Homer Glasses Please

One of my greatest bug bears as a teacher is professional development, commonly referred to as PD. The issue is not whether I should do PD: in fact, I do extra PD that is not paid for by any school I have worked at or recorded as part of my professional learning but simply for the sake of feeling like I am an informed, knowledgeable professional. This includes reading books on education, doing online courses on the subject areas I teach and watching television shows that might be useful for my classes. All these are forms of PD I am happy to do and I really enjoy.

There is however a form of PD that I find really tough to swallow: school based PD. This may sound strange coming from someone who actively seeks PD in other forms but the truth of it is that I find a lot of the PD organised by schools to be unproductive and inefficient. This belies the good natured and well-meaning attempts by those in authority to improve the professionalism of my workplaces and often means good money is wasted on speakers who are politely listened to and promptly forgotten when the staff leave the room.

All this is said not as a criticism of the schools themselves because more often than not the speakers have expertise in areas of importance to teachers. For instance, I attended a very informative talk recently about the different learning styles of boys and girls. From this talk I took some important points away about the way that I deal with students and the set-up of my classrooms to support the learning of either sex. In particular, I was interested in a discussion about the organisation of content into a descriptive-reflective-speculative model as it clarified some observations I have had of students for some time. Similarly, I have also learnt a lot of great classroom management tips from attending Kagan workshops organised at another school.

The problem with school based PD can be summarised by the following diagram:

Anyone who has attended a school based PD will find it immediately recognisable. This is the diagram, or some form of it, that is regularly trotted out when these guest speakers wish to highlight the importance of a particular learning style or approach to classroom activities. They will tell you that lectures are the least efficient way of retaining information and that the best way is to get the students to experience the learning themselves. Be it through group work or by experimentation, the act of doing is the best way to learn and something that should be done as often as possible.

They will then spend the next 40 or so minutes lecturing you on why you should allow people to experience the learning themselves with slide after slide of information on how to do this. If you are lucky you might then get some questions in at the end before filing out the door and heading home.

Do you notice the irony?

If you haven’t, look closely at the top part of the pyramid with the lecture style and notice the amount of retention that occurs. Yes, that’s right: 5%. So if people retain only 5% of information given in a lecture format, how much information does the guest speaker and school expect the staff to retain from the PD session?

If the answer to the last question is 5% then they are going about it the right way. Taking into account that these meeting often occur after school when staff have been teaching all day or are just about to start holidays, the low retention rate would not be surprising. Add to the mix that the teachers realise that the guest speaker, who often brags about being an ex-teacher turned principal turned educational guru who lectures people, is making more than they will in a pay cycle and only has to lecture for 2-3 hours to earn it then the retention rate plummets further.

The question then remains why do we still use this as the dominant form of PD? One answer could be that teachers tended to be the well behaved students at school who enjoyed being lectured to by teachers and hence why they are in the profession. Another could be the reality of maintaining ones job by attending mandatory meetings and not doing a Homer Simpson performing jury duty impersonation. Finally, it could be that teachers are actually sadists who enjoy being tortured by largely pointless lectures.

In fact, the answer is that it doesn’t need to be this way.

Taking a leaf out of the Kagan or Tactical Teaching book is the best way forward to produce genuinely useful school based PD. For those who haven’t attended a Kagan workshop, the name itself implies that work will be done. Yes, there is a component of lecturing and slides but they are interspersed with actual movement, interaction with the other people in the room and hands on testing of the techniques and ideas. Even better, the Kagan instructors show you what it is like to be a student on the receiving end of these techniques and thus you can experience what it might be like to be in your own classroom.

One of the best experiences I had on school based PD was my first Kagan workshop on group work and techniques. Being sceptical of the approach I really felt I wouldn’t learn anything so I only half-heartedly participated in the workshops tasks. However, by the first break I couldn’t help but admit that I had learnt something important about my own teaching and what it is like to be student. Even worse, by lunch I had started to enjoy the workshop and looked forward to trying some of the techniques in the workshop and in the classroom. Moreover, the instructors never spent more than 10-15 minutes lecturing me about theory and spent almost half the time getting me to DO the activities.

Looking back at the pyramid this is a clear difference to the traditional model. Practice by doing results in 75% retention and I can attest to the fact that I learnt more in one day then I did in a year’s worth of lectures after school. So what does this mean for school based PD?

Put simply, we need to move past the lecture based model for school based PD. It puts teachers to sleeps, makes them realise they could earn more lecturing other teachers on how to be better teachers (oh the irony!) and has little impact on teaching in classrooms. Instead, schools should invest more in teacher led PD that is hands on and interactive. This means tailoring PD for specific departments or ensuring that whole staff PD has ample opportunities for departments to discuss and plan how to implement the ideas. This was the approach used in Tactical Teaching and the pressure of having to implement and report back on one of the teaching activities was telling: not only did I have to use one of the techniques but it worked and I have used it ever since.

Good school based PD shouldn’t be a glorified educational lecture but should allow professional teachers to think about their practice and consider new approaches. This cannot be done from the anaesthetising grip of a chair in a hall but must involve practice by doing and appropriate follow up to ensure it is being actioned. 

Redesign My Brain

Redesign My Brain poster

A must watch for educators on ABC television at the moment is a new documentary series called Redesign My Brain. Hosted by Todd Sampson from the Gruen Transfer series, he undergoes a series of challenges to change his brain. The first episode last week was on memory and thinking skills while this week was all about creativity. While we may not all be scientists, the show holds a number of important lessons for all educators no matter what subject they teach.

One of the key ideas to come out of the first episode was the incredible ability of the brain to improve itself given the appropriate training. Over the course of a month, Sampson was able to significantly improve his memory, thinking speed and peripheral vision. Apart from a few specialised computer programs, this improvement mainly came about through the act of repetition and daily practice, such as juggling. In the end, he demonstrated the power of simply practicing these skills by memorising a complete deck of cards at the World Memory Championships.

While those of you who have seen or read about brain plasticity (see Norman Doidge’s The Brain That Changes Itself and Barbara Young’s The Woman Who Changed Her Brain) may not be surprised at such results, it is a good reminder of the power of this still largely mysterious human muscle. Moreover, it shows that whatever the age or profession that such transformations are possible.

Specifically though for educators, it is a reminder of the power of encouraging students to practice, practice, practice. This idea, as well as the general area of brain plasticity, was taught to me by my former head of department Brendan Sullivan. For a staff meeting one day he got us all to read an article from an American journal about labelling students as smart. I read the article a little begrudgingly, I generally didn’t like department meetings and extra reading didn’t seem like a good addition, but the information was eye opening. In particular, the notion that labelling a student clever can actually be dangerous to their education came as a surprise. However, the research showed that the label of clever or smart can lead to students avoiding challenges to avoid appearing to be dumb. Moreover, by encouraging students to try hard and persist in the face of adversity lead to improved results. The take home message was to never call students smart in class and it is something I have worked very hard at not doing ever since.

Later that year Brendan also introduced the department to the concept of growth mindset. Based on the work of Carol Dweck, it examined how different students approach challenging class work. The research suggested people can have either a fixed or growth mindset. People with a fixed mindset tend to avoid challenges, give up easily, see effort as wasted, ignore negative feedback and are threatened by the success of others. If this sounds like your top and bottom performing students then you are probably on the right track because this is the sort of thinking schools encourage. That is, by focusing on assessment and labelling students with grades, we subconsciously train kids to have a fixed mindset about the various subjects they do. For instance, I often avoid doing musical related tasks in class because I was ‘bad’ at music at school. Instead, I tend to avoid anything musical and don’t see much point in trying to learn a musical instrument. On the other hand, I was ‘good’ at maths at school so I don’t mind helping out in this area. Consequently, many students come into the classroom with fixed mindsets about their abilities in that subject. Are we then surprised that despite coming up with creative and interesting tasks they just don’t engage?

Dweck also identifies the growth mindset. People with this mindset will embrace challenges, persist in the face of setbacks, see effort as worthwhile, learn from criticism and find inspiration in the success of others. For instance, if I read a book and don’t quite get the meaning or the ideas then I will reread or do research until I do. I clearly have a growth mindset when it comes to English – luckily I am an English teacher! However, I have also tried to apply this to my other areas of interest such as rock climbing. I am not ashamed to admit I have only completed 1 climb so far in the year and a half I have been climbing but that doesn’t upset me. I know that every time I go out to a rock face that I am getting better. Moreover, I know that when I regularly practice in the climbing gyms and do my core exercises at home my climbing gets even better.

The problem is how to get students to think like this. Clearly it is not something they naturally do because we encourage them to do otherwise with our grading and reporting. To counter this I decided to teach my students this year about fixed and growth mindsets. This wasn’t content in any of the curricula I used or mandated by the schools but it was something I felt was important. Thus, I gave each student a diagram of the two mindsets and asked them, “Who here is good at English?” This allowed me to straight away get out my mantra of practice, practice, practice. Hence, I set the ground work early in all my classes: no one is good at English in my class but we can all work hard. Importantly, I make a point of recognising those who do work hard and seek help to improve. This can be as simple as noting publicly someone using a planner to improve a piece of writing or seeking help to understand something better. These are not big in themselves but they reinforce the idea that it is the effort and practice that count not some innate ability.

Finally, this idea led me to utilise what is known as Good Learning Behaviours (GLBs for short). This came from the PEEL research (http://www.peelweb.org/index.cfm?resource=good%20behaviours) and when used in conjunction with growth mindsets helps promote a great classroom environment. Importantly, it encourages students to take ownership of their own learning and seeks ways to improve. Thus, I also teach my classes GLBs at the beginning of every year. I take it a step further by giving each student the GLBs list and making them stick it in their record book so they can reference it easily in any class. And yes, once again I can praise students for seeking help and planning rather than simply being clever.

In conclusion, Redesign My Brain may not be ground breaking in the research uncovered or the ideas presented but it is a good reminder of the power of our own brains. Moreover, it highlights how much power we have to improve our own skills through practice and a growth mindset. I better stop typing now so I can do my juggling practice – never too old to learn some new tricks.

A Window into Shattered Lives

The problem of juvenile offenders is much more complex then "name and shame" Jarrod

Last week I wrote an open letter to Queensland attorney general Jarrod Bleijie about his proposed “name and shame” laws for juveniles in the Backwards, oops, Sunshine State. I posted that letter on this blog, tweeted the minister (@JarrodBleijieMP) and sent him an email with my full contact details so that he could get back to me. Unsurprisingly he hasn’t responded and probably with good reason: he has been roundly criticised for this ridiculous law. There was even an insightful and detailed article by educator Dan Haesler (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-27/haesler-name-and-shame-juveniles/4984188) pointing out not only the emotional impacts but the lack of a sound economic or statistical reason for the policy. Yes, he is introducing this law as juvenile repeat offender rates are decreasing – talk about creating a crisis in order to appear “tough”.

This issue came up again for me this week as I was watching an ABC2 documentary called Kids Behind Bars. The multi-part documentary looks at the worst juvenile offenders in detention in Britain. Each episode typically focuses on 3 children and gives their back stories as well as their journey through the detention centre. While at first I was shocked at the violence, language and attitude of these children, the documentary painted a convincing picture about what these kids really need.

One of the common aspects to all the subjects of the documentary was the dysfunctional home environment that they faced. While this was not always the fault of the parents, the carers and teachers at the centre spoke regularly about the need to set clear boundaries and expectations of behaviour. As they point out, why would the kids expect to get in trouble for hitting or swearing at a detention staff member if that sort of behaviour was condoned at home? Moreover, it was inspiring to see the transformation that the children underwent as they adapted to the routine of the detention centre and saw the benefits of regular education.

Another common aspect was the vulnerability that the juvenile offenders displayed. While it is easy to just see their violence and crime, the documentary showed that this is often the outer manifestations of deep seeded insecurities and that it is their way of seeking help. Often the carers and teachers in the detention centre are the first people to genuinely show care about the emotional wellbeing of the children and this can form the basis of their development as members of society.

The final key aspect for me was the role of education. Many of the staff commented that the detention centre was the first time many of the children had sustained classroom education. Being locked up they had little choice but to attend, however, once they started they quickly saw the benefits from improving their literacy and other skills. The show also demonstrated how these young criminals often had very low literacy levels and thus simplistic “name and shame” policies fail to recognise the importance of education to improving the chances of disadvantaged young people. In episode 2 it was particularly great to see how one of the very violent female offenders was able to get into college and used it as a way to escape the drugs and violence of her home in Wales.

Hopefully Jarrod Bleijie can take time out of his busy schedule locking up and embarrassing young people and watch an episode of this great documentary. By doing so he might gain an insight into the social conditions that lead to crime and not simply label juvenile offenders as never do wells. As the documentary shows, many juvenile offences are a result of society failing to properly care for and educate young people. While prison can sometimes provide the space for these young people to learn these skills and rehabilitate, it would be much smarter and cost efficient to ensure they get the help they need in the first place.

The Drum: Uninformed Nonsense on Education

An ill informed and poor source of debate on education

Tonight’s episode of The Drum on ABC24 is a classic example of what is wrong with the education debate within Australia. Hosted by former journalist Julia Baird, she asked the panel consisting of a politician, editor and ex-political advisor/journalist to comment on new Education Minister Christopher Pyne’s views about the need to review Australian history in schools.

Before we examine the issue, note the composition of the panel: they were all journalists and politicians. If they were to have a discussion about Iraq or Syria I’m sure they could locate an expert on Middle Eastern politics from a university and similarly a medical or technology expert on related matters. Come to think of it, I’m sure there are many teachers like myself or professors in education departments around Australia who would love to get that sort of air time. But no! This is only education after all and Julia’s reminiscence about an out dated history textbook are more than enough expertise to share around.

As such, the debate about the Australian history curriculum replayed old arguments about black arm band views on history with one panellist bemoaning the lack of Australian history in the Australian history curriculum. At least one of them had the decency to admit that he wasn’t an expert but he too had his input.

This is the core reason why education in Australia is going backwards and we are stuck in these old debates. Julia shouldn’t be looking at her textbook for out dated views: she should try the panel and her own views. Teachers are more professional and better trained than in the past and our history curriculum came about through a lengthy consultation process involving ACARA. Of course none of the guests could discuss this because the ABC couldn’t be bothered to get an actual expert on to discuss it. Instead, we have half-baked ideas from people who haven’t taught in a classroom or been a student in a high school classroom for a very long time.

If we want to have proper debates about education in Australia then get some educational experts in to discuss the matter. No one is saying that the history curriculum is perfect but please respect the PROFESSIONALISM and EXPERTISE of teachers by at least giving them primacy of opinion. While we continue to have educational debates run by rank amateurs like on the Drum then we will get nowhere. The attitude in Australia that teachers are not professional is only compounded by TV shows having such debates rather than seeking teacher input. It also makes our jobs that much harder because despite over 4 years of trainings, multiple post-graduate qualifications and more hours in a classroom than most of the people I speak to, almost all of them think they know as much about teaching as me.

Sorry to tell you Julia and the rest but YOU DON’T! When you come back with a teaching degree, have taught in a classroom for more than a few years and have worked full time in this demanding profession then feel free to lecture me on history curriculum and teaching. Until then, please treat me like the professional I am because I have the qualifications and experience to back up my opinion. Unlike you, who think common sense and “back in my day” arguments are better than research and practical experience, I know what I am talking about.

Shame on You!

An open letter to Queensland Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie

Jarrod pointing a generation of Queensland children to a life of crime

To Mr Jarrod Bleijie MP,

Your government took a disturbing step today in the fight against crime by announcing that you would bring in a policy to name and same repeat juvenile offenders in an effort to stop reoffending. On the outside this doesn’t seem like a bad idea but even a first year sociologist (or teacher of sociology such as myself) knows that this policy is far more dangerous that it sounds.

Firstly, the study of criminology is far more complicated than you are making out. Crime is not simply a joyful activity carried out by delinquent children that can be cured by a bit of community head shaking. Crime is a more deeply rooted social issue that often reflects a lack of education and care, with the criminals often committing crimes to meet basic needs such as food. While pretending to be tough on children by plastering their name all over the newspaper may win you votes with the uninformed, I expect politicians to make informed decisions that reflect expert advice rather than decisions that grab a good headline.

Secondly, the unintended consequence of this naming and shaming is to create a generation of kids who will only ever be criminals. I will put it as simply as I can so that you will understand: labelling someone a criminal majorly increases their chance of committing a crime. Moreover, according to sociology.about.com:

“Social research indicates that those who have negative labels usually have lower self-images, are more likely to reject themselves, and may even act more deviantly as a result of the label. Unfortunately, people who accept the labeling of others—be it correct or incorrect—have a difficult time changing their opinions of the labeled person, even in light of evidence to the contrary.”

Thus, you would like to condemn any repeat young offender in Queensland to a life of hardship because they will never be seen as anything but a criminal. What a way to stop crime: create a whole generation of criminals instead! Maybe they can rename Queensland the “Criminal State” as opposed to the “Sunshine State”.

Lastly, you clearly lack any sense of empathy. To deliberately shame someone is never helpful and can be very harmful. No one likes to feel a sense of shame, be it about a private or public act that we have done. That feeling of being less than you ought to be or acting in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable is never pleasant. I’m sure you have a memory or event that you can easily recall that makes you feel a sense of shame.

Spend a minute thinking about that memory.

Did you feel sick to the stomach? Did you wish you could relive that moment and make some better decisions? If you answered yes, then imagine living with that in a public way for the rest of your life.

So I hope you rethink your policy on naming and shaming young offenders. Any basic sociologist will tell you it is a bad idea and being a teacher it makes me sick to my stomach. It is clear that young criminals need our care and support not a public flogging to give you good headlines. Try implementing a policy that does this and it would be money well spent.

Yours sincerely,

James Purkis

Education in Australia?

Is the NSW government the only sensible player in education reform?

Now that the election has been run and won by Tony Abbott, attention is now turning back to three word slogans about boats and the economy. Fortunately, some people are also asking questions about the future of education in Australia too. While debate still rages about the long term impact and effectiveness of Labor’s reforms, commentators are starting to ask what an Abbott Coalition will do with schooling in Australia.

Peter Job has a decidedly broad view about what needs to be done and a clear idea of went wrong for Labor (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-23/job-labors-failed-education-revolution/4975262). Entitled “Labor’s failed education revolution”, he derides Labor’s Gonski/Better Schools Plan as failing because it focused too much on funding. He also accuses the Labor created NAPLAN, MySchool and performance pay policies as leading to poorer quality education. Ironically, he argues for more funding for public schools (can’t see Abbott doing that) and:

• recognising their unique role in addressing the needs of all - the gifted and the disabled, the advantaged and the disadvantaged
•  the adoption of the practices of countries which achieve above us in international measures rather than those which achieve below
• valuing teacher professionalism
• allowing teachers to use their professional knowledge as they judge best to address the diverse needs of their students.

While these are nice statements to address what he sees as the growing inequalities in the system, this doesn’t really address any of the practical aspects of achieving them. Sure the final Gonski package did miss some key aspects but it was better than doing nothing, which was the policy of the Coalition until just before the election when they agreed with Labor. However, his criticisms of NAPLAN and MySchool are genuine and have negative impacts on schools. I have experienced many a concerned parent quoting NAPLAN figures at me during interviews because their child may not have been above standard in all areas. They often fail to see that this is one measure at one point in time and that students improve over the course of the year, often doing better in the second half of the year when the tests are NOT held. Similarly, I have been at schools that have altered curriculum to prepare students for NAPLAN, although we officially do not do that, and thus upset a well thought out program. Finally, the pressure school administrators place on teachers to improve NAPLAN results or ensure certain children are absent on testing days has also been well documented.

Kevin Donnelly is clearly enraptured with the Abbott victory, so much so that he seems to be delusional. In the opening to his piece “Policy challenge: Abbott’s education plans” (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-19/donnelly-abbott-government-education/4967216) he states that: “The Abbott Government has clearly signalled school education as an important policy issue…” Clearly he saw something most of the voting public missed because despite following the election very closely I didn’t see any major announcements by the Coalition on school education. In fact, wasn’t it Chris Pyne that one day said he was dead set against Gonski but the next day agreed it was the best way to go forward then proceeded to not mention the issue again throughout the course of the campaign. That’s ok though, Kevin is often a little confused when it comes to what is best for school children. Having read a few of his books, he would like schooling to be about phonics and the three Rs – that’s it! So it is not surprising that he is in favour of decentralising education control from Canberra and reviewing both NAPLAN and the National Curriculum. It did surprise me though that he was a fan of letting non-qualified teachers into classrooms when he is so focused on improving Australia’s standing in international testing. Maybe he thinks the current lot do such a bad job that amateurs couldn’t do much worse. Apart from that he likes having reviews of everything so he doesn’t need to specify how he would transport education back to the 1950s.

Thus, these two pieces provide a contrast in political stand points but the same lack of clear direction for Australia’s education future. Peter Job may have some nice broad sweeping statements about how it should be but derides the one side of politics that could actually implement his schemes. Kevin Donnelly remains an outlying, conservative educational commentator that will probably have greater sway with Abbott so be ready for your phonics everyone. However, neither spoke of the reduced funding to the university sector, where reform and improvements to teaching can actually occur, or clear plans for improved teacher professionalism and development. Maybe we should start the conversation around the NSW government’s Great Teaching, Inspired Learning policy (http://theconversation.com/nsw-government-makes-a-positive-start-on-reforming-teaching-quality-8549) that actually brings all the aspects together and starts by respecting teacher professionalism.

Regardless of who is in power in Canberra or the states, education is not only about NAPLAN or international testing or funding. A real debate about the role of public funding and curriculum that respects the professionalism of teachers to make the best decisions (we wouldn’t question a doctor’s prognosis with quite the same vehemence we do that of teachers) is needed to address the perceived slide in standards in Australia. This has to begin now as we have already fallen behind and the new century will not wait for us to catch up.

"Because it's there"

Mallory on Everest, did he make it?

Two Sundays ago I had the pleasure of watching the inspiring documentary The Wildest Dream: Conquest of Everest on ABC2’s Sunday Best. The documentary examined the life of famous climber George Mallory and claims that he was in fact the first person to successfully climb Mt Everest. While the evidence might contradict history’s claim that this was done by Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay, George Mallory’s determination to conquer the impossible provides an important parallel to the work of teachers in classrooms: curricula and assessment.

To explain, George Mallory was once asked "Why do you want to climb Mount Everest?"

His response, "Because it's there".

While this has become arguably the most famous quote in mountaineering, importantly, it showed his determination to conquer the impossible. However, it might also be a response many teachers have to the question by students: “Why are we studying this topic?” or “Why do we have to do this task?” That is, we are often forced into covering material or grading students on tasks simply because they are written into curriculum documents or told to us by various heads of department. This can often be at the expense of material that genuinely engages the students and thus destroys a love of learning. Moreover, this view can be expressed in meetings or informal talks between subject teachers yet nothing gets changed at a departmental level because they lack the agency to make it happen.

I find myself struggling with this too when I teach history. The national curriculum has very clear guidelines in terms of content and topics to be covered. Unfortunately, this does not reflect the actual amount of time teachers have to teach the course or whether students want to relearn the same material in a slightly different way for the 10^th time. For instance, I recently taught the section on Movement of People and found that the topic that got the most complaints was Australian experiences of settlement. While I see the importance of looking at convicts, settlers and First Australians, this material is done to death in lower grades and thus students feel like they are being punished. Moreover, the lack of time I had to teach the material meant it was covered in a brief manner that did not do the topic justice.

However, in some senses I was happy to take this criticism. I spent most of the unit looking at the slave trade and William Wilberforce, topics that really engaged the students. We were able to explore the issue of modern slavery, Kony 2012 and the role of politics in creating change. From a curriculum stand point this was barely a quarter of the unit but based on the student’s reaction to and engagement with the topic, I judged it prudent to lose time on these other topics. Furthermore, I had a supportive head of department that was willing to allow me to do this as long as I covered certain topics in enough detail.

So coming back to Mallory: how often do we teach something “because it’s there”? Is this good enough? Should we all just throw out the curriculum and all go our own way? Is following the curriculum exactly the wildest dream after all?

In reality, curriculum is written to provide an outline for teachers with assessment as a way to mark student progress for report cards. Each school is different with some being stricter than others. For instance, at a middle school in Canberra they literally map out a lesson by lesson plan which they expect to be followed. In other cases, curriculum is just a guide with heads of department willing to negotiate certain aspects while ensuring assessment standards are maintained. Thus most teachers follow the curriculum for the most part, try to finish it if they can and if not they don’t get too stressed.

However, if Mallory could have the wildest dream of conquering Mt Everest, why can’t teachers have the wildest dream of freedom of curriculum? Clearly various forms of national or state curricula and testing lead to targeted lessons to help students do best in the final exam (and this is of course a natural outcome of this model) but is there an alternative?

If our focus of schooling is to ensure students can pass a written exam on a given day on a given amount of content then we are on the right track but this does not reflect the real world. No worthwhile job in the real world nowadays relies on a set amount of content with a written exam at the end. Most jobs require students to be flexible and creative thinkers: problem solvers who can adapt to a range of situations. The school model with its mandated curricula and assessment in no way reflects this reality.

Wouldn't it be better to give students a topic area and ask them to come up with a task to hand in? Of course guidelines would be required and students may not love every topic area but at least they could explore the topic area in a way that engaged them. Rather than saying we will study and do a test on First Australians, settler men, settler women and convicts, imagine if I had said to my class: choose an area on the settlement of Australia from 1788 to 1901 and decide on an assessment task to give me. I can now imagine a class full of students bursting with ideas about what to research and how to present it. Imagine: all the students with relatives who were convicts, students who had visited Indigenous communities and learnt some of their customs, students interested in the politics of early Sydney and the various other possibilities. Now imagine all the various ways they might like to show their knowledge: iPad apps, websites, computer games, museum displays, videos etc.

In summary, like Mallory, this post may meet its end in the death zone: starved of oxygen, not at the pinnacle and forgotten about until dug up 75 years later (see picture). However, just as Mallory had the wildest dream of conquering the impossible, there is nothing wrong with the wildest dream of education: genuinely engaging classes with all students buying into the process. This may not be achieved under current curricula and assessment practices but we need to start making attempts at the summit. Who knows, we one day might make it.

An Outbreak of Learning!

Today I nearly destroyed the planet. After initially failing to infect the entire planet with my deadly virus, I eventually worked out how to best spread the virus before beginning its destructive path to total annihilation. Fortunately, a few of my students did manage to destroy the planet so all in all it was a successful day.

The experience I described above came about due to my interest in the notion of gamification. Gamification is the process of using computer games, such as apps or fully fledged X-box games, to teach students. While this may sound like an excuse to play computer games in class, the upside to a proper implementation of gamification can be enormous.

I decided to try gamification with my Year 8 History class. We are studying Medieval Europe and I thought that the Plague might be a fun way to experiment with computer games. I had heard of this app called "Infect the World" and had seen some students play it in their spare time. After researching the app, and to my delight discovering it was free for a lite version, I decided that it fitted the criteria for good gamification:

1) Good content

2) Game joined seamlessly to content

3) Good game

Firstly, the Plague is the gory kind of topic that boys love because if they aren't infecting the room with their own odors, they often complain about the ones their friends make. Plus a quick inspection of any locker room towards the end of the year will reveal a plethora of never before seen bacteria and viruses fermenting in left over lunches and snacks.

Secondly, the game itself involved choosing the traits and environmental conditions to help spread your virus around the world. From sores to coughs, vomiting and diarrhea, these were all the classic symptoms of the Black Death and Great Plague that formed the historical content of the lesson. Moreover, the environmental conditions they could create in the game using heat and cold allowed them to mimic the conditions that caused these major outbreaks in history.

Finally, the game itself is reasonably fun to play. Once you get your head around the way to manipulate your virus and the frustration of quarantines and cures, it can be quite addictive. In fact, I originally only intended to play the game with the class for 30 minutes but extended this to 50 minutes because on my second turn I was actually winning and beating the game. This is even more surprising considering the relatively simple display but a dose of healthy competition in the class definitely helped.

The biggest reward however came in the wrap up to the lesson. After playing the game for almost an hour, I dreaded finishing up to do some basic research on the Black Death and Great Plague so that they could complete some scaffold summaries. However, the experience of playing the game made the students more willing to do this grunt work and when I showed them the connection between the viruses they had created and the actual plagues they were genuinely excited. As one student said to me at the end of the lesson, "Before I didn't get how the plague could spread but now I can see the ways that it did in real life." Moreover, the use of some Venn diagrams and bespoke scaffolds allowed me to effectively link the game with the historical content.

Thus, in summary, I would suggest everyone give gamification a go. Finding the right game for the content can be tricky, right now I am toying with the idea of a combat game to teach the Crusades, but when it fits nicely the results are spectacular. It is especially nice to see the kids that are usually so bored get into the game and furthermore see their eyes shine when they start to make the connections to the class content. But most importantly, I need to stop writing this blog so I can go back to infecting the world - my learning journey never ends.

Starry Night

Starry Night by Van Gogh

This week I continued my exploration of inquiry based teaching in my Year 7 English classes. We are currently working on a poetry unit and I thought that this provided a great opportunity to put into practice what I had learnt from MoMA. As it turned out, there was much more to it than just a beautiful piece of art.

I started the week with the simple inquiry question: “What is poetry?” They were mostly silent to begin with but once people started mentioning types of poems, the names of poems and poets started flowing. It was also interesting to see the technical language they used such as rhyme because it gave me a good insight into how much work will be required to teach them analysis skills. This tied in well with the course I have been doing on differentiation and it was pleasing to see the two ideas intersect.

I then followed this mind mapping activity up with a hands-on poetry experience. One of my fears when I teach poetry is that students think poetry is either incomprehensible garbage or just a laundry list of technical terms applied to words, lines and stanzas. I remember at school how much fun I had discovering poetry through the work of William Carlos Williams and I wanted them to know that poetry is accessible and fun. So, with a pen in hand, we headed out to the school oval with a 5 senses scaffold (created from a 5 sense picture of Google images). My idea was simple: experience the oval and write a poem about it. After a few brief instructions, with most students ignoring my pleading to “please do this activity by yourself”, I had them touching and eating grass, sniffing the breeze, examining the various items left on the oval and gazing upwards at the sky. We then headed over to some tables and wrote. Unsurprisingly, many of them chose to write acrostic poems but I told myself that next time I would push them to write something more ‘proper’ because I didn’t want to be too restrictive this early on.

The next day, having already successfully written one poem, I decided to try the activity again but using Van Gogh’s Starry Night painting. I got the idea from the MoMA education page using their theme based categories. Not only was the painting visually appealing, particularly the way the stars are portrayed, but it captured a wonder I hoped would inspire the kids. Moreover, I decided to team teach the lesson with my colleague as we both had reduced classes due to a school activity.

Using the same 5 sense scaffold, together we elicited responses to the painting. Using that great question of “what else do you see?” we were able to generate an extensive list of items and feelings. I was really impressed by the way the students could see different interpretations in the painting, such as the hills being a tsunami or wave, and the interactions the painting generated as students were keen to share their ideas. In fact, they were so keen to share that we had to remind them to share with the class rather than just blurt out answers to their friends. Next we got them to write a 7 to 10 line poem about Starry Night.

I was amazed!

The quality of the work they produced was out of this world – and only 1 or 2 acrostic poems in sight. From poems about drowning to trips down some filled alleys, the students were able to use the 5 senses to create moving poems as diverse as the class itself. Moreover, everyone was able to complete the task and I didn’t hear a single complaint about poetry being boring or too difficult. I especially loved being able to share some of the poems with the class as both of us teachers discussed how our childhood memories effected our own poems. The highlight though for me was the work of a Chinese student who is just learning English and the wonderfully natural way he crafts his poems. He often asks for help because he sees himself as weak in English but every poem of his I read amazes me with its grace.

Thus, inquiry based learning once again came up with the unexpected and rewarding. The painting and activities is definitely something I will reuse plus this way of getting the students to write poetry is really effective. Rather than complaints about poems being too boring or difficult, artwork allows them to express what they see in the work and how they interpret the world. The results so far have been wonderful and I have the pleasure of putting their poems together in a book for the class. Just like the glistening, golden stars in the painting, my students really showed me how they shined.

It's all in the journey

Mickey Arthur at a Cricket Australia press conference

Successful teachers and coaches have a lot in common: the skills required to get a team or individual to be the best in their sporting field is not that dissimilar to getting a student to ace an exam or write a great assignment. So it was with some interest that I saw a tweet about an interview with former Australian cricket coach Mickey Arthur (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-22/interview-mickey-arthur/4905796?section=sport).

For those who don't know, Mickey Arthur was the South African born coach of the Australian cricket team up until just before the Ashes started a month or so ago. A controversial selection in the first place, his tenure as coach was littered with rumblings about his style and ability to deal with the various egos that dominated the team. The most notorious of these incidents became known as "homework-gate" in which a number of players were sent home during a tour of India for not abiding by team rules and failing to hand in a reflection task on how they could contribute to the team's future success. Predictably at the time there was a chorus of criticism: how dare this non-Australian blow in tell our cricketers what to do (but of course we aren't racist in Australia, we just don't let the foreigners near the cricket team unless they are good spin bowlers) and why is he treating them like children and making them do homework?

At the time I felt a fair bit of sympathy for Mickey Arthur and I secretly suspected all cricket following teachers might have too - even if they didn't like a South African coaching Australia. The frustration of students not completing homework can become a huge millstone around your neck as you are required to cajole then threaten and finally carry through on detentions and phone calls home to get that one paragraph summary that would only take 5 minutes to write if they just bloody did it! The alternative is to make threats and not follow through but that then makes the situation worse as you need to reinforce any punishments that much more to ensure they don't take advantage of you. So I could understand his annoyance at paid professionals, with honestly not that much to do apart from attend training and play cricket, being too lazy to write a few sentences suggesting ways they could contribute in the next game. Apart from the trivialisation of homework (NB: I'm sure every cricket following student in Australia saw it as tacit encouragement to not do their homework), it seemed to me much more about respect and attitude. The act of not handing in something the coach asked is just disrespectful and says that you don't care about the team or anyone apart from yourself. Moreover, the players sent home did seem to have the biggest egos in the squad so maybe this assertion was not far off the mark.

Fast forward to the Ashes and Mickey Arthur is sacked as Australian coach. Cricket Australia cite poor performances and a lack of team discipline as the reasons - the irony being that this came from the same people who refused to properly sanction the "homework-gate" offenders and allowed them to retain their senior positions in the team. They then appoint an Australian - thank God the masses cry as they vehemently deny that it was performance and not Arthur's South Africaness they disliked - to coach the team as ex-players galore claim that this is the boost the team needs to win the series. Moreover, the ill-disciplined boof-head (sorry David but it is true) that sparked Arthur's sacking even admits he is to blame for destroying someone else's career while he gets second chance after second chance and making heaps of money for his troubles. Unsurprisingly to anyone who could stop being a one-eyed supporter for half a minute, the Australian team has not performed any better under new management and all hope now rests on home ground advantage. So it was great at this time for Mickey Arthur to give an interview on ABC Radio.

If I had been in Mickey Arthur's shoes I would have been pretty bitter and angry. Here was a guy trying to coach a team in a period of rebuilding, following unprecedented and sustained success, and rather than support he gets the boot. Also, the irony that the same players who were ill-disciplined are rewarded with spots in the team and full forgiveness by the new coach would have made my blood boil. So as I eagerly await his first hand grenade about the Australian team all I get is... happiness. What is this? Isn't he angry or upset? Where does this happiness come from? He must be nuts.

As I listened more carefully, particularly as he described his coaching philosophy, I realised that he was a much better person than I am because he was above all that. His main concern at the time, and to this day as he watches the Ashes from his living room, was the individual development of players as people not cricketers. For him, it was much more important to develop an environment and culture with the right values that fostered individual development rather than just teach them the right way to bat or bowl. Moreover, even though he no longer coaches them, he recounted with passion his frustration at watching them make the same mistakes over and over, wishing he could just step in and give them a quiet word about hitting the ball straighter so that they don't get out again. Finally, he was still so in love with a game that had treated him badly of late. Rather than throw in the towel, he was working at a school and starting his own cricket academy: giving back to a game that has given him so much, as he put it.

This got me thinking about the parallels between what he does as a cricket coach and my job as a teacher. Every time my students attempt to analyse a film or research a history topic they are like a Shane Watson striding out to the middle to face an over from Jimmy Anderson. I can give them all the advice, encouragement and wisdom of my many years of teaching as I like but ultimately they have to score the runs of learning themselves without me. Moreover, we all try to create that particular learning environment that fosters creativity, exploration and learning within each class for every lesson and we can run into a Warner or Watson who just won't play ball. However, they just don't do their homework but go out on the field and deliberately sabotage the game for everyone else into the bargain. So do we write them off? Fortunately, teachers tend to take the Mickey Arthur approach of giving them another chance and helping them along their journey rather than cheer on their failures.

The biggest thing for me though was how Mickey Arthur talked about developing the cricket side as a journey. His greatest disappointment was not getting the chance to turn good players into great ones: the lost chance at tapping into the undeveloped potential that the team contained. This reminds me of a student I mentored for 2 years and who is a mad Liverpool fan. I was surprised when he asked me to act as his mentor, he didn't seem that keen on me as a teacher, but I wanted a chance to work with someone one on one through to year 12. After a slowish start, we were both a bit tentative and unsure of how to be a mentor/mentee we eventually found a nice balance of study advice, proof reading and just talking football. For me the joy was in watching him go from lacking confidence in his studies to becoming a more confident and diligent student. It didn't matter what marks he got at the end of the day because I had seen him grow as a student and that made the whole process worthwhile. I can think of similar cases with some of my unofficial students and they all have the same core principle: it was the journey that mattered, often ending with a good result too.

The other big thing for me was the reasons Mickey Arthur went into coaching. Recognising his own limitations as a cricketer, good but not great, he used his love of cricket along with his communication skills to become a successful international coach with the South African team. It was his desire to communicate with people and build relationships that brought him this success. More importantly, even though he was sacked, he could still be satisfied with the effort he put in. As he stated, he gave everything for the job while he did it and thus even the events surrounding his sacking could not diminish the pride he had in his effort. This too is a lot like being a teacher: sometimes we can work really hard with a particular student, from one on one help to special scaffolds and differentiating tasks, but still experience that same disappointment when they either give up or maybe fail in the big test or assessment. However, if we know that we did all we could to help that student then we can take the satisfaction of the effort we put in and hope that next time it pays off.

So that's my longer than expected rant/reflection/potted history of Mickey Arthur and his relevance to teaching. I recommend that everyone listen to the interview (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-22/interview-mickey-arthur/4905796?section=sport), even if you aren't a teacher but then why are you reading this blog(?), just so you can be inspired by his passion, dedication and sheer positivity in the face of hard times. While coaching the Australian cricket team and teaching in a classroom may seem poles apart, his journey and the journey he wanted to take the team on can inspire us all to give everything we have to every day of class. We might see our kids get out leg before again and again but hopefully we can help them far enough along their journeys to eventually reach that century.

Time to Meet Your Maker... Model

There is one good reason why every high school in Australia should have an iPad or laptop program for every student: differentiation.  Not only does this technology provide opportunities to support every learner in the classroom but they make implementing a differentiated curriculum that much easier.

For those educators who have been living under a rock for the past couple of years, differentiation is

“the recognition of and commitment to plan for student differences. A differentiated classroom provides different avenues to acquire content, to process or make sense of information and ideas and to develop products. The goal of a differentiated classroom is to maximise student growth and to promote individual student success.” (Tomlinson 1999)

In essence, differentiation is ensuring that you modify:

•  what you teach
• how you teach it, and
• how the students show you they understand

for every student. While this may seem daunting, it is something teachers naturally do every day in the classroom. From a slightly more complex question to a small extension task, these are great examples of modifying the curriculum to suit a particular student’s needs and abilities.

Recently I started an online PD about differentiation in order to get more skills in this area. One of the models of differentiation they used was the Maker Model and I used it this week to teach my Year 7 English class film analysis skills. Essentially, the Maker Model focuses on:

• Content – varying the level of abstraction and complexity of concepts covered
• Process – giving students alternative methods to complete tasks as well as different types of graphics organisers
• Product – allow students to demonstrate mastery through a variety of forms
• Learning environment – student-centred and flexible areas that encourage independent learning

Using this as a template, I tried to design a lesson where my best kids could push themselves to deeply analyse the ideas and techniques behind the film we were studying while also providing my lower ability kids with the chance to successfully write an analytical paragraph. In terms of content, the Maker Model helped me focus on the bigger concepts behind the film as well as the task. So rather than just add more clips for my better kids to analyse as I might have done, I tried to choose clips with different themes that showed different aspects of the message of the film. While each student had to write an analytical paragraph, I used the process and product elements to really differentiate what I was doing. Hence, I had students completing everything from 1 properly structured paragraph through to mini-essays. Thus, rather than have my better students finish early and become bored, I was able to keep them on task and occupied for the whole lesson. Importantly too, it pushed them to make connections between the themes and film techniques and hence engage their higher order thinking skills in a meaningful way. Finally, I was able to utilise the student laptops to allow them to work individually or in pairs to view the clips and type their responses.

In terms of the actual lesson, it turned out to be a success. My introduction and explanation of the task definitely needed work, especially in distributing the tasks (which I could have used the laptops to do), but once the class got started they were quiet and on task for the whole lesson. I really enjoyed the opportunity to work more one-on-one with the lower ability students as well as seeing the higher ability kids embrace the challenge I set them. In particular, two students who usually get all their work done but I don’t really extend all that much, were a little surprised when I gave them the mini-essay task but were animatedly talking and writing for the whole lesson. Moreover, they asked more questions than usual and I was able to teach them some new technical terms that I wouldn't cover with the rest of the class. On the other end, all my lower ability students produced an edited, structured, analytical paragraph and were beaming with pride because they had completed all the class work. So all up, every student was engaged and on task for the whole lesson as they developed their film analysis skills.

The important thing for me from this experience was that using a structure like the Maker Model made my differentiated class more focused and effective. Sure, I have been differentiating my lessons for years, but the Maker Model helped me see my lesson content and procedures in a new light and thus be able to better tailor my differentiation for my own purposes. It is a model I will use to plan differentiated lessons in the future and I think it is definitely worth a try.

The Little Monsters! (App-tastic! #1 Class Dojo)

It would be remiss of me to have a technology and education blog without reference to some of my favourite educational technologies, so today I will tell you about my one of my current favourite apps for the classroom …

Class Dojo

I discovered this app through a colleague at a previous job. One day he started talking about this program that allowed you to award points to students for their good behaviour and take points away for their bad behaviour. At first I was sceptical; this seemed a bit too much like a primary school app rather than something to be used in a secondary classroom. Still I downloaded the app (it was free after all) and after spotting some funny shaped creatures decided it was not an app for me.

Fast forward and I can now admit that I was a little short sighted. Has the app changed? Not all that much: still funny shaped creatures, still awarding points. However, I have come to the realisation that while the appearance may be targeted at a younger audience, the uses for the app (affordances) are for all classrooms. Not only does this app allow you to keep real time track of student behaviour but it can actually improve your class’s behaviour.

I first tried this app with my Year 9 History class for a bit of fun. This is probably my best behaved class and I felt they would see the spirit of fun the app aimed at and not be offended that I was treating them like primary students. So I put it up on the overhead projector as they were working on an inquiry based task (see my previous blog for inquiry based learning) and just started awarding points for on task behaviour, helping others and hard work. The effect was almost immediate, some turned around and tried psychoanalysing their funny shaped creature as my representation of them (by the way: the creatures are randomly assigned) while others took a few seconds notice and got on with their work. However, once they got over the initial excitement of the creatures their behaviour started to change: they started behaving for points! As I said, this is my best behaved class but even the most off task of students started knuckling down to their research in an effort to be recognised and earn another point. This worked particularly well during the class discussion as everyone wanted to contribute so they got a participation point. At no point did I offer a reward for the person with the most points or signal that the points meant anything: they simply wanted more points and that was enough.

A word of warning though, the points system does not work for all students. In the same class discussed above, I had one of my best and one of my worst students both react negatively towards the point system. Both deliberately tried to get negative points as a protest against the system and thus needed more traditional classroom management techniques to get them back on task. So the lesson I learnt from this is that while it is fun to make the points public, it is better to keep them private and maybe just show the student their totals at the end of class or even not at all.

With this important lesson learnt, I spent this week using it in my Year 7 English class. I did not make the points public this time but instead just used it to keep track of their behaviour. This private use of the system made it easier for me as I didn’t feel pressured to award points and it helped me to be available to every student in the class. In particular, the random student selector option prompts you to award positive or negative points to a randomly selected student. This has been really useful as it helps me to get to all the students and see what they are up to rather than then handful of students who regularly monopolise my time. This has the added benefits of ensuring that I am moving around the classroom and making everyone feel more included. Moreover, the reports that can be generated from the app make long term classroom management planning easier. For instance, after each class I print off the scoring for each student – where it shows how many positive and negative points they got that lesson and the behaviours displayed – and quickly review them looking for multiple negative behaviours. By doing this, I have been able to identify some organisational issues that effect a well-intentioned and generally hard working student that I might have not noticed otherwise. So rather than miss an opportunity to help him improve his learning across all classes, consequently I have also noticed he is often the last to leave his locker and head to class, Class Dojo has alerted me to a problem through mere data.

In summary, Class Dojo is a great app for keeping track of behaviour in the classroom. While it can be used in a public sense to get students to monitor their own behaviour, I prefer to use it privately to help me keep track of all the students in my class. Not only can you record and monitor their positive and negative behaviour but the system allows you to add your own behaviours and thus customize the system. This has been particularly useful as I try to get my students to focus on organisation and practice Good Learning Behaviours (GLBs) and thus I can reward them for these specific behaviours. Moreover, the random student function provides a friendly reminder to get around to all students in every class and the summary data helps in long term planning. The best bit is that it is free and the recent update has made it much more user friendly. So try it today… you’ll never see your little monsters the same way again!

For all the 3 out of 10 kids

What numbers are the kids in our classrooms given everyday?

Watching the film The Way Way Back today reminded me of the positive influence we teachers can have on students.

The film starts with the main character, Duncan played by Liam James, being given a free character assessment by the critical, hypocritical, future step-father, Trent played by Steve Carell. Asked to give himself a rating out of ten, Duncan like most people struggles to come up with an answer. How can you judge your own worth? What aspects of ourselves do we focus on? Pressed he comes up with a safe answer of six, middle of the road and safely uncommitted. However, Trent is not to be stopped and roughly informs him he is in fact a three. A three! Duncan sits there speechless as Trent then proceeds to list his faults and ends with a half-hearted pep talk to use the trip as a chance to improve his score.

Needless to say, this is a somewhat comedic moment, the archetypal start to a coming of age film. However, this is in fact a sad reflection of how many of our students come to us. They may not be told in such a blunt way how much they are valued, and indeed some may be told their faults on a regular basis, but the labels they get in the non-school world hangs around their necks whether they like it or not.

Unsurprisingly, when Trent tries to get Duncan to follow a simple curfew and house rules later in the film he meets strong resistance. Taking the moral high ground he says that they need to work together based on trust and respect for the sake of the family. To me this is the funnier moment of the two: after disrespecting Duncan in the car, making him wear a life jacket unnecessarily on a boat trip and generally treating him like a slave, he says that Duncan lacks respect for him – the pot calling the kettle black in any language.

However, the issues of respect and trust are central to productive and friendly classrooms. Unless you can develop a trusting, caring environment then students will not be willing to take risks and explore all their talents. Unfortunately, how they learn to show this respect and develop this trust may be undermined by the home and outside world. From simple acts of discourtesy on public transport or in the shops to road rage and our politicians abusing each other every night on the news, our students are exposed to models of behaviour that promote disrespect, rudeness and the individual above all.

Fortunately, the film has the saving character of the water park operator Owen, a man child who follows his own path after experiencing similar bad parenting to what Duncan has to put up with. Owen shows patience with Duncan, first to break through the awkwardness to make a connection then later to build his self-worth. Owen doesn’t judge Duncan as a three, nor does he put any number on him whatsoever. He sees a human being not having a good time and tries to help him out. Moreover, by giving him a job and extra responsibilities, he is able to show Duncan his inner strength and that he is valued by others.

While I know this is just a film and that this may fairly be called pointless psychoanalysis of a well-worn plot, I think we all have the responsibility of being more like Owen and not like Trent. We are role models for our students and the way we treat each other, colleagues and other school staff, in a respectful way is vital to showing them the right ways to act. Particularly as the world gets more isolated, through increasing online communication, it is important we show students the need to value everyone.

In a lovely touch at the end of the film, Owen stands up to Trent as Duncan finally breaks free and says, “I’m friends with the number 3.” The horrible label has come full circle from critical, hurtful label to a badge of friendship. Hopefully, we can all stand up for our students, regardless of their number, to show them that we value them for them because that is enough.

Silence is Golden

One of the great things about the internet is the range of professional development opportunities that exist for teachers. From Sophia (www.sophia.org) to Coursera (www.coursera.org ), there are a range of MOOCs (massive open online courses) that offer a vast array of courses for teachers of all subjects and persuasions. Last week, I began another online course with coursera.org called Art and Inquiry: Museum Teaching Strategies For Your Classroom. Run by the Museum of Modern Art, it focuses on using art to promote inquiry based learning that models the education programs run in the museum.

One of the most exciting things about the course is the direct and practical way that I have been able to use it in my classes this week. Having not taught history for a few years, this inquiry based learning approach suits history pedagogy and the approach of my school. More importantly, it has made class more fun and a nice change from a content heavy curriculum.

I first tried it with my Year 9 class where we are studying slavery and industrialisation. Previously, class had been focused on source analysis and note taking from PowerPoint presentations. Naturally I was a little tentative, the literature said silence was my best friend and the thought of standing there in front of them waiting for a response seemed a little scary. However, I took a deep breath and just began to write on the board my inquiry question: “How do we stop slavery?”

Silence.

More silence.

A tentative hand went up from one my regular contributors, who made a comment about the Emancipation Proclamation. Then another hand: make rich people slaves for a day, then another: pirates from Somalia, and another and another. By the time I had finished the mind map on the board; my fears had been erased and replaced by genuine excitement. This class had a wealth of ideas and historical knowledge, especially about American history, that had previously been in hiding. Moreover, they were engaging in debates about these ideas across the classroom without prompting. This seemed too good to be true.

Drawing on the two key ideas, the Emancipation Proclamation and whether slavery still exists, I set them a simple pair-share research task with a time limit of 20 minutes. This is where the rubber really hit the road: you could have good class discussion but what I wanted to see was research and detail. And off they went, as everything from Yahoo answers to Wikipedia to newspaper articles to YouTube started appearing on their screens. Even better, this was focused, organised work where I didn’t need about 10 different reminders to get exercise books out to take notes.

To finish the class I held a plenary session where I got each subject area to share their findings. Rather than the usual reluctance to provide an answer, usually where there is only one correct response and it goes to a regular contributor, I had everyone battling to get their voice heard. So much so that my regular contributors were starting to feel left out. Moreover, each person was able to add something new or different to the subject. So class ended with 90% of my planned content, back-up in case the experiment failed, waiting for another day. The lesson hadn’t gone quite in the direction I expected but the students were enjoying it and left the room buzzing.

I next tried it with my Year 8 class studying medieval history. Having done a little more reading, I centred this lesson on some pictures of medieval punishments to get them thinking about law and order. The inquiry based learning literature focused on unsolicited viewing and the use of the questions: “What else do you see?” and “What do you see that makes you say that?” So I just put up the pictures on the Apple TV and waited to see who would speak first.

Unlike my Year 9 class, these guys had no issues in putting forth an opinion. The problem was, so many good ideas were coming out I needed to slow it down so that I could get all these ideas on the board. Importantly, just using these questions, I was able to go beyond the obvious content of the punishment itself to expose some of the social issues involved with crime and punishment.

Also unlike my other class, the content for my inquiry question (How were medieval criminals punished?) was a lot more structured and focused. Using a good video from a Tony Robinson television series and their textbook, I was able to direct them to the key ideas around the topic. However, unlike previous lessons where textbook work was greeted with a groan, the students eagerly delved into the text to find out more information to support what they had seen in the video.

Importantly for me though, when they posted their answers to the inquiry question, it contained all the detail outlined in the curriculum documents and more. They even debated their answers and were suggesting areas in which more detail could be included. This was the best lesson I have had with this group and a quick straw poll at lunch confirmed the success of the class.

So a week into my new MOOC and it is already paying dividends. The inquiry based learning approach has re-energised my classrooms and shown me a new side to my students. I can’t wait for the coming week to see what question we will answer next.