Developing educational practices in Kazakhstan – learning from a study visit

Posted on 4 December, 2015 by David

Introduction

During December 2015 a fourth cohort of academic colleagues from universities across Kazakhstan undertook a study visit to Newcastle University. The visit was hosted and facilitated by staff from ECLS and managed through the North Leadership Centre. Our visitors had a busy schedule of taught sessions and workshops during which they were offered insights into a wide range of academic practices. At the same time the visitors experienced British life – both in Newcastle and further afield. Every day was an opportunity for learning, but what have they learned and what difference will it make in their own work and in development of Higher Education in Kazakhstan? Here in their own words (italics) are reflections on their experiences with a focus on how their visit will help them to develop their practices in their own contexts. As one group wrote in their reflection the educational systems in Kazakhstan and UK have their strong and weak sides. We should take the best of the both systems.

Professional development

Contributions from Darya Pashkanyan, Latipa Issembaeva, Yelena Dubinina, Bakytgul Ibraimova, Saule Mamytova.

Following the session on professional development our visitors wrote that an important factor in formation of professional development is critical reflection. We believe that critical reflection is the use of important experiences to identify assumptions and extract learning to move forward. They went on to recognise the importance of their autobiographies as learners and teachers, students’ eyes, colleagues’ experience and theoretical literature to support critical reflection. Extending beyond reflection they also articulated the value of

studying our teaching for professional improvement,
systematically evaluating our teaching through classroom research procedures,
linking theory with own practice,
questioning our personal theories and beliefs,
considering alternative perspectives and possibilities
trying out new strategies and ideas.

Their aim is to maximise the learning potential of all our students and enhance the quality of our teaching. It is important to them to ensure that professional development will allow us to be competitive on the educational market. It seems that staff in universities across the world share the same concerns. During the study visit significant time was given to microteaching as a professional development activity. This is considered in the next section.

Microteaching

Written by Mariyash Jumagulova, Raushan Zhexembayeva, Dinmukhamed Kelesbayev, Galina Karimova, Karlygash Shetieva.

During our visit to Newcastle University Microteaching session was conducted as one of the main program course for the purpose of using peer observation in teacher development. Microteaching sessions 1 and 2 were delivered to us. During the lesson 1 various activities were done. In small groups we compared and discussed our experiences and approaches to peer observation. The aims of Microteaching 1 were the following: to consider the role of feedback in professional practice, skills and attitudes needed for successful learning from practice, discuss and identify ways to become involved in peer review or to enhance existing peer review processes. Three modules of peer observation were referred: Evaluation Module, Development Module and Collaborative Module and principles of attuned interaction were introduced. At the end of session 1 preparation homework tasks for Microteaching 2 were given.

Session 2 was very unusual and interesting. Each learner led and managed a seven minute Microteaching or discussion activity on the definite topic which was discussed. The plans of the activities were covered by metacognitive approaches of learning (Map from memory, Odd One Out). After the activity each participant was asked how they think it went and had a short reflective discussions with the group for 5 minutes. Post-observation discussion was initiated by the members of the group. Each learner was drawn her or his attention to what happened and was invited to reflect. The learners tried to comment on every aspect of teaching session. Each learner answered any further comments and accepted offered suggestions positively.

We think we gained effective and useful information having been provided, participated in and observed interactive microteaching episodes. So we came to conclusion that a microteaching session is much more comfortable than real classroom situations, because it eliminates pressure resulting from the length of the lecture, the scope and content of the matter to be conveyed, and the need to face large numbers of students, some of whom may be inattentive or even hostile. Another advantage of microteaching is that it provides skilled supervisors who can give support, lead the session in a proper direction and share some insights from the pedagogic sciences. In conclusion we must say that we will extend our microteaching episode practices. If it’s possible we will try to experiment with using the principles of attuned interaction in our future teaching activities and in development of Higher Education in Kazakhstan.

Group work

Contributions from Gulmira Adilbektegi, Lyazzat Zhunussova, Zhanar Talaspayeva, Bauyrzhan Nurimov.

Some of our visitors indicated relatively little experience of creating teaching situations in which students work in groups, and so they selected this as a key theme for teaching development on their return to their universities. In particular they were interested in the way that student group work could contribute to acquiring skills necessary for effective collaboration such as students listening and respecting each-others’ contributions. They also noted that group work can support the self-realization of the student and the development of active leaders through the formulation of cumulative reasoning and creation of productive solution to questions related to their subject. They recognised that this needed teachers in HE to think about their roles differently, although they were reassured that groupwork can be planned and structured and teachers can use techniques to facilitate group and individual learning, including strategies for preventing difficult situations in groups.

Online learning tools

Contributions from Orynbassar Joldasbayev, Akmaral Shokanova, Raushan Torgayeva, Boris Rabinovich, Inkar Kulenova.

Another area for productive development in teaching and learning is online learning. The visitors recognised that online learning is getting more popular all over the world, a lot of Universities and Higher Institutions use it for teaching and learning because young generation like new IT-technologies. They were introduced to online platforms such as Moodle, WordPress, OneNote, and Twitter and discussed how they can be successfully used in education and training because they fit not only for communication with one student (as e-mail) but with the group of students at the same time. They suggested that potential benefits of online learning include

On-line platforms increase students’ motivation.
They are good for giving and receiving feedback.
Any teacher can create his or her own blog if needed.

Conclusion “What experience will we go back to Kazakhstan?”

Contributions from Kairat Tlebayev, Zhanara Kultanova, Arailym Omarova.

We are the members of LTHE sessions held in Newcastle University, UK. The Republican Institute of Increasing of Qualification of Teachers “Orleu” Republic of Kazakhstan every year send group of teachers from different universities of republic for conducting teaching training. The idea of Leader, Nursultan Nazarbayev is to raise the teachers’ level on the level of the world. To realise this purpose it is necessary to prepare high-qualified teaching any disciplines in English. This programme provides the opportunities. One of the best reasons for this programme is increasing of teachers’ professional development to gain more teaching experience from UK colleagues on the sessions.

Several key aspects were highlighted in the transition back to their home universities;

The difference in UK is teaching in groups;
The role of team teaching (more than two teachers share their ideas in one session);
The lecturer makes his or her sessions have a good and more comfortable atmosphere;
The lecturer teacher provides directions for students and they actively discuss the given problem.
The lecturer can use online teaching lectures.

As we welcome, work with and bid farewell to each cohort of Higher Education colleagues from Kazakhstan we learn about their culture and education practices, just as they learn from ours. What is perhaps as significant is the opportunity that this visit gives them to learn from each other – across the universities in Kazakhstan itself. As our conclusion authors wrote, this programme provides the ways to communicate and collaborate between teachers. Teachers in all settings are very busy and often work in relative isolation. We are pleased to provide a space and a programme in which teachers can learn from and with each other.

Authentic Professional Learning in the school workplace. A Leadership Perspective.

Posted on 23 November, 2015 by David

Stefan McElwee George Stephenson High School

It is a widely held belief amongst professionals in a wide spectrum of professions that we continue to learn during our working lives. Learning is a continual process of development linked to professional and social context, both within and outside of the workplace environment. It might be viewed that this is a challenging assertion which stimulates further investigation within the busy school environment. Can we assume teachers learn or do we need to investigate carefully what conditions exist or can be created to facilitate authentic professional learning?

This blog summarises the thinking and feelings of a Leadership team in a secondary school in Newcastle-upon Tyne on professional learning. As an Assistant Head Teacher with a responsibility for learning in school, I wanted to probe the subject further. The rest of the team agreed and so we read. The reading process alone was wholesome as our agendas often focus on the routine or strategic management of the day to day operational material which demands much of our time. Through reading academic research findings on the subject we uncovered a stimulus, a developing need to reflect on this important, yet often neglected subject.

The first challenge was to establish the clear difference between the traditional didactic delivery of content which is common in CPD environments, and the potential to create alternative environments in the workplace that allow authentic professional learning to flourish. The work of Ann Webster-Wright (2009) summarises this distinction and argues for a conceptual change towards a new form of professional learning based on two decades of research across professions. This article was introduced to me through my participation in modules related to coaching and mentoring for teacher development, in the School of ECLS, at Newcastle University.

As a leadership team, our conversations quickly turned to our “performativity” agenda, and our role in ensuring professional standards, accountability of practice and the creation and monitoring of measurable outcomes. Our ownership of “knowledge” linked to standards inevitably influences what we determine to be of value and justifiable to learn for teachers and other colleagues in our school context. We feel these pressures place a huge constraint on learning – both that of teachers and our schools’ students. The uncertainty and pace of educational reform produces a high-stakes environment in which colleagues often tell us they have no time to learn. The challenge for us was fairly clear in our discussions. We want to devolve this knowledge ownership and to provide an infrastructure for teachers to take ownership of their own learning in an environment which supports authentic professional learning.

This key aim led our thinking to the consideration of the contextual factors that make our school a unique place of learning for those operating within it. We have considered the importance of context to the learning of our pupils for years but have never really reflected on it for the learning potential of our staff. How well do we create and support a learning culture in our school? We feel we are establishing an environment supportive of authentic learning as established through research findings. We strongly believe in communities of enquiry. Our staff learn together in collaborative groups where teacher talk draws on critical reflection based on experience. We are comfortable and confident in our teachers as participants and not spectators in the learning process. Much of what staff tell us reflects the notion that teacher ownership of a hunch or problem is essential to actively engage professionals in working on genuine problems. We discussed the crucial component of ensuring our teachers have time to reflect on their problem-solving to transform experience into learning.

We feel strongly that our action research cycles meet many of the criteria of authentic professional learning, but there are areas we need to probe further. Our thinking takes us towards the purpose of learning. Should it be represented in activities that are amenable to outcomes? What do we count as legitimate knowledge? Do teachers have a say in this and how do we justify our decisions in a standards-driven framework?

We have concluded that teacher ownership of learning is a key component, some needs to be negotiated yes, but authentic learning challenges leadership structures to consider the “lived experience” of our colleagues. The social complexity of their position in the workplace potentially drives their assumptions of practice and how they “feel” about their own learning. We are considering sociocultural factors very carefully. Our follow-up work will now focus on establishing how we can involve our teachers in the learning process and how we can further exploit the supportive contextual factors that have allowed the first tentative steps in authentic professional learning to occur in our school.

Reference:

Webster-Wright Anne, Reframing Professional Development Through Understanding Authentic Professional Learning. Review of Educational Research. 2009 79: 702 published 25 February 2009.

Stefan McElwee is Assistant Headteacher and George Stephenson High School which is a Teaching School with both ECLS and CfLaT (Newcastle University) as strategic partners. Stefan is currently completing the M.Ed in Practitioner Enquiry (Leadership) programme at Newcastle University.

Hello and welcome to the Education blog from the School of ECLS, Newcastle University.

Featured

Posted on 23 November, 2015 by David

The staff and students in Education conduct research in a range of areas, and this blog offers them opportunities to share this informally. If you read on you will see contributions from research staff such as those in our research centres, reflections on our taught programmes from both students and staff, and posts from our students and visitors on learning that goes well beyond the university itself. If you would like to contribute a blog post please contact your programme leader. We look forward to continuing to build this blog as a living archive of educationally interesting posts.

Going beyond the information given

Posted on 20 November, 2015 by David

Introduction

During November 2015, twenty-five academic colleagues from universities across Kazakhstan undertook a study visit to Newcastle University. The visit was hosted and facilitated by staff from ECLS and managed through the North Leadership Centre. Our visitors had a busy schedule of taught sessions and workshops during which they were offered insights in to a wide range of academic practices. At the same time, the visitors experienced British life – both in Newcastle and further afield. Every day was an opportunity for learning, but what have they learned and what difference will it make in their own work and in development of Higher Education in Kazakhstan? One session was about blogging for academic development and communication. Here in their own words is a blog post written collaboratively in that session. Writing in English they reflected on their experiences and possible outcomes, helping us make sense of how they are “going beyond the information given”.

Professional development

Meiramgul Mukhambetova, Aizhan Mamyrbekova, Gulsara Turguntayeva, Saltanat Nyshanova, Gulsim Tulepova

In education the term professional development can be used in reference to a wide variety of specialized training. To be professionally developed teachers should improve their professional knowledge, skills, competence and creative activity. In practice professional development for educators encompasses an extremely broad range of topics and formats. It would be helpful, for example, to work with colleagues in professional learning communities to develop teaching skills. This might help us to develop collaborative courses that are taught by teams of two or more teachers. We would like opportunities to be professionally developed to increase our teaching skills by using different types of learning technologies. All of the aspects which we learned about in Newcastle, such as constructivism, critical thinking, working in small groups, microteaching and online learning are priorities for our professional development. Our learning will have an impact on our own students’ learning and future success. To succeed we should improve our professional development step by step.

Microteaching

Dana Jantemirova, Bibenur Baidalinova, Galiya Suleimenova, Laura Butabayeva

Today I want to tell you about my microteaching experience at Newcastle University. It was amazing! Many thanks to our tutors: Anna Reid and Alina Schartner

And what is microteaching you ask me?

Microteaching required us to present to our colleagues a short episode of a lesson of our choice.

We discovered that it is an excellent way to understand your teaching techniques not only “inside” but more important “outside”. Microteaching pushed us to leave our comfort zone because our everyday practice means the interaction with our students a lot and we cannot observe ourselves. In this case it is possible to improve our teaching practical skills.

How does it work?

Colleagues gather in one small group and one of them presents the short episode of his lecture or seminar (or something else) and during the lesson colleagues behave as students. The group then all evaluate his style of lesson, his techniques of teaching. In this way we improve our interactive skills.

How can it be used in our future?

We should share the experience for improving the teaching quality of our colleagues.

At the end, we understood that using microteaching experience will be useful for our colleagues to improve their interactive practical skills, interpersonal relationships and making their lessons more effective.

Assessment

Gulshat Abugaliyeva, Laura Oilybayeva, Marianna Dyachuk, Aliya Seraliyeva

Assessment is used to know what the student’s skill level is in the subject. It also helps the teacher decide how to explain the material more efficiently.

There are many aims of assessment:

selection
motivation
improvement the process of education
feedback
control

We believe that assessment must be clear and give understanding for all students.

Summative and formative assessment are often referred to in a learning context as assessment of learning and assessment for learning respectively. Assessment of learning is generally summative in nature and intended to measure learning outcomes and report those outcomes to students, parents and administrators. Assessment of learning generally occurs at the conclusion of a class, course, semester or academic year. Assessment for learning is generally formative in nature and is used by teachers to consider approaches to teaching and next steps for individual learners and the class.

Formative assessment is generally carried out throughout a course or project. In an educational setting, formative assessment might be by a teacher or the learner, providing feedback on a student’s work and would not necessarily be used for grading purposes. The formative assessments aim to see if the students understand the instruction before doing a summative assessment. A common form of formative assessment is diagnostic assessment. Diagnostic assessment measures a student’s current knowledge and skills for the purpose of identifying a suitable program of learning. Self-assessment is a form of diagnostic assessment which involves students assessing themselves.

Summative assessment is generally carried out at the end of a course or project. In an educational setting, summative assessments are typically used to assign students a course grade. The summative assessments are made to summarize what the students have learned, to know if they understand well. This type of assessment is graded and often counts, it can be in form of tests, final exams, projects, etc. Assessments are important because they decide if the student passed or failed the class. If teachers only do summative assessments, the learners will know how well they have done too late. The importance of pre-assessment is to know what the skill levels of a student are before giving further instructions. Giving a lot of feedback and encouraging are other practices.

When we come back to Kazakhstan we will use all of information which we learned in Newcastle University. We are interested an assessment and mainly formative assessment. Before doing any work (task) with students we give them criteria of assessment. Formative assessment will helps us to improve motivation for learning the subject and to use it in future.

Online learning: taking the borders away make learning everlasting

Aidar Aitkulov, Khamit Sarsenbayev, Beibyt Temirbekov, Murajan Aslanov, Zukhra Abdrakhmanova, Tatyana Kim

The session was devoted to online learning which was presented by “Queen of Moodle” in Newcastle University – Eleanor Gordon. The first thing she asked us to do was to name the online tools we work with. The point is that most of the participants are not acquainted with online tools which may be used for both learning and teaching. Then we were given the challenge to find the information about different online tools we are not familiar with. They were chosen by Eleanor and also it was her initiative to form the groups we were going to work in. For example: Onenote, Mind42, Twitter, Wikispace, WordPress, Moodle. We found it interesting that we were allowed to use GOOGLE.

Having discovered the information we were able to share it and discuss in special chats which are still in our online profiles. And also we took part in an online forum. We came to conclusion that different online tools are used for different aims: either you use it for communicating with your peers or students. The discussion occurred about the advantages and disadvantages of online learning.

One part of the participants spoke about the following advantages:

It may saves time to get to your teacher or students
It helps to cover the wider number of students, much more than a room may include
It is more interesting for students to use up-to-date electronic tools
They may navigate on both computers and mobile devices anywhere and anytime

The second one had these arguments:

Online learning and teaching takes time
It is impossible to concentrate on one theme
If there is no electricity then online learning is over.
Is harmful for our eyesight
No communication face to face without seeing the emotions and the language of the body
Students may cheat

Some items were really controversial. And the discussion was really hot. We discussed how to transfer these tools into our own teaching contexts. We aim to implement at least one online tool in our teaching. And so there are still many things to ponder over. There are the things that may “surprise, confuse and inspire” us. And it is only your choice either use it or not. We hope that this session will be a kind of beginning of taking the borders away to teach and learn.

Peer observation

Aktorgyn Agisbayeva, Gulzhanat Baigudanova, Ainura Amirova, Ulbossyn Kanseitova, Aigul Uteshkaliyeva, Gulnar Mukusheva

Peer observation is a process of teaching which mutually enhances the quality of teaching. It is cyclical, reciprocal and iterative process. We will consider this using the following questions such as who, why, what and how. To support peer observation a short workshop should be scheduled before the paired members of staff undertake observation to discuss demands, areas and methods of observation and teaching.

Who should participate in the observation? We believe that senior and junior staff and also the head of the department should be involved.
Why use peer observation? It is for own professional development and giving feedback (self-analysis, analysis of observer and some evaluations of the head of the department).
How should observation be done? It should be taken into consideration post observation discussion for observer and for teacher. Both of them should have the plan: the teacher should have the lesson plan and observer should have observation plan. All of these things under the discussion should have the exact criteria of observation.
What should be observed? Contemporary methods of teaching any subject and also improvement of students’ knowledge.
When should observation happen? Peer observation must be done according to the schedule. The scheme operates for all teaching staff (both on full and part time students) other than those on probation for whom arrangements for observing and evaluating teaching process.

We would like to say that using peer observation is necessary and useful for members of the department. We’ve come to the conclusion that there needs to be a mutual understanding and trust between peers.

Conclusion

The themes that the course participants have reflected upon above provide an indication of the areas of professional and pedagogic practice that they feel they have scope to develop in Kazakhstan. We wish the participants well in their ongoing work and look forward to meeting more of their colleagues later this term.

Abi Henry, Mathematics School Direct PGCE trainee, reflects on our recent SEND Conference.

Posted on 10 November, 2015 by David

The day started with an informative session from Newcastle School Improvement Services about the massive legislative changes that have taken place within SEN from September 2014 as part of the Children’s and Families Act 2014. This clearly laid out the responsibilities and expectations on teachers to support all children. It is good to understand the framework in which the profession we are training for sits.

This was followed by 4 workshops to explore differing needs and how best to differentiate a lesson to ensure the needs of all pupils can be met. The sessions were varied in their content but also their delivery which would have suited most learners.

The speakers were well informed and generous with their time and knowledge. They used good techniques to make us consider how if feels to be a child with SEN and what measures we can take to alleviate the daily stresses they may feel. We all have a responsibility to make sure school is a positive and pleasurable opportunity for young people who are far more likely to learn if they are happy.

In terms of what I will take away and plan to try out over the coming weeks:

Plan your lesson for the children and then add the subject specific information to the lesson
Have ‘Secret Heros’ – when on yard duty give a child what appears to be a random fact to a question you will ask in a later lesson – it allows all children to succeed and build confidence answering questions in the classroom.
If a child needs a worksheet printed in a certain colour just print them all in that colour; don’t single them out.
Use word to check the readability of the work you produce (the +5 rule).

Thank you to everyone for organising!

Growth of private tuition tells story of mounting pressure on parents

Posted on 22 October, 2015 by David

Our recent research found that 5% of seven-year-olds and 22% of 11-year-olds were receiving extra academic tuition outside of regular school hours. This suggests mounting pressure is being put on parents to make sure their children “perform”, comparable to the performance pressures on schools to achieve good exam results.

We analysed data from the Millennium Cohort Study, which is tracking 19,000 children born in 2000 through childhood (so far at age three, five, seven and 11) and plans to continue to adulthood. We looked at the children’s out of school activity, at how it changed during primary school and at patterns of activity for children from different backgrounds. The sample we looked at contained about 11,000 children from a white background and about 2,000 from an ethnic minority background – similar proportions to those in the wider population.

Jump in private tuition

Our findings on the extent of children having private tuition, presented at the British Education Research Association conference in September, seem to be quite a lot higher than previous estimates – although of course we are rarely comparing the same groups of children. A paper by education researcher Judith Ireson found that of 3,000 children aged 10-18, 27% had a private tutor. It was only when she got to children aged 11 to 16-years-old living in London that the figures became as high as 40%.

What seems to shock about our figures is that at such a young age, seven years old, 5% of children are having tutoring of some kind. And substantial proportions of children at age 11 are having tutoring, either for English, maths or school entrance. This varied for different ethnic groups, but over 40% of children identifying as Indian, Black, and other (which includes Chinese) had some kind of tutoring.

What we don’t yet have is data on how to interpret these figures. Over the past ten years we have seen the “scholarisation of childhood”, through which parents face enormous pressure to use whatever resources available to them – including tutoring – to make effective choices about their children’s schooling.

Sometimes schools and parents can struggle to engage with each other. In this context, some parents give up and take their own action. This raises questions about the extent to which schools alone are responsible for their exam results – whether good or bad. But we do not know yet how effective private tuition is and how it might influence exam results.

Tough choices

Our research also found that extra tuition was most common among children whose mothers had a postgraduate degree – 30% – and least common among children whose mothers had no formal qualifications, though it was still relatively high at 19%. This suggests that parents with all types of educational backgrounds put an importance on education.

Our finding that music lessons were taken by 43% of children whose mothers had a postgraduate degree, but only 6% of children whose mothers had no qualifications, could lead us to speculate that less educated parents are choosing extra tuition rather than music lessons. But this would be conjecture and more research is needed to interpret this.

There was other good news in our research: most children (78%) help with chores at home, and 53% several times a week. One in ten children aged 11 have commitments at home, caring for elderly, sick or disabled family members at least once a week. It is not easy to find comparative historical figures for the same age – but one in ten seems much higher than other estimates.

What’s clear overall is that there is unequal access to out of school activities. The expense of the school day is shocking. At Newcastle University we are also carrying out an evaluation of Child North East’s work in schools to poverty proof the school day.

They have found that regular costs such as the cost of uniform, trips, homework, swimming lessons and badges, and pressure to collect charity money stigmatise children and parents. In one school, the holiday drama club costs £100 and so excludes a significant proportion of children. The cost of the end of school prom ranges from £250 to £1,000 per child – but students and parents feel pressured not to miss out.

The next phase of our research will be to look at whether there is an association between different after-school activities and educational attainment at age 11.

Written by: Liz Todd, Professor of Educational Inclusion, Newcastle University

Outdated exams are holding children back – not computers in the classroom

Posted on 20 October, 2015 by David

A recent report has confirmed that simply increasing the number and use of computers in a school is unlikely to result in significant improvement in “educational outcomes”, including in results for reading, mathematics and science.

The report, from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), recommended solutions were fairly predictable and included increasing training for teachers and greater use of innovative teaching methods.

According to Andreas Schleicher, the OECD’s director for education and skills: “Adding 21st-century technologies to 20th-century teaching practices will just dilute the effectiveness of teaching.” We therefore need to get much better at using pedagogies that make the most of technology.

But a significant problem still remains. Even if we combine 21st-century technologies with 21st-century teaching practices we are still stuck with a form of assessment born in the 19th and 20th centuries – the written exam.

Testing the wrong things

Like it or not our national exams continue to dictate children’s “educational outcomes”, the kind of content that is delivered and the skills which pupils are expected to develop. Unfortunately, in many countries these exams do not attempt to assess, evaluate or encourage the development of 21st century skills such as problem solving and critical thinking.

It is easy to understand why the introduction of new technology in the classroom may well have very little, if any, impact on the traditional learning outcomes that are associated with it. For example, if an exam is expected to test a student’s knowledge of a clearly defined subject area which is covered in a single textbook, then having access to the internet in the classroom may well prove to be an unnecessary distraction. Instead, the text book alone may be sufficient.

And if teachers have a proven track record of producing grade A students without using technology, why risk rocking the boat with new technology? Within this outdated assessment framework of examinations there appears to be little incentive for teachers to introduce and use new forms of technology.

The damage being done by a culture of education built around exams is now also being further exacerbated by the OECD itself and its Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) survey and league tables. Member countries now take great pride in being top of the league table. But this means they’re competing with each other to have the most efficient but outdated assessment framework, which is assessing many skills which are slowly becoming redundant.

And this perverse race to the bottom will continue until assessment systems are reformed and begin to focus more on the development of 21st century skills. PISA has already taken an encouraging step in this direction by introducing a test on problem solving; but the traditional tests still dominate much of its analysis.

Unfortunately, an OECD Education Working Paper from 2009 found that while there was much talk about 21st century skills and competencies there were few specific definitions and “virtually no clear formative or summative assessment policies for these skills”. There was also a distinct lack of relevant teacher training programs, which is a real cause for concern.

Bring in the internet

To help drag assessments systems into the 21st century a simple solution is now being proposed by a number of academics such as our colleague Sugata Mitra at Newcastle University and by Eric Mazur at Harvard. Internet-enabled exams involve introducing the internet into the exam hall. The hope is that they could prove to be a catalyst that will encourage the educational system to reform itself from within.

The organisations writing the examinations would have to think differently. If students have access to the internet then they would no longer be able to use the same old standard exam questions. Instead, they would have to think of new, open and challenging questions which would require students to navigate the internet and identify different perspectives and points of view.

The curriculum would also need to change from being one that is based on things that are known, to one based around big questions that do not have an easy answer. Teachers would also have to focus less on the teaching of facts and more on developing children’s searching, critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

Students would also have to think differently. Remembering facts and figures and passive listening skills would no longer be as important. Instead, the development of 21st century skills would become critical, including skills associated with the effective use of multiple forms of technology.

In 2010, the Danish government began experimenting with internet enabled examinations with initial success. Mark Dawe, the former chief executive of the OCR exam body in the UK, has also suggested that this is a reform whose time has come. Now it is time for others to think the unthinkable and blaze new trails.

Written by:

James Stanfield, Lecturer, School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, Newcastle University.

Angelika Strohmayer, PhD candidate in Digital Civics, Newcastle University

The education of the heart

Posted on 20 October, 2015 by David

By Tran Nhan, Vietnam National University, Hanoi

In this blog post I would like to reflect on my working experience as a part-time Head of English at KOTO Vocational Training Center, Vietnam, a charity organization to train underprivileged youths to work in international hospitality industry. The center is considered the second home of all the youths here, the home where they can feel love, empathy and so much caring to compensate for all the misery they had to suffer during their childhood. The teachers here (both Vietnamese and international volunteers) are normally called “elder sisters/brothers” and we, sisters and brothers, do not just teach them the essential knowledge and skills for hospitality industry but more importantly, we assist them to change their identities from low self-esteem and inefficacy to confidence and success within an 18-month training programme. That seemingly incredible mission has been successfully achieved with the graduation of more than twenty classes so far. The secret behind this success, I firmly believe, lies in the educational philosophy of this center – KNOW ONE TEACH ONE – which reflects the education of the heart and mind mentioned by Sir Ken Robinson, Dalai Lama and Aristotle with his unequivocal saying: “Educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all.”

The educational environment here favors formative assessment. The teachers have a good understanding of the learners’ living circumstances as well as the affective baggage they may bring to class so that they can be patient, empathetic and wholeheartedly accompany the learners to attainment in their study. Constant verbal feedback is given to the learners both inside and outside class regarding how they progress after each lesson. Weaker learners are boosted by a special tutoring programme with extra support from both Vietnamese and international volunteers. As the learners share the same dormitory, they are assigned to study in pair at home so that they can give and receive mutual support to/from their classmates and the senior learners. Learning and assessment here are similar to what Pryor and Crossouard (2008, p.4) refers to as “an inter-subjective social process, situated in, and accomplished by interaction between students and teachers.”

In this learning environment, more traits of divergent assessment can also be observed. Serious attempts are made at the beginning of the course to establish what the learners already knew, understood or could do via open and explicit dialogues as is mentioned by Pryor and Crossouard (2008, p.4). As most of the learners here start with no English, ‘helping questions’ rather than ‘testing questions,’ have been employed to guide them through the process of constructing new knowledge, correcting mistakes and prompting further engagement. The Know One Teach One culture also indicates that very little explicit ‘teaching’ is found here rather the learners can engage alongside with their “elder sisters and brothers” and peers in carrying out “tasks with high authenticity in the communities of practice in question” (Crossouard, 2009, p.78).

In a nutshell, what I have experienced in KOTO Vocational Training Center is rather contrastive to the traditional form of schools: it favours formative and divergent assessment rather than summative one and a process of co-inquiry rather than measurement (Hargreaves, 2005, p.218). There is a simple truth that I could realize, my heart sings every time I head for the Center.

Author biographical data: Tran Nhan is an IPhD candidate in Education and Communication at School of Education, Communication, and Language Sciences, Newcastle University, the United Kingdom. She works as a lecturer of English in the University of Foreign Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. Her research interests include assessment in higher education, thinking skills and learner and teacher identity.

References

Crossouard, B. (2009) ‘A sociocultural reflection on formative assessment and collaborative challenges in the states of Jersey’, Research Papers in Education, Vol. 24 (1), pp. 77-93.

Hargreaves, E. (2005) ‘Assessment for learning? Thinking outside the (black) box’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(2), 213–224.

Pryor, J. & Crossouard, B. (2008) ‘A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment’, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 34, pp. 1-20.

Behaviour Conference Reflection

Posted on 20 October, 2015 by David

Matt McGuire, PGCE Trainee reflects on what he learnt from the Behaviour Conference

undefined Plato said that “all learning has an emotional base” suggesting that behaviour puts a student’s feelings on display, so teachers need to know exactly what to say to enable students to process the information and get on with it. The workhops focussed on how we as teachers can act in ways where good behaviour is inevitable and bad behaviour is rare. Throughout the day it became clear that the most significant factor is the quality of the teacher, and how behaviour is something that is taught rather something that is managed. As a teacher it is important to not only know but also understand the tools at our disposal including voice and body language. Looking at scenarios, I learnt the importance of planning for behaviour through understanding student’s backgrounds in order to implement appropriate strategies. Although reflection is important, it is important not to dwell on the negatives and instead learn from them. Finally, I learnt that when teaching behaviour, students can be motivated in different ways. Teachers must decide which technique is most appropriate to use, depending on the individual situation.

Florelena Galvis, SD PGCE Trainee reflects on the day and what she personally gained.

Last Friday’s Behaviour Conference provided a great opportunity for teacher trainees to discuss and understand a topic that is central in today’s teaching classrooms: behaviour management. The conference opened with a lecture about “Behaviour and/for Learning”, by Dr Simon Gibbs, Reader in Educational Psychology. In this talk, Dr Gibbs focused on how teachers could turn poor behaviour into positive learning by creating classroom routines and adopting strategies that would directly address students’ anxieties, reminding us all that a significant portion of the nation’s pupils are excluded every year due to undesirable performances in the classroom. How can teachers make a difference in children’s learning process?

A series of workshops continued, initiated by a discussion about why students behave the way they do. In this first session trainees learnt about the nature of behaviour, which was defined as “thoughts and feelings in display”, meaning that pupils carry with them “bags of stress and fears” caused by situations at home, outside home or maybe even at school, and that we teachers need to take this into consideration. The following session concentrated on behaviour management techniques and strategies, and presented a very effective way to minimise poor behaviour in the classroom: see everybody, hear what is going on, communicate clearly and uses body language appropriately. The next workshop encouraged a discussion that involved real classroom scenarios and effective ways to deal with these that would promote a safe learning environment within the classroom. For example, a good way to deal with a misbehaving student is to give them choices where the responsibility for changing their behaviour around falls entirely on them. The final session referred to how teachers can help improve behaviour for learning by incorporating tactics in their lesson plans that account for any opportunity of misbehaviour or prevent misconduct from escalating.

undefined

All four workshops presented several ways that teacher can deal with poor behaviour effectively in the classroom, and a common conclusion from all four meetings was that teaching is an emotional profession, and that teachers must control their emotions and reactions in front of every occurrence of poor behaviour, no matter how bad this is, in order to be able to successfully deal with them.

The behaviour conference was not only exciting and enjoyable, but also very enriching in arguments and answers. It allowed trainees to think about possible behaviour situations that could threaten the progress of their lessons and potentially turn into a build-up of whole-class poor conduct. The conference provided a fertile base for participants to think about ideas and strategies that could be put in place to minimise poor behaviour and to maximise learning. Trainees left the conference feeling more confident about managing students’ behaviour, and willing to try different techniques that could help them secure behaviour for learning and, more importantly, overcome their apprehensions about behaviour management.

It takes a village to raise a SOLE

Posted on 19 October, 2015 by David

Panel sole nyc 007

SOLE NYC in Harlem has got its work cut out. Simply introducing the concept of self organised learning is a challenge in most schools, but at John B. Russwurm PS 197M they will also be using it to engage particularly hard-to-reach students.

“I didn’t want to do this in a school where everyone was doing ok – I wanted to do it here because I knew it could make a real difference,” says Natalia Arrendondo, who is the driving force behind SOLE NYC and will be overseeing the research into reading comprehension, social skills and how young students navigate Big Questions.

Professor Sugata Mitra officially opened SOLE NYC today (14 October) as the first dedicated American SOLE research lab. It joins five other labs in India and two in the UK that have all been created as part of his 2013 TED Prize wish to build a School in the Cloud.

New York’s schools are the most segregated in the whole of the USA, with students divided not only by race, but also by socio-economic status. SOLE NYC is in a high poverty and low income area, where most families live on well under $25,000 a year.

Most of PS 197M’s students come from less well-off African American families, along with those from Hispanic and Asian backgrounds. “Some kids have difficult home lives,” explains Natalia. “This can have a knock-on effect on behavioural issues and make it difficult for them to engage in class.”

Natalia sees her role as SOLE lab co-ordinator as also part counsellor, trying to talk to the students to see what’s going on and offer a bit of stability in their lives.

This SOLE lab, which is being funded through Newcastle University’s SOLE Central, will cater from Pre K (three to four-year-olds) up to 5th grade (12-13-year-olds) and will be run by a committee made up of 3rd, 4th and 5th graders.

The design the students decided upon that best reflected their idea of ‘adventure’ for the SOLE lab was a jungle, complete with an animal mural with clouds, monkeys and butterflies hanging down from the ceiling.

The plan is for classrooms to cycle through the SOLE lab so that there is a session happening at all times (4+ sessions a day).

“I feel very lucky that everything has come together in such an amazing way,” says Natalia Arredondo, who is a PhD student at Newcastle University currently living in New York. “I’ve been bowled over by the help the school has provided – custodians, teachers, construction workers and parents have all come together to help, often after school hours. They’ve made it their own project. It’s often said that it takes a village to raise a child, but in Harlem it’s taken a village to build this SOLE lab.

“I’m confident about what will happen with the students but what I’m curious about is the teachers, as very few are into inquiry-based learning and it’s very much the opposite of traditional teaching.  “Whether the teachers embrace it or not is crucial and I think this is where the work will need to be done.”

Natalia has already carried out several SOLEs in the school to get the students used to the idea of working in this way and was surprised how quickly they took to it.

PS 197M is a focus school, meaning it has failed to pass state examinations several years running and so becomes the district’s focus, with more support and visits from the superintendent’s office as a result.

Natalia carried out a lot of research and demonstrated in all types of schools in the area before deciding to locate it in Harlem. “Natasha (Spann, the school principal) has a passion for education – she just loves it but is in a difficult spot,” Natalia says. “I wasn’t sure if she’d go for this, as it’s a gamble, but in the end I just put it to her, stepped back, and did as Sugata would, sitting back and just letting it happen.”

Written by Sarah Cossom, Media Relations Manager

Opening up a discussion: Do coaches and mentors make successful educational leaders?

Posted on 14 October, 2015 by David

In October 2015, I was fortunate to be able to lead a discussion session at the first ever WomenEd unconference. WomenEd[1] is a grassroots movement which connects existing and aspiring leaders in education. The group exists to address the fact that even though women dominate the workforce across all sectors of education there still remain gender inequalities, particularly at senior leadership level. My session was entitled ‘Do coaches and mentors make successful educational leaders?’ The session was a learning conversation. I invited the participants to discuss the fact that many women take roles as mentors or coaches in schools and colleges, playing a key role in facilitating professional development and building learning cultures, but to consider the degree to which acting as a coach or mentor might prepare us for, or dissuade us from, leadership. While this is an issue of relevance to women in education, it is not exclusively so. As Teaching Schools and School Direct extend the reach and scale of their combined roles in the ‘self-improving school-led system’ it seems logical that coaching and mentoring activities will expand. When working well both coaching and mentoring draw on, and build up, the cultural competency and linguistic skills of both parties. In terms of impact it is frequently reported that coaches and mentors find the role has a positive impact on their own teaching, but what about its impact on their potential and practice as leaders?

I have a history of research, teaching and school-based CPD in coaching and mentoring, as is evident by other blog posts on this site and elsewhere[2]. While they serve different purposes coaching and mentoring might both provide levers and pathways into good leadership. However, in relation to the links between coaching and mentoring of teachers (for the development of teaching practices) and educational leadership I have the following concerns;

The objectives and practices of coaching and mentoring often get distorted by the performative culture in schools and can fail to have the positive impact that is their potential. In previous work we have explored this through CHAT (Cultural-Historical Activity Theory)[3]. As we wrote in the abstract of the paper, coaching in educational settings is an alluring concept, as it carries associations with life coaching and well-being, sports coaching and achievement and improving educational attainment. Although there are examples of successful deployment in schools, there is also evidence that coaching often struggles to meet expectations. We used socio-cultural theory to explore why coaching does NOT transplant readily to schools, particularly in England, where the object of coaching activity may be in contradiction to the object of dominant activity in schools – meeting examination targets.

Coaches and mentors have the opportunity to develop great communication skills. However, this opportunity is not always realised. Too often these activities are squeezed into very busy working weeks, given inadequate time, or are hijacked (deliberately or inadvertently) by a narrowly-defined target-based sense of professional development. Developing, practicing and sustaining excellent coaching or mentoring requires a certain language, and a willingness to look beyond the particulars of specific lessons. It requires a more open understanding of a shared process of informed scrutiny than is typically possible in a hurried conversation or one which has overtones of performance management. The communication skills being rehearsed in coaching or mentoring can become rather diminished. If they are not, and coaching or mentoring becomes more sophisticated then the participants develop a new language for talking about teaching and learning, linking together critical incidents and whole lesson characteristics (for example), and exploring each-others’ understanding using a broad interactional repertoire which allows for challenge, exploration of ideas and co-construction. Good coaches and mentors support successful formation of teacher identities that go beyond the requirements to demonstrate a checklist of competencies. Previous research illustrates these levels of development of both coaching[4] and mentoring[5]. But, even when it works at this level there may still be a problem. Educational leadership has become a very managerial process – one through which a priority is holding colleagues to account. The language of exploration and development which might be developed through coaching and mentoring does not always translate easily to accountability regimes.

While coaches and mentors may gain real insight into the issues affecting colleagues and learners in their school (and sometimes beyond) this ‘intelligence’ may not then be translated in to leadership. This gap may be caused by the difficulties in resolving activities at different scales. Coaching and mentoring are typically inter-personal activities, focusing on an individual’s practices, and only the most sophisticated coaching and mentoring successfully relates this too influences of policy or society (at school level or beyond). Coaching and mentoring can generate the sort of professional knowledge which comes from the ground up or from lateral conversations. School leaders and managers often deal with top down implementation of the latest national agenda. Expertise or dilemmas from the classroom or practitioner conversations can easily be squeezed out in this context. As such, even when coaches or mentors become leaders they may not easily be able to draw on what they learned in that context.

Good coaches and mentors can get pigeon holed (or even pigeon hole themselves) and their talents may not be developed in relation to educational leadership. This may be exacerbated by the issues raised above. We have evidence that some coaches would rather let coaching dwindle than let it fall in to the hands of senior leadership. We also know that if SLT set up coaching programmes they have to work hard to overcome their own tendencies to over-manage it in the direction of the latest school agenda.

So, my questions at this point are framed by a core concern of how we can use the experience of coaching and mentoring for better educational leadership. I believe that coaching and mentoring can provide genuine opportunities for educational development through a focus on pedagogy, learning and learners, colleagues’ professional practices, school and curriculum structures, challenges and opportunities for change and improvement and staff and students’ wellbeing. I am, however, concerned that the vital link to educational leadership is not secure.

Blog by Dr Rachel Lofthouse

——-

[1] www.womened.org

[2] https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog/beyond-mentoring-peer-coaching-by-and-for-teachers-can-it-live-up-to-its-promise

[3] Lofthouse, R. & Leat, D. (2013) An Activity Theory Perspective on Peer Coaching. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 2 (1), pp.8-20.

[4] Lofthouse, R., Leat, D & Towler, C. (2010) Improving Teacher Coaching in Schools; A Practical Guide, CfBT Education Trust

[5] Lofthouse, R. & Wright, D.G. (2012) Teacher education lesson observation as boundary crossing. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education 2012, Vol. 1. (3), pp.89-103.

Three women and a camera

Posted on 25 September, 2015 by David

Developing a coaching partnership that crosses professional boundaries

Education conference season in September 2015 seemed more frenzied than even as ECER and BERA took many of us away from our desks for two subsequent weeks. Researchers from CfLaT http://www.ncl.ac.uk/cflat/ gave many papers and workshops in both Budapest and Belfast, this blog is about just one of them and its back story.

Picture three women; Jo, Bib and Rachel. If you saw us in a coffee shop or pub you would see us in animated conversation. We might even be old school friends. You might overhear us talking about our children and husbands or our holidays. We would probably look like we had been chatting all day as we popped in and out of shops and impersonated ‘ladies who lunch’. But this impression would ignore the real reasons for our conversations, and the shared passions that have brought us together.

What has this got to do with conference season? Well we three women shared a conference presentation, the very last paper of the very last session, in the most distant seminar room of BERA 2015 in Belfast. Our paper was entitled ‘Sustaining change through inter-professional coaching; developing communication-rich pedagogies’ and through it we explained how and why we had come to work together and what outcomes we are now able to identify.

So – a little background. Jo and Bib are independent Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs), working in Derby. Their aim is to develop an evidence based model of support that enables the workforce in nurseries and primary schools to maximise the skills of all children who experience communication difficulties. They have written about this work on the BERA blog https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog/the-potential-of-inter-professional-learning-in-supporting-children-with-speech-language-and-communication-needs. I (Rachel) am a teacher educator and researcher at Newcastle University. My research and teaching expertise is in teacher coaching and mentoring, including the use of video. I have also written about this for the BERA blog https://www.bera.ac.uk/blog/beyond-mentoring-peer-coaching-by-and-for-teachers-can-it-live-up-to-its-promise. We have been working together for about two years (in part funded by a Newcastle University business development voucher) to develop a model of video-based specialist coaching for workplace learning through which Jo and Bib (as SLTs). We have worked with teachers and teaching assistants in a primary school (3-11 yrs) and a pre-school nursery (3-4 yrs) located in multi-cultural and multi-lingual communities in the East Midlands, UK. In these settings 85% of the children are learning English as an additional language to their home language. The coaching is designed to support the teachers’ and teaching assistants’ professional development to create communication-rich pedagogies, drawing on the research and practice evidence offered to them through the coaching.

The coaching approach was informed by models of teacher coaching (Lofthouse et. al., 2010) http://www.ncl.ac.uk/cflat/news/documents/5414_CfT_FINALWeb.pdf and video interaction guidance (Kennedy et al., 2009), and was rooted in learning which made deliberate and explicit work processes, learning activities and learning processes Eraut (2007). It made deliberate use of video to allow the speech and language therapists to engage teachers and teaching assistants in conversation about their own classroom practices. Video is proving to be a great tool for professional development. Its value is described here http://ipda.org.uk/thinking-beyond-the-toolkit-using-video-for-professional-learning-and-development/. We developed the coaching approach through collaborative action research as our combined motivations and work drove us to improve the practice through adopting an inquiry stance with a ‘continual process of making current arrangements problematic’ and assumed ‘that part of the work of practitioners individually and collectively is to participate in educational and social change’ (Cochran-Smith and Lytle 2009, 121).

At the same time we wanted to make sense of the role of the inter-professional coaching in shaping practices in the school and its impact on professional development. We used a Theory of Change approach as a structure of two interview cycles, enabling multiple voices to inform both the development and evaluation of the intervention. This ‘Mental model’ of Theory of Change privileges the knowledge & experience of stakeholders (school leaders and practitioners) who have their own ideas about how things will work. This approach is outlined as a case study in this CFLAT guide http://www.ncl.ac.uk/cflat/publications/documents/theoryofchangeguide.pdf.

So what have we learned? Well at this point I hand over to those we interviewed. Amongst their comments we discovered that the coaching helped to build professional confidence,

“The discussion with the SLTs about my video clips was very reassuring. They found things I do well which I see as natural. They asked me questions about my practice, they focused my attention on things I had noticed and gave me advice. This worked because the video coaching came at the end of the audit and training process, so I had got to know them and felt comfortable with them. I trusted them and accepted their feedback. I feel more confident and reflective.” Nursery teaching assistant

We also found that video was significant in enhancing the coaching conversations,

“Although video was initially an uncomfortable experience through watching myself I noticed many of my own teaching and learning communication behaviours. I realised I needed to stop answering for children and also to give more thinking time. I questioned the concept of ‘pace’. The coaching raised my awareness of the significance of the elements of the SLC training in my classroom.” Primary teacher

In terms of the development of the schools as learning organisations engagement of staff in coaching helped to change the culture in the settings,

“There has been a definite shift from individual specialist coaching to staff coaching culture. The setting is open plan and I now notice teachers and teaching assistants commenting to each other while they are working with the children, referring to commonly understood concepts which support SLC. Because they are more informed their conversations with parents about SLC are more meaningful.” Nursery headteacher

It also supported strategic capacity building

“While some impacts have been diluted by staff maternity and promotions to other schools the teachers who have been coached and remain in post are being given strategic roles in school to support NQTs or lead key stages, with an explicit intention to focus on communication-rich pedagogies with new colleagues. This is being deliberately linked to a renewed whole-school focus on literary.” Primary headteacher

So, what can we conclude from this small scale development and research? There is evidence here that specialist coaching can play a significant part in creating bespoke professional training. Coaching can create a neutral, non-judgmental space in which teachers’ own interactional practices can be exposed and made open to co-construction based on the relationship between pedagogic and communication knowledge and skills. The coaching approach formed a key component of an ecology for focused professional development, providing participants with common understandings, a shared language, a willingness to share ideas, and to be more open to self-evaluation and critique. It also provided some of the ‘triggers’ and ‘glue’ which supported access to, and learning from, other CPD and the development of new leadership and support roles.

What next? Well, that depends on spreading the good news, and also on developing strategies and structures that can fund the co-operation through coaching between speech and language specialists and the teachers and teaching assistants that can learn so much by working with them.

Blog by Dr Rachel Lofthouse

Is research-based classroom practice realistic and is it desirable?

Posted on 1 September, 2015 by David

Blog by Dr Rachel Lofthouse

In August 2015 I was invited to make a short presentation at a discussion organised by Optimus Education. The question was Is research-based classroom practice realistic and is it desirable?

This blog is the essence of my contribution.

To consider the question I am going to draw on the work of Martin Hammersley, Jack Whitehead and Gary Thomas, with a little bit of Aristotle and my own thinking thrown in.

Of course the question is actually really complicated. We have to unpack it in order to develop a critical response.

What do we mean by research?
What kind of research is relevant – which academic disciplines are we drawing from?
What does it mean for something to be research-based?
Who conducts the research, is it somebody else’s research that I learn from and apply, or is it my research that I conduct in my classroom?
What does it mean for something to be realistic – is it to do with funding, opportunity, or priorities? What does it suggest about the teachers’ role, skills and knowledge for them to realistically base their practice on research?
And who is to judge what is desirable? What are the outcomes we are aiming for? Do we all share the same goals?

Wikipedia defines research as ‘creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge’. So it’s about knowledge. Are we therefore simply proposing that teachers base their classroom practice on ‘knowledge’? This seems to make sense.

But of course research takes many forms and the type of knowledge generated depends on these forms. Hammersley sees a distinction between scientific research and practical research. Scientific research aims to contribute to a body of knowledge, is judged in terms of evidential validity and is the pursuit of ideas that do not have immediate practical value. Practical research has an immediate audience of practitioners and policy makers, aims to provide knowledge of immediate practical use, and is judged in terms of its relevance and timeliness. Surely we would be most interested in practical research – related to the issues we face in the classroom, providing answers that would be of immediate use. Although it is scientific research that has given us the much hailed insight into cognition and the brain (for example), so we do use both.

Whitehead recognises education research as a formal academic discipline. However, he makes the case that educational researchers generate explanations of their educational influences in their own learning and in the learning of others. He calls these explanations living-educational-theories. Perhaps teachers need living-educational-theories (not research) on which to base their classroom practice?

So – what is my take on whether research-based classroom practice is realistic and desirable?

On a simple level it is not classroom practice we should consider but classroom practices (plural). I propose that we should not worry so much about research-based classroom practice (which could be relatively singular and static), but that we should be concerned about the ongoing development of diverse classroom practices. If we are concerned about the role of research it should be about how it supports each individual teachers’ practice development – something which happens over a career and supports professional changes that ripple beyond their own classroom. How, for example, can research be used to support coaching, mentoring, curriculum design, lesson study or practitioner enquiry as means to develop classroom practices?

We should have an ambition that teachers develop phronesis – practical wisdom wisely used in context, or as Thomas suggests ‘the ability to see the right thing to do in the circumstances’. Imagine an education system in which professionals had the disposition to act truly and justly according to their values and moral stance. It might help us to counter the influences of policy-makers and quangos who determine so much of the daily experience of learners, teachers and school leaders.

So – my question is – how might research contribute to the development of teachers’ phronesis, and as such help them develop practices which are based on their ability to see the right thing to do in the circumstances? This ambition should be both realistic and desirable.

Hammersley, M. (2003) Can and Should Educational Research be Educative? Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 29 (1), pp. 3-25

Thomas, G. (2011) The case: generalisation, theory and phronesis in case study, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 37 (1), pp. 21-35

Whitehead, J. 2015. Educational researchers and their living-educational-theories. BERA. Accessed August 20, 2015, www.bera.ac.uk/blog/educational-researchers-and-their-living-educational-theories

Applying Intelligence to Teacher Education

Posted on 1 September, 2015 by David

I was motivated to write this blog after Michael Wilshaw, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, gave a speech about teacher recruitment and training at the Festival of Education, at Wellington College on the 18th June 2015 News reports focused on his attribution of blame to the media for putting off prospective teachers (hard on the tail of Nicky Morgan who has reached the same conclusion), while the assembled twitterati were evidently underwhelmed by his self-professed trumpet blowing about his own remarkable teaching. His speech was actually about was the crisis in teacher recruitment. Of particular significance was the worry that some schools are now out of the loop and no longer deemed appropriate for teaching placements, and that those same schools find recruiting teachers a challenge. As Wilshaw said ‘The prospect of the most successful schools cherry-picking the brightest and best for themselves, creating a polarised system between the strongest and weakest schools, has become a reality.’ Dr Mary Bousted (general secretary of the ATL) tweeted that Wilshaw was ‘spot on about teacher training crisis’ which really was an interesting moment of convergence.

structural changes at this scale can prevent us from looking hard at the details of practice

So, in the spirit of seeking out alternatives for a better future I returned to my blog written as part of a series published by the Newcastle University Institute for Social Renewal, written in the form of research-informed messages for the new government. My blog was a plea – a call to arms, a challenge to plan initial teacher education differently. Policy developments have sent schools and universities along journeys of structural change from HEI / school partnerships for teacher education to school-led provision for teacher training. But structural changes at this scale can prevent us from looking hard at the details of practice, as we become so busy re-organising (rather than reconceptualising) existing programmes, budgets and roles. In prioritising schools as providers of workplace learning we have affected the experiences of, and infrastructure for, teacher training. In the current system new teachers are immediately exposed to the performative culture of schools, having their individual successes and failures measured and graded from the moment they arrive, and becoming acutely aware of the relentless ‘standards agenda’. Prioritising teaching placements in the most successful schools reinforces this agenda, and convinces some prospective teachers that some places are much safer career destinations than others. As Wilshaw said in his speech ‘Unsurprisingly, the majority opt for a well-performing school in a nice area.’

We can rake over the irony of this statement, or we can look ahead. Wilshaw suggests ‘national service teachers, contracted directly with government and then deployed to a disadvantaged area’ and ‘more flexibility when deciding which schools can lead teacher training’. I suggest we need to focus on reducing the significant anxiety that many prospective and qualified teachers feel about training and working in more challenging contexts. I fear that student teachers are rarely encouraged to innovate and many simply learn how to survive. Instead of new teachers being a source of inspiration and innovation they adopt normative practices, and their potential and energy is not garnered for their individual benefit or that of the schools. In the worst cases, instead of building the necessary professional capacity to work flexibly to meet ever changing demands of the job, they become less resilient to the stresses of the job.

So, looking for a solution, my NISR blog was called ‘ProjectTeach – applying intelligence to teacher education’. It was a flight of fancy, but not fanciful, painting a picture of a different approach, with new pedagogic models of teacher education that have the capacity to change the professional outcomes. Through PROJECT-TEACH intelligent thinking would be applied to teacher training, drawing on the principles of successful learning organisations, coaching and project-based learning. I suggest that student teachers should be educated not only individually but also in teams which tackle real-life workplace challenges through projects based on research, development and practice. The teams would be supported by co-coaches who enable their team to develop collaborative, empowering and supportive relationships, as well as the knowledge and skills required for them to tackle the genuine challenges of teaching. The responsibility for the professional learning of all student teachers in a team becomes a collective one; each team is aiming for the best possible outcomes in terms of professional learning, pupil outcomes, and school development.

If we are to crack the recruitment crisis we need to make initial teacher education irresistible

Much successful adult learning is social and contextualised, and PROJECT-TEACH would enable new teachers to develop skills and knowledge through collaboration on authentic and rich learning tasks set in the realities of the full range of schools. The project briefs would be planned by drawing on the combined expertise of the professional and academic co-coaches who would design them to meet the ambitions of the host schools as well as to take account of the development stage of the new teachers. The Teacher Standards would develop significance in terms of long-term occupational capacity, rather than simply as a checklist of time and context limited competencies. If we are to crack the recruitment crisis we need to make initial teacher education irresistible – the best learning experience one can imagine, one which reinforces aspirant teachers sense of vocation rather than diminishes their sense of efficacy. We need new ideas – for now ProjectTeach is mine.

RACHEL LOFTHOUSE is the Head of Teacher Learning and Development for the Education section of 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. She has co-authored a successful book, published by Optimus, called Developing Outstanding Teaching and Learning (now in its second edition), which supports teachers and school leaders in improving pedagogy. She also writes regularly for professional publications and websites. Rachel is currently working with a range of educational practitioners, including those interested in community curriculum development and professional coaching for speech and language support in multicultural early years and primary settings. Through these diverse roles she supports individuals to make a positive impact on the educational outcomes for their own learners and communities.

Taken from BERA

Written by Rachel Lofthouse, Head of Teacher Learning and Development (Education Section)

An opportunity for change

Posted on 28 August, 2015 by David

Nationally, the speed of change involving education policy is rapid and much of teachers’ and school leaders’ practices is overwhelmingly dominated by externally imposed agendas. Careers of school leaders now seem to hang in the balance as the benchmarks of what is deemed acceptable in terms of school improvement are apparently edged up each year. In the UK, this is referred to as a culture of ‘performativity’ (Ball, 2000). It is used by government to raise standards in schools, which, in turn, are intended to raise the educational achievement of the mass of the population. ‘Performativity’ is a technology of power composed of public league tables, targets and inspection reports that regulate practice (Ball, ibid.). Teachers and school leaders perceive these as high stakes due to the potential for judgements to be made about the quality of teaching or a school’s success (Ball, 2003). It is against this backdrop that aspiring leaders start programmes for the national the National Professional Qualifications for Middle Leadership (NPQML), National Professional Qualification for Senior Leadership (NPQSL) and National Professional Qualification for Headship (NPQH). This blog reflects on my role and experiences as Deputy Director of these programmes for a National College for Teaching and Leadership (NCTL) licensee in the North of England.

The purposes and principles of the final assessment process for NPQML, NPQSL and NPQH are to provide a common framework for licensees and assessors throughout England. Competencies and level indicators provide readily recognisable standards for all stakeholders in schools; governors, teachers and parents, and a common language for leadership across the nation. In part at least, they are geared towards the performative education culture. However, the assessment process does include opportunities for more formative opportunities to raise the awareness of participants, their coaches and facilitators with regard to their own agency: what they do and how they act. Going further, it must also address concepts of ‘self’, ‘space’ and ‘time’ if it is to enable shifting leadership practices which demonstrate impact on future leaders’ selves, teams, and student outcomes (Forde et al., 2013).

One way to make sense of these dimensions is through dialogical self theory (DST) (Hermans, 2001)resents the ‘self’ in relation to ‘internal positions’ and ‘external positions’. In the context of the National Professional Qualifications for school leadership and participants’ practical experiences in school, an example of DST might be the relationship between ‘I as a teacher’ (internal position) in relation to ‘my NPQ programme’ (external position). It might also be ‘I as an aspiring leader’ in relation to ‘my NPQ programme’ (external position) or even ‘I as over-worked’ (internal position) in relation to ‘my NPQ programme’ (external position). Other possibilities include ‘I as a teacher’ (internal position) in relation to ‘my in-school coach’, ‘my face-to-face day facilitators’, ‘the online learning environment’ (external positions). For all aspiring school leaders, performativity is perhaps the most significant ‘external position’, in relation to which the potential for their vision of leadership development in relation to participants’ agency might be seriously reduced. That said, the multiple dimensions are limitless and I wonder whether the current assessment provision truly accounts for these factors. In other words, do the means by which we judge capacity to lead acknowledge the widest possible development of agency necessary to fulfil the complex demands of the genuine leadership challenge?

Taken from BERA

Written by Anna Reid, Lecturer in Educational Leadership