and supported by carefully crafted lessons and resources to foster deep conceptual and procedural knowledge. Practice and consolidation play a central role. Carefully designed variation within this builds fluency and understanding of underlying mathematical concepts in tandem.

Implications for ITE Providers

The widespread implementation of mastery within ITE will bring with it challenges that providers will need to overcome. These include the need to develop providers’ and partnership schools’ understanding of the principles of mastery.

There exist influences within Primary Education that shape teachers’ current practice which may need to be challenged. The way in which the National Numeracy Strategy was interpreted by some led to many schools rigidly teaching one hour maths lessons, utilising a 3-part lesson structure. Often lessons consist of teacher explanation followed by pupil practice (completing worksheets containing routine problems). There is often a low level of teacher-pupil interaction within the lesson. A further challenge is that teachers are familiar with assessment through levels (and sub levels) and are not yet certain of assessment without levels.

Trainee teachers will need opportunities to embed the principles of mastery, but schools may resist this. The challenge is to change established attitudes held by teachers, to enable them and trainees to teach in a mastery way, even though many have not experienced mastery. Some school-based trainers may also have fixed ability thinking and practices. This mindset will also need to be challenged. Solutions to these challenges may include continuing professional development in the form of school-based training for mentors, ‘Teaching for Mastery’ events and involvement in Maths Hub projects. In the North East region, Maths Hubs include the Great North Maths Hub and the Archimedes NE Maths Hub.

For further information follow the link to:

https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/47230

A presentation to teachers on teaching for mastery by Debbie Morgan NCETM Director for Primary, December 2015

https://www.ncetm.org.uk/resources/48432

“Step out of the shed and into the garden”: how lesson study enables deep professional learning.

Posted on 12 February, 2016 by David

Upon first hearing of the words ‘lesson’ and ‘study’ in the same sentence, I was puzzled. I was to be studying another trainee teacher’s lesson? Wasn’t I supposed to be teaching lessons? Wasn’t that, after all, the whole point of the PGCE, to learn how to teach through practice? I wasn’t completely wrong, however, once my blinding ignorance had slowly subsided, I realised that even though teaching and learning was now at the heart of my life, I had, up until now, focussed solely, if not obsessively, upon the teaching and learning of other subjects – those of the pupil cohorts sent my way. I must get those learning objectives on the board. How will I be showing progress? Will behaviour for learning targets be achieved? And what about assessment?

In my misguided innocence to please and deliver, I had forgotten about MY own learning and what others could teach me. Of course, I diligently attended every CPD session and university lecture but it takes time to realise that independence in sustained professional learning is also vital. I needed to take time to breathe. To step back. And to slow down and reflect. We often spend so much time moving forward that we forget what sights we have passed along the way. This blog is my narrative of how I took a pause to process key stages and markers that are appearing with increasing frequency on my professional journey as my career in teaching continues to accelerate.

Education is not something one can ever really ‘finish’, not truly. I am learning and I will also be learning as an NQT and also for many more years to come for that is the cyclical nature of the profession to which we have entered – and this is not something mutually exclusive to education, either. Coming from a family of medical professionals, I have also been aware of the other contours of our public sector landscape continuing to reform and evolve as society progresses and years tick by. That said, I was more than a little disappointed, if not in a state of lamentation, of my failure to see beyond the four or five periods stretched out before me. I had been so busy in my shed of learning, attempting to differentiate, collate evidence, mark homework and plan lessons to name but a handful of examples, that I hadn’t heard the screaming going on just outside. I needed to step out, and beyond, so I could actually learn something within a wider professional context before returning to the aforementioned shed and returning to my own affairs. Lesson study was the means by which I could facilitate this process of study for myself for once – and not just my Key Stage Four French class which hadn’t quite mastered the imperfect tense yet.

Cynicism and scepticism dissolved, the lesson study process began. Here we were, myself and Matthew Hutchings, a Chemistry specialist, about to embark upon a professional task about which I knew relatively little. Writing retrospectively, I am now in a position to share what I have learnt and espouse the benefits of lesson study to one and all – an invaluable tool for education practitioners far and wide and one which is possibly, at times, overlooked.

The rise of genuine professionally-minded discussions about the teaching and learning taking place and the benefits of the lesson study process have helped both me and Matt become critical in examination of our own practice and what we would wish to do moving forward in the future, which was something I never thought possible to such an extent, especially in terms of cross curricular engagement with another teacher in a world where some scholastic departments have a tendency to be more than a trifle tribal. Sad, but true.

Personally, I have relished the chance to observe a subject outside of my own subject specialism to contribute to not only my Teaching Standards (T8/PPC) but also begin to examine within myself a broader, deeper and wider idea and construct about what I really think the purpose of education is and how fully-rounded it can be. The observation of Matt’s practical experiment was a chance for me to confess to his pupils that as a linguist, Chemistry was far from my forte but I’m not too old to be learning, too. The pupils seemed to respect this, albeit with a minor degree of surprise, but I’m sure it was hugely reassuring for them to know that I am only human too, teacher at 3:25 or human on the drive home.

Lesson study was useful to see the interactions and behaviours of some of my own pupils in a different lesson with a different teacher and think about why this might be similar, different, and/or unchanged and what I/we could do about it. Humans are social animals and school is, for many young people, the centre of their social environment before adulthood. This permeates into our lessons and as teachers, we have a responsibility to ensure behaviour for learning is largely a positive affair, both inside and outside the confines of the four walls of a classroom.

I enjoyed the chance to observe a trainee in practice to realise that I am not the only one learning, developing and training and this helped dilute any initial professional and/or training confidence issues, something which appealed to my introverted character and emotional nature as a person, distanced from the classroom persona I project on a daily basis when I’m ‘in the zone’.

Amidst a plethora of training, teaching and learning challenges that crop up during the PGCE year, the directed process of lesson study was invaluable in allowing myself and Matt to reflect more deeply about what we are actually doing, how we are doing it and even the ‘why’ (this doesn’t always happen for us in as much detail for a “normal” lesson with time constraints often an unavoidable barrier to the depth of our routine reflections).

Matt put the date in French as a nod to me as a MFL trainee in his Chemistry lesson. A pupil asked why, with more than a certain tone of incredulity and sarcasm to which the response was: “We don’t always teach French in French lessons, nor English in English lessons. We’re all teachers and, quite frankly, why not?” This genuinely made the pupils before my eyes ponder what had just been uttered to them by an education practitioner – even if only for a moment – and felt to me as one of the most sincerely tangible albeit short manifestations of SMSC and the broader notion of what it is ‘to educate’ coming to life before my very eyes in a classroom. If I hadn’t been involved in lesson study, I may never have even seen these fleeting but crucial seconds! It was almost as if the pupils were thinking that it’s actually okay to have a bit of French within chemistry and that, actually, subjects are interlinked as part of a broader curriculum and not mutually exclusive entities.

So, I leave you now with my reflections and invite you to probe at your own. Perhaps you already have. If so, keep doing it. If not, there’s never any time like the present. A real exploration of lesson study is beyond the ticking-boxes-jumping-hoops superficial. It is a real exercise, a deep process which places the spotlight not on them but on us. What are we learning? Step out of that shed and into the garden. You might be missing something.

Author: James Rivett Newcastle University PGCE Student, Modern Foreign Languages

CfLaT Newsletter January 2016

Posted on 1 February, 2016 by David

CfLaT Headlines

Robin Humphrey has been awarded a Principal Fellowship of the UK Higher Education Acade-my for his work on Doctoral Research Training, becoming the fourth Principal Fellow in the University and joining a group of just over 400 in the higher education sector.

Congratulations to Jill Clark on the award of her PhD. Her thesis is entitled: The Journey of re-searching on to researching with –theoretical and methodological challenges within educational research . Dr Clark will formally graduate in the summer ceremony.

Pam Woolner and Lucy Tiplady have a chapter in a German edited collection. The chapter, about change through the Open Futures programme, is in English, but there is a German abstract—thanks to CfLaT colleagues Ulrike Thomas and Alina Schartner!

Following the success of the LTHE programme for Kazakh academics, Anna Reid has received an invitation to work as a visiting professor at the Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University in April 2016.

Paula Cardellino, an architecture academic from Uruguay, will be visiting CfLaT in February and March. She will be doing a Research Tea (24 Feb) and a seminar (3 March).

DAVID LEAT DEBATES THE FUTURE OF LEARNING

In December David Leat travelled to Singapore for a three day visit to appear in a TV panel discussion on the Future of Learning, transmitted by Channel NewsAsia in January.

This was part of a series to help develop the profile of Newcastle University in Singapore, as the university runs six under-graduate programs there, in a partnership with Singapore Institute of Technology. Here are David’s reflections on the experience:

Can you summarise what you think is important in a context in 3 or 4 sentences, in a way that an alert lay audience can make sense of.? In your head you have endless arguments, examples, complex concepts, favourite bits of research, jibes etc. But can you form that into a coherent message that an audience member can hook into? You can judge for yourself how I did, if you watch the recording: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/tv/tvshows/perspectives/episode/episode-18-the-future-of/2425136.html

I experienced two media formats, a panel discussion with four other panelists, and series of magazine interviews. The second is far more comfortable as you get a chance to elaborate and develop points in successive questions. In the panel format, you are in competition with the other panelists, partly for air time and partly in arguing your case. There are many skills to be deployed: catching the eye of the moderator, waiting for a tiny lull in someone else’s flow and getting in, connecting to what has been said by others, in agreement, disagreement or in terms of causation. And, above all, making the audience laugh. After the first section of the programme, the assistant floor manager whizzed up to me and asked me to ‘pull my socks up’. I thought I had done OK so far. But it transpired that this was a literal not a metaphorical request as we were in lounge chairs and I was exposing a bit of skin be-tween sock and trousers. Note to self – long socks next time.

BLOGGING FOR BRITAIN

CfLaT research is gaining a new audience through our contributions to the British Educational Research Association’s new multi-authored blog.

In its first six months blog posts by Rachel Lofthouse and David Leat were each in the top ten read list. Other CfLaT contributors include Pam Woolner, Simon Gibbs, Alina Schartner and Anna Reid. Why not take a look at https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog?

And if you fancy contributing a blog post do get in touch with Rachel.Lofthouse@ncl.ac.uk as she is one of the BERA blog editors.

DELIVERING FAMILY SERVICES IN SCHOOL SETTINGS: THE CASE OF M-PACT+

Karen Laing has recently completed some research working alongside colleagues at Mentor UK that evaluated M-PACT+ (Moving Parents and Children Together). M-PACT+ is an intervention devised by Action on Addiction who are now working with Place2Be to offer help through schools for families struggling with the effects of substance abuse.

M-PACT+ is being offered in four areas of the country (including the North East). The evaluation was commissioned by Comic Relief and the Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. 47 families received support between 2013 and 2015.

The evaluation found that the benefits for children included improved family communication and family functioning, being better able to cope with challenges and having a better understanding about how addiction affects families. Children told us that they felt more confident, had been able to develop strategies for keeping themselves safe and felt less isolated following their involvement with M-PACT+:

“People your [own] age – like probably other people’s parents have got the same ad-dictions as your parents so it means you can bond with them and they understand. It wasn’t just happening in our family.”

The delivery of M-PACT was accompanied by training opportunities for school and Place2Be staff to develop their understanding of hidden harm and how M-PACT could help children affected by parental substance misuse. The training was highly regarded and staff reported gains in knowledge and understanding. However, some school and Place2Be staff continued to report that they lacked confidence in their ability to identify and support families who might benefit from M-PACT. Staff emphasised that confidence and trust are key to engaging parents and carers in conversations about parental sub-stance misuse and participating in M-PACT. Developing this trust can take time.

The evaluation also found that M-PACT is more likely to be integrated with a school’s support for families where the school and Place2Be staff routinely share appropriate information about pupils and where schools already offer a range of services for pupils and parents. In these schools there are clear procedures for discussing concerns about the needs of children and about who is best placed to speak to parents about M-PACT. Parents valued the support that was offered, and told us about the benefits they had found from attending:

“I felt I could voice my concerns and opinions and people would listen without interrupting and being judgemental. There were people there to listen and they understood. It felt like someone cared for you, for what your feelings and thoughts were…..especially when you have come off drugs.”

“Communication has improved. It seems like such an easy task – it should be automatic and it’s extremely difficult – we are all different personalities. It has helped me to tone down the shouting. It was a major breakthrough for me.”

Dissemination events and briefings on the findings from the evaluation are currently being prepared.

For further information, please contact Karen Laing k.j.c.laing@ncl.ac.uk

Internationalisation of Higher Education

Sue Robson has just returned from Bangkok where, with Newcastle colleagues, she delivered a workshop for 28 early career researchers from UK and Thai universities on ‘Internationalisation of higher education: developing values-based inter-cultural research approaches’. The workshop enabled early-career re-searchers from across disciplines to meet peers with similar research interests with the aim of developing research joint proposals for future funding. CfLaT’s Alina Schartner was one of the participants.

Feedback from participants was very positive and special thanks go to Dr Navaporn Snodin from Kasetsart University for the superb venue she organised for the work-shop. We look forward to further developing the links that have been made with Thai universities.

For further information, please contact sue.robson@newcastle.ac.uk

SCHOOL REBUILD RESEARCH GETS THE GO-AHEAD

Pam Woolner and Ulrike Thomas are about to start work on an exciting project following the changes at a local school currently being rebuilt.

Although new school spaces can be raise morale and be catalysts for other change, there is no guarantee of long term benefits. As we all know, change can be hard! With CfLaT colleagues, Karen Laing and Anna Reid, Pam and Ulrike will work with the school community to understand their experiences of the existing building and their expectations of the new. They are interested in student attitudes, before and after the rebuild, and the views of the non-teaching staff—the administration, technical and sup-port staff who sometimes get forgotten. As well as revealing more about the impact of changing the educational environment, the project will enable members of the school community to discuss and develop their views of the old and new premises. This should assist the school to maximise the advantages and minimise the stresses of their move. Financial support from the university has been provided for this project and to develop work in this area.

For further information, please contact pamela.woolner@ncl.ac.uk

Marie Butterworth 2015 Prize awarded to Sara Wood

Issue 23- January 2016

We were pleased to present this award to Sara Wood this year, who recently completed her dissertation entitled ‘Fifty Shades of Independent Reading’. Sara’s enquiry focused on developing a curriculum based approach to encourage and enable greater participation and enjoyment in independent reading at Key Stage 3.

Sara discussed her approach and findings at a CfLaT research tea where we welcomed Steve Jones, Marie’s husband, to share in the event. He acknowledged the award stating “It’s a very touching – and appropriate – gesture to help keep Marie’s memory alive and to, in a sense, allow her work to continue.” In relation to Sara’s work he added “It’s encouraging to know that there are still people out there who don’t see data-crunching as the be-all and end-all of education.”

The last word should go to Sara, who wrote, “I just want to thank you again for the wonderful recognition of this award and the opportunity to talk about my research. It really was an absolute pleasure – please pass on my thanks to all who attended. Their interest and thoughtful questions were particularly gratifying. It’s a delight to be able to share my research in such depth to such an esteemed group – it has let me re-engage with the successes and findings of this research as well as inspiring me to further this work.”

FaSMed update: The FaSMEd project is progressing well and is now two years in!

After receiving the Scientix Resource Award for The Prototype Toolkit, Scientix invited two members of FaSMEd to represent the project at EMINENT 2015 – STEM IN EDUCA-TION AND LIFE. This is the Experts Meeting in Education Networking annual event by European Schoolnet. This year it was held from 19-20 November in Barcelona and was organized in cooperation with Scientix and the Department of Edu-cation of Catalonia.

EMINENT 2015 brought together 280 participants from 37 countries including ministries representatives, policy-makers, researchers, STEM teachers and other stakeholders.

In February, two members of the FaSMEd project team – Jill Clark and David Wright – will be travelling to Cape Town in South Africa for our consortium meeting. During their visit they will be visiting some of the schools that our South African partners have been working with, discussing the analysis of our interventions and case studies across all our partner countries and presenting our latest version of the web-based toolkit.

For further information, please contact Jill.Clark@ncl.ac.uk

An update on ROMtels (Roma translanguaging enquiry learning space)

ROMtels is an Erasmus+ funded project based at Newcastle University, with partners in Finland, France and Romania as well as Middlesex University and a local Newcastle school. The Newcastle team is Heather Smith and Lydia Wysocki.

Our aim is to effect practice changes in the inclusion and education of Traveller pupils across Europe and in particular Roma pupils, who continue to suffer overt racism, discrimination and social exclusion. We aim to achieve this by sup-porting teachers in enabling pupils to use their home languages for learning in school. The project begins with Roma and Eastern European Traveller pupils, but will create resources open to many different languages.

We start this quest in Newcastle by using an innovative blend of technologies to create an interactive multilingual enquiry-based learning space (see http://research.ncl.ac.uk/romtels/ for more details). Children undertaking the enquiries — for example learning about the Great Fire of Tyneside 1854 — will hear characters, who come to life on the walls of the interactive space, speaking in their home language(s) and English. Children will be encouraged to speak to each other in whichever languages they need to undertake the enquiry. We began by identifying the various Ro-ma languages of the communities attending our partner school, Arthur’s Hill Federation. We worked with the school’s Slovak/Czech community worker, Zaneta, who is herself of Roma heritage. After several meetings and quite a bit of detective work utilising an amazing linguistic resource developed by Manchester University (http://romani.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/), we identified two distinct languages in a group of 10 families. Nine families appeared to share what is named in the Manchester database as East Slovak Roma whilst one family spoke a Slovak form of Kalderash. Given the number of families speaking East Slovak Roma, we began translations with this form of Roma.

From the families we met, two parents (from different families) agreed to help us: Marta and Laco, who has had to give up several days work to do this!

The translanguation, as we are calling the process of translating from English to Czech/Slovak to a translanguaged form of East Slovak Roma/Slovak, has required remarkable attention to detail. But all involved have learned a great deal. We cannot wait to see the parents and children‘s faces next month when the space and technology are finally completed. For further information, contact Heather.Smith@ncl.ac.uk

RESEARCH TEA TIMETABLE Spring 2016

Research teas aim to provide an informal forum for discursive examination of emerging research themes and concepts. This term the programme includes an eclectic mix of speakers – details below, or from the Centre website: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/cflat/news/Teas.htm

Tea and cakes will be available from 3.45pm in the Centre base (2.50 KGVI) with the session running from 4-5pm.

Wednesday 17th February Vidya Sarangapani, Open Lab:

Virtual. Cultural.Collaboration: Mobile Technologies, Migrant Communities and Multicultural Learning.

Wednesday 24th February Paula Cardellino, Visiting Academic, Uruguay: An architectural perspective on educational challenges – The Uruguayan experience

Wednesday 16th March Theresa Thornton, Northumberland College: Can changing the approach to CPD encourage Teacher Agency and develop Communities of Practice?

Wednesday 6th April Research Methodology Poster Tea: Room 1.71, KGVI.

For further information on CfLaT research teas and/or if you are interest-ed in discussing some of your own research at a tea please contact Laura.MazzoliSmith@ncl.ac.uk

For further information:

Research Centre for Learning and Teaching
School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences
King George VI Building
Newcastle University
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 7RU
clt@ncl.ac.uk
www.ncl.ac.uk/cflat/

SOLE meets Self-Advocacy at the Workers Educational Association

Posted on 26 January, 2016 by David

Anne Preston (left) and Diane Holmes (right) drafting out the Self-Advocacy
SOLE Toolkit in SOLE Central base

By Anne Preston and Diane Holmes

Dr Anne Preston is a Research Fellow in SOLE Central, Newcastle University. Diane Holmes is Adult Literacy specialist teacher at the Workers Education Association North East.

Could teaching ever be obsolete? Can we learn by looking at a Google page? These are just some of the big questions proposed over the years by Newcastle University Professor, Sugata Mitra, who led the well-known ‘hole in the wall’ experiments and more recently, introduced the notion of a Self-Organized Learning Environment (SOLE).

A SOLE is a space where ‘educators encourage students to work as a community to answer their own vibrant questions using The Internet’, an idea which is now achieving global impact. But how are SOLEs made material in local contexts? Is the idea of using The Internet just an example of a ‘charismatic technology’, lacking all- important notions of pedagogy and theory which typically surround what is deemed to lead to ‘deep learning’?

Supported by an ESRC Impact Acceleration Account Knowledge Exchange Secondment award, we have been probing the SOLE of adult learning over the last few months in a collaborative project between SOLE Central and the Workers Educational Association (WEA) North East. Made up of one part Adult Literacy specialist and one part SOLE Central Research Fellow, our work has involved using the SOLE approach with a group of students who have learning difficulties and disabilities. The students are all working towards gaining a qualification in Functional English (ranging in ability from Entry level 1 up to Level 1).

So how did we end up here?

Diane was very keen to use SOLE within the sessions, as she thought this would be an excellent way to inspire ‘deeper’ learning for the students as they studied for their English test. In addition to this, she felt a sense of self advocacy would develop amongst the group. This concept is important to her students, as this type of learner group often have greater difficulty in getting their views heard (or listened to). The students embraced the concept of SOLE really well. They relished the fact that they could do research in groups on the internet and feed back to the class and tutor about what they had discovered. Working in this way naturally developed their reading, writing, speaking and listening skills too – almost by stealth! The group loved the idea of answering the ‘Big Question’ and finding out what different information they could share. A crucial part of the success was also the fact that Diane, as the tutor, had to relinquish control. This really encouraged self-efficacy, as the group became the ‘experts’ and explained to her what they had discovered in their research groups. They became more curious and driven to discover new knowledge, and in short the sessions became a more invigorated learning environment. As individuals, the students were keen to have their own views heard and became more able to present their findings to class. Presenting the research formed part of their Speaking and Listening discussion test. In all, Diane has become more connected to her students and they, in turn, have become more confident and rounded learners.

Students combine skills to search and curate information as part of their
research to the Big Question: Do insects see in colour?

Students use digital literacy skills to zoom in on relevant information

So could a computer replace a teacher? We don’t think so. SOLE is not unique in its focus on developing the physical and conceptual space for learning with the inclusion of technology but as our work has shown, such environments can lead to a change in thinking about the organization of learning by teachers and students. The facilitation of SOLE involves a change in the role of teacher from transmitter to facilitator of knowledge and importantly in this context, can empower students with the skills to self-advocate: they have realised that they can have views, they have the right to be heard, and can identify ways to get their voice heard.We are currently remixing the original SOLE Toolkit to enable other practitioners to explore similar issues in their practice with students who have learning difficulties and disabilities, this will be available soon.

We are currently remixing the original SOLE Toolkit to enable other practitioners to explore similar issues in their practice with students who have learning difficulties and disabilities, this will be available soon.

Additional information:

Founded in 1903, the Workers’ Educational Association (WEA) is a charity and the UK’s largest voluntary sector provider of adult education. In 2013/14 we delivered 9,700 part-time courses for over 70,000 students in England and Scotland with classes in almost every local authority area and our work in England was assessed in 2014 as ‘Good’ by Ofsted. The WEA offers a wide ranging curriculum and we do all that we can to make your learning experience a positive one in our friendly and supportive learning environments. A better world – equal, democratic and just: through adult education the WEA challenges and inspires individuals, communities and society.

SOLE Central is a global hub for research into self-organised learning environments (SOLEs), bringing together researchers, practitioners, policy makers and entrepreneurs. Professor Sugata Mitra’s work has already transformed lives in some of the most disadvantaged communities in the world and our aim is to build on these strong foundations. Work in this interdisciplinary research centre is led by Newcastle University’sSchool of Education, Communication and Language Sciences and Open Lab and involves academics from across the University.

This entry was posted in ESRC Impact Acceleration Account and tagged adult learning, Anne Preston, Diane Holmes, disability, ESRC, ESRC IAA, Self-Organized Learning Environment, SOLE Central, Workers’ Educational Association by Angie. Bookmark the permalink.

‘I don’t need the British to communicate in English’. Social connectedness and the international student experience

Posted on 21 January, 2016 by David

The ‘international student experience’ is of increasing interest to researchers, educators and policy-makers alike. Social connectedness has been found to be key to the quality of this experience, both in terms of student wellbeing and adjustment to new academic and sociocultural environments (Ward et al., 2001). International students typically lack familiar social support structures in the host country, making the formation of social ties a paramount objective for this group. Study abroad is therefore, first and foremost, a social experience.

there is overwhelming evidence that international students, across different locations, struggle to instigate and maintain meaningful contact with local people

Research suggests that international students typically form social ties with three distinct groups: co-nationals, host nationals, and other international students (Hendrickson et al., 2011, Schartner, 2015). Of these, social contact with host nationals, or ‘local people’, is often seen as especially desirable, both by researchers and students themselves, not least for the perceived benefits in terms of linguistic and cultural learning. However, there is overwhelming evidence that international students, across different locations, struggle to instigate and maintain meaningful contact with local people, often despite their best efforts. Seventy per cent of postgraduate students surveyed by UKCISA in 2004 reported not having any British friends at all. Where host contact does occur, this tends to be limited to functional and formulaic encounters. As one student in my own research put it, ‘It’s just the lady I meet in Tesco or the cab driver’ (Schartner, 2015). In light of these findings, some speak of a ‘ghettoization’ of international students on our campuses (Deardorff, 2009), while others fear that lack of host contact may lead to feelings of disillusionment and disenchantment among this group (Brown, 2009).

But is ‘host’ necessarily ‘best’? There is now increasing evidence, both anecdotal and empirical, that friendships with ‘comparable others’ (i.e. peers also going through the study abroad experience) can enable international students to have a positive experience independent of the host society. These ‘international communities of practice’ (Montgomery & McDowell, 2009) have been found to not only augment students’ sense of wellbeing and belonging, but also to boost their academic performance (Young et al., 2013). Likewise, research has shown that social ties with co-nationals, whether face-to-face or via social media, are of vital importance to international students’ wellbeing (Schartner, 2015). Nonetheless, these bonds are often discouraged or sneered at, to the point that students feel they ought to avoid any contact with their compatriots during their time abroad.

Contact with host nationals appears to be no longer the single most important factor for achieving integration with the host environment

So should host universities advocate international and co-national ties as a valuable alternative to host contact? I would dare to answer this question with a tentative yes. Contact with host nationals appears to be no longer the single most important factor for achieving integration with the host environment. Instead, international students seem to obtain the most effective support from their sojourning peers, including opportunities to develop their language skills. As one of my students recently put it, ‘I don’t need the British to communicate in English’.

International students arguably want to belong, but whether this must necessarily mean ‘fitting in’ with host nationals is doubtful. This raises the question whose need it is to achieve integration with hosts. One wonders whether it is in fact the institutional endeavour to achieve ‘internationalisation at home’ that drives and perpetuates the notion that host is best.

Contact with ‘home’ students and the local community at large should of course be encouraged wherever possible, but the number of British friends may not be the best, or only, indicator for the quality of international students’ social experience at UK universities. Perhaps it is time to call for a more holistic and inclusive understanding of social integration, one that acknowledges the multilingual and multicultural reality international students encounter at our universities.

References

Brown, L. (2009). A failure of communication on the cross-cultural campus.Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(4), 439- 454.

Deardorff, D. K. (2009). Connecting international and domestic students. In M. Andrade & N. Evans (Eds.), International students: Strengthening a critical resource. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Hendrickson, B., Rosen, D., & Aune, K. (2011). An analysis of friendship networks, social connectedness, homesickness, and satisfaction levels of international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(3), 281–295.

Montgomery, C., & McDowell, L. (2009). Social networks and the international student experience: A community of practice? Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(4), 455–466.

Schartner, A. (2015). ‘You cannot talk with all of the strangers in a pub.’ A longitudinal case study of international postgraduate students’ social ties at a British University. Higher Education, 69(2), 225-241.

UKCOSA (2004), Broadening Our Horizons: International Students in UK Universities and Colleges, UKCOSA: London.

Ward, C., Bochner, S., & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock(2^nd Ed.). Hove: Routledge.

Young, T. J., Sercombe, P. G., Sachdev, I., Naeb, R., & Author, (2013). Success factors for international postgraduate students’ adjustment: Exploring the roles of intercultural competence, language proficiency, social contact and social support. European Journal of Higher Education, 3, 151-171.

Taken from: BERA

Written by Alina Schartner, Lecturer in Applied Linguistics at Newcastle University

Singapore Grip

Posted on 14 January, 2016 by David

Prof David Leat

In early December 2015, I travelled to Singapore for a 3 day visit to appear in a TV panel discussion on the Future of Learning, recorded by Channel NewsAsia for transmission in January. This was part of a series to help develop the profile of Newcastle University in Singapore, as the university runs six undergraduate programs there, in a partnership with Singapore Institute of Technology. On learning the names of the other panel members, I was gripped by a little apprehension to be in such company.

For most of my university career, I have been a teacher trainer, higher degree teacher and supervisor and researcher concentrating on securing research income, delivering projects and publishing. I have done my fair share of professional keynotes and training sessions and had some success with professional publication. But like many others, the advent of the ‘impact’ agenda as part of the process of having the quality our research evaluated, has spurred my thinking about how we present our ideas and research results to the wider public. If I am truthful I have tended to shy away from this activity, consoling myself with the feeble notion that the worth of ideas is intrinsic and declares itself. With such a state of mind, why did I go when it was not essential? The potential payoff was twofold – first a chance to challenge myself and learn something about influencing public and policy debate with a view to the next Research Excellence Framework, and secondly a chance to catch a little bit of birdwatching in South East Asia.

So here are some reflections:

Can you summarise what you think is important in a context within 3 or 4 sentences, in a way that an alert lay audience can make sense of. In your head you have endless arguments, examples, complex concepts, favourite bits of research, jibes etc.? But can you form that into a coherent message that an audience member can hook into? You can judge for yourself how I did, if you listen to the recording …

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/tv/tvshows/perspectives/the-future-of-learning/2424586.html

Other panelists

It was intriguing to read their biographies and meet them beforehand. In my head one of them had a strong institutional line to follow, one had some done some homework (or had it done) so he had some facts to quote and a consistent line of argument, one was a very graceful ‘gymnast’ who could adapt and respond skillfully and one had an amazing CV that seemed impossible in one lifetime and a strong ‘IT’ message. I had a few ideas about which ideas I could argue against or join in with. The biggest challenge was the question of ‘coding’ about which there was to be a question. At least 3 of the others were likely to be very strong advocates of coding, so what could I say that was not ‘anti-coding’ but put it in some fresh perspective?

Clothes

On news programs and BBC2’s ‘Newsnight’ you do see a range of attire. As a university representative, shirt, jacket and tie seemed expected and I had been given a university tie to wear. I am not known for being the sharpest dresser, so should I buy new trousers? In the end I didn’t – which was fine. But I had not gone deep enough into my wardrobe deliberations, as after the first section of the program, the assistant floor manager whizzed up to me and asked me to ‘pull my socks up’. I thought I had done OK so far, but it transpired that this was a literal rather than a metaphorical request as I was exposing a bit of skin between sock and trousers as we were in lounge chairs with no intervening table. Note to self – long socks next time.

Tweeting

I am not a natural tweeter, and I have my excuses, but if you want to evidence impact then one of the pathways to impact is getting your message out there. So I will be making a bit of an effort (honestly) as various interviews and the program itself comes out. Despite suggestions to the contrary I am not going to be glued to my phone when I take the dog out.

And the birdwatching

I managed two trips, a half day to the wetland reserve, Sungei Buloh, on the north of the island and an early morning visit to the Botanical Gardens, which were wonderful and made the trip worthwhile. I saw a large Monitor lizard swimming, a Stork (Asian Openbill) catch and eat a snake and over 40 species of bird including Brown Shrike, White-bellied Sea Eagle, Arctic Warbler and Oriental Dollarbird.

You can read more about The Future of Learning on our press office website.

Ferryhill Changing Relations Project; Taking Responsibility

Posted on 4 January, 2016 by David

Lisa Davis, Director Changing Relations
Dr Rachel Lofthouse, ECLS

Introduction: Developing a co-produced curriculum

Changing Relations – a social enterprise that uses the arts and creative methods to achieve social transformation around gender equality and healthy relationships – recently undertook a project with Ferryhill Business and Enterprise College. The project aimed to explore ways of addressing concerns held by the senior leadership team about risk-taking behaviour amongst the student population. The Deputy Headteacher Tim Pinkney was particularly keen to see peer learning enshrined in any intervention planned. After negotiations between Changing Relations and the school leadership and wellbeing team the decision was made to place student leadership at the heart of the curriculum project.

A student Steering Group was thus selected who highlighted to Lisa Davis, the Director of Changing Relations, the issues related to sex and relationships that most concerned them. It was clear that the students felt that many of these issues were not currently being addressed within the delivery of the curriculum. From these early discussions, a residential was planned, in which the young people were given the opportunity to explore issues ranging from sexism to sexting, sexual consent, sexual exploitation, homophobia and healthy relationships. Their engagement and learning was supported by the involvement of Relate North East, the Rape and Sexual Assault Counselling Centre for Durham and Darlington, DISC, Wear Valley Women’s Aid and Durham Police in addition to Changing Relations. With local artists, including film-maker Rupert Ludlow, also present, the young people further selected the topic that resonated most with them – sexting – and began the work of creating plot and characters for a film that would be used to stimulate discussion around this topic with their peers at school.

In addition to making the film, the young people were involved in planning, researching and designing a booklet for their peers about who to go to for specific sex and relationships concerns, from coming out to seeking support in the wake of sexual assault. Alongside Lisa Davis they also planned and co-facilitated an off-timetable Big Learning Day for their peers, meeting each week for several months to pull all of the strands of the project together. In order to contribute to the evaluation of the project a number of focus groups were held with students at Ferryhill. These were facilitated by Rachel Lofthouse from ECLS. Two of the focus groups were held with student leaders from Years 9 and 10 (the steering group).

Taking responsibility through student leadership

It is clear that a successful aspect of this project was the long term involvement of the student leaders from Years 9 and 10 who took significant responsibility for shaping the project, planning the Big Learning Days and creating the new learning resources. The Year 10 student leaders stated that this had been no mean feat, but recognised that they had “had to work as a team” and were impressed that “it all came together like a jigsaw”. In the same focus group the students stated that they had valued “being treated like an adult, being challenged to consider their own ideas and comfortable giving opinions”.

The student leaders group was not selected purely from the school’s ‘go to’ students, but deliberately included students considered to be at risk by the school pastoral staff. This was illustrated by one of the Year 10 student leaders who said “I wanted to be involved because it sounded important, sounded interesting, and it is close to my heart through personal experience.”

The inclusion of a weekend residential was valued by the student leaders, allowing an immersive and relatively intense learning experience which set the scene for their role in the wider project. This was recognised by the Year 10 student leaders who said that “the residential was fun and interesting, we made films, it was hard work, it was jam packed with lots of info; it was intense.” The Year 9 student leaders stated that the experience as a whole “was a big commitment but we enjoyed it – it was fun.” The year 10 student leaders stated that “this was a different experience, it makes things more interesting, we met people from outside of schools; we were taking responsibility and representing the school at formal meetings.”

For most of the students planning an event and working for a sustained period with outside experts was a unique experience and one which they highly valued, “we got more out of it than we expected” (Year 9 student leaders). It is probable that the depth of their resulting knowledge exceeded those of the rest of the students in Years 9 and 8 for whom the Big Learning Days were planned. This was in part reflected in their abilities to articulate key ideas in the focus groups, with the Year 9 student leaders recognising the quality of their learning about “the difference between healthy and unhealthy relationships and where you can go for health advice.” Their greater insight provided the trigger for them from thinking “what’s the harm?” (for example of sexting) to “realising we did not want it to happen to other students” (Year 9 student leaders).

Making the video

Planning, making and showing the video was highly rated by the student leaders, and its authenticity has already been noted above as critical in its impact. The Year 10 student leaders stated “it was our idea to do a film – we thought about the topic and how to do it, we developed the storyline”. The Year 9 student leaders thought that as “young people we could make the video better, we made sure it was a relevant topic choice, and we were the same age as the audience, so people respect it more”, and this perspective mirrors that of the student participants given above. Making the video provided another opportunity for the student leaders to engage with an outside expert – in this case a film maker, who again was recognised for his major contribution. It was also important to the student leaders that the video had a genuine audience, partly in being used to introduce the Big Learning Days themselves, but also in being posted on the school website. The fact that the school organised a premier to which parents were invited and that this was featured in the local press was significant. The student leaders felt proud of their work and the value of it in the local school community and beyond. The Year 9 student leaders stated that they “would like to take it to other schools”. This has some value – but perhaps overlooks quite how important the fact that the video was very much school-situated was. It would be interesting to see whether its impact was similar with a different population of students.

The Big Learning Days

The student leaders’ roles in planning and co-facilitating the Big Learning Days was significant in terms of their own development. They said that they had learned a lot from “having to lead sessions, making the powerpoint, presenting it and doing the activities with the students” (Year 10 student leaders). Without doubt they were proud of their contribution and felt that it was critical in the success of the days, “it was powerful that pupils were speaking to pupils – they were more open to asking questions” (Year 9 student leaders).

Conclusion – what can we learn?

The student leaders acted as a significant bridge between the expertise offered by the outside agencies related to the desired curriculum content and felt needs of the wider student cohort (made up of their peers). The student leaders’ involvement at all stages greatly supported the planning and facilitation of the project. They were responsible for the development of real and locally situated authentic products of the planning phase (the video and booklet) which were actively used as learning resources to support the teaching and learning phase, and indeed outlive that episode as a longer term resource. The Big Learning Days also created a platform (with a deadline) for the student leaders to deliver the outputs of their own learning and planning. This focus provided a real event in which the student leaders’ own learning became purposeful and visible – they had indeed ‘taken responsibility’ and certainly lived up to it.

SOLE brings a little sparkle into children’s lives

Posted on 23 December, 2015 by David

Self-organised learning environments (SOLEs), originally created by Prof Sugata Mitra, are now branching out into art as a way to help children become more self-sufficient learners.

Exploring SOLE through art

Self-organised learning environments turned arty in a Newcastle school last week to discover the secret of the perfect sparkle.

Year 2 class at Broadwood Primary School worked with their teacher Melanie Horan and Newcastle University SOLE Central researcher Helen Burns to think about ‘How do things sparkle?’.

Self-organised learning environments, which were originally created by Professor Sugata Mitra, are spaces where children all over the world work in groups using the Internet to come up with answers to Big Questions.

Creating the ultimate ‘sparkle’ recipe

After using the Internet and their own experiments to find out what sparkles and what doesn’t, these seven-year-olds designed their own ‘recipe’ for making things really sparkle.

They then applied this knowledge to answer a second question: ‘How can we make the sparkliest Christmas decoration?’. Working in small groups, they made decorations from recycled materials, torches, mirrors and glitter.

“We are working closely with this class using art and SOLE to try and help children to become self-organised learners who can ‘think for themselves’,” explains Ms Burns. “Teachers find that many children struggle to apply their learning or think deeply beyond being able to provide a ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ answer within the constraints of the current curriculum.”

This research work has just begun, and is currently focused on simply supporting the children to be able to ask and answer ‘big’ questions. However, early next year this will be developed to help children to think about how they think and learn, hopefully enabling them to be more creative and able learners.

Taken from Newcastle University (Press Office)

Sara Wood – winner of The 2015 Marie Butterworth Prize

Posted on 18 December, 2015 by David

Every year we present the Marie Butterworth Prize for Excellence in Practitioner Enquiry to a student who has completed one of our M.Ed in Practitioner Enquiry programmes. Marie was a keen advocate of teacher research, an active participant in a number of ECLS research projects, a CfLaT research fellow and a local deputy head teacher. ECLS makes this award in her memory to celebrate her enthusiasm and achievements. We were pleased to present this award to Sara Wood this year, who recently completed her dissertation entitled ‘Fifty Shades of Independent Reading’. Sara’s enquiry focused on developing a curriculum based approach to encourage and enable greater participation and enjoyment in independent reading at Key Stage 3. Her research was undertaken while she worked at The Academy at Shotton Hall, a Teaching School with whom ECLS has had a long relationship supporting teachers to develop their practices through Master’s level professional enquiry. Sara recently discussed her approach and findings at a CfLaT research tea. During the research tea Sara’s supervisor Rachel Lofthouse commented on the significance of Sara’s core pedagogic values and how they had influenced and shaped her practice and enquiry, and Maria Mroz complimented Sara on the quality of her writing and encouraged her to consider writing about her enquiry for publication.

Sara is presented with her award by Rachel Lofthouse

We also welcomed Steve Jones, Marie’s husband, to share in the event. He acknowledged the award stating “Thank you too for all the work you put into choosing the award winner every year. It’s a very touching – and appropriate – gesture to help keep Marie’s memory alive and to, in a sense, allow her work to continue.” In relation to Sara’s work he added “It’s encouraging to know that there are still people out there who don’t see data-crunching as the be-all and end-all of education.” The last word should go to Sara herself who wrote, “I just want to thank you again for the wonderful recognition of this award and the opportunity to talk about my research. It really was an absolute pleasure – please pass on my thanks to all who attended. Their interest and thoughtful questions were particularly gratifying. It’s a delight to be able to share my research in such depth to such an esteemed group – it has let me re-engage with the successes and findings of this research as well as inspiring me to further this work.”

Sara is joined by Steve Jones at the CfLaT research tea