Learning in Practice Volume 3 Number 1 December 2019
Honor Non Honores
Mission An Anglican community inspiring every learner every experience every day
Vision To be a leader in Christian education that is characterised by a global vision that inspires hope
Values Commitment Compassion Courage Integrity Respect
We acknowledge the Dharug and Darkinjung peoples who are the traditional custodians of the land on which Barker College and Darkinjung Barker stand. We pay respect to the Elders past, present and emerging of the Dharug and Darkinjung nations and extend that respect to other Indigenous people within the Barker College community.
Editors Dr Matthew Hill Mrs Amanda Eastman Dr Greg Cunningham Editorial Assistant Susan Layton Creative Barker Communications
Printing Barker Print Room JTP Graphic Design & Custom Print
2 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The Barker Institute
About the Barker Institute
About the Learning in Practice Journal
•
Provides a centre for research, reflective practice, professional learning and innovation in education
•
Is a resource hub that facilitates the ongoing development of learning for teachers, allowing them to stay abreast of emerging practice, constantly striving to refine the quality of teaching and learning
As a leader in Christian education, Barker College aims to both demonstrate and inform best practice. This journal was developed to showcase a range of initiatives and research projects from across the School. It explains the rationale behind innovations in practice and archives pivotal developments in Barker’s academic, cocurricular and pastoral realms.
•
Looks to develop collaborative ventures with other institutions and providers, initiating research and innovation combined with the implementation of new projects and programs for the benefit of students, staff and the broader community
•
Shares current research and issues with parents, professional bodies and educators around the globe through ongoing symposia, forums, lectures and conferences
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 3
Introduction: Quality teaching and learning in a coeducational context
It is obvious that Barker is going through a substantial transition to full coeducation by 2022. Some may be wondering whether the teaching and learning will fundamentally change. At Barker we tailor our teaching experiences to meet the needs of our student population that is diverse in so many ways, whether the student is a boy or girl is just one small part of this variety. This is the third year of the Barker Institute Journal, Learning in Practice, and in the context of increasing levels of coeducation it was appropriate to tie the theme of this year’s journal to such a context. However, the theme is not coeducation in itself, but the ultimate goal of quality teaching and learning in the context we find ourselves in. The journal’s feature article, Teaching in a coeducational classroom, introduces and justifies the idea that quality teaching and learning is not defined by the gendered nature of the classroom, but by the positive experiences that relate to all learners regardless of their background. A quick glance at the contents page will reveal the amount of work done in areas of Research, extending our influence (or learning lessons from) Beyond the Mint Gates of the School, Teaching and Learning at Barker, and Pastoral Care by teachers. They each contribute to a growing picture of what quality teaching and learning looks like for a School like Barker in its coeducational context.
The purpose of this research is that it is to be shared. While many may be tempted to think that publication is the final step in the research process, I also believe it represents the beginning of a new cycle. My vision is for the right articles to be in the hands of the relevant people at Barker and at other schools to provoke thinking and conversations of continual growth. Please do not hesitate to get in contact if you would like physical copies of individual articles, or to be connected with authors to discuss their work. I know that they would be enthusiastic to see the impact of their research. I especially want to thank Mrs Amanda Eastman for her research assistance to the Barker Institute throughout 2019. By designing and implementing data collection protocols, authoring multiple articles and leading the collation and review, the entire Journal is a reflection of her work. I also thank Mrs Susan Layton for her dedication to supporting my vision of the Barker Institute in ensuring dissemination of student and staff research. She has managed various projects to ensure that tight deadlines have always been met. Finally, I thank Dr Greg Cunningham for proof-reading, and Mr Glenn Quevado for the design of the Journal.
Dr Matthew Hill Director of Research in Learning and the Barker Institute 4 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
From the Head of Barker College
It is the passion for excellence in teaching and supporting student development that drives Barker staff to be constantly reflecting on their own practice. Our teachers regularly seek the expertise and wisdom of others, typically as expressed in the academic literature. They are also contributors to the literature, considering how their work may benefit colleagues in the School, or even impact those nurturing young lives elsewhere. The Barker Institute Journal, Learning in Practice, is just one of the public displays of a team of staff relentlessly seeking best practice in academics, leadership, co-curricular and wellbeing across school education. This is the third volume of the Barker Institute Journal, coming during an important period in the history of Barker College, with the transition to full coeducation underway, along with the challenges of what education means to prepare students expected to thrive into the twenty-second century in an everchanging world with its growing needs and concerns. Therefore, staff at Barker need to be leaders in academically rigorous, gratitude infused and student-centred education from our Christian context for the sake of their students and as a model to those outside our Mint Gates.
I commend each article in this Journal to you. Read it, consider its claims, decide how it impacts your own desires for the best possible opportunities for the young people in your care. I also invite you to make contact with the authors, directly or through the Director of the Barker Institute, to learn more and share your response that we all may continue to learn and grow together.
Phillip Heath AM Head of Barker College
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 5
Content Feature Article Teaching in a Coeducational Classroom 11 Melissa Brady
Research
15 A year in review: The Barker Institute in 2019 Dr Matthew Hill
19 The Barker Journey: Lessons from cohort 1 Amanda Eastman Dr Brad Merrick
27 The Barker Journey: The commencement of cohort 2 Amanda Eastman Dr Matthew Hill Girls’ interest, enjoyment and participation in secondary school mathematics Kester Lee
35
Beyond the Mint Gates The untended garden: Reflections on designing and implementing a 43 teaching and learning framework within a coeducational, international school context Dr Timothy Scott
51 Darkinjung Barker and our connection Jamie Shakleton The Project Zero classroom: Reporting from Harvard University 53 Joshua Toth Teaching & Learning Three years of hope and despair: Reframing the curriculum for gifted learners Greg Longney
65
Collaborative teaching to prepare Year 11 Physics students for university – 71 Lessons from the second iteration. Dr Matthew Hill Dean Johnston Nonie Taylor Daniel Woolley
Girls Got Game 79 Alex Butt
6 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
A blended learning approach to formative assessment 83 Andy Mifsud
In search of engagement Kath Driver Understanding opportunities for learning in STEAM for high schools 97 Daniel Woolley
Gender and technology 103 Sally Filtness The controversial classroom: Making understanding visible with no hands up Amanda Eastman
107
Pastoral Care
Student wellbeing in a coeducational context 113 Rowena Dudgeon Training, support and growth of pastoral leaders in the Middle School 117 Timothy Eastman
About the Authors 120 Melissa Brady Alex Butt Alison Cox Kathryn Driver Rowena Dudgeon Amanda Eastman Tim Eastman Sally Filtness Dr Matthew Hill Dean Johnston Kester Lee Greg Longney Dr Brad Merrick Andrew Mifsud Dr Timothy Scott Jamie Shackleton Nonie Taylor Joshua Toth Daniel Woolley
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 7
8 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Feature Article Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 9
10 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Teaching in a Coeducational Classroom
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Melissa Brady Director of Coeducation Transition Abstract Greek philosopher Plato in his Republic wrote that educating men and women together would foster a feeling of equality, based on their ability to learn rather than gender. Yet more than 2000 years later debates about coeducation persist. As classroom teachers we know that there is no definitive ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ way of learning, there are only generalisations. Good classroom teachers tailor their lessons to meet the learning needs of the individual students in the class, not their gender. Schools and teachers should challenge gender stereotypes, not reinforce them by insisting that boys and girls are not capable of learning together. Doing so woefully underestimates the capabilities of our young people. The educational landscape has changed immeasurably in the last decade to the point where what was considered cutting edge in 2000 is now old news. The students who are now sent out the school gates at the end of their tenure will have on average 17 different jobs and 5 different careers throughout their professional lifetime (FYA 2015). None of these will be based on gender. Today’s students are taught to apply knowledge to new situations, look at cross curricular integration through project-based learning and most of all need to develop the ability to adapt to new situations. Problem solving, collaboration, time management, higher order thinking and digital literacy are some of the skills needed for the future. We are about sending Barker students into the world equipped with the skills they need to be future ready. Coeducational classrooms within a fully coeducational school will help us to do that. Much has been written about the efficacy of single sex vs coeducation and one does not have to look too far to find research to support a claim that one is ‘better’ than the other. Polemical arguments on the topic are rarely instructive or helpful and do nothing more than disparage the ‘other’ side. But what of the students and teachers in this debate? A student in a single sex classroom is not asked of their experience in a coeducational one and if they are, the variables are immense. Similarly, a student in a coeducational room. Ask any classroom teacher about their experience in a coeducational or single sex classroom and their views will often differ wildly. One thing they will tell you is that teaching in a coeducational classroom is different to teaching in a single sex classroom, just like teaching Year 7 is different to teaching Year 10. The age and developmental stage of the students is different, as well as the relationship between the teacher and the class. We know that there is no uniquely ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ way of teaching and learning and good classroom practitioners adapt their teaching to suit the needs of the individual children in their class. Claims that boys and girls learn differently are only generalisations. Longitudinal studies confirm that the differences in the learning styles within one gender or one group of students alone are far greater than a perceived learning difference between boys and girls. Classroom teachers can tell you that based on experience alone. But what of the actual academic studies? There is a plethora of them. Sue Bennett in her 2015 PhD study on gender relations
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 11
in elite schools stated that only 17% of 21st Century research supported the claim that single sex education is better for girls. Just 17%. The remaining studies found either no or negligible difference in achievement levels for girls in single sex or coeducation environments. It is the ‘presence of a supportive community of teachers…and the whole school community (being) committed to the principles of gender equity and the fulfilment of individual potential’ which will ultimately determine achievement (Gill 2004 p.121). Messages that tell girls that they can only lead when amongst other girls or that they can only excel in Mathematics or Science when with other girls, underestimate the capabilities of young women. Telling boys that they are too loud or disruptive or are not good at humanities is similarly inaccurate and unhelpful. All students learn in different ways and we should acknowledge that. As educators we should be very concerned about the gender stereotyping of students as learners. We are in the business of challenging stereotypes, not reinforcing them. It is important that our classrooms provide opportunities for all students to draw on their individual talents and interests, whilst helping them to improve in areas in which they might have difficulty. A coeducational setting allows boys and girls to do this together, without gender discrimination, challenging them to work together to problem solve and learn. Effective teaching engages students and gets them excited about their learning and a one size fits all model does not suit boys or girls. 21st Century learning pedagogies and methodologies challenge the notion of gender-based limitations. We must ask questions like What is education for? What is its purpose? What do we teach children about, for and to do? In previous years young men and women were educated with a predetermined future in mind; men and women entered ‘traditional’ fields and movement between these was not fluid. Now that future is wildly different to the ones that educational leaders imagined a century ago. How are we preparing them for their futures now? Social skills, emotional intelligence, problem solving, teamwork and the lively exchange of ideas are the skills we want our young men and women to leave our schools with, skills that will prepare them for a life that involves a work place with both men and women in it. At Barker we are committed to our stated aims; to inspire every learner, every experience, every day. Our values of respect, integrity, courage, compassion and commitment underpin all that we do. The aim and purpose of a Barker education is to enable students to be inclusive and participate in a rapidly evolving and technological society, one which is vastly different to the last generation of learners. Students at Barker are encouraged to work together, to celebrate difference and champion inclusion, both inside and outside the classroom. Plato espoused the idea of coeducation as it creates a feeling of comradeship noting an equality in men and women based on their academic capabilities not their gender. He comments that ‘If women are to have the same duties as men, they must have the same nurture and education...’ (Book V). He argued that educating boys and girls together was the only way that they could both become useful members of society. Who are we to argue with Plato? References Foundation for Young Australians, 2015, The New Work Order, www.fya.org.au/report/new-work-order/ Gill, J, (2004), Beyond the Great work/153084054?q&versionId=217748731.
Divide,
UNSW
Press,
Sydney.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/
Murphy, M., (2015), Plato’s Philosophy of Education and the Common Core debate, https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/ED559997.pdf. Plato, (updated 2002) The role of women in the ideal state, https://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/ Philosophers/Plato/plato_republic_bk5_women.html.
12 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Barker Research Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 13
14 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
A year in review The Barker Institute in 2019
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Dr Matthew Hill Director of Research in Learning & The Barker Institute Abstract 2019 was the fifth year of the Barker Institute running events, training and research in the School. Developed under the leadership of Mr Phillip Heath (Head of Barker College) and founding Director, Dr Brad Merrick, the Institute has been a gathering point for the Barker community to engage in further learning. Through sharing emerging thinking, practice and approaches to learning with the broader Barker community the Institute has continued to create an inclusive and welcoming environment that fosters learning across all key areas. This article serves as an overview of the various presentations and areas of coverage included in the internal and external events throughout the year, the first with Dr Matthew Hill as the Institute Director. Learning together as one community from experts and best-practice research In 2019 the Barker Institute continued in its strong legacy of providing access to rich and diverse presentations, research and thinking across a range of settings. This year involved seventeen public events, for almost 3000 people, along with various other training opportunities for staff at Barker and beyond. Two important values of the Barker Institute are excellence and accessibility. Through every Barker Institute activity, it is experts (from the academic, professional or community spaces) who are sharing their wisdom either directly or through books, film and other literature. In 2019 this included those at the top of their field such as Dr Corey Cunningham (Medical Director for the NSW Institute of Sport and Chief Medical Officer for Football NSW, the Australian Paralympic Team and the Australian Sailing Team) sharing how his work at Barker College through the groundbreaking concussion clinic has almost eliminated secondary concussions at the School. Similarly, Heather Staker (international blended learning expert, author, founder and president of the research initiative Ready to Blend), was flown in from the USA to train staff and parents from Barker and beyond. The Institute has access to the top journals in educational psychology, professional development, adolescent wellbeing and health and is regularly engaging the staff community with opportunities to adopt best-practice by learning from expertise. Under the wise leadership of Phillip Heath and the School’s leadership, the Barker teaching community, parents and students have access to such expertise, however learning must always be done in an inclusive and accessible way. The benefits of learning afforded by the Barker Institute were never to be held back from the wider Barker community that extends across Sydney and beyond. Evening events are advertised to a wide subscriber base consisting of teachers and parents from many schools in the local area and others even further afield. Our Term 4 screening of the film ‘2040’ with an appearance and interview from creator, director and star Damon Gameau became a collaborative activity amongst
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 15
passionate young people and their families from many schools. Probably the most exciting example of accessibility was when the Institute hosted two public lectures for the new NESA Year 12 Science Extension course. Teachers came for professional learning in how they might teach the difficult content of the history and philosophy of science from Dr Alison Gates and Dr Matthew Hill and were provided with notes and PowerPoint presentations that they could take back to their classes. Classes were cancelled around Sydney and students were bussed to Barker from schools such as Pittwater House, Gosford High School, Menai High School and even as far as Macarthur and Wollondilli Anglican Schools. This was a rich experience for the Barker students to participate in an excellent and accessible community of learning, modelling life-long learning as part of their school education. Learning is truly for all. 2019 Events Junior School students and parents participated an interactive workshop on The Language of Friendship led by Dana Kerford of URStrong, considering what friendships and relationships look like at an early age. Additionally, in Term 3 they joined members of the Middle and Senior Schools and the community for the Barker Light Festival, an evening of all things STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics) including games, puzzles, talks and presentations from astronaut Dr Paul Scully-Power and Lead Scientist of the Royal Institution of Australia, Professor Alan Duffy, on space and technology. An academic and expert perspective on real issues facing our world and our young people was explored through evenings focussed on Sport (Age appropriate strength and conditioning – Dr Angus McEntyre and Understanding concussion, mitigation and management – Dr Corey Cunningham) and two documentary screenings and associated interviews with filmmakers (The Final Quarter with Norman Laing, Sally Fryer, and ex-student Jayden Kitchener-Waters; and 2040 with Damon Gameau). Some evening presentations were related to the school curriculum (Everyday Economics with Joanne Masters, Chief Economist for EY Oceania, and Lea Jurkovic, A Graduate Economist with the RBA; and The History & Philosophy of Science with Dr Alison Gates and Dr Matthew Hill) and gave insights to parents and the community about curriculum design at Barker (Guided Inquiry with Dr Leslie Maniotes, and Blended Learning with Heather Staker). The issue of impacts of ubiquitous technology was investigated through three insightful presentations including Families in the Digital Age – Toni Hassan, Brain Health – Gayelene Clews and Safe on Social Media – Kirra Pendergast. This theme of thriving in a technology rich environment will continue to be dominant through Barker Institute events and research in 2020. Research and Publications At the start of the year the second volume (2018) of the Barker Institute Journal, Learning in Practice (http://www.barkerinstitute.com.au/about/research/barker-institute-journal) was published. This included 11 articles from 15 Barker staff members involved in teaching, research and leadership. Three articles from the first volume (2017) were republished as monograph-like feature articles resulting in higher dissemination throughout the School and beyond. These included ‘Barker Girls’ Rugby Sevens Trial: Breaking Stereotypes’ by Alex Butt and Alison Cox, ‘A Coeducational Future’ by Melissa Brady, and ‘Establishing our Darkinjung Barker Reading Programmes’ by Michelle Studd. They can be downloaded from the website (http://www. barkerinstitute.com.au/about/research/feature-articles). 14 Year 12 Barker students (studying Science Extension in its inaugural year) were published
16 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
in our first Scientific Research in Schools academic journal disseminating first-hand research more typically seen at a university level. Copies of this journal are available to the public on the Barker Institute website (http://www.barkerinstitute.com.au/about/research/studentresearch) and have been sent to schools and universities around Sydney. Already new Year 12 students are basing their research off work done by the 14 Barker students in 2019. The work of these students has even come across the desk of senior staff at NESA and the Chief Scientist of Australia. One example of research from this year is presented as two articles in this current volume of the Barker Institute Journal (2019). These reflect the summary and launch of two complementary projects entitled ‘The Barker Journey’. Dr Brad Merrick (founding Director of The Barker Institute) began a study in 2006 with a group of Year 3 students as they were embarking on a decade of Barker education. The longitudinal study followed the male students as they developed intellectually, physically, socially, personally and spiritually over each year of schooling. In 2019 the Barker Institute began the second iteration of the Barker Journey study with a now coeducational cohort of students, the first coeducational Year 3 group on the main campus at Barker, to see the similarities and differences with the Barker experience ten years on from the first study. Observations from the first year are presented in this journal and progress will continue to be reported for years to come. Further research projects have been conducted in partnership with The University of Sydney, The University of Melbourne, Ridley College, The University of Technology Sydney, Macquarie University and The University of New South Wales on issues ranging from teacher wellbeing, brain science, the impact of religiosity on wellbeing, teacher training, sport and conditioning, and leadership development. Conclusion 2020 promises to be an exciting year of future learning through the Barker Institute and all are welcome to participate in this growing community activity. May the prayer of the Barker Institute continue to be true for many years to come. Our Lord and Our God, We pray for all who teach, learn, research and innovate in our school community. Deliver all of us from thinking that we have grasped all we need to know, done what we need to do, and become all that we could become. Make us humble and teachable, grateful for the opportunity to learn, and open to growth and new understanding today and each day. Amen.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 17
18 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The Barker Journey: Lessons from cohort 1
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Amanda Eastman Assistant to the Director of Research in Learning and the Barker Institute Dr Brad Merrick Former Director of Research in Learning and the Barker Institute Abstract What constitutes a good education? When judging or choosing schools, we are often forced to examine the more ostensible features of a school, such as its facilities and its academic performance in standardised testing. Whilst these characteristics are important, they alone do not paint an accurate or holistic picture of what a school has to offer. Surveys of Barker parents have revealed that they attribute the most value to balanced education, quality of teaching and pastoral care. The question then arises, how do we examine aspects of school culture such as these that defy traditional metrics? This longitudinal, qualitative study was designed to capture the more intangible aspects of the Barker journey. It has tracked the social and emotional development of a cohort of students through their perspective over their 10 year experience at the School and will continue to follow their journeys beyond the Mint Gates. This article describes the methodology of the study, enabling replication both within a Barker context or elsewhere. It discusses the results of the study and also outlines the parameters of the next phase of research, whereby the study is recommencing in 2019 within the School’s new coeducational context. What did we do? In 2008, the entire cohort of Year 3 students was invited to participate in a longitudinal study to track their Barker experience. This consisted of two classes of male students who were all new to the School. The study began with 47 participants representing a vast range of academic ability and cocurricular interests. The attrition rate was limited to those who left the School, with 43 students continuing in the study until Year 12 and all of those opting to continue the study beyond their School completion. Each year, the students participated in a one-on-one semi-structured interview with the primary researcher, Dr Brad Merrick. The interviews were video recorded and the researcher took field notes during the interviews. For the inaugural interview in Year 3, the Head of the Junior School was also in attendance. The timing of the interviews varied each year depending on a range of factors. For example, the Year 3 interviews occurred during the first half of the year in order to capture the students’ initial impressions of their experience. In most subsequent cases, the interviews occurred in Term 4 in order to allow the students to reflect on the year as a whole. In Year 11, the interviews occurred in Term 3 as Term 4 marks the commencement of Year 12 studies. In Year 3, the interview lengths ranged from three to six minutes, whereas the final interviews were around twenty to thirty minutes.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 19
The questions also varied slightly from year to year. In general, they included questions about highlights from the year, challenges faced, interests, strengths, areas for improvement, effort, future aspirations, personal growth, teaching and reflections on the School. In addition, the participants always had an opportunity to add any further insights or reflections. This option was initially declined by most, but over time they came to expect, and value, the chance to voice their views. At the completion of the interviews each year, any responses of particular interest were asterixed. The interview sheets were all scanned and saved electronically, as were the video tapes. At the conclusion of the study, the interview sheets and footage were analysed by an additional researcher, Mrs Amanda Eastman. To date, the results have been disseminated in a range of written publications and live presentations to staff, students and parents. Each participating student also received a copy of all their interview footage before graduating. What did we learn? The inaugural interviews captured a group of excited (albeit nervous and sometimes monosyllabic) young students who were unanimously awestruck by the opportunities at their fingertips. Common phrases included “my old school didn’t have…” and “it’s the first time I have…”. They really enjoyed the new experiences such as camp, CRU (a voluntary Christian group), play night and learning a musical instrument. They admired the facilities, including the art room, the indoor swimming pool, the canteen and even the vast amount of grass. They liked having nice teachers and making new friends. As the years progressed, the students began to appreciate the more intangible aspects of the School. Their answers became more abstract and sophisticated. By Year 12, the students were still grateful for the facilities and the opportunities, but the thing they had come to appreciate the most was the culture. They were able to articulate how unique the community was and how much it had shaped and supported them. Over time, they also honed their career aspirations and felt that Barker helped them to pursue and achieve their goals. They learnt to deal with busy schedules, increasing workload and the inevitable hardships of the teenage years. In the end, the researchers were impressed by the maturity, work ethic, resilience and gratitude of the young men who had participated in the study. The key themes that recurred throughout the interviews were quality teachers, personal growth and opportunities. Each of these themes will be expounded on below.
What makes a Barker student? ...to treat other people the way you want to be treated”
Quality teachers The appreciation of teacher quality was evident from the start. Initially, comments focused primarily on the personal characteristics of the staff. Over the years, the comments diversified to also include reflections on teachers as instructors and influencers. This shows how the aspects of quality teaching that were valued changed over time in conjunction with the students’ maturity levels and attitudes to learning. It also captures how teachers at Barker embody multiple facets of quality teaching, as they demonstrated an ability to develop both academic aptitude and personal character. The thing that the students appreciated most in the early years was having a “nice teacher.” Many commented on the importance of things like “he’s very funny” and “she doesn’t get angry or yell”. Interestingly, when the students were in the Senior School and reflected on their Primary School teachers, they were able to elaborate more fully on their lasting impact.
20 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
One student appeared to have a particularly close rapport with his Year 3 teacher as she had helped his family immensely through his brother’s cancer treatment. He still remembered and reflected positively on her impact years later. Another student, who was clearly impacted by his Year 3 teacher, said: “One thing Mr Taylor told me in Year 3 … I asked him, ‘What makes a Barker student?’ and he said ‘to treat other people the way you want to be treated’ and that’s kind of stuck with me as my nine years have passed.” Another student looked back on his Year 5 teacher and said he “shaped me as a person” and is still “someone I look up to”. Over time, the participants came to appreciate many other aspects of teaching, above and beyond just hoping for a “nice” teacher. They praised teachers for qualities such as extensive subject knowledge, pertinent feedback and the ability to motivate and foster learning. Additionally, an ever increasing number of the students realised how their own character, not just their understanding, had been shaped by their teachers. When asked about how Senior School differed from Middle School, almost every student spoke about how the relationship with their teachers had changed and deepened. It was evident to the participants how much the staff cared, not just about their results, but about their lives as well. For many, they had become “someone to reach out to.” In their final interviews, the students were able to recognise that their teachers really cared and had put in immense effort to help them reach their full potential. In turn, they wanted to work hard and do well to make their teachers proud. Clearly, the work ethic of the staff had provided an inspiring and motivational environment. It was also noteworthy that a number of students from the study were HSC All-round Achievers (meaning they attained above 90 in 10 units or more). Across the whole year group, 6% of students received this accolade. Comparatively, 16% of the participants in this study were awarded the same honour. This suggests that (at least in this particular cohort) having spent 10 years at the School had impacted positively on the students’ academic performance, compared to the students who commenced at later entry points.
All the values that the School goes by get instilled into each Barker kid… it becomes a part of you”
Overall, the findings of the study dovetailed closely with contemporary research on quality teaching. There have been many lists compiled to summarise the dimensions of quality teaching (Darling-Hammond 1997; Hattie 2003). Most notably in this context, NESA (2014) has synthesised this research into a set of Government endorsed ‘Australian Professional Standards for Teaching.’ The standards describe the many varied facets of quality teaching, placing emphasis on attributes such as knowing the students, creating a positive learning environment and providing quality feedback. The interview responses provide evidence that Barker students recognise and value these traits in their teachers. Personal Growth By Year 6, the students appeared to have learnt many significant life lessons from their time at Barker. Some explicitly mentioned the “Barker Values” – a set of characteristics which at the time included show respect, be helpful, be humble, be honest and get involved. These had been overtly taught and also displayed around the School as a visual reminder. However, most students did not merely list the values verbatim. They were able to paraphrase or elaborate on the values and explain what they meant to them. This included examples such as trying new things even if they were difficult and speaking to students who didn’t know many people.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 21
By Year 12, most were able to articulate that their values had been shaped by the people around them rather than simply through lessons and instruction. They spoke about how the culture had impacted them, saying things such as “Barker builds good people. When you’re around good people you become one yourself” and “all the values that the School goes by get instilled into each Barker kid but especially once you’re here for this long it becomes a part of you.” Overall, there was a sense that Barker allows you to be “the best possible version of yourself.” Some commonly cited values included compassion, respect, manners, confidence, character, work ethic and responsibility. One student also gave a moving account of how the School had played a pivotal role in shaping his Christian faith: Probably the biggest thing it has done for me is allowed me to make a decision to pursue a relationship with God. As well as that, most of the core values that Barker has are Christian values … all the Christian Studies’ staff are really supportive and allow you to make that decision for yourself. It’s massive for me – it’s the most important thing in my life. These reflections capture one of the amazing legacies that Barker offers its students – creating wholesome, selfless, hard-working individuals. Another significant aspect of personal growth that emerged throughout the study was resilience. This is particularly relevant because teenagers today are typically less resilient than previous generations (Haidt and Paresky 2019). However, research into the psychology of success has revealed that grit, rather than just academic prowess, is crucial for success (Duckworth 2016). This has profound implications for education, suggesting that schools need to work on developing passion and perseverance, not just content knowledge. A review of the literature on resilience (Wu, Feder, Cohen, Kim, Calderon, Charney and Mathe 2013) defined resilience as “effective responses to environmental challenges and ultimate resistance to the deleterious effects of stress.” As the Barker Journey study unfolded, it became clear that many of the students were facing stressful situations and significant setbacks. For example, one student with aspirations of becoming a professional sportsman, was devastated when he broke his leg. However, in hindsight, he described this experience as a “blessing in disguise” as for the first time, he could focus more on school work and enjoyed seeing his marks improve. Another student said even though he had surgery that went “horribly wrong”, he was able to take a step back and evaluate his priorities. As a result, he learnt to focus more on his studies. Additionally, most students had phases of being stressed by the ever-increasing workload. It was pleasing how over time they were able to report vast improvement in their ability to manage their time, study more effectively and overcome the associated stresses. The researchers were impressed by the resilience that was often evident in the face of adversity, especially since this characteristic can often be lacking in students of this age. Consequently, the role that Barker had played in shaping this valuable trait was examined. Throughout their journey, the students participated in multiple programs specifically aimed at developing resilience, mostly through their weekly period of Pastoral Care and Social Education. These included the RAP program in Year 7 and sessions by guest speakers such as Glen Gerreyn in Year 12.
22 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
There has been really good support and we’re building a team to go through Year 12”
Interestingly, while these programs have a place, it was the relationships that had a bigger impact on the development of resilience. For example, the aforementioned students reported that it was the support from their year group and the dedication of their teachers that allowed them to emerge from their setbacks feeling stronger and more focused. This attitude resonated through the participants, with comments such as “We’re a whole year, not individuals within a year … There has been really good support and we’re building a team to go through Year 12”. Therefore, community appeared to be a major factor contributing to the development of resilience amongst the group. This finding dovetailed with the results of another Barker Institute study on the characteristics of successful learners (Eastman 2018). In this study, one of the factors that strongly influenced both academic success and general wellbeing was a feeling of belonging and connectedness, which was demonstrated in corporate activities such as utilising shared resource repositories. Other characteristics that were developed over time and appeared to contribute to the strong sense of resilience, were gratitude and a sense of perspective. As the students realised how lucky they were, they became less introspective and developed hearts for social justice. Indeed in the primary years when they were asked about how the School had shaped them their answers were often inward looking, such as “try your best” and “have a go”. Increasingly, the answers become more outward looking, such as, “look out for others more than myself”. Pivotal experiences in this vein included visiting the Darkinjung Barker campus and participating in overseas tours such as the trip to Crossroads in Hong Kong. After such experiences, one student reported, “that was the big thing for me, to realise how privileged we are in Australia and how much we can do to help”. Another said, “I realised how lucky I am … there are a lot of people doing it tough … it’s definitely given me a world view and the inclination to help out where I can”. These quotes capture the holistic nature of a Barker education and account for a level of grit that is rare amongst most teenagers. The development of resilience will be examined closely in the next iteration of this longitudinal study, in order that the School might continue to hone how it promotes this crucial characteristic. Opportunities Another key theme that played out repeatedly for the duration of the study was that of opportunities. Most of the interviews commenced by asking the students about the highlight of their year and most of the time their responses related back to opportunities they had had. These included excursions, cadets, work experience, productions, camps and representing the School in international events such Mock Trial and Robotics. The participants took part in an incredibly diverse range of activities and spoke of trying new things all the way through to their graduation. Initially, the students were impressed by the number of options on offer and the facilities at their disposal. Through their involvement in the vast cocurricular program, they also identified many additional benefits. One Year 3 student spoke of the camaraderie, saying that he was proud to make a relay team for JSHAA and even though they lost, it was still a great experience because “it made me feel part of the School even though I’ve just started.” This sentiment continued through High School, with many of the students talking about how events such as cheering the School at CAS and watching their peers perform at Coffee House (a student run popular music concert) all built a sense of belonging and pride. In a particularly profound insight, a Year 11 student was able to identify that one of the amazing by-products of a “phenomenal” cocurricular program is a close community. The range of opportunities at Barker College also shaped the students’ career aspirations. In Year 3, the students were asked what they wanted to be. Interestingly, a common thread was that their ideas were often shaped by their realm of experience. For example, “I want to join the army to take after
It has given me the tools to be who I want to be”
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 23
my grandfather’ and “I want to work at Microsoft, like my dad.” Whilst some students never wavered from their initial aspirations, others had their eyes opened to experiences that they never would have imagined when their journey began. In terms of fulfilling these objectives, many students appreciated the way the Senior School allowed them to focus on and extend subject areas of interest. They were appreciative of the fact that Barker students can choose from a limitless combination of subjects and have state-of-the-art facilities to develop their skills and interests. One student who wanted to be an engineer reflected on how the tech facilities and dedicated teachers have “given me the tools to become who I want to be.” Another student with aspirations of being a professional sportsperson spoke of how the coaching, support and facilities at the School had allowed him to far exceed his own expectations and to help this dream to become a reality. Another aspect of the Barker education that was seen as an opportunity was the coeducational nature of the Senior School. At the time of the study, female students joined the cohort in Year 10. The study also coincided with the announcement that the School would be transitioning to full coeducation. Consequently, this theme featured prominently in the remaining interviews. The participants identified a range of academic and social benefits, resulting in unanimous endorsement. The perceived benefits included: increased academic rigour, accelerated maturity, preparation for the workforce, improved social skills and a better learning environment. In terms of negative feedback, a few students did comment that the introduction was temporarily disruptive, particularly to their established friendships. The transition to full education will enable the positive aspects to be retained and amplified, whilst eliminating this potential drawback. The coeducational nature of the School is currently distinctive amongst proximate Independent Schools, and this was thus considered one of the unique opportunities of a Barker education. The second iteration of the study will also provide an opportunity to reflect on the coeducation transition. What do we do next time? The Barker Institute is proud to be continuing this study in two main ways. Firstly, all of the original participants have expressed interest in continuing the study beyond their graduation. The Barker Journey: Continued will continue to track the 2017 School leavers as they venture around the world to pursue a very diverse range of interests and aspirations. The original researcher, Dr Brad Merrick, will continue to investigate how Barker has shaped and prepared its alumnae to be successful and selfless global citizens. Secondly, the decision has been made to commence a second edition in 2019. The Barker Journey 2.0 will largely follow the same format as the original study, with the following modifications made to suit the changing context of School life. Much has changed since the original study began. The earliest entry point for students is now Preparatory School, rather than Year 3. The School is also currently undergoing the phased introduction of female students, with the aim to be fully coeducational by 2022. The decision has been made to recommence the study at the same entry point, rather than include the Preparatory students. Therefore, not all students will be entirely new to the School. Those who have attended the Preparatory School will be able to reflect on their experience there, whilst there will be an additional intake of students able to offer their initial impressions of Barker. Another change in the School context that required consideration was the size of the cohort. Given the increase in numbers, it would not be sustainable to interview the entire year group individually. However, the researchers did not want any students to feel excluded from the study and were also concerned about how the validity of the data would be impacted by limiting the participants. Hence, the decision was made to invite all students to participate,
24 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
but utilise group interviews as a means of keeping the quantity of data manageable. In the first year of the study, every student will participate in a small group interview, with some students also being selected for individual interviews. The individual interviews will aim to be representative of the year group, including a range of academic abilities, co-curricular interests and genders. The individual interviews will continue annually whilst the group interviews will be conducted again in Years 6 and 12. The questions will also be amended to suit the changing context. For example, it will no longer be pertinent to ask Year 10 students about the impact of introducing girls into the cohort. Rather, a question could be asked each year about the students’ perception of the coeducational environment. Another amendment to the methodology would involve more ongoing analysis of the results. Rather than leaving the bulk of the analysis until the completion of the study, there is benefit in analysing and publishing the results progressively. This would allow more in-depth analysis of each set of interviews, generate ongoing interest in the study and also make it easier for new researchers to pick up the study mid-way if required. In addition to the style of analysis conducted previously, there will also be some comparative analysis to examine changes in school culture between 2008 and the present. For example, towards the conclusion of the first study, there appeared to be an increasing concern for Aboriginal welfare and it will be interesting to track the development of this trend. Conclusion Examination of educational literature and consultation with Barker parents both reveal that quality education is about so much more than just grasping curriculum content. This Barker Journey study has illustrated that whilst Barker does inspire academic achievement, it is also able to deliver so much more. The participants all spoke of a unique and transformative School culture that has shaped them as people and helped them to flourish into the best possible version of themselves. They capitalised on the quality teaching and diverse opportunities at their fingertips, setting audacious goals and being supported and inspired as they pursued them. In so doing they also developed grateful and generous spirits, with hearts for social justice. Whilst their journeys were not always easy, they found role models and comrades to help them through the tough times, emerging as resilient, compassionate and impressive young people. Their journeys have each been unique, but are all a testament to the quality of the education they have received.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 25
References Darling-Hammond, L. 1997. Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching. National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future, New York. Duckworth, A. 2016, Grit. The Power of Passion and Perseverance. USA, Scribner Haidt, J., and Paresky, P. 2019 ‘By mollycoddling our children we’re fuelling mental illness in teenagers,’ The Guardian, 10 Jan. Hattie, J.A.C. 2003, October. Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Paper presented at the Building Teacher Quality: What does the research tell us ACER Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2003/4. Eastman, A. 2018. 2017 HSC Results: How to Pass their Successes onto their Successors. [online] Available at: http://www.barkerinstitute.com.au/media/2164/2017-hsc-results-how-to-pass-their-success.pdf. NESA, 2014, AUSTRALIAN PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS FOR TEACHERS. Celebrating quality teaching and inspirational teachers. [online] Available at: https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/wcm/connect/8658b2fa-62d3-40ca-a8d9-02309a2c67a1/ australian-professional-standards-teachers.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=. Wu, G., Feder, A., Cohen, H., Kim, JJ., Calderon, S., Charney DS., and Mathe, AA. 2013. ‘Understanding resilience,’ Frontiers in Behavioural Neuroscience, 7(10).
26 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The Barker Journey: The commencement of cohort 2
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Amanda Eastman Assistant to the Director of Research in Learning and the Barker Institute Dr Matthew Hill Director of Research in Learning and the Barker Institute Abstract In 2019, the Barker Institute commenced the second iteration of the ten year longitudinal study, the ‘Barker Journey’. The aim of this research is to track personal growth amongst Barker students, thus exploring what the School offers beyond the typically recognised academic and co-curricular success. The participants, the class of 2028, will be the first cohort to experience coeducation at Barker from Year 3 to 12. This report briefly outlines the methodology used throughout the research project and examines what the Year 3 interviews from 2019 reveal about the students’ journeys so far.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 27
Introduction The 2019 cohort of Year 3 students were immensely positive about their commencement at the Barker Junior School. Their enthusiasm and comradery was evident immediately. When asked to rate their experience so far using a thumbs up/down scale, all students gave an average or better rating with the vast majority giving a thumbs up. When these ratings were converted to a numerical scale from 1 to 5 (with 5 being the highest possible rating), the average rating was 4.5. For those who had come from preparatory schools other than Barker, they said that their Year 3 experience compared favourably to their previous school. Many students also reflected on how friendly their year group was. When asked about a highlight from the year, camp and STEAM were the most common responses, closely followed by sport. There were also multiple comments about how nice the teachers are. When asked to pick one word to describe their experience, some recurring responses were: amazing, awesome, outstanding, great and fun. A visualisation of their one-word responses is in the image on the previous page. Methodology The data collection process consisted of group interviews with sixty-six students from Year 3 and individual interviews with all fifteen female students and an equal number of randomly selected male students. The interview questions were designed to facilitate in-depth analysis of various aspects of school life and personal growth that defy traditional metrices: values, relationships, resilience, coeducation and goal setting. A variety of factors were considered in the selection of these themes. Educational research was used to ascertain pertinent issues in contemporary schooling; Barker’s masterplan was consulted to identify key focuses for School growth; previously conducted surveys of Barker parents were considered in order to establish which issues matter most to these key stakeholders; and results from version one of this longitudinal study were used to determine areas warranting further analysis. The responses from the year three interviews have been analysed below, and the process will be repeated annually until the students graduate. Values Research into school values identifies two common potential problems (Halstead, Halstead and Taylor 2005). Shared values may not be clearly articulated, or they may not reflect what is important in the broader community. Over the past decade, Barker has refined its statement of values through extensive community consultation. As a result, the School promotes and seeks to nurture five key values: commitment, compassion, courage, integrity and respect. This process has ensured that the common issues associated with school values do not apply at Barker. Whilst our values have been thoughtfully developed and disseminated, this does not automatically guarantee that they become embedded in school culture. Thus, the question arises, to what extent are these values embodied at the School? To begin the process of understanding how these values are embodied for this cohort, the Year 3 students were asked ‘What do you think a person at Barker should be like?’ The question was written in consultation with the Year 3 teachers to ensure that the language was accessible to that age group. The word ‘values’ was deliberately emitted to prevent the students from being led into reciting the official School values. Rather, the researchers were seeking genuine and spontaneous responses. The students were then asked ‘Is this the case? Are there people at Barker who are like this? Who are they?’ Very few of the participants specifically named the Barker values. Those who did had attended Barker in Prep School, suggesting that over time the values had begun to permeate their thinking about how people should behave. For a vast number of the remaining students, kindness was the most important character trait. This could be considered synonymous with 28 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
compassion, suggesting that the values they have brought from their prior experience are enmeshed in the School’s values (thus validating the process of community consultation and exempting the School from the criticism of irrelevant values). When elaborating on what kindness meant to them, many actually cited examples of helpfulness, such as picking up someone’s books when they dropped them. However, the extent to which these values are actually reflected in the cohort could be considered an area for growth. Students shared that some of their peers, along with many of their teachers (particularly their classroom teacher), did act like a person at Barker should. Along with this, most students shared that there were (in their opinion) other students whose actions were not consistent with the ideal characteristics they had identified. It is exciting that the students themselves do see the teachers as exemplars of good behavioural traits. Halstead and Taylor (2005, p.11) promote the role of “implicit values education which derives from the teacher as exemplar”. Thus, the clear demonstration of Barker values amongst the staff bodes well for the anticipated propagation of values throughout the student body. The growth in this area will be tracked throughout the study to determine how values are shaped over time. Increasing congruence and shared understanding should be a by-product of time amongst the Barker community. Indeed, in the previous iteration of the study, the graduating students reported personal growth and collective values as some of the most outstanding aspects of their Barker experience. Relationships The theme of relationships will be tracked throughout the ten year study in order to determine the roles that peers, parents and staff play in character formation and academic success. In the previous iteration of the study it was clear that the comradery of the year group and dedication of teachers were two of the most valued and transformative aspects of the School experience. Indeed, these relationships formed a unique School culture that deeply impacted the students in the study.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 29
Keifer, Alley and Ellerbrock (2015) emphasise the role of primary school peer relationships in developing a sense of engagement and belonging. It was pleasing to hear the participants reflect positively on their developing friendships. The School’s provision of shared experiences such and a diverse co-curricular program had also enriched these relationships. As will often be the case, there were a couple of examples of unedifying peer relationships cited in the interviews. Whilst this is never desirable, it was pleasing to see that those involved felt well supported by the staff and had been able to seek help and observe improvement. Many of the Year 3 students also spoke of how their parents played a pivotal role when help was needed. For example, one student spoke of the distress associated with getting out during the highly esteemed playground handball contests. Consequently, he spoke of how his father had practised with him to help him achieve more court time. Others detailed how their parents had helped them to understand homework or rote-learn times’ tables. Research points to the fact that as children mature, they are less likely to turn to their parents and as such need positive role models amidst their peers and staff to help them navigate the possible perils of adolescence (Biddulph 2018). Furthermore, Kiefer et al (2015) suggest that the teacher’s role in establishing a sense of belonging is pivotal to academic success. Investigations over the next decade will reveal the extent that this is true for the current Year 3 cohort. Resilience Resilience is considered a vitally important characteristic (Duckworth 2016) and yet it appears to be in decline amongst adolescents in recent years (Haidt and Paresky 2019). In the previous iteration of this study, many of the students demonstrated remarkable resilience, thus prompting the researchers to examine what educational experiences had stimulated the development of this trait (Eastman 2017). In this iteration of the study, age appropriate questions were designed to measure and track the development of resilience. Interestingly, when asked about what had been hard this year, the responses almost unanimously focused on academic challenges. Amongst the Year 3 cohort, many reported that Year 3 was much harder than Prep School, but about half of those were able to see harder work as a positive. This is an important step in developing strategies for coping with hardship. It also is therefore an area for growth for many of the participants and the School will continue to implement strategies for improving resilience. Coeducation The researchers deliberately did not ask the students directly about coeducation, despite this being the first cohort of coeducation in the Barker College Junior School (Years 3 – 6). Rather, they were asked more general questions such as ‘What do you like about Barker?’ ‘How is year 3 different to last year?’ and ‘What has been hard about being at Barker this year?’ Thus, they were given the opportunity to raise the issue if it genuinely factored into their thinking, rather than being led to a particular response. This allowed the researchers to gain more sincere insight into how the students were being effected by coeducation transition. Interestingly, gender issues did not feature in the majority of their answers, suggesting that for many, it was a normalised part of their School experience. In contrast, when the students in the previous iteration of the study were interviewed in year 10 (when female students previously joined the cohort), they did report some initial disruption to their studies and their friendship groups. Notwithstanding the adjustment issues, these students all eventually spoke positively of the coeducational environment and
30 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
could clearly articulate the benefits of such an approach. The early results of version two of this study suggest that the presence of both genders from the outset has negated these adjustment issues and magnified the benefits of a coeducational environment. On the few occasions that coeducation was raised, it was by female students who had come from an allgirls environment and found that having boys in the cohort made the environment friendlier. One potential criticism of coeducation in the literature is that girls’ presence is diminished in the company of male students, leading to their invisibility both in the classroom and on the sporting field (Spender 1982, Miller 1986). Despite being decades old, this research is sometimes still cited by those who advocate for single sex schooling. The researchers sought to determine whether this assertion retains any validity in the 21st century. The girls themselves did not appear to perceive any disadvantage. A couple of them did mention that they enjoyed spending time together in the ‘girls only’ space in the Library, and enjoyed the ‘Girls Got Game’ sporting program that had been tailored to them. Any observable prominence of male students in shared spaces could be accounted for by gender ratios at the time of the study, rather than power imbalance. The researchers will continue to examine the use of shared spaces throughout the study, particularly as the gender ratios even out over time. Another previously purported argument against coeducation is that boys and girls should be separated on account of different learning preferences. In contrast, Gill (2004) suggests that differences in learning preferences differ more between individuals than between sexes. To test this hypothesis, the qualitative interview data relating to learning preferences was graphed and subjected to numerical analysis. While slightly more girls than boys preferred to learn in groups and slightly more boys than girls preferred to learn individually or on the iPad, the small sample size means that this is more likely to be accounting for individual differences rather than gendered preferences. These inclinations could be considered as averages rather than absolutes. The most notable observation was that learning preferences were quite varied, leading to the conclusion that a variety of methods should be employed regardless of the classroom’s gender composition. Furthermore, these preferences may be seen as similar to the theory of learning styles, which contemporary educational research shows have a relatively minor impact on student improvement. Hattie and Yates (2013) conclude that there is ‘no recognised evidence suggesting that knowing or diagnosing learning styles will help you to teach your students any better’ (p.176). Therefore, this potential criticism of coeducational environments does not appear to hold great weight in this context. Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 31
Goal setting/aspirations Questions in this area looked at both short term goals and long term aspirations. In terms of short term goals, the students were asked ‘What is something you would like to get better at this year?’ and ‘How can you make that happen?’ Overwhelmingly, the responses to the first question focused on academic goals. The researchers wondered whether the responses were being led by a previous question ‘How do you like to learn?’ When the order of questions was changed, the students still tended to focus on academic goals rather than social or sporting goals. When the students were asked what they could do to achieve their goals, many hesitated and were unable to identify what steps they could take. This particular question was driven by research which suggests that self-reflexivity and student expectations have an immense impact on student achievement (Hattie 2017). Furthermore, Lee and Gavine (2003) conclude that “involving pupils in their learning can raise attainment levels in spelling and punctuation”. Thus, there is scope to improve the students’ ability to articulate their goals and know how to achieve and exceed them. In relation to their longer term career aspirations, there were two key observations made. Firstly, many students named careers that had not existed when the previous cohort completed their Year 3 interviews in 2008, such as YouTuber and gamer. It is also a difficult task for them as we know that some will probably end up in careers that still don’t exist even now. Thus, there is an urgent need for educational institutions to prepare students for an unknown future (Barnett 2004), especially with growing pressure from parents who feel that “school education should facilitate this development (Holdrege 2012, p.1). To this end, Barker teaching and learning programs increasingly focus on building skills in technological literacy, executive functioning, emotional intelligence and inquiry-based learning. Another important aspect of tracking this preparedness will be the ‘Barker Journey Continued’ research initiative whereby students from the initial cohort (Year 12 class of 2017) will continue to contribute to the research with interviews regarding their post-School endeavours. The second key observation relating to career aspirations was the identification of a slight gender bias that it will be interesting to track as the cohort progresses. Research by Archer et al (2013) suggests that societal expectations influence girls’ career aspirations from a young age, resulting in less girls aspiring towards careers in the realm of science. Amongst this cohort, responses showed that 20% of the girls aspired towards STEM-related careers, compared to 44% of the male students. This finding was also mirrored when the boys spoke about their interests, with many of the boys citing STEAM as their favourite thing in the Junior School, whereas this response did not feature amongst the female students. The universal significance of these results is not claimed in any way, it is important to remember that these are specific answers from a unique group of students and so assumptions should not be made about the role of gender, however the progression of these students through various fields will be of interest over the coming years’ research. In this way, such questions will be repeated throughout the longitudinal study in order to ascertain how the coeducational environment impacts the students’ career aspirations. In particular, there are many initiatives, such as Maths Week and Science Week that promote STEM subjects amongst all students, irrespective of gender.
32 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Conclusion The inaugural interviews for version two of the ‘Barker Journey’ study revealed interesting insights in each of the five focus areas. The students’ initial impressions of the School shed favourable light on the teachers, the facilities and the opportunities available. The questioning did reveal growth potential in the areas of shared values, resilience and goal setting. This was not unexpected, particularly in light of the fact that the 2017 graduates who participated in the previous manifestation of the study identified these as significant growth areas throughout their tenure at the School. Thus, it is anticipated that the current cohort will improve likewise and the researchers will continue to explore why and how this character growth develops throughout a Barker education. The researchers wish to thank the Year 3 teachers, along with senior Junior School staff including Mr Martin Lubrano, Head of Junior School and Mr Phillip Heath, Head of Barker College, for facilitating this research and for the amazing work they do with these wonderful Year 3 students every day. Thank you also to the young students themselves as they start out on a life-shaping journey together at Barker.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 33
References: Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B. & Wong, B. 2013. ‘Not girly, not sexy, not glamorous: primary school girls’ and parents’ constructions of science aspirations.’ Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 21(1), 171-194. Barnett, R. 2004. Learning for an unknown future. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3), 247-260. Biddulph, S. 2018. Raising Boys in the Twenty-First Century. Harper Collins, London. Duckworth, A. 2016, Grit. The Power of Passion and Perseverance. USA, Scribner. Eastman, A. 2017. Reflections from the ‘Barker Journey’ study 2016 interviews. Available online: http://www.barkerinstitute.com.au/media/2197/reflections-from-the-barker-journey-study-2016-interviews-bijournal-2017.pdf. Gill, J. 2004. Beyond the Great Divide: Coeducation or Single Sex. University of NSW, Sydney. Haidt, J., and Paresky, P. 2019 ‘By mollycoddling our children we’re fuelling mental illness in teenagers,’ The Guardian, 10 Jan. Halstead, M., and Taylor, MJ. (eds) 2005. Values in Education and Education in Values. Routledge Falmer, Oxon. Hattie, J. & Yates, G. 2013. Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn. Routledge. Holdrege, C. 2012. Education and the Presence http://natureinstitute.org/pub/ic/ic28/educ_unknown.pdf.
of
the
unknown.
Available
Online:
Kiefer, SM., Alley, KM., & Ellerbrock, CR. 2015. Teacher and Peer Support for Young Adolescents’ Motivation, Engagement, and School Belonging. Research in Middle Level Education 38(8). Lee, D., & Gavine, D. 2003. ‘Goal-setting and self-assessment in Year 7 Students,’ Educational Research, 45(1), 49-59. Miller, P. 1986. Long Division: State Schooling in South Australian Society. Wakefield Press, Adelaide. Spender, D. 1982. Invisible Women: The Schooling Scandal. Women’s Press, London.
34 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Girls’ interest, enjoyment and participation in secondary school mathematics
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Kester Lee Director of Studies Abstract In recent years, developing Australia’s capacity in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects has become a national priority. It is also well known that girls tend to report lower rates of participation, enjoyment and self-belief in these subjects. With the introduction of girls to Barker in Year 7, 2020, it was timely to undertake a study in this area. Therefore, the purpose of the Travelling Fellowship was to identify ways that girls’ interest, enjoyment and participation in secondary school mathematics can be increased and to provide key recommendations for coeducational mathematics teachers. This paper is a brief summary of the full report tabled to the Barker Foundation, to which the author extends his thanks for its generous financial support of this Travelling Fellowship. Background Conventional wisdom may say that boys tend to be stronger in numeracy while girls are stronger in literacy. Data on spatial and mathematical reasoning, reading, writing and other related measures is often used to support these claims, though a closer examination shows they are still quite contestable and open to interpretation. Nevertheless, on the back of these claims, there has been a well-established and accepted movement in Australia (and internationally) to increase boys’ engagement in reading and writing. Therefore, it would seem just as worthy a cause to look at increasing girls’ enjoyment, participation and engagement in mathematics and the STEM fields. With regard to Australia, research from large-scale international studies such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS) has found that when examining mathematics and science achievement, “there were no gender differences in 22 of the 42 countries that tested at Year 8, including Australia” (Thomson et al. 2012, p.20, emphasis added). No gender differences were found within any single state or territory either, including New South Wales (NSW). Therefore, at least with regard to achievement in mathematics, the conventional wisdom of gender differences appears to have been overstated. Instead of concentrating on mathematics achievement, this study focuses on areas where differences are more certain and observable. Consider the following:
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 35
•
There is a participation difference. Enrolment figures in high school Mathematics Extension courses show consistent under-representation of girls. From 2014-2018, according to NESA, the percentage of Mathematics Extension 1 and 2 candidates who were female was approximately 41% and 36% respectively, while 51% of HSC candidates were female.
•
This imbalance in Mathematics Extension courses also occurs at Barker. However, the situation is more complex as the Barker gender ratios from year to year are not weighted evenly and, with girls arriving in Year 10, their formative mathematics experiences and subsequent pathways have often been set by the time they have arrived at Barker.
•
There is an interest difference. Watt (2008) has noted that girls in Australia are less likely to follow a mathematics-related career path. There being no achievement gender difference as noted in Thomson et al above, the participation differences in mathematics courses and careers are likely explained by some inherent interest disparity. Watt et al (2012) later confirmed that in the Australian setting, there is some difference in the “intrinsic value” that boys and girls place on mathematics-related careers.
•
There is an enjoyment difference. In some international studies, Frenzel et al (2007) reported that although girls and boys received similar grades in mathematics, girls reported significantly less enjoyment and more anxiety than boys. Luo et al (2009) also report statistically significant differences in mathematics anxiety in middle school students (with girls having higher anxiety levels than boys) and with Year 9 being the age of peak anxiety. In non-Australian settings, these studies appear to be relatable to the Australian context given on-the-ground classroom experiences and the other Australian results stated above.
Societal and cultural influences such as gender stereotyping by parents, teachers and peers are often identified as factors underpinning these differences (e.g. Gunderson et al. 2012). Research conducted by Forgasz and Leder (2017) notes that among those with gendered views, the responses are typically in favour of boys. For those who might consider these gender-stereotyped views to be anachronistic and likely self-correcting over time, Forgasz and Leder draw the startling conclusion that “younger adult respondents are more likely to espouse traditionally gender-stereotyped beliefs than older participants” (p. 279). Therefore, it is imperative to be proactive when addressing gender equity issues in mathematics. All of the challenging gender differences discussed above will be real for Barker’s introduction of girls to the Year 7 2020 cohort. However, it is an excellent opportunity to rewrite conventional wisdom and show the world beyond the Mint Gates that girls in a coeducational context can experience real success and engagement with mathematics. It may take time to realise fully, but with some strategic thought (of which this report is but one component), we hope that every learner, girls and boys, will be able to thrive in their study of mathematics at Barker.
Study Tour Summary •
Research Conference in San Diego The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) is the world’s largest association of mathematics educators, drawn from the United states and Canada. Panel discussions included the issue of equity in mathematics education, defined in racial, socioeconomic and gender terms.
36 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
•
University of Nevada Dr Harsha Perera (Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology) is an expert in motivation and engagement for secondary school students with a particular interest in the STEM fields. I was able to consult with him and Dr Rachael Robnett (Associate Professor of Psychology) about recent research on girls’ education in STEM fields.
•
School Visit 1: The Alexander Dawson School, Las Vegas Dawson is an independent school (Pre-Kindergarten to Year 8) with an enrolment of 700 students. I was able to observe several mathematics lessons, including interviews with seven girls in Years 7/8 and a meeting with the mathematics teaching staff. Female students expressed that they needed more time to really understand concepts, whereas boys either “got it quickly” or “didn’t care as much” if they did not. Girls felt they were more likely to take assessment results to heart whereas boys were more likely to shrug off a bad result. The mathematics staff added that boys thrived on competition, placing an emphasis on task completion, whereas girls tended to emphasise conceptual understanding.
•
School Visit 2: All Saints’ Episcopal School, Fort Worth At All Saints School, similar to Barker, but smaller in size, I was able to observe several Middle School mathematics lessons, including an excellent one involving grouped seating and group work, where the groups had been engineered to be of mixed genders. With careful guidance from the teacher, students were able to work well together and achieve high standards of learning outcomes.
•
School Visit 3: Good Shepherd Episcopal School, Dallas Good Shepherd is a K-8 school and their mathematics staff were particularly effusive about the work of Jo Boaler, a well-known mathematics educator and researcher who emphasises the importance of mathematical growth mindsets, having conducted research with Carol Dweck in this area. Staff advised of the good potential of group work and team discussion and the necessity of strong behaviour management.
•
School Visit 4: Parish Episcopal School, Dallas Parish is a K-12 school with a hard-driving and innovative flavour. The school’s campus is a repurposed ExxonMobil Research and Development centre. Educationally progressive, Parish had many pioneering programs, particularly in STEM fields and it had systems of project-based learning. An experienced female member of the mathematics staff advised of the “speed advantage” that boys had compared to girls, not due to intelligence or affinity, but because of boys’ tendency to “do first, think later,” whereas girls tended not to put pen to paper until they had thought through the issues first and were confident.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 37
Conclusions Mathematics staff should be passionate about the subject, form positive relationships, have strong classroom management and use alternative assessment practices In my discussions with Dr Robnett about the best type of teacher for an incoming Year 7 coeducational cohort, she was careful to point out that having a female teacher does not automatically result in better outcomes for female students. Indeed, the majority of mathematics teachers in the USA are female and yet girls still face challenges in engaging with mathematics. The quality of the teacher is most important, regardless of their gender, including: •
Dynamic passion for the subject
•
Ability to form positive, warm relationships with students. The teacher-student relationship is crucial for any student, but particularly for girls and for Year 7 (the first year of high school).
•
Strong and equitable behaviour management, while being carefully attuned to gender dynamics in the classroom such as using inclusive language, speaking sensitively about marks, proactively managing poor behaviour.
•
Good assessment practices, being able to assess achievement and provide feedback in many different ways, not just pen and paper tests. Traditional tests tend to advantage boys in terms of their competitiveness, emphasis on speed and higher outward confidence.
Mathematics staff should encourage more group discussion and make physical spaces more engaging At all four schools I visited, I was struck by the constant presence of group work and group discussion. As Year 7 and 8 are considered part of the Middle School (Years 5-8) in the United States, it was common to see classrooms that were similar to the Barker Junior School; that is, they were colourful and engaging spaces, filled with technology, with grouped seating (not rows) and sometimes alternative furniture. Girls seemed to thrive in this environment, especially when given the chance to explain something to another student or work together. Mixing boys and girls in groups may be challenging at first, but ultimately beneficial, rather than having students gravitate to different halves of the classroom, creating group mentalities based on gender. Mathematics staff should recognise and encourage examples of female role models in mathematics While some might consider this recommendation tokenistic, the conversations I had with female students indicated that they took notice of such things and were often encouraged by having female role models in mathematics and other STEM fields. Both Dr Robnett as well as female teachers from the schools I visited were keen to stress this. Role models need not be limited to having female teachers in the classroom. I was directed to the research work of Walton, Murphy and Ryan (2015) who spoke about female “belongingness” in STEM fields and the “stereotype threat” that undermines confidence and performance for people who are in settings where their group is negatively stereotyped (such as girls in mathematics). I am familiar with the research myself, having
38 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
published a paper (Lee & Anderson 2014) based on my interviews with male and female students across a number of schools that showed a strong bias (44 to 17) towards male figures when asked to name someone “who is really interested in mathematics”, with fathers and male peers the dominant figures named. The “stereotype threat” can be mitigated by recognising examples of female representation and providing female role models in these areas. In the schools I visited, practical measures included “fixed” features (including alumni posters and advertisements) and more personal interactions (such as guest speakers and female mentors for girls). To be clear, this does not suggest that we focus solely on female role models, only that we ensure that they are included equitably alongside any male role models. Schools should educate parents about stereotypes and growth mindsets At each school that I visited, staff commented on the parental effect on gendered expectations in mathematics. In particular, mothers often comforted their daughters after a bad result by saying that they were not good at mathematics and this “problematic comforting” often led to reduced expectations. It can sometimes be a similar story at Barker, where parents may be, sometimes understandably, very quick to comfort their children by talking down their own mathematical experiences. In public settings, Barker staff need to continue to combat negative stereotyping and problematic comforting in mathematics. We ought to replace such thinking with Jo Boaler’s “mathematical growth mindset” – it is a peculiarity that most people believe that proficiency in mathematics is a fixed trait which you are born with (or not, as the case may be!) whereas in many other areas and fields we recognise and champion the value of hard work and training. Jo Boaler’s (and Carol Dweck’s) research shows that this is not the case, and that anyone can attain proficiency at mathematics. Moving from a fixed mindset to a growth mindset is a message that we need to be repeating time and time again, to parents, students and even our own staff; that we have high expectations of all students, male and female; that we will encourage and support all students to achieve their best and that all students can thrive in their study of Mathematics at Barker.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 39
References Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., Goetz, T. 2007. Girls and mathematics - A hopeless issue? A control-value approach to gender differences in emotions towards mathematics. European Journal of Psychology of Education 22, 497. Forgasz, H. J. & Leder, G. C. 2017. Persistent gender inequities in mathematics achievement and expectations in Australia, Canada and the UK. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29, 261-282. Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., Levine, S. C., Beilock, S. L. 2012. The role of parents and teachers in the development of gender-related math attitudes. Sex Roles, 66, 153-166. Lee, K. J., Anderson, J. 2014. Who is really interested in mathematics? An investigation of lower secondary students’ mathematical role models. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh & A. Prescott (Eds.), Curriculum in focus: Research guided practice. Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 397-404. Sydney: MERGA. Luo, X., Wang, F., Luo, Z. 2009. Investigation and analysis of mathematics anxiety in middle school students. Journal of Mathematics Education 2(2), 12-19. Thomson, S., Hillman, K., Wernert, N. 2012. Monitoring Australian Year 8 student achievement internationally: TIMSS 2011. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research. Walton, G. M., Murphy, M. C., Ryan, A. M. 2015. Stereotype threat in organizations: Implications for equity and performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behaviour 2, 523-550. Watt, H. G. 2008. What motivates females and males to pursue sex-stereotyped careers? In H. G. Watt & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Gender and occupational outcomes: Longitudinal assessments of individual, social, and culture influences (pp.87-113). Washington, DC: USA: American Psychological Association. Watt, H. G., Shapka, J. D., Morris, Z. A., Durik, A. M., Keating, D. P. & Eccles, J. S. 2012. Gendered motivational processes affecting high school mathematics participation, educational aspirations, and career plans: A comparison of samples from Australia, Canada and the United States. Development Psychology, 48(6), 1594-1611.
40 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Beyond the Mint Gates Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 41
42 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The untended garden: Reflections on designing and implementing a teaching and learning framework within a coeducational, international school context
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Dr Timothy Scott History Teacher Abstract The focus of this paper is to reflect on the development of a quality teaching and learning framework within a coeducational, international school context. Using an international school based in Germany, and its partnerships with other German national schools, this paper will posit that for the successful development of a quality teaching and learning framework in a coeducational, international school context collaborative leadership that works towards authentically delivering on the school’s mission, vision and values is crucial. By extension, then, such an approach to the development of a quality teaching and learning framework should also be at the core of what is done within any school. Introduction This is the “deep work” of teaching: designing instruction that takes teachers deep into content and deep into consideration of their students’ learning…it goes far beyond selecting activities and writing tests; it extends past the teachers’ performance to address the bedrock of the whole educational enterprise – demonstrated student learning. (Reeves in Knight 2013, p.30) Teaching and learning frameworks can assist in delineating content and processes that teachers should convey as part of learners’ schooling. They can also provide the basis for strategic thinking about pedagogy within a school’s own context. They can contribute to the construction of an environment whereby teachers can develop the belief in themselves, and their competencies as educators, to positively impact learner outcomes. The reflections within this paper convey that the successful development of a quality teaching and learning framework in a coeducational, international school context is not just centred on collaborative leadership working towards authentically delivering on the school’s mission, vision and values. The successful implementation of a teaching and learning framework is also determined by the extent to which coherence, capacity and professional capital have been encouraged and maintained.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 43
About the international school …the nature of international schools can be puzzling. Most of us go to school within one education system. It is this experience that forges our educational beliefs. When families first explore expatriate education they discover a world of differences. The nature of the differences is confusing and can call into question some of the beliefs and values that families hold dear. (Findlay 1997, p. 5). The case study for this paper is one of Germany’s international schools. With approximately 300 learners, the international school maintains connections with other international schools in Germany as well as German national schools in its local area. Learners at the school typically have a non-European passport, hailing mostly from the United States, Canada, and Korea. It would not be uncommon for a learner to arrive at this international school, already able to speak two or three languages other than English, which is another indicator of the international nature of the school environment. Learners who attend this international school in Germany are categorised academically as Third Culture Kids (TCKs), the accepted definition for which is: …a person who has spent a significant part of his or her developmental years outside the parent’s culture. The TCK frequently builds relationships to all of the cultures, while not having full ownership in any. Although elements from each culture may be assimilated into the TCK’s life experience, the sense of belonging is in relationship to others of similar background (Pollock and Van Reken 2009, p. 13). This definition was used as a starting point in considering what the teaching and learning framework at this school might look like. The broad characteristics of the learner who attended the school were also taken into consideration. In this way, the learner was positioned at the centre of the teaching and learning framework. Developing a teaching and learning framework in a coeducational, international school in Germany Are there certain characteristics which define an international school, and if so what are they? Is it because children from several nationalities attend? If so, then many schools in Britain could be described as international. Is it determined by the curriculum? If so, then only the schools offering the International Baccalaureate would qualify. There are many schools overseas offering a U.S. or U.K. curriculum or another mixture which would presumably [result in their being] rated as national schools overseas. It may well be that many schools overseas consider themselves and indeed call themselves international yet never consider that while teaching an international curriculum to a group of students from many different nationalities, the teaching faculty is 95 percent British or American and inevitably they perpetuate certain national and cultural values. (Fail in Pollock & Van Reken 2009, p.208) The purpose of the framework was to provide structure and direction to the teaching and learning that was taking place in the international school, its teaching and learning environment having been described by one staff member as “an untended garden”. The learner was positioned at the centre of the framework, contributing to an alignment between what is expected of learners in the world today and the approaches to teaching and learning within the school. Fadel, Bialik and Trilling (2015), who were influential in the conceptualisation of the teaching and learning framework, speak about how the education of children, at least in theory …is meant to prepare them to fit in with the world of the future, empowering them to actively work to improve it further. Yet there is growing evidence (as we will see later) from scientific studies, from employer surveys, from widespread public opinion, and from educators themselves, that our education systems, globally, are not delivering fully on this promise—students are often not adequately prepared to succeed in today’s, let alone tomorrow’s, world (Fadel, Bialik and Trilling 2015, p.8). 44 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The teaching and learning framework articulated what the school believed its learners should learn so as to be equipped for a world that was not entirely certain, thereby contributing to their overall success. Furthermore, the rationale behind developing the framework was to balance against educational and cultural exceptionalism or bias that ultimately worked against the principles upon which international and intercultural education is based. The dominant cultural background of learners and faculty at the international school was American. Discussions with non-American faculty and families at the international school highlighted how this was a problem and that there was an urgency in creating an environment that did not favour one cultural background over another. The sentiment expressed to this author in conversations with non-American parents is best described by Pollock & van Reken when they cite a study about Australian TCKs and their experience with standardised placement tests at international schools that are in reality based heavily on American standards in testing and curriculum content: Why are such [placement] tests invalid? Firstly, such aptitude testing is rarely carried out in Australian schools…There has long been a belief among Australian educators that no scores are conclusive because of the enormous range of variables involved… Secondly, there is no doubt that the US tests are biased in content. Small children may be asked to complete a sheet by filling in the initial letter of a word represented on the page by a picture. One example of this is of a window with flowing material covering much of the glassed area. The Australian child would automatically write “C” for curtains and be marked incorrect, as the required answer is a “D” for drapes. Further evidence of testing which requires cultural understanding is a general knowledge test for primary school children asking what is eaten with turkey at Thanksgiving…the answer required is cranberry sauce. (Pollock & van Reken 2009, p.209). Developing a framework was a response, then, to friction between the school’s strategic planning processes, that sought to create authentically globally-minded learners who would impact their world, and a teaching and learning culture whose disposition was to perpetuate certain national and cultural values that were ultimately at odds with what being an international school entails. Concepts The first concept underpinning the teaching and learning framework was knowledge. The definition offered by Fadel, Bialik and Trilling was adopted. This definition interpreted knowledge to be a combination of modern subjects, such as robotics, entrepreneurship, coding, and media communications taught alongside traditional, and foundational, subjects such as reading, mathematics and language (Fadel, Bialik & Trilling 2015, p.31). The teaching and learning framework not only accommodated what was current in the classroom but also what should be incorporated into learners’ experiences as they were readied for the world beyond the school’s front doors. The second concept key to the teaching and learning framework was skills. The work of Fadel, Bialik and Trilling in identifying skills that contributed to learners’ readiness for the post-school world sat alongside that of Fullan’s New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (Fadel, Bialik & Trilling 2015 cf. Fullan and Longworthy 2014; Fullan, Quinn, & McEachen 2017). The skills considered important were: creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, communication, and citizenship. The rationale behind their choice, over others, was that as competencies, they were considered crucial for learners to have in order to flourish as citizens of the world (Fullan, Quinn, & McEachen 2017, p.16).
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 45
The final concept was character. This appears in both Fadel and Fullan’s literature on what is required of learners to be successful contribute to their communities and serve as ethical citizens (Fadel, Bialik & Trilling 2015, p.80 cf. Fullan, Quinn, & McEachen 2017, p.16). The school’s interpretation of character was heavily based on Dow’s Virtuous Minds, in which seven traits are discussed, each identified as intellectual virtues (Dow 2013). These traits were courage, carefulness, curiosity, honesty, fair-mindedness, tenacity, and humility. After discussions with the academic leadership team, an eighth was added: independence. On their own, the eight traits were regarded as the school’s learner profile. That is, an articulation of what learners would be once they had finished their schooling. Inspired by the International Baccalaureate Learner Profile, and the Cambridge International Learner Profile, the international school’s Learner Profile consisted of “we” statements such as: “We are tenacious. We do not give up but work through difficulties in order to gain a deeper understanding of the truth. We are engaged intellectually and socially, solving new problems. We are flexible and strive for excellence”. The concepts of knowledge, skills and character were bound together by learners building their awareness of their own learning and cognitive ability, or meta-cognition (Fadel, Bialik & Trilling 2015). This is essential for activating transference, building expertise, and establishing lifelong learning habits. Learners would be provided the opportunity to reflect on how they learnt as they performed the learning tasks of gaining knowledge and understanding, building skills and developing character. On the outer edge of the teaching and learning framework, encompassing all teaching and learning processes, were the concepts of engage, equip and evaluate. The individual definitions of these were directed towards faculty and staff. The purpose of this level of the teaching and learning framework was to incorporate actively those with whom the learners would engage on a daily basis. The exploration of each of these concepts was through key focus questions such as, but not limited to: how do teachers go about deepening their knowledge and refining their skills? What happens in the classroom when teachers apply their learning? What do teachers need to know and do in response to learner needs? New Pedagogies for Deep Learning Fullan argues that Deep Learning situates learners as individuals who act upon the world, thereby transforming themselves and the world itself (Fullan, Quinn & McEachen 2017, p.xvii). The goal of deep learning is to create learners who can thrive in turbulent, complex times, apply thinking new situations, and change the world (Fullan, Quinn & McEachen 2017, p.13). The position of the learner and the outcome of deep learning made deep learning an attractive proposition for framing of teaching and learning in an international context. New Pedagogies for Deep Learning was considered to have a strong alignment with the nature of international and intercultural learning, the outcome of which having been broadly identified, since 1985, as equipping learners to come to grips with an increasingly interdependent world (Hayden 2006, p.5 cf. CIS 2017, p.14). The allure of Deep Learning was also found in its applicability to learners who might be disconnected from schooling. One of the central traits of TCKs is their mobility, a factor that Hattie consistently describes as one of the single most negative influences on learners’ capacities to learn (Hattie 2009, pp.81-2 cf. Hattie 2011). Therefore, for an international school whose main clientele were learners who had in some cases already attended four or five schools in different cultural and linguistic contexts on account of their parents’ work, any teaching and learning framework that was adopted had to be something that could support learners in their learning as they moved from country to country. Through its focus on global competencies, New Pedagogies for Deep Learning provided the basis of a teaching and learning framework that sought to foster shared understanding free from the scope and sequencing of a specific curriculum that might otherwise provide limitations to TCKs’ learning. 46 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
As a specific example of how this worked in practice, the international school and a German national school came together to create a joint venture bilingual primary school for children in Years 1-4. As a part of the German system, the primary school curriculum was that of the state in which the schools were located. Learners who opted to progress to the international school would have had to transition from a national system to an international school that did not share the same approaches to curriculum and pedagogy. The global competencies outlined in the New Pedagogies for Deep Learning model and integrated in the international school’s teaching and learning framework provided a basis from which deficiencies in English-language learner academic backgrounds could be addressed. External Accountabilities The international school was accredited with several external accreditation agencies. One of these was the Council of International Schools (CIS). Accreditation with CIS required international schools to have an operational framework that promoted intercultural learning with a view to developing global citizens (CIS 2017, pp. 14-15). Additionally, the development of a teaching and learning framework had to demonstrate a connection with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (CIS 2017, pp.24-27). In turn, this contributed to the teaching and learning framework developing and maintaining both ethnic and gender equality in relation to access to education (CRC Article 2, 28 & 29). “External accountabilities” is a term that stretches to include what administration in the international school referred to as the “moral owners”. This term identified a specific group of people within the school’s wider community, beyond that of the learners, faculty and staff. Often consisting of school parents, but not exclusively, the school’s “moral owners” formed an advisory group to whom the school would report and from whom the school would seek advice. Of particular concern to the school’s “moral owners” was the development of curricular programs that offered high quality learning opportunities which would be transferable and highly regarded when TCKs transitioned to their home countries. In short, there was a desire amongst the school’s wider community to see implemented an academically rigorous and interculturally sensitive curriculum that recognised the diversity of the clientele that availed themselves of the school’s services. Implementation of the teaching and learning framework Learning-through-culture is to be distinguished from simply learning about cultures other than one’s own. It is a concept that recognises that there are distinctive ways in which cultures constitute both the process and the product of thinking and that these in turn become distinctive elements of learning. It is important not to confuse the fact that there may be culturally different ways of learning and culturally different things to learn (Feinberg 1998, p.146). The implementation of the teaching and learning framework was more complicated than initially determined. External accreditation with CIS provided an objective validation of this assessment; core to accreditation was the school’s purpose, direction and decision-making being guided demonstrably by the school’s vision, mission and values (CIS 2017, p.25). Complications with implementation came from a lack of coherence and capacity building, an issue which highlights the authenticity of Fullan’s own conclusions that the fostering of coherence and capacity, particularly amongst faculty and staff, are crucial for successful change management (Fullan & Quinn 2016; Fullan 2016).
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 47
Building coherence For the teaching and learning framework to become a reality, it was crucial to have supportive and collaborative leadership working authentically on delivering on the school’s mission, vision and values (cf. Blandford and Shaw 2001, p.16; Cambridge 1998, p.199; Rodgers 1995, p.53). In the present case study, faculty and staff were aware that the school had a mission, vision and a set of values. They were less certain in answering the question about how they deployed the school’s mission, vision and values into their own classrooms. It was considered to be something achieved, for the most part, intuitively. The school’s leadership was supportive of the initiative to formalise the learning processes that took place within the school. There was a recognition that it would assist in aligning what was taking place in the classroom with what the school stated its purpose to be. In other words, the proposed framework provided coherence in order to give the learning system within the school a greater focus in direction, cultivate collaborative cultures, deepen learning and secure accountabilities across the different key learning areas (Fullan & Quinn 2016). An example of this coherence was a common teaching and learning language. Particularly important amongst a faculty and staff that was drawn from many different cultural backgrounds, having standard language that described whole-school learning goals or competencies that framed the learning experience was important. Using Fullan’s competencies from his New Pedagogies for Deep Learning Project, stating that citizenship, communication, collaboration, critical thinking, creativity and character were competencies upon which the international school would base the output of its teaching and learning provided consistent language upon which strategic planning could happen, school reports could be written or around which individual lessons could be created. Importantly, given the diversity in academic and cultural backgrounds, the accompanying definitions of each of these terms left a clear benchmark or standard against which faculty, staff and learner could engage the school’s broader learning community. Building capacity to work within the teaching and learning framework Implementing the framework meant first building capacity across faculty and staff. There were two principal reasons for this. The first was that faculty and staff came from a variety of different cultural backgrounds thereby contributing to the nature of the teaching and learning teams being intercultural. The immediate task was, therefore, building capacity within intercultural teams so as that they would work within the teaching and learning framework that had been approved by the school leadership. The second reason was faculty and staff can often be largely change averse (cf. Muhammad 2009, pp.61-81). Professional learning sessions were organised around a series of underpinning questions focussed on the teacher-preparedness within the teaching and learning framework: Do teachers possess knowledge and skills in pedagogical practices associated with the new teaching and learning framework? Do teachers have knowledge and skills to create learning environments in line with the new teaching and learning framework? Communications from school leaders to all faculty and staff started to deliberately use the language of the teaching and learning framework as a means to communicate the school’s vision, mission and values. Faculty and staff were encouraged to think through how the teaching and learning framework would appear in their key learning area of department. The aversion to change shared by faculty and staff further underscored the importance of capacity building (Fullan & Quinn 2016; Muhammad 2009). In the case of implementing the teaching and learning framework, building capacity involved developing knowledge and skills, deepening a collaborative culture amongst and between faculty, staff and leadership, and reinforcing the commitment to the school’s vision, mission and values (cf. Fullan &
48 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Quinn 2016, p.56). The change represented by implementing the framework entailed a change in mindsets and practices amongst somewhat change-averse faculty and staff. There was a need, therefore, on the part of the school’s leadership to show a combination of trustworthiness, ethics, humility, maturity and patience. Opportunities to explain the change in approach were provided through weekly sessions so there was an understanding of how the change fitted into broader, long-range strategic planning. Leadership was sensitive to the myriad of day-to-day responsibilities that faculty and staff had and worked to ensure that there was as little disruption in this area as was possible. For some teachers who were particularly concerned that the new framework might redefine them and, in the process, identify them as failures, it was important to contextualise that the change was development of new organisational standards built upon a common language, knowledge base and set of practices about quality learning and teaching (Fullan & Quinn 2016, p.102).
Conclusion Some of these issues [relating to curriculum in international schools] are particularly thorny and no easy solutions are proposed: what is clearly important is that those involved are aware of them, as indeed many are, and that they continue to debate the means by which the curriculum can be made as valid as possible for all of those studying in the international school context. (Hayden 2006, p.146) The nature of international schooling can be puzzling on account of the variety of differences facing those who attend international schools as learners or members of faculty and staff (cf. Findlay 1997, p.5). In this context, a teaching and learning framework has a significant role to play in assisting learners and teachers alike to navigate these differences, bringing coherence to the learning environment. Coherence contributed to aligning the school’s pedagogy with its intercultural and international learning context. It also helped to steer any debate about teaching and learning change away from what one system might do better than another and centre discussion on what would contribute authentically to what the case study international school aspired. A focus on developing common teaching and learning language was also helpful in this respect. As the new teaching and learning framework was unveiled, there was an increasing need for the school to invest in the professional capital of its faculty and staff. If the implementation was to be successful then faculty and staff had to be equipped to integrate it into what they did at the school. Leadership was faced with two key questions. What is the right change for the school to embrace? How does the school get all faculty and staff to embrace the change and actively apply the right methods once they have been identified? Framing the action plan that was to come, the implementation of the teaching and learning framework had to be clearly justified, connected to the foundational purpose of the school and supported with empirical and anecdotal evidence of effectiveness from several different sources. In turn, this helped to cast the teaching and learning framework as something that was indicative of the school’s commitment to the education of children, and that the school was going to remain true to its vision, mission and values.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 49
References Blandford, S. & Shaw, M. 2001. “International School Leadership” in Blandford, S. & Shaw, M. (eds). Managing International Schools. Routledge: London, New York, pp.9-28. Cambridge, J. 1998. ‘National and organisational culture’, in M. Hayden and G. Thompson (eds) International Education: Principles and Practice, Kogan Page: London. CIS. 2017. CIS International Accreditation: The Protocol for the Evaluation and International Accreditation of Schools. Leiden. Dow, Philip E. 2013. Virtuous Minds: Intellectual Character Development. InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove. Fadel, C., Bialik, M. & Trilling, B. 2015. Four-dimensional education: The Competencies Learners Need to Succeed. Centre for Curriculum Redesign: Boston. Fadel, C. & Trilling, B. 2012. 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco. Feinberg, W. 1998. Common Schools/Uncommon Identities National Unity and Cultural Difference. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT. Findlay, R. (ed.) 1997. International Education Handbook. Kogan Page: London. Fullan, M. and Longworthy, M. 2014. A Rich Seam: How New Pedagogies Find Deep Learning. Pearson: London. Fullan, M. & Quinn, J. 2016. Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts and Systems. Corwin Press: Ontario. Fullan, M. 2016. The New Meaning of Educational Change. Teachers College Press: Ontario. Fullan, M., Quinn, J., & McEachen, J. 2017. Deep Learning: Engage the world. Change the World. Corwin Press: Ontario. Hattie, J. 2009. Visible Learning: A synthesis of meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge: New York and London. Hattie, J. 2011. Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximising Impact on Learning. Routledge: New York and London. Hayden, M. 2006. Introduction to International Education, International Schools and their communities. SAGE Publications: London. Knight, J. 2013. High-impact instruction: A framework for great teaching. Corwin: Thousand Oaks Muhammad, A. 2009. Transforming School Culture: How to overcome staff division. Solution Tree Press. United States. Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights. 1990. Convention on the Rights of the Child. United Nations: Geneva. Pollock, D.C., & Van Reken, R.E. 2009. Third culture kids: The experience of growing up among worlds. Nicholas Brealy: Boston. Rodger, A. 1996. Developing Moral Community in a Pluralist School Setting. Gordon Cook Foundation: Aberdeen.
50 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Darkinjung Barker and our connection
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Jamie Shackleton Campus Co-ordinator - Darkinjung Barker Abstract Darkinjung Barker continues to promote the development of a quality education in a happy and safe environment built on the values of commitment, compassion, courage, integrity and respect. I see growth every day. Growth cannot always be measured with graphs, data and statistics. Social, emotional, cultural and general wellbeing are areas of huge improvement. Learning about ATSI histories and cultures allows students to develop respect for diversity and understanding of cultural difference. It is an opportunity to acknowledge and pay respect to the Traditional Owners and ongoing custodians of the land - the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging. Darkinjung Barker continues to promote the development of a quality education in a happy and safe environment built on the values of commitment, compassion, courage, integrity and respect. To achieve this, students, parents and staff work co–operatively to maintain a stimulating whole–school community environment. High priority is given to student welfare. Whilst recognising the individual differences of students, the School aims to develop student outcomes in all Key Learning Areas, an understanding of the social and physical environment of the Darkinjung people and provide significant opportunities for creative and cultural pursuits. We are very proud of our Darkinjung Barker. Parents and carers show commitment to our school through attendance at curriculum information evenings and parent teacher interviews. Partnerships with Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council are evidenced through our cultural program which continues to show promise. School learning programs address the needs of students, both individual and group, through differentiation of learning programs, technology for learning, and significant co-curricular learning opportunities. Students needing learning support are identified early. This ongoing monitoring is facilitated in the first instance by the class teacher and then through the Learning and Support Team. Students’ reports contain detailed information about individual student learning achievement and provide a basis for discussions with parents.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 51
Darkinjung Barker is a place where I see growth every day. Growth cannot always be measured with graphs, data and statistics. Social, emotional, cultural and general wellbeing are areas of huge improvement. Mapping of these things is important and an integral part of what we do but not everything that we do can be mapped. Results are improving, but there will never be an easy fix. The gap will not close after a small time at Darkinjung Barker, it will be an ongoing learning journey. There will be days that we see a sudden jump in academic results and we know we are winning - but it won’t happen every day. Patience, nurturing and guidance are a few of the important keys to success. I work with a brilliant team who give everything they have and more for the good of these magnificent children. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) people have a profound spiritual connection to the land. At Darkinjung Barker we continue to work hard to instil in the children that health of land and water is central to culture. Land is mother, is steeped in Indigenous culture, but also gives them the responsibility to care for it. The land is a link between all aspects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s existence - spirituality, culture, language, family, law and identity. Each person is entrusted with the cultural knowledge and responsibility to care for the land they identify with through kinship systems. Through our cultural program we work alongside Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council (DLALC) to promote the importance of connection. We work with the children and support daily the importance of an Acknowledgement of Country. It is an opportunity to acknowledge and to pay respect to the Traditional Owners and ongoing custodians of the land - the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging. The Dreaming for ATSI people represents the time when the ancestral spirits progressed over the land and created life and important physical geographic formations and sites. Again at Darkinjung Barker, we embrace the dreaming and learn together about Aboriginal philosophy through guidance from DLALC. Learning about ATSI histories and cultures allows students to develop respect for diversity and understanding of cultural difference. We gain greater understanding of The Dreaming and connection to country through traditional dance. It tells stories which were passed down through generations. These stories would be about the land, animals, dreamtime and ATSI people. DLALC have worked with our children to give understanding and cultural meaning to all our dances. It is quite common for dance at Darkinjung Barker to incorporate imitations of certain animals to assist in the storytelling and bring the dreamtime to life. Dancing at Darkinjung Barker is accompanied by music and instruments. We are learning to tell stories through song. Many ATSI communities still participate in ceremonial dance and continue the traditions of their ancestors. Throughout the late 20th century, Aboriginal dance has also been incorporated into modern and contemporary forms of Australian dance and performances. Organisations such as NAISDA (National Aboriginal Islander Skills Development Association) create performances using ATSI dancers, displaying stories and movements from traditional routines. Many of these performances have toured across the world, showcasing the unique and spiritual experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dance around the globe. Darkinjung Barker is so privileged to have such a close relationship with NAISDA. Our children were invited to come to visit and to perform the opening dance on their new dance grounds at Kariong. Traditional and ceremonial Aboriginal Dance has been a part of the ATSI culture for thousands of years. Dances played an important role in the spirituality of Indigenous Australian people and connection to land – mother. We love to embrace everything at Darkinjung Barker. Naya Wa Yugali - We dance.
52 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The Project Zero classroom – Reporting from Harvard University
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Joshua Toth Commercial Studies Teacher Abstract In July 2019, I fortunate to be able to attend the Project Zero Classroom 2019 course at Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. The course ran for five days and included a mix of plenary sessions and mini-courses all tailored for learning, thinking, questioning and creating. ‘Creating Cultures of Thinking’ was a foundation behind the course’s implementation and this led to deeper discussion about increasing student understanding and engagement.
Key Terms Project Zero Project Zero is a research centre founded in 1967 that explores topics in education such as deep thinking, understanding, intelligence, creativity and ethics. Through its varied projects, including Agency by Design, Making Learning Visible, Cultures of Learning and Teaching for Understanding, Project Zero shares best practices in education throughout the academic community and beyond. Thinking Routines These routines are simple structures, for example, a set of questions or a short sequence of steps that can be used across various grade levels and content. What makes them routines, versus merely strategies, is that they get used repeatedly in the classroom so that they become part of the fabric of classroom’s culture. The routines become the ways in which students go about the process of learning.
Body Project Zero has now been educating teachers worldwide for over 50 years, played host at the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE) to almost 360 educators from 38 countries around the world. Australia had the second biggest contingent (after the USA) with 42 teachers making the journey. Project Zero Classroom 2019 focused on aspects like ‘rethinking intelligence’ or being aware that intelligence can be extended, nurtured and fostered through a growth mindset approach and developing thinking routines within the classroom. The ultimate intention of the course was to provide teachers with the tools to deepen student engagement, support them to think critically, as well as making student learning and thinking visible. But what does this look like in the classroom?
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 53
Thinking, particularly in classrooms, has been traditionally invisible. Ways to combat this and create deeper student engagement include: the language teachers use in class, incorporation of thinking routines (and making these part of everyday practice), collaborative learning and knowing when it is appropriate (for teachers and students), and a development of natural curiosity to foster deeper understanding. The mini-courses attended included: •
‘Establishing Patterns of Thinking in the Classroom’ with Mark Church
•
‘Designing and Assessing Powerful Playful Learning Experiences’ with Ben Mardell
•
‘Understanding and Perspective through Monologues’ with Mary Hall Surface
•
‘Creating a Culture of Thinking right from the Start’ with Ron Ritchhart
•
‘How Thinking Routines Support Classroom Agency by Design’ with Indi McCasey
•
‘Empowering Disenfranchised Learners through a Culture of Thinking’ with Julie Rains
At the end of each day, the course participants would meet in their study groups with their tutor or group leaders. This was designed to be like a homeroom where members could: •
Synthesize/personalise the information introduced earlier in the day;
•
Reflect with and learn from other members of the group;
•
Ask questions and seek connections between course philosophies and our own work;
•
Receive and offer feedback on our inquiry question.
Creating a culture of thinking One course worth highlighting was ‘Creating a culture of thinking right from the start’ with leading author, Ron Ritchart. Culture is set at the very first part of the day, month and year. There are three things that could be done from the outset to help establish a culture of learning and thinking: •
Set the expectations of the class this year
•
Encourage wider reading of related material
•
Reflection on their previous year’s work
This can be completed through various teaching strategies such as: •
‘Give one, get one’: designed for students to share ideas, as well as refine and strengthen their own.
•
Creating a safe space for students: this is done by providing consistency as well as giving the students choices and voices.
•
Creating some substance with the parents by allowing them to be engaged in their child’s learning.
The Cultural Forces must be present from the outset (“This is how we do things here…”) and the absence of one can jeopardise the whole process. Thinking Routines = providing tools for and patterns of thinking that allow students to be thinkers.
54 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
1.
Time = Allocating time for thinking to explore topics, as well as formulate a thoughtful response.
2.
Modelling = We need to go beyond ‘instructional modelling’. What is needed is ‘dispositional modelling’. Do we demonstrate reflection, do we learn from mistakes, etc.?
3.
Environment = The physical environment needs to reflect learning. Furniture, lighting, info on walls.
4.
Interactions = The way we interact and then how they interact with other students.
5.
Expectations = A step beyond what we want (e.g. class rules). What is more powerful is “What do we want for our students?” You could say “I have this expectation for us to ….”
6.
Opportunities = Purposeful activities to improve the classroom experience.
7.
Routines & Structures = Scaffolding students’ thinking in the moment as well as providing tools and patterns of thinking that can be used independently.
8.
Language = The use of pronouns. Our learning, what are we going to do?
Above: “Understanding Map”: knowledge acquisition is a somewhat passive process, while understanding is an active process. They need to ask questions or answer curiosities about the topic.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 55
The cultural force of It was this last cultural force that may be particularly applicable to the Barker teaching environment. It may have been its simplicity of application, but also the fact that the author of this paper hadn’t really been paying attention to it in the past. For example, if one were to ask their Middle School classes what the teacher asks them repeatedly at the beginning of the lesson, they may respond with “Where’s your homework?” A simple disposition change to “Are you prepared for today’s lesson?” may garner different results. Other “eye-opening” uses of language include: •
the use of “Hello and Goodbye” each lesson can radically increase learning and lower disruption within your room.
•
WMYST? (What makes you say that?) The Swedish call this the magic question.
•
“Talk to me about what you’re doing”. This is all about metacognition. This allows students to reflect and assess their own work.
•
“Here’s where we are going with this”. This applies purpose to a task and allow students to see a roadmap of what is to come. If we say that this is the learning intention – it is ‘teacher-speak’ and can shut off.
•
“Here’s the thinking we’ll need to do”. Rather than number the resources, you can say that, “You’ll need to build and support the following argument”.
•
“Let’s debrief”. It doesn’t happen as often as it should - time seems to be an issue. You can use ‘exit cards’ but make sure you DOCUMENT responses in some way.
•
“I’ve noticed” instead of “I liked”. We are close lookers and listeners instead of someone the student needs to please us. Teachers tend to notice and name good behaviour and correctness. Then we wonder why they won’t take risks.
•
The use of “We” can show that we’re co-learners.
•
The use of “Sorry” is a powerful phrase. It shows that we’re taking responsibility.
•
“WOW!” Give your students an opportunity to surprise you. If this doesn’t happen, the lesson was too narrow, or we weren’t paying attention.
•
BONUS ONE – just pull back and say nothing!!! WAIT (“Why Am I Talking?”) (See more details in Appendix One)
56 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
With such a great opportunity to learn from the world’s best, mini-courses were selected to include topics that clearly extend beyond Commercial Studies to any subject at Barker as we seek to make learning accessible for all in our growing coeducational environment. Personally, this allowed for development of my own line of inquiry, “How do we encourage students to take risks?” Making mistakes is an important part of learning and developing a growth mindset. However, not all mistakes are equal.
Above: “The Four types of Mistakes”: Some mistakes are better than others… As educators we want to guide our students to extend themselves. Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 57
This is a concept of taking risks and making the right mistakes is something that I tried to implement with my senior classes a few years ago but found students increasingly reluctant to take that first step. It surprised me because of the uptake of technology by students and the ability to correct any false attempts. The realisation came that it had little to do with going back and correcting a response. It was more about being comfortable with making a mistake and how do our peers view us when we have gone out on a limb. I wish this was a problem we just saw in our students because then we could be comforted in the knowledge that we may “grow out of” that disposition. Even in the middle of my teaching career, I am conscious of making that leap in front of my very capable colleagues. Again, this comes down to culture and the environment we create.
Study Group F (with 4 Australians in the group)
58 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
References Allen, D. & Blythe, T. 2018. Protocols in the Classroom. Teachers College Press. New York. Gardner, H. 2019. Children and Multiple Intelligences. Les Plumes Magazine, July edition. Paris. Harvard Graduate School of Education. 2016. Cultures of Thinking, available online: http://www.pz.harvard.edu/ projects/cultures-of-thinking. Mindset Works. 2017. Growing lifelong learners. Available online: https://www.mindsetworks.com. Perkins, D. 2009. Making Learning Whole. Jossey Bass. San Francisco. Ritchhart, R. 2015. Creating Cultures of Thinking: The 8 Forces we must Master to Truly Transform our Schools. Jossey Bass. San Francisco. Ritchhart, R. 2011. Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding and Independence for All Learners. Jossey Bass. San Francisco
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 59
Appendix One
10 Things to Say to Your Students Everyday …and Why They Are Important 1. Hello & Goodbye Learning is a social endeavor. One of the most basic human needs we have is to be known and acknowledged. As Rita Pearson said in her popular TED talk, “children won’t learn from people they don’t like.” When students feel that their teacher knows and cares about them, they are more invested in their learning, they are less likely to disrupt class, and they are more likely to show respect. Saying “hello” and “goodbye” to every student is one small way we can acknowledge them each day and set a tone for the day.
2. What Makes You Say That? The quesHon, WMYST?, asks students for the reasoning evidence behind their thought, opinions or ideas. It sends a message to students that simply giving the correct answer or guessing what’s in the teacher’s head is not the game we are playing. When teachers’ press students for thinking, students feel more engaged, challenged, and moHvated. They also develop a greater sense of iniHaHve and feel like their teachers expect more out of them.
3. Talk to me about what you’re doing. When students explain their acHons and plans, they have a chance to review and clarify those plans for themselves. ONen they will make adjustments or idenHfy problems just through the talking out of their acHons. This simple quesHon takes the metacogniHve process, which is crucial to independent learning, and makes it overt, apparent, and visible. For us as teachers, students’ responses provide valuable formaHve assessment informaHon.
4. Here’s where we are going with this. When learners feeling a sense of purpose in what they are doing, learning goes way up. However, establishing purpose is much more than staHng a learning intenHon or objecHve. Helping learners feel a sense of purpose is an ongoing endeavor in which we situate work in a larger context that has meaning and where students feel like their accomplishing something that has worth in their own eyes, not just the teacher’s eyes.
5. Here’s the thinking you’ll need to do. When we introduce assignments, projects, or tasks to students we oNen lay out the logisHcs of the task. We describe the product that that will be created and how students will know when they are done. We might also supply grading criteria (in the form of a rubric or as success criteria) that let’s students know what we are looking for in their completed project. However, this approach risks focusing on the work to be done rather than the learning we hope will happen. To focus on the learning, we must also share with students what kinds of thinking they will be asked to do (see Understanding Map). If we can’t idenHfy the thinking, or help students to idenHfy it, we might have a task that limited in its learning potenHal.
© Ron Ritchhart, 2016 May be shared with a8ribu:on 60 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
6. Let’s debrief. One of the most neglected parts of lessons is the debrief, wrap up, or closing of the lesson. Teachers run out of Hme and so this gets abandoned. In BriHsh schools, this is typically referred to as the plenary or “the assembling together.” Research shows that learning gains in a class are very fragile and that when Hme is not available to consolidate the learning through reflecHon and personal summary, it can easily be lost. Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman has idenHfied the importance of "good endings”—what happens at the end of events tends to be what we remember. Make sure you plan for the extra 5 minutes at the end for students to consolidate their learning.
7. I’ve noticed…
NoHcing is a powerful form of feedback. Whatever we noHce and name we will get more of in the future, because we are signaling this is what we care about. We are communicaHng where the group or individual is at, and where we want to progress to in the future. In contrast, when we say, “I liked,” we aren’t really giving feedback, but are communicaHng that school is about pleasing us. Our noHcing also signals to students that we have a growth mindset when it comes to learning and the development of culture.
8. We Establishing a culture of thinking is about building a community of learners. Using the collecHve pronouns we, our, and us sends a message about community and clearly situates us as teachers as a part of the group. In contrast, using primarily the pronouns of I and you, can create more distance and emphasize power and control.
9. I’m sorry. Teachers make mistakes. We are human and we have one of the most decision-‐intense occupaHons. When we admit our mistakes we aren’t lessening our authority, as some might think, but modeling our humanness and the importance of admi_ng and learning from mistakes. Walking our students through our decision-‐ making process and idenHfy for them the events that made us reconsider our acHons models this process for students and helps them to take ownership of their own learning and acHons as well.
10. Wow! One of the quesHons I always ask teachers aNer I have observed a lesson is “What surprised you?” If nothing surprised them, then something has gone wrong. Either they haven’t delved deeply enough into students’ thinking to uncover the mysteries and uniqueness of their thinking process, they weren’t really tuned into and noHced students’ thinking, or they constructed a lesson that didn’t ask students to do very much.
Bonus: Say Nothing. SomeHmes we as teachers talk too much. However, it is learners who need the opportunity to discuss, quesHon, and play around with ideas. Therefore, the person doing the talking is most likely the person doing the learning. Also, when we are talking, we may not be listening and allowing our students to surprise us. Remember the acronym WAIT: Why Am I Talking?
© Ron Ritchhart, 2016 May be shared with a8ribu:on Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 61
62 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Teaching & Learning Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 63
64 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Three years of hope and despair: Refocusing the curriculum for gifted learners
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Greg Longney Director of Learning and Enrichment Abstract This paper is a reflection on the process of investigating the School’s practices for our most able learners and a review of approaches that are best suited to the needs of gifted and high potential learners. The title is adapted from Michael Cooney’s book about his work as speech-writer for Julia Gillard.
Key Terms Gifted Students Gifted students are those whose potential significantly exceeds that of students of the same age in one or more domains: intellectual, creative, social-emotional and physical. High Potential Students High potential students are those whose potential exceeds that of students of the same age in one or more domains: intellectual, creative, social-emotional and physical.
Body The landscape of gifted education in Australia is, at best, fragmented. There is no federal mandate or funding for gifted education with the responsibility for addressing the needs of gifted students being left to states and territories (Jolly and Walsh 2018). The New South Wales Department of Education has recently released the first update to gifted education policy in the state since 2004 (DET 2019). All states and territories refer to Francois Gagne’s Differentiated Model for Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) – See Appendix A (Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation 2019) as the key resource for understanding giftedness and the process for translating natural abilities into talents. However, very few teachers are familiar with the DMGT and fewer still have had any experience in using the model in their teaching practice. This is further complicated by the fact that initial teacher education courses in Australia provide no mandatory training in gifted education for beginning teachers. Therefore, it is possible to undertake a career in teaching without having to devote any thought to the needs of gifted students. This position is summed up well in the statement, ‘there is no consistent approach to the education of gifted students across Australia’ (Victorian Parliament 2012, cited in Jolly and Walsh 2018). Up until 2017, the situation described above was the experience of the author, 22 years as a teacher and very little consideration of the needs of gifted students. This situation changed with the creation of the role of Head of Academic Enrichment and Extension and a brief to focus on investigating and improving curriculum offerings for our most able students. This was framed in the School’s move to full-coeducation and the opportunity to investigate all aspects of School life. This was not a statement about what was currently in place being inadequate, more an opportune moment to review educational practices in all areas of the School. Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 65
Initial investigations into the School’s practices for our most able students revealed a number of common and well-established practices. Many opportunities for academic extension were presented as in-class optional extras or out-of-class excursions. There was little evidence of differentiated classroom practice and the existence of some misconceptions about highly able students. The language of giftedness and differentiation was not readily used in discussions about teaching and learning; where discussions about highly able students did exist, it tended to be framed around streamed classes, based on academic attainment. A gifted and talented policy did exist, but it was not widely known about and not enacted. There was no staff training in gifted education. As part of this investigation, a team of staff enrolled in Elevate, a professional learning program run by the Association of Independent Schools (AIS), in conjunction with the Innovation Unit. The focus of Elevate is high potential learning and participating teams were invited to participate in a disciplined innovation model to investigate high potential learning in their schools. The first stage of the Elevate process was to empathise with the user experience; this involved collecting data about the student experience and focusing on students that the team considered to be of high potential. An interesting element of the Elevate process was the lack of any reference to giftedness. This in and of itself seems to add to the general lack of clarity around what is meant by giftedness and a lack of comfort for teachers to use the term. The Elevate process allowed the participating Barker staff to see high potential in different ways. We tested a set of hypotheses about certain groups of students and drew three significant conclusions: 1. 2. 3.
Many of our most successful students, in terms of academic achievement, still reported to be under-challenged. Many students of high-potential were bored and were underachieving. Some students who were of high-potential were seeking academic fulfilment in areas outside of their school-based subjects.
The initial investigations into the School’s approaches for its most able students, along with the conclusions of the Elevate group, prompted the introduction of a series of measures to improve the academic environment for our most able students and to better equip staff to understand and to respond to giftedness. One of the unforeseen challenges of this process has been arriving at definitions of giftedness and high potential with which staff are able to work. The recent update to the Department policy has provided some much-needed clarity in this area (DET 2019). The most significant development has been the introduction of planned professional learning for staff to learn about gifted and talented theory and practice and to undertake classroom-based research. This has been facilitated in groups of 10-12 staff led by Mrs. Bronwyn Macleod from Aldea Education. Research indicates that teacher attitudes toward gifted students are often negative, but improve significantly with appropriate training (Jolly and Walsh 2018). The program has helped staff to understand how to interpret test data, the importance of pre-testing to identify what students already know, the complex picture of the identification of gifted students and the different approaches to planning and delivering a differentiated curriculum. Another step has been the reintroduction of external placement tests for students entering the School in Year 7 and the grouping of students in classes based on ability. Historically, Year 7 students have been placed in House groups in all classes except English and Mathematics, where students have been grouped based on academic attainment determined by internal testing. The aim of the new approach was two-fold: to put a focus on student ability as much as student achievement; and to acknowledge the research that indicates that ability grouping for gifted students can be an effective practice. The conclusions of the research in this area are still debated and the success of such programs will depend on effective 66 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
curriculum differentiation and appropriate assessment practices (Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation 2019). The School has allocated staff that have received training in gifted education to lead this program and the results thus far have been pleasing, without being conclusive. The future success of such programs will depend on adjustments to teaching practice in other areas, most notably assessment practices. Traditionally, all students, regardless of ability, have completed the same summative assessment tasks and this restricts any benefits of a differentiated curriculum. It has been pleasing to see some departments begin to experiment with differentiated assessment practices and this change will need to be expedited to take advantage of the decision to group students by ability. The focus on high ability class grouping has allowed us to discover more about the learning characteristics of gifted learners. In relation to the highly able students, teachers have always known that they learn faster than other students and are capable of learning more complex material. With this in mind, staff who have been teaching the Year 7 high ability classes have been asked to seek opportunities to provide greater complexity, greater abstraction and, where appropriate, more opportunities for students to conduct independent research. (McCoach et all. 2017, cited in CESE 2019). However, what staff are discovering is that students, regardless of ability, need a certain level of explicit teaching techniques such as scaffolding and worked examples especially in the early stages of learning new content. Rosenshine (2009) comments that gifted learners will be able to move through this content faster, but still require this foundational instruction. Furthermore, students of high ability will likely develop talents asynchronously and still need very explicit instruction in some curriculum areas. For example, some students that present as highly able can master content quickly, but are poorly organised and are not adept at writing. This is not altogether surprising, but the experience has added to our collective understanding of how to teach gifted learners. The process of discussing the needs of our most able learners has inevitably led to consideration of acceleration practices. Acceleration is considered to be one of the most effective educational interventions available to gifted learners (Rogers, 2007) and yet at Barker we have very limited experience of using subject acceleration to advance the needs of gifted students. The work of the Iowa Acceleration Institute identifies 20 different methods of providing acceleration for gifted students (Assouline 2016). Since 2017, we have had some great success with the use of mentoring as a form of acceleration. This has been most often used with Year 11 students who have been paired with high-ability ex-students with similar interests, but we have extended this to younger students working with older aged peers. In some cases, this has provided opportunities for students to engage in advanced paced learning, but most often it has simply provided an opportunity for gifted students to gain a perspective from an older aged peer who has travelled a similar path and is now studying in a field that the younger student can see themselves entering in the future. If negative views of acceleration exist, they usually stem from two misconceptions about gifted learners. One is that students should not be accelerated for social and emotional reasons and the second is that offering acceleration to some students is going to result in more parents demanding it for their children. Neither of these reasons are supported by the research on acceleration and, like all interventions for the gifted, are going to be determined by the quality of the implementation of the program that is put in place (Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation 2019). Despite significant progress in the awareness of Barker College staff about the needs of gifted learners and the introduction of some programs to support the needs of our most able learners, staff attitudes towards gifted learners remain mixed and in conflict with the research around giftedness. This has been confirmed by having a sample of staff complete an attitudes survey, Opinions About the Gifted and their Education (Gagne 1991) – See Appendix B. There are some apparent contradictions in the results; staff seem to acknowledge the special needs of gifted learners and yet show concern for acceleration and
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 67
grouping practices. This should not be surprising given the picture of the gifted education landscape described at the start of this paper and the lack of attention that the School has paid to gifted education prior to 2017. From the point of view of the author, these results provide some confirmation of the challenges facing this School as it looks to deliver the best educational outcomes for all students and the importance of basing educational interventions on a strong evidence base and then supporting those interventions with wellsequenced professional learning. References Assouline, S et al. 2016. 20 types of acceleration. Accessed September 26, 2019. http://www.accelerationinstitute. org/Resources/acceleration_types.aspx. Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation. 2019. “Revisting Gifted Education.” Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation. Accessed September 25, 2019. https://www.cese.nsw.gov.au. DET. 2019. High Potential and Gifted Education. Accessed September 25, 2019. https://education.nsw.gov.au/ teaching-and-learning/high-potential-and-gifted-education/about-the-policy/high-potential-and-giftededucation-policy. Gagne, F. 1991. “Brief presentation of Gagne and Nadeu’s attitude scale: Opinions about the gifted and their education.” Montreal: University of Quebec. Jolly, Jennifer L, and Rosaling L Walsh. 2018. “Gifted Education in the Australian Context.” Gifted Child Today 81-88. Rogers, K. 2007. “Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A synthesis of the research on educational practice.” Gifted Child Quarterly. Rosenshine, B. 2009. “The Empirical Support for Direct Instruciton.” In Constructivist instruction: Success or Failiure? New York, NY: Routledge.
68 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Appendices Appendix A – Gagne’s Differentiated Model for Giftedness and Talent Appendix B – A sample of results from Barker College staff who completed a survey about their attitudes to gifted students and their learning.
The specific educational needs of the gifted are too often ignored in schools
A greater number of gifted children should be allowed to skip grade
Children who skip a grade are usually pressured to do so by thier parents
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 69
Special programs for the gifted have the drawback of creating elitism
Most children who skip a grade have difficulties in their social adjustment to a group of older students
The gifted need special attention in order to fully develop their talents
70 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Collaborative teaching to prepare Year 11 Physics students for university – Lessons from the second iteration.
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Dr Matthew Hill Director of Research in Learning & The Barker Institute, Physics teacher Mr Dean Johnston Physics Teacher, Stage 4 Science Co-ordinator Mrs Nonie Taylor Physics & iSTEAM teacher Mr Daniel Woolley Physics & iSTEAM teacher Abstract For the second year, many of Barker College’s Year 11 Physics classes have taken on a new format modelling university teaching to promote executive function, resilience, independence and self-reliant learning amongst the students. At high school, many students can perceive that their learning is their teacher’s responsibility leading to high university attrition rates when students fail to adapt to optional classes, self-directed study and homework practices. Three Year 11 Physics classes in 2018 and four in 2019 were structured in a similar format to a first-year university Physics course with weekly lectures, tutorials and experimental work (along with additional support hours at a weekly Physics’ “Access” session on one evening). In an anonymous survey of 56 students, 74% of respondents indicated that they preferred this week-by-week method of teaching over a lesson-by-lesson approach, more typical at high school. Particular benefits to the students included development of executive function and planning, improving ability to understand concepts and reducing stress and anxiety with a structures approach to classes and homework. In addition, the students profited from staff time being freed up for more personal counselling, support and tutoring as they progressed through the course.
Key Terms Lecture A lesson that is delivered to a group of students larger than the typical class size (< 25 students). This is not meant to imply mere transmission of knowledge or inactive attendees (e.g. Sharma et al. 2010). There is no limit to the method of teaching and engagement, merely the ability to deliver the lecture to larger numbers of students. When delivered to only one class of students it can sometimes be referred to as a “theory” class.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 71
Tutorial A lesson devoted to guiding students through problem solving. May involve practical, conceptual, or numerical problems or activities. Tutorial problems A set of problems written for the students to allow them to grow in their understanding of physics and develop their problem-solving skills. At least some of these problems should be done during a tutorial lesson but all are to be completed before the start of the following week. Experiment A scientific test including an aim, method, results, analysis, and conclusion. Team-teaching A coordinated approach among multiple teachers taking responsibility for a group of students. It usually involves different teachers facilitating different parts of the course.
Body Introduction In 2018, two of the authors trialed a new initiative with three Year 11 Physics classes involving a university-style structured week. The new NSW Physics syllabus outcomes were divided into weekly topic areas. In addition, the practical component of the course was aligned to these topic areas. Reflections on the first year were published including recommendations for future implementation (Johnston & Hill 2018). Key recommendations included: •
Involving more teachers to bring in additional collaboration and synchronized delivery.
•
Providing students with a schedule and tutorial book at the start of each module to better allow them to plan their term. Each tutorial should have a range of problems with increasing difficulty.
•
Weekly short quizzes on the online learning management system, Canvas
•
A common style and format for all digital and printed material
•
Filming lectures and making them available through Canvas
•
Increasing interactivity of lectures including interactive lecture demonstrations
Many of these were able to be achieved and there is still more work to be done to continue to increase the efficacy of this teaching method.
72 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Course Structure: A university-style format with school-level personal relationships Each week one topic area of content was presented Year 11 Physics students. The weekly structure consisted of an interactive lecture (or theory class), a problem-solving tutorial, and an experiment or practical tasks. Four teachers (the four Authors of this paper) and their classes were involved in 2019 (achieving the first recommendation from the 2018 teaching team). Two classes were run concurrently allowing for a common lecture in the lecture theatre and two classes were run on other lines.
Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Interactive lecture
Tutorial
Experiment
Students attended an interactive lecture (or theory class) designed to cover all content required for the week.
A set of practical, conceptual, and numerical problems were completed by the students and various techniques were used to provide in-class support
Students completed a scientific investigation with aim, method, results, analysis, and conclusion to apply their understanding and continue to develop their scientific inquiry skills.
Table 1: The university-style format for Physics teaching (Adapted from Johnston & Hill, 2019)
The 2019 timetable involved one additional hour of instruction per fortnight. The additional class was used as a discretionary class for the teacher or student to decide how to best use this additional time. Rationale: most effective learning, preparation for university, maximum utilisation of teacher resources. The rationale for continuing the structure in 2019 builds on the rationale described by Johnston and Hill (2018) who pioneered the program in 2018. At its heart is an understanding of effective learning. This occurs within the particular teaching structure in two ways. First, there are multiple points each week where students cover the same content from different perspectives allowing for internalisation of concepts and skills to take place. When the same content is covered in the lecture, in a tutorial, and as part of an experiment, students get to wrestle with the difficult ideas in Physics and more effectively construct new knowledge overcoming limitations in working memory (Paas, Renkl, & Sweller 2003; Sweller 1988). Second, it establishes students as agents responsible for their own learning able to use many resources, including their teachers, to progress their learning. Carpenter & Pease (2013) describe three categories of non-curricular learning strategies including Self-Regulation, Collaboration, and Academic Mindsets which are all skills developed through the new Physics structure. Providing a class schedule and giving the students access to all resources at the start of term with specified deadlines gives engages students in self-regulation developing an academic mindset where they begin to ascribe more responsibility to themselves as the learners rather than placing expectation on teachers (Fisher & Frey 2008; Mameli et al. 2019; Zimmerman and Kitsantas 2005). One particular way this is achieved is though students learning that success can correlate with meeting clear performance requirements such as weekly tutorial deadlines (McCombs 2012; Perencevich & Kett 2005).
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 73
University preparation was a deliberate part of the rationale for the course. The model parallels university instruction, especially in the sciences. Motivation and the lack of immediate teacher accountability has been identified as a factor hindering performance and retention of first-year students at Australian universities (Baik et al. 2015) and therefore exposure to the university learning-style with the additional school-level accountability is preparing these students for future learning. Lecture participation (note taking, active listening, lecture preparation, accessing resources) and effective tutorial use (pre-work, collaboration, asking salient questions, ensuring completion) were skills that taught, both explicitly and implicitly, through the year. The four teachers firmly believe in fully utilising their collective teaching resources to best serve the students entrusted to them. Collaboration in resource preparation allowed for professional development in effective teaching of difficult concepts and freed up time to invest in higher-quality shared resources and individualised tutoring and mentoring of students that teachers can struggle to find time for in their busy schedules. Changes for 2019 There were three main changes for the 2019 year. 1.
Four teachers were involved rather than two. This allowed for greater collaboration and sharing of the load of resource creation. Greater professional discussions were able to be had concerning the pace of the course and particular student difficulties as four teachers were working to the same schedule with the same resources.
2.
Full tutorial books were printed and distributed to students at the start of each module. This allowed students to clearly see what was expected of them in each module, allowed for them to collaborate across classes as they knew that other classes had the same tasks as them, and was crucial in allowing students to plan ahead for when they might be missing classes or catching up when absent. For example, one student spent two weeks on an international tour missing two out of the four weeks on Module 4: Electricity and Magnetism. Because of the tutorial book, with proper planning and independent work, they returned to school entirely on schedule having completed the two tutorials that they were away for and only needing to catch up on the practical tasks.
3.
Each module concluded with a diagnostic test written by the staff member responsible for that unit. In line with the principles of formative assessment, this diagnostic test was marked by fellow students as a learning exercise and students were to re-attempt and resubmit their work until they achieved a mark of 80%.
74 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
2018 Recommendation
2019 Implementation
2020 recommendations
Involving more teachers to bring in additional collaboration and synchronized delivery.
The staff involved grew from two to four teachers. Collaboration was greater as each teacher took responsibility for a Year 11 module and were able to discuss progress and planning. Unfortunately timetabling allowed for only two of the four classes could have synchronized lectures.
Request timetabling to schedule more concurrent classes, at least once per week for the lecture.
Providing students with a schedule and tutorial book at the start of each module to better allow them to plan their term. Each tutorial should have a range of problems with increasing difficulty.
With four teachers, each teacher adapted the separate worksheets that formed the 2018 tutorials to produce a common tutorial book that was used across the four classes. There were problems of a range of difficulty, but this was not always sequential or clearly articulated.
Polished tutorial books have been completed and edited. Problems should be separated into varying levels of difficulty including optional extension problems.
Weekly short quizzes on the online learning management system, Canvas
Another colleague produced weekly quizzes that were only applied to these classes in a limited manner.
Continue to ensure that weekly quizzes are aligned to content.
A common style and format for all digital and printed material
Achieved through the creation and distribution of the tutorial book and all practical tasks were completed and assessed in a similar (check pointed) format.
n/a
Filming lectures and making them available through Canvas
Technical difficulties meant that only a few lectures were recorded.
Continue to consult with the IT team to develop manageable solutions to recording lectures.
Increasing interactivity of lectures including interactive lecture demonstrations
Partly achieved through deliberate effort, but difficult to measure.
Explore professional learning courses, possibly at a university level, for interactivity in lectures.
Student reflections During Term 3 (the final term of Year 11), participating students were surveyed to gauge the level of support for the new format. Responses were collected voluntarily and anonymously using Google forms, increasing the validity of the responses. 56 out of 65 possible students completed the survey. Two main questions asked of students included one way that weekby-week format was helpful and one thing that they prefer in other subjects that use a different format. The results are summarized below. 1.
One way that the week-by-week format is helpful:
Student responses were grouped according to topic and the categories included: â&#x20AC;˘
Helpfulness in planning, executive function, and preparation (25 responses fit into this category) Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 75
•
Improved their ability to understand concepts (21)
•
Helpful for when missing classes and needing to catch up (5)
•
Reduced stress in homework and assessments (4)
•
Prepared students for university (3)
Clearly students appreciated the opportunity to plan their week and know what was expected of them in class and for homework. The only homework was ensuring that the full tutorial was complete with worked solutions before the following week’s lecture. Students commented “As a result of [this structure], I feel more organized in Physics than any other subject” and “It’s less stressful as I knew the weekly due date for tutorials and upcoming pracs”. One student simply said that it is “good for time management”. These skills go far beyond Physics and relate both to learning in general and various life skills. Students took responsibility for their own learning and needed to make plans or accept the inevitable consequences. Excitingly, many students believe that the benefits extend beyond planning and organization to an improved opportunity to learn and understand the difficult concepts they encounter in Physics. They comment “the week by week structure allowed me to focus on the topic at hand more distinctly, to ensure that I understand it” and “It helps me to understand the topic completely, not having to change my mindset in between each lesson.” One of the purposes of this structure is to prepare students for university. More important than students explicitly identifying this is that they recognise the skills applicable for university that they are able to develop. University tutors exhort their students to begin tutorial work before the tutorial class so that they can answer questions but this rarely happens. Many student in Year 11 physics were attempting to do this: “I can decide when to do work in advance… the layout helps to prepare us for university” and “the tutorial allowed for at least one period per week where we could just ask out questions to help us with our work”. 2.
One thing you prefer in other subjects that are not week-by-week in format:
Only 37 of the 56 students were able to articulate an answer to this question. One student remarked “Nothing, the Physics structure is the best way to learn” and the categories included: Multiple students (approximately 6) indicated that they preferred direct instruction and did not appreciate needing to find answers for themselves “[I prefer other subjects where you are] being taught the subject instead of having to teach yourself” or be expected to work for a whole tutorial “in tutorial lesson… sometimes work doesn’t get done”. Other students believed that more repetition of problems and topics happened in other courses and there was more flexibility to spend different amounts of time based on topic difficulty. A few students indicated that they enjoyed the unpredictability where they didn’t need to plan for class but would just be told on the day what was needed of them. Teacher reflections Teacher 1 - Reflections on the experience: I found the structure useful, practical and collaborative. It has improved the organisation of my classes, making my preparation more effective. The collaborative nature has improved my teaching efficacy, confidence and provided professional development. These were developed through frequent discussions surrounding the sequencing of content into weekly sections, lecture content and diagnostic quizzes. It is also helpful to have planned and shared work expectations across classes. These expectations assist both students and teachers in planning for work and following up students who are experiencing difficulty with the content.
76 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Reflections on student feedback: Students in my class appreciated the structure as it broke the module down in smaller sections. They found this useful for several reasons; it allowed them to focus on a concept for a week at a time, it organised their notes and learning and they became aware of the sequential nature of their learning. Students saw the value in completing tutorial questions each week to consolidate their understanding but could develop their practices to utilise each other more as resources for learning during this time. Teacher 2 - Reflections on the experience: I really valued the efficiency in collaborating to produce materials and other resources. We were able to produce five full tutorial booklets by working together and were able to discuss our teaching strategies as a group. One colleague chose to produce worked solutions for every tutorial problem and the benefits of their work were multiplied as they were producing them at the exact same time that I needed them. I was able to volunteer more of my time to be mentoring and supporting my students one-on-one. Reflections on student feedback: Some of my students were commenting that they wanted the tutorials to be the day before the lecture, so they can ask any final questions. I am concerned that this will mean that some students don’t begin the tutorial until then when it is too late. Instead, I want to keep the same structure (where the tutorial follows the lecture), but specify how may simple processing questions they should complete immediately after the lecture to have them done before the tutorial the next day. Teacher 3 - Reflections on the experience: I found the predictable structure of the course not only benefitted the students involved, but also benefitted me in managing my time. I knew at the start of the year when I would need to invest more time to develop lectures and tutorials for my unit of work and I was able to set aside some time during holidays to give that my concentrated effort. Knowing that it would be used by my peers gave me extra motivation to invest extra time – something a teacher does not always have time to do when working week to week preparing content. The collaboration between the teachers meant that I never felt unprepared or concerned about my ability to teach all concepts within the timeframe given, which is a great way to feel when teaching a new course. Reflections on student feedback: It was good to see that the students enjoyed the predictability of the course – knowing when things were due and how to best prepare for each lesson. The structure also enabled the students to better see the connection between the content covered, the tutorial problems, and how that linked to the practical investigations. This is absolutely crucial in the study of physics – to relate the theory to what is observed. Teacher 4 - Reflections on the experience: The true collaborative nature of this structure allows for more one-to-one engagement with students without disadvantaging other students in the class. For example, during a tutorial lesson I could be assisting a student to further develop a particular concept they were struggling with in order to answer a particular problem whilst other students would continue to work through the pre-prepared tutorial book.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 77
Reflections on student feedback: Some of my students struggled with less ‘direct instruction’ from me (despite a whole lecture of an interactive format of “direct instruction”); after that week’s lecture, students were typically required to investigate the concepts independently using their textbook. Perhaps some have learned a behavior through their formal schooling whereby they expect the teacher to provide them with everything they need to know. This is less likely in senior years, and certainly not the case beyond school, so it’s crucial that I support them to develop their skills in this area now. Conclusion It is clear that both the students and the teachers involved in this program of study believe that it is an efficient and effective way for learning and development to take place in the Physics classroom. It is hoped that lessons from this article may be able to be applied in other learning areas and year groups. There may even be a possibility for inter-school collaboration in order to best utilise the small pool of physics teaching expertise that is spread thin across the state all for the benefits of the students. Please contact any of the authors if you would like to know more. References Baik, C., Naylor, R. and Arkoudis, S., 2015. The First Year Experience in Australian Universities: Findings from Two Decades, 1994-2014. Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education. Carpenter, J.P. and Pease, J.S., 2013. Preparing students to take responsibility for learning: The role of noncurricular learning strategies. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 7(2), pp.38-55. Fisher, D. and Frey, N., 2013. Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. ASCD. Johnston, D., Hill, M., 2018. New Syllabus, New Approach: Preparing Physics students for university studies with a structured approach to the Year 11 course. The Barker Institute Journal, 2, p22. Mameli, C., Molinari, L. and Passini, S., 2019. Agency and responsibility in adolescent students: A challenge for the societies of tomorrow. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), pp.41-56. McCombs, B., 2012. Developing responsible and autonomous learners: A key to motivating students. Retrieved from American Psychological Association: http://www. apa. org/education/k12/learners. aspx. Paas, F., Renkl, A. and Sweller, J., 2003. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist, 38(1), pp.1-4. Sharma, M.D., Johnston, I.D., Johnston, H., Varvell, K., Robertson, G., Hopkins, A., Stewart, C., Cooper, I. and Thornton, R., 2010. Use of interactive lecture demonstrations: A ten year study. Physical Review Special TopicsPhysics Education Research, 6(2), p.020119. Sweller, J., 1988. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science, 12(2), pp.257-285. Zimmerman, B.J. and Kitsantas, A., 2005. Homework practices and academic achievement: The mediating role of self-efficacy and perceived responsibility beliefs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(4), pp.397-417.
78 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Girls Got Game Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Alex Butt PDHPE Teacher and Girls Sports Project Leader Ali Cox Director of Girls Sport Abstract The benefits of sports participation and positive correlations with academic improvement and wellbeing have been well researched. However, the positive outcomes are not an automatic consequence of participating. Single Sport Specialisation and the concurrent over-focus on development of sport specific skills in children is leading to higher levels of injuries and burnout. It is time to “change the game” in youth sports and the Girls Got Game program is trying to do just that – a program designed to be fun and engaging while currently designed to build capacity of our students to positively engage them in long-term sports participation. Sport is an integral part of the students’ journey at Barker, designed not only to provide involvement in physical activity, but also to enhance character values, improve academic outcomes and contribute to the essential social and emotional development of students. However, positive outcomes are not necessarily an automatic consequence of participating. Often, we make the wrong assumption that sport aline is an environment that fosters these desirable characteristics and do not attend to the fact that instead it is something that has to be intentionally cultivated (McCarthy et al 2016). With this understanding and as we transition to coeducation, Barker embarked on a Girls’ Sport project to start with a blank canvas, dismissing notions of what sport “should be” to what sport “could be” to design an environment that intentionally cultivates a transformational experience for students in sport. The Girls Got Game program which our Year 3 students participated in throughout Term 1, 2019 is a direct outcome of this project. The best way to describe the program is a cross between a ninja warrior obstacle course and Free G gymnastics with some agility games also in the mix. However, the program was underpinned by three main concepts – increase selfefficacy of the students within the realm of physical activity, increase exposure to movement patterns to build a solid base for future sports participation and, of course, fun. One of the keys in providing an engaging experience for girls in sport is building an absolute resolute sense of self-efficacy within the domain of physical activity. Self-efficacy is defined as the belief in one’s own abilities, specifically our ability to meet the challenges ahead of us and complete a task successfully (Akhtar 2008). Importantly, it underpins an individual’s values, beliefs and persistence in activities and directly relates to reducing barriers to girls participation in sport which generally relate to a fear of judgement centred around appearance and ability (Office of Sport 2019). Psychologist Albert Bandura (1997) identifies that to develop self-efficacy, important components include performance accomplishment – seeing evidence that you have succeeded; vicarious learning – watching and learning from others and verbal persuasion – hearing positive statements from trusted others. The Girls Got Game program involves Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 79
attempting various obstacle-based courses where students challenged themselves with movement concepts – celebrating that it is ok to fail (fall off equipment) and it is important to just keep trying to achieve (get back on and give it another go). Place this in an environment surrounded by positive reinforcement from coaches and peers and students problem solving the course challenges, you create an ideal environment to develop not only movement confidence but also a positive self-efficacy underpinning a strong belief that anything is possible. It was particularly special to watch the growth of the students as they challenge each other and celebrated success when they completed an obstacle that may have been difficult first time round. The second concept involves changing the way we think. Previously, it was thought that simply by mastering fundamental movement skills at an early age a person would become physically literate and develop the necessary skills to participate in sport. However, emerging research from around the world of sport is identifying that developing movement patterns (or foundational movement competencies) is becoming more important as our risk averse society encourages children to spend more time on video games and mobile phones as opposed to climbing trees and playing street games (Tompsett et al. 2014). Despite focusing on developing sport specific skills and attempting to reach the golden 10,000 hours as early as possible – this hyperspecialisation has not seen the production of a generation of superstars but rather higher injury and burn out rates (Frisch 2018 & Sagas 2013). It is interesting to note that the work of Moesch et al (2011) identified that “future elites” actually practised less on average in their eventual sport than near-elites through most of childhood – reinforcing the need for multisport participation. We suggest that we take this one step further and also reinforce that “Training for sport doesn’t always have to look like that sport” (Frisch, 2018). Importantly, finding a way to challenge the rigorously structured learning environment in sport to one of exploration with a focusing on falling, rolling, jumping and balance is essentially important not only for movement confidence but also for increasing cognitive flexibility (and improved academic outcomes). It was mind-blowing to see the creativity of the girls on display. Their confidence developed over the 6 weeks to leap, jump and push the boundaries of movements further and faster – indirectly creating an environment that involved very little instruction but one in which students independently solved problems and found new ways of doing things resulting in a strong development of movement concepts (or general athleticism). Fun is obviously a given in any program and the number one reason why kids want to play and be involved in sport. In a 2014 Study from George Washington University – nine out of ten kids said that fun is the main reason they participate and when asked to define fun – they gave eighty-one reasons and winning was ranked at number forty-eight. Providing an environment that encourages development through challenge while concurrently engaging students in a fun way is no easy feat. The inspiration gained from Jeremy Frisch (Achieve Performance USA) was fundamental in ensuring a base for the development of the Girls Got Game program. However, by modifying the environment and “changing the game” we have ensured a positive first experience of involvement in sport, laying the necessary foundation of movement competencies for these students to thrive both on and off the fields/courts long term in Barker’s sports program. The end result of taking a risk with the Girls Got Game Program and effectively “changing the game” was the development of a group of girls that are strong, confident, embrace challenge and know that anything is possible (as long as you keep trying). This effectively leaves us with the question as to whether we are ready to change the game across our entire junior programs and place a greater emphasis on fun and general athleticism (focusing on a variety of movement challenges) over the traditional sport-specific fundamental skill development? The research suggests it is now time to take the risk to not only maximise the holistic outcomes from sport but it is indicating that it will also help improve our sports team’s results. 80 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
References Akhtar, M. 2008. What is Self-Efficacy? Bandura’s Four Sources of Efficacy Beliefs. Positive Psychology UK. Retrieved from http://positivepsychology.org.uk/self-efficacy-definition-bandura-meaning. Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman and Company, New York. Frisch, J. 2018. A Return to Play: Movement Training for Youth Atheletics. Simplifaster, USA. Retrieved from http:///simplifaster.com/articles/play-movemet-training-youth-athletes. McCarthy, J. & Bergholz, L. & Bartlett, M. 2016. Re-Designing Youth Sport: Change the Game. Routledge, New York. Moesch, K., Elbe, A.-M, Hauge, M.-L. T. & Wikman, J. M. (2011). Late specialization: the key to success in centimeters, grams, or seconds. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 21, 282-290. Office of Sport NSW. 2019. Her Sport Her Way Strategy. State of NSW. Sagas, M. 2013. What does the Science say about Athletic Development in Children?, University of Florida’s Sport Policy & Research Collaborative. Gainesville, Florida. Tompsett, C. & Burkett, B. & McKean, M. 2014. Development of Physical Literacy and Movement Competence: A Literature Review. Journal of Fitness Research. 3. 53-79. Visek, A. & Achrati, S. & Manning, H. & McDonnell, K. & Harris, B. & Di Pietro, L. 2015. Fun Integration Theory: Towards Sustaining Children and Adolescents’ Sport Participation. Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 12(3) 424-433.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 81
82 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
A blended learning approach to formative assessment.
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) Š Barker Institute 2019
Andy Mifsud Digital Learning Leader Abstract Blended learning at Barker aims to support and strengthen existing and emerging teaching and learning strategies across the school. This paper explores the way one such strategy, formative assessment, has been strengthened using Canvas and blended learning approaches by examining one way it is being used in a Year 8 Music class. The use of formative assessment data being captured on Canvas provided teachers involved with more accurate data on the skill and content development of each student in the class. This in turn opens avenues for personalisation and differentiation of content, a particularly pertinent point as the school moves towards a fully coeducational environment.
Key Terms Blended learning A student-centred approach to education, where online and face-to-face interactions are used to give students a more personalised learning experience. Formative assessment A term given to a board range of strategies that uses assessment for learning. Student-centred
learning
A broad-ranging pedagogical approach, grounded in constructivism, that includes ideas of personal growth, consciousness raising, and student empowerment.
Body Introduction Blended learning at Barker College is approaching the end of the third year of implementation. The concept of blended learning is seen as a set of strategies that leverage the best elements of face-to-face and online learning to provide students with a personalised and learnercentred environment (Stewart, Temle tt, Mifsud, & Harmon 2017). The learner-centred approach is grounded in constructivist theory, where learners build on prior knowledge by engaging in purposeful, active learning and sense-making (Perkins 1999). A deeper exploration of this approach reveals strong associations to ideas of consciousness raising, personal growth and empowerment (Tangney 2014). This is the reason why blended learning complements other learner-centred approaches, such as the Guided Inquiry Design (Longney & Mifsud 2018) and formative assessment strategies (Atkinson & Lim 2013; Lawton et al. 2012). In the case of formative assessment, the association with growth and development can be found in the root of the word itself. Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 83
In the Ancient Greek Philosophy, the word form meant, in the first instance, an inner forming activity which is the cause of the growth of things, and of the development and differentiation of their various essential forms. (Bohm 2005, p. 15) This paper seeks to build on an emerging body of literature by drawing blended learning and formative assessment strategies together, illustrated through an action research case study on a Year 8 mandatory Music class. The aim is to examine the way formative assessment delivered through blended learning environments can open powerful opportunities for personalisation and differentiation. These aims are important in any educational context, but should be given increased attention as the school transitions to a fully coeducational environment. Assessment As a teacher, I make use of two primary instruments of assessment: •
summative assessment: an assessment of learning, and
•
formative assessment: an assessment for learning.
Both forms are valuable. The former in providing concrete goal posts at strategically determined points throughout a course. The latter in guiding and adjusting learning appropriately for each student. Currently, all Stage 4 teachers are aided by the use of a rubric that breaks down key progress markers in each subject area. In Music, students are introduced to the following four areas: •
Performance
•
Composition
•
Listening
•
Writing.
These four elements form the four outcomes on our Stage 4 formative assessment standards demonstrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Year 8 Music Standards for each of the four outcomes (Performing, Composing, Listening and Writing). 84 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Method The Canvas learning management system (LMS) acted as the platform to support formative assessment. While Canvas is primarily used to provide students with a structured sequence of teaching and learning activities, the strategy put forward in this study shifts the focus of Canvas into an assessment engine, particularly aiding the capturing and accessing of formative assessment data. The first step was to import the Music standards criteria into the Outcomes area in my Year 8 Canvas course. Figure 2 shows the way I created a separate outcome for each standard, added the detail for each marker, and finally set the mastery level at 3. This means that students that are achieving a mark of 3 (or sound) will be given the feedback that they are achieving that particular outcome.
Figure 2: Outcomes in Canvas
The next step was to attach one or more outcomes (such as composing) to related learning tasks in Canvas. For example, when students were working on composition style activities, the composition outcome would be added to the task (see Figure 3). This process was repeated at strategic moments throughout the semester, with each outcome deliberately assessed three to four times on average throughout the semester. The advantage of using outcomes in Canvas was that each outcome feeds into a larger data engine that allows teachers to see results in a snapshot, or as an unfolding story of growth throughout a topic.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 85
Figure 3: Attaching an outcome to a task
Data analysis Data for this study was generated from two main sources: 1.
Student outcome data was captured through the Canvas learning mastery tools. Data was categorised into three categories, seen in Table 1.
2.
Qualitative data was sourced through personal notes and reflections gathered throughout Semester 1. This journal included a number of conversations held with students in my class, allowing me to include student voice in my research.
Growth
Student outcome data showed an overall growth over a semester.
Stagnation
Student outcome data showed little change over the course of a semester.
Decline
Student outcome data showed a downwards trend in results.
Table 1: Categorisation of outcome data
86 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Findings The ability to view whole class snap-shot data provided opportunities for me to easily institute differentiated learning activities. Figure 4 is a screen-capture of the outcome data available to the teacher as a snapshot of current student attainment. Each column in the table represents the four formative assessment outcomes, and each row represents a student in the class (these have been edited out for anonymity). This view can be generated at any time to show the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; current level of attainment based on a combination of their most recent formative assessments. Colour-coding is used to highlight students that are finding the work difficult (red), are making progress (yellow), and those that can be extended (green). Having access to this data first presented opportunities to personalise and differentiate work. A typical process would be to call together all students in the red zone to spend a portion of a lesson working one-on-one with me, allow yellow zone students to continue with a sequence of activities on Canvas, and provide the same activity with an added challenge for the green zone students. The yellow zone was considered to represent the right mixture of comfort and challenge that forms an ideal learning environment. The added challenge for green zone students was to attempt to also bring them back into that environment. Students enjoyed this form of differentiation as the groups were flexible and formed to meet the needs of each student at each stage of the course.
Figure 4: Colour-coded class outcome attainment at a snapshot in time
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 87
Once a base-line state is established through the first assessments of each criteria, subsequent instances of formative assessment tasks reveal either growth, stagnation or decline in ability. Of the 20 students in this particular class, I was able to identify 69 individual data points where studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; progress indicators either improved, declined or did not change per outcome, over the course of a unit. Overwhelmingly, individual student outcome reports were able to illustrate a growth in outcomes in 82.6% of cases. Stagnation, where studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; skills were recognised as neither growing or declining contributed 15.9% of the data, and there was only one instance of decline (1.4%). Discussion Throughout the semester, it became clear that both growth and decline play important roles. Growth is important for students who begin their learning at the elementary level and work to improve their skills. Conversely, students who already demonstrate an understanding of the content should be given additional work to provide stimulation and challenge. This raises a number of important points. First, the yellow portion of the outcome grid represents a powerful learning-state. Students in this zone display a level of both discomfort and challenge. Their assumptions and processes are questioned and this in turn leads to break-throughs. The green zone represents activities that serve to support or confirm student understanding and assumptions. While achieving in this zone should be the goal of the student, the teacher must ensure that the student does not reside in this zone permanently, as her or his learning is essentially put on hold. The red zone therefore represents skills where the student does not yet possess a firm grasp of the concepts or skills. This is an indication to the teacher that the student has not yet developed the fundamental tools needed to successfully complete the learning activity. This leads to the second understanding, that after students have demonstrated proficiency in a particular outcome, the teacher should shift towards providing additional challenges, or applying the outcome in new contexts. In essence, the student should be taken back to the learning state to provide a renewed sense of challenge. Another issues presents itself when students are stuck in stagnation for a long period of time throughout a topic. Stagnation in any of the zones should raise concern. Students who stagnate in the green zone may not experience activities that provide any real challenge. Students stagnant in the yellow zone might not experience any growth or sense of accomplishment in their activities. Students stagnant in the red zone may start to give up due to a prolonged period with a lack of understanding. Finally, the case of rapid growth or decline should also be monitored. In the case of rapid growth, this may indicate that the student has increased their effort, or made a break through that should be celebrated. Figure 5 shows one such story of a student who commenced the year demonstrating relatively weaker listening skills, only to make considerable improvements throughout the semester, ending with strong results in the final assessment. In the case of rapid decline, this may indicate a significant gap in student understanding, but might also point towards issues regarding the personal wellbeing of the particular student.
88 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Figure 5: An example of growth visualisation throughout a semester of work
Model The findings that emerged through this research project can be summarised through the use of the following theoretical model (see Figure 6). The model demonstrates the ideal progression of students throughout a unit of study, beginning with a movement out of the discomfort zone, towards a zone where there is a right balance of challenge and comfort, and finishing in the mastery zone before the process begins again. The progression shows the importance of ensuring that students move through the different zones, achieving a constant growth and rebirth.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 89
Figure 6: Theoretical model of student movement through formative assessment outcomes
Conclusion As the classroom teacher, these individual student reports were highly accessible and were able to tell a more compelling story about each student’s journey than one might find in a standard mark book. The data began to illustrate instances of breakthrough learning moments, of perseverance, or of the importance of providing the right amount of support and challenge to each student. As coeducation provides more diversity in our learning environment, this approach to formative assessment will provide teachers with the ability to create learning experiences that inspire every student, every day. References Atkinson, D., & Lim, S. 2013. Improving Assessment Processes in Higher Education: Student and Teacher Perceptions of the Effectiveness of a Rubric Embedded in a LMS. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(5), 651–666. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.526. Bohm, D. 2005. Wholeness and the implicate order. Routledge. Lawton, D., Vye, N., Bransford, J., Sanders, E., Richey, M., French, D., & Stephens, R. 2012. Online Learning Based on Essential Concepts and Formative Assessment. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(2), 244–287. https://doi. org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb00050.x. Longney, G., Mifsud, A. 2018. Positioning inquiry: The place for Inquiry in Years 7 – 10. . Barker Institute: Learning in Practice, 2(1), 19–25. Retrieved from http://www.barkerinstitute.com.au/media/2164/positioning-inquiry-greglongney.pdf. Perkins, D. 1999. The many faces of constructivism. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 6–11. Retrieved from http:// search.proquest.com/docview/224844889. Stewart, J., Temlett, S., Mifsud, A., & Harmon, P., 2017. Shaping blended learning at Barker. Barker Institute: Learning in Practice, 1(1), 19–25. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/ barkercollege/docs/journal-28_november-_print. Tangney, S. 2014. Student-centred learning: a humanist perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(3), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.860099.
90 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
In search of engagement Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Kathryn Driver Dean of Middle School Abstract We are all searching for that utopian classroom where the students are engaged, learning is taking place and progress is palpable. It is clear that we are not consistently achieving this as many students in Australian classrooms are currently disengaged. While classrooms are complex and teachers are diverse, research reveals that positive relationships are the key to engagement. These relationships are fostered when teachers know their students and when they make an effort to create optimistic, productive and predictable environments. Strong, warm relationships are particularly important for girls whose disengagement can look less threatening than for boys and often goes unnoticed. The way forward is for teachers to know and to care. The Ideal Classroom Picture this. An orderly classroom, chairs and tables in neat rows. Students alternating between furious scribbling of notes and furrowed brows of concentration as weighty morsels are disseminated. A teacher with greying hair holding court, model of an atom in one hand, smartboard pen in the other – remarkable not only for her encyclopedic knowledge, but also for her deft oscillation between old and new technologies. Is this the engaged classroom? Picture this. A classroom that emits a buzz, chairs and tables of different shapes and colours in various combinations. Some students assembling a medieval castle in groups, others sitting singly on the lounges taking in the greenery through large windows as they compose their odes to the Sultan Saladin. A sprightly young teacher moving between clumps of students, nodding here, asking questions there – remarkable not only for his swift assessment of student progress but also for his facilitation of discussion and debate. Is this the engaged classroom? We are all searching for engagement from our students, the reason being that students who are engaged are students who are learning. But this is sometimes an elusive goal: difficult to perceive, difficult to measure and difficult to sustain. (Dis?) Engagement in Australian Classrooms According to a report produced by the Grattan Institute, as many as 40% of Australian students are unproductive in a given year. The key indicators of this are not highly disruptive behaviours but more minor behavioural issues, like talking out of turn or persistent lateness to class and compliant disengagement. The report goes on to state that these students are one to two years behind their peers in terms of academic progress – regardless of whether they are disruptive or compliant (Goss, Sonnemann and Griffiths 2017). Additionally, those students who are compliant are (predictably) best at masking their disengagement. They may work slowly, intermittently or not at all, but are not enough of a problem to draw attention. Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 91
Disengagement not only has an impact on students, but also on teachers who can become very anxious and despondent when the one thing they are looking to foster – a classroom of engaged students – appears unattainable. One NSW trial found no relationship between years of teaching experience and student engagement (Goss, Sonnemann and Griffiths 2017), so this probably affects more teachers than might be imagined and certainly affects all of us at some point. Teachers might respond by resorting to punitive measures on a more regular basis – a method that has its place, but does not win students to the cause. Teachers can also respond in more destructive ways - with aggression, sarcasm or withdrawal. Everyone loses when students are disengaged. The Key to Engagement The worst advice I ever received as a teacher was, ‘Don’t smile before Easter’. This encouraged a desire to become the archetypal teacher that existed in my mind – one with supreme knowledge of my subject, ultimate confidence in my newfound role and all available disciplinary strategies at my disposal, ready to wield when required. However, it did not promote the desire to get to know my students, to ask them about their lives outside the classroom door, to let them into my world a little or to show them a humanity and even vulnerability that binds us to each other. And, without romanticising this notion any further, current research indicates that relationship is the key to engagement and, indeed, learning. The Grattan Institute reports that, ‘Students who have a good relationship with their teacher tend to succeed at school’. It goes on to suggest that, in order to reduce behavioural problems in the classroom, The first step is that teachers must know their students (Goss, Sonnemann and Griffiths 2017). A document produced by the Californian Department of Education stated that in the midst of competing teacher priorities, ‘Establishing trusting, warm relationships is paramount’ (O’Malley and Austin 2014). US staff trainer, Marieke van Woerkom, offers this advice to teachers: ‘Get to know your students… The stronger the relationship and the better we understand our students, the more knowledge and goodwill we have to draw on when the going gets tough’ (van Woerkom 2018). A study that emerged from UNSW about the impact of teacher-student relationships on student engagement concluded that: ‘Students are more academically engaged when they are positively connected with their teachers. Each additional positive relationship with a teacher was associated with greater academic engagement by way of participation, enjoyment and aspirations’ (Martin and Collie 2018). A similar study honing in on girls’ disengagement added that ‘When girls feel more connected to their teachers and peers, they feel more included in the classroom and, as a result, may be less likely to disengage’ (Burns, Bostwick, Collie and Martin 2019). Tools of Engagement The evidence is overwhelming and the application is simple: get to know your students. Understand how they work, what they like, what they are good at and what their deficits are. This will reap rewards in terms of engagement, it will support students socially and emotionally, it will give them the best chance of making progress academically and it will promote hopeful and aspirational thinking. While it is a simple and natural task to relate to others, this is made much more difficult by the complex nature of a classroom which contains 20 or more very different human beings whose natural inclinations will vary from those who love to learn to those who love to subvert to those who are experiencing difficulties they are hiding beneath the surface. Here are some tools that might be helpful as we strive to make connections and prevent disengagement:
92 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
For school leaders: •
Prioritise the communication of effective teaching strategies that lead to a positive classroom climate and an engaged student body in teacher induction programs.
•
Promote opportunities for teacher observation and collaboration including the use of mentors who can pass on strategies that have been tried and tested.
•
Listen to students as we seek to understand what matters to them and include them in crafting school rules for the purposes of ‘building community norms that preserve learning time’ (O’Malley and Austin 2014).
•
Produce a coherent, transparent and achievable Behaviour Management Plan that is widely disseminated and universally adopted.
For school teachers: •
‘The teacher’s ambition should not necessarily be a quiet class but a genuinely productive class’ (Goss, Sonnemann and Griffiths 2017). This is a classroom that feels comfortable, where students can be confident, where participation is not only the norm but an expectation, where mistakes are made without fear and where students are challenged to go beyond their previous limits.
•
Teachers should focus not just on teaching their subject content but on teaching behaviours for learning. Research shows that ‘teachers tend to reserve praise for good work rather than good behaviour’ (Goss, Sonnemann and Griffiths 2017). Perhaps instead we could focus on exhibiting model student behaviours that promote learning.
•
Teachers should share classroom expectations and develop classroom norms collaboratively. This fosters student ownership of their behaviour and communal adherence to shared standards.
•
Teachers should have high expectations of student success, understanding that different students will progress at different rates and achieve different markers. Success breeds confidence which breeds motivation which breeds further success.
•
Teachers should inculcate not only positive teacher-student relationships, but also positive relationships within the student body. This ensures a level of trust that encourages debate, disagreement and the ability to fail in order to learn.
•
Teachers should strive for clarity in their instructions and structure in their lessons. This should not hamper the element of surprise, spontaneity and fun, but ensures that routines which give students security are preserved.
•
Teachers should promote student participation as a significant factor in their engagement. ‘The more opportunities students have to respond in class, the more likely they are to learn well’ (Goss, Sonnemann and Griffiths 2017).
•
Teachers should assign work that is ‘important, significant and interesting’ and provide ‘clear feedback on how they can improve’ (Martin and Collie 2018). Students, just like teachers, want to know they are doing something worthwhile and want to know how to reach their goals.
•
Teachers should offer consistent encouragement and praise to their students. This is best when it is specific and, especially, when it is genuine. Students can see right through hollow praise.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 93
•
Teachers should offer consistent consequences and corrections to their students. Warnings give students the opportunity to self-correct and remind them of expectations, but teachers should act quickly, if needed, to follow through on consequences. These consequences may include utilising a formal disciplinary system but it may also (with potentially greater effect) be dealt with immediately in a manner appropriate to the misdemeanour. A teacher who responds well to misbehaving students encourages good behaviour from others.
Does Gender Make a Difference? Research suggests that, in general, students become more disengaged in high school (Burns, Bostwick, Collie and Martin 2019). However, this research has also focused more on boys because they tend to disengage in ways that are more overt – through disruptive classroom behaviours. However, disengagement in high school is also an issue for girls. And, concerningly, because their disengagement is more likely to present as quiet, compliant underachievement, this has not been as assiduously investigated or combatted. According to Burns, Bostwick, Collie and Martin (2019), disengagement among girls can take the form of self-handicapping (where students sabotage their chance of success by avoiding work) or failure-acceptance (where students actively stop participating in classroom activities). The key to tackling disengagement among girls is to bolster their social support. In other words, teachers need to foster relationships with them and relationships between them and their peers. It has been found that teacher support when girls transitioned into high school was a significant buffer against disengagement, while peer support did not play a major role in this regard (Burns, Bostwick, Collie and Martin 2019). The key recommendations of a study by UNSW educators were: “listening to girls’ opinions and ideas in the classroom” and “showing interest in and asking about girls’ hobbies and extracurricular activities” (Burns, Bostwick, Collie and Martin 2019). This shows the significance of a relational approach when it comes to engaging girls and this should be at the forefront of our minds as Barker College transitions to full coeducation by 2022. The Final Word What is the ideal classroom? Perhaps it is always best to leave the final word to a student. When I asked a Year 9 student this question earlier in the year, he said: ‘I love my Maths class.’ Why? ‘Because my teacher cares about me.’
94 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 95
References Burns, E., Bostwick, K., Collie, R. and Martin, A. 2019. Teacher support reduces girls’ disengagement in high school. ACER. Goss, P., Sonnemann, J. and Griffiths, K. 2017. Engaging Students: creating classrooms that improve learning. Grattan Institute. https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Engaging-students-creatingclassrooms-that-improve-learning.pdf. Martin, A and Collie, R. 2018. Teacher-student relationships and students’ engagement in high school: Does the number of negative and positive relationships with teachers matter? Journal of Educational Psychology. O’Malley, M. and Austin, G. 2014. What Works Brief #11: Proactive and Inclusive School Discipline Strategies. WestEd, San Francisco, CA. http://californias3.wested.org/tools. van Woerkom, M. 2018. A Proactive Approach to Discipline. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/ proactive-approach-discipline.
96 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Understanding opportunities for learning in STEAM for high schools.
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Daniel Woolley Physics & Science Teacher Assistant Coordinator (iSTEAM) Abstract An increasing number of schools are running STEAM activities, but it can be difficult for schools to navigate choosing, implementing and supporting such courses. For schools effectively to implement STEAM activities, it must be clear what constitutes a STEAM activity, what these activities look like in schools, how they can be supported and which programs offer the right activities for their students.
Key Terms STEAM Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, Maths
Body Introduction With the growing recognition of the importance of STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics) skills for students, there are a plethora of companies, gurus and programs that are offered and promoted to schools. These programs vary in content, implementation, resources and length, partly because there are many competing options for schools looking to implement or improve STEAM programs. While many programs are engaging and effective at developing skills, not all such activities are developing STEAM ideas. An increasing number of schools are running STEAM activities, but it can be difficult for schools to navigate choosing, implementing and supporting such courses. While these programs all espouse their benefits for students as STEAM activities, it is impossible to compare or evaluate them without an idea of what defines STEAM. For schools effectively to implement STEAM activities, it must be clear what constitutes a STEAM activity, what these activities look like in schools, how they can be supported and which programs offer the right activities for their students. What is STEAM? While any activity that involves practical skills or technology can be marketed as a STEAM activity, there are essential requirements that make these activities useful for students’ learning beyond the enjoyment of the activity itself. The main criteria are that it is crossdisciplinary, solves problems in a relatable context and focuses on skill development rather than content.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 97
STEAM is Cross-disciplinary learning STEAM is cross-disciplinary in that activities and events must draw from and link different content areas together and not the application of only one. Many activities focus on a STEAM strand (either Science, Technology, Engineering or Maths), this allows it to be more easily programmed or organised by a specific area of the school, but without explicit links to another discipline: it is a practical activity for that subject but not a STEAM activity. These connections do not need to be exhaustive, as long as they are apparent in the design of the activity and are clear and meaningful to students. These connections should arise naturally from the activity as forcing tenuous links between subjects where they do not exist ruins an activity. Engaging, subject-specific activities are better than dull STEAM activities. STEAM is problem-solving STEAM activities involve solving problems and these problems should relate to real-world issues and needs. Solving problems will give students context for what they are learning and provide motivation. The problems can be a simplified version of real-world situations or even contrived to real situations, as long as the ideas and skills required to solve these problems are the same ones that are needed to complete the original task. It is also important to note that while they must be problem-focused, they do not necessarily need to be inquiry or project tasks (though they might be). Inquiry or project tasks are an essential part of education and are useful in developing students with specific skills, but they are not inherently a STEAM activity. STEAM is skills focussed STEAM activities explicitly focus on developing skills and mindsets that allow students to understand and solve problems. Activities could cover skills the students have gained relating to working between different content areas, solving and expressing the solution to the problem they have faced and understanding the process by which they were able to complete it. An important distinction is that activities which focus on teaching a student how to use a particular piece of equipment or software, even in a relatable context, are merely training a student how to use that program or technology. A STEAM activity needs to focus on what skills can be learnt from how the program or technology solves problems. What can STEAM activities look like in a school? STEAM activities in schools can be grouped into three main types: events, courses and integrated content. Ideally, STEAM activities in all three of these areas are present in a school to provide the opportunity and variety to reach all students. For schools attempting to start STEAM programs, focusing on one particular area may be beneficial as they each have different challenges for implementation. Schools may also find that they have one particular STEAM activity that is quite successful and would like to leverage this into a broader STEAM program. Tying new types of activities to a successful one can be an excellent way to expand with lower risk before trying to duplicate or broaden the existing program. Option 1: Events STEAM events are stand-alone activities that have the focus of engaging participants through fun, challenging or exciting content. These events are often conducted to drive interest in a subject, program or topic. Predominately, events are targeted towards students. Some examples are STEAM expos, excursions, tours, workshops, competitions, guest speakers and presentations. Other typical STEAM events can also involve parents or community members as learners or participants.
98 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
STEAM events are commonly developed and run by external groups reducing the burden on school staff. They can be created at any scale from small student groups through to class, year group or whole school size. This versatility can reduce the difficulty in timetabling such activities. STEAM events can also present challenges for a school to implement effectively. As external groups commonly run events, they come with set content and focus. It is difficult to modify or alter the content and how it is delivered which means a school must take care to select providers that offer genuine STEAM events and not merely practical activities. Option 2: Courses STEAM courses are defined as activities run over multiple sessions of dedicated class or extracurricular time, which have a defined curriculum (skills and content) and specific student outcomes that can be measured. These courses can range in length from a week to an entire year and are usually run on a class or year group level. These courses come in a range of different forms from elective classes, such as Stage 5 electives, to compulsory courses, such as standalone Stage 4 integrated or subject replacement short courses, to voluntary extracurricular courses such as robotics groups. Courses have the advantage of being mostly or entirely directed by school staff and, therefore, these can be made to ensure they are authentic STEAM activities. There is specific time set aside for the course and the presence of repeated lessons allows for the development of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; skills over a much longer continuum than can ever be achieved at an event. The nonprescriptive nature of the curriculum and time required allows schools to modify both as required to fit within the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s timetable. This provides excellent opportunities to allow students to have meaningful, in-depth STEAM learning experiences. The freedom and open nature of these courses are also the main barriers to them being effectively implemented in schools. There is a high burden on schools to plan, prepare the materials, organise and purchase the equipment and set assessments. Courses require teacher training and development upon implementation to train teachers in the practical skills and in the STEAM focus of the unit. Another barrier to the implementation of these courses in schools is achieving buy-in from teachers and administrators. These courses will, by their nature, reduce student time for other areas, either through the reduction in student numbers for other elective classes or the loss of teaching time for other subjects or activities. This can lead to resentment among staff and this will reduce the effectiveness of the STEAM course, especially if those teachers are also required to teach the subject. Effective communication about the aims of a course and how it will be implemented and strong leadership are the two ways that can reduce this resentment. Option 3: Integrated content STEAM integrated content refers to activities being used within subject courses to deliver both subject content and create engaging activities for students. These activities can be within a single course, focusing on teaching subject content through practical problem solving and linking to other learning, or it could be between or across different courses (which can involve joint assessment tasks across subjects). Integrating content within a course can be an activity in a single lesson, or it could form a unit with a course. With any of these activities, students can gain a much greater appreciation of context and purpose of the information they are learning by using it to solve a problem in a way that relates their different learning experiences together.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 99
STEAM education at Barker Barker offers a range of STEAM activities aiming to engage students and staff across the school as well as parents and members of the wider school community. The most established and significant activities are STEAM events. Some of these events include the STEAM festival, Science and Maths week activities and presentations from guest speakers both in class and through the Barker Institute. NASA and STEAM tours are offered to students to gain a broader perspective and experience from around the world. The Barker Robotics program and Code Club provide opportunities for students to be involved in extracurricular courses. A dedicated STEAM course for Junior School students has been running since 2017. In addition, since 2018, Barker has also offered a curriculum STEAM course for Years 9 and 10 students, the iSTEM elective. How do you develop STEAM activities? Amongst several features required to implement successful and lasting STEAM activities in the school, there are three key requirements to consider including resources, authority and time. Requirement 1: Resourcing The most essential and helpful resourcing that can be provided to STEAM activities is staff. The success of any new change in a school will hinge on the staff chosen to implement the change. Staff need to be given the opportunity to perform this role and the responsibility to achieve it. Both of these are necessary to ensure the staff members are both motivated and available. The second resource is space. This includes space in which to undertake the activity and also space to store and prepare equipment. While schools contain many spaces that could be used for these activities, an activity cannot be adequately planned, nor will it be an enduring activity if there is not a reliable space available. The third required resource is funding. STEAM activities are often by their nature practical and require resources in the form of consumables, tools and external personnel. Requirement 2: Authority To improve a schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s STEAM program, the staff that have been tasked with implementation must have the authority to enact change. These changes may be small or large, but without the backing of leadership to empower key staff, changes will not be well implemented and cannot endure. School leadership must also provide support for STEAM programs. Change is always challenging to implement; it must overcome the inertia of established routines and competing priorities present in a school. To implement change well, support and promotion of the change must occur to ensure it is embraced by staff. If staff, particularly those that are helping run it, do not feel that an activity is valuable, then it will not be. Requirement 3: Time The last and most valuable resource that can be provided to increase the likelihood of a successful STEAM activity is time. These activities require significant preparation time due to their practical nature, complexity and staffing. For a program to be effective and lasting, it must be reviewed and documented. All activities should have time to be evaluated and to incorporate changes for future planning.
100 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 101
As STEAM activities are practical, they require materials and equipment to be ordered and prepared well in advance. Staff need time to become familiar with the material and effectively to communicate with students to ensure they are developing the desired skills. STEAM is inherently an activity that involves different parts of the school and there must be time to collaborate and create activities that authentically and usefully involve different areas. Lastly, time must be created for students to attend these programs. For some schools, this is the most challenging aspect of properly supporting STEAM activities. Conclusion The essence of any STEAM activity is different areas of learning coming together to develop skills to solve practical problems. The activities can vary widely and schools looking to implement or improve these programs should examine what activities they provide from the different area of events, courses and integrated content. When implementing STEAM activities, it is crucial to support them well with resources, authority and time. These guidelines will allow schools to ensure the STEAM activities they offer are worthwhile and productive. References Taylor, N. 2017. â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;STEM Education and the Water Industryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, Barker Institute Journal, 1(1), 50-53.
Gender and technology Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Sally Filtness Senior Head of Butters House Design and Technology teacher Abstract Two reasons prompted the author to write this piece for the Barker Institute Journal. Firstly, Design and Technology teachers are planning and disseminating the new mandatory Technology Syllabus (NESA 2017) in 2019 and 2020. Secondly, Barker is transitioning to full coeducation by 2022. It is imperative to conduct a literature review on gender and technology. Cai, Fan & Du (2017) discuss a gender attitudinal gap, but then go on to state that when the general attitude was broken down to different dimensions of attitude, it showed a reduction of gender difference in the dimension of self-efficacy and belief. We, as a Design and Technology Department, hope to disseminate and implement design projects and activities to decrease the ‘gender attitudinal gap’ and ‘increase self-efficacy and belief’ in both genders. Key Terms Constructivism Constructivism is a learning theory found in psychology which explains how people might acquire knowledge and learn. It therefore has direct application to education. The theory suggests that humans construct knowledge and meaning from their experiences. Constructivism is not a specific pedagogy. Piaget’s Theory of Constructivist Learning has had wide ranging impact on learning theories and teaching methods in education and is an underlying theme of many education reform movements (University of Sydney 2019). Dissemination To provide lecturers with information, involvement and support with as many of the essential and important factors as possible from a list identified in an earlier project (McBeath 1996). Self-efficacy Personal judgments of one’s capabilities to organise and execute courses of action to attain designated goals. Strength of perceived efficacy is measured by the amount of one’s certainty about performing a given task (Zimmerman 2000). Technology Refers to methods, systems and devices which are the result of scientific knowledge being used for practical purposes (Collins 2019).
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 103
Tinkering A socio-technical, material and cultural practice; a curious investigative D-I-Y (Do-ItYourself) approach to invention that is often compared with the practice of hacking, making or modifying (ACLA 2019).
Body Gender differences are the focus of much of the research which deals with children’s technological abilities (Cai, Fan & Du 2017; Gipps & Murphy (2003); Barnes, Barnes, Morley, Morley & Sayers 2002; Fleer 1996; Greenberg 1986; Pickford 1992; Rogers 1997; Ryan 1993; Zarins 1996). The perspective provided by technology is especially suited to the study of gender (Jenkins 2000). According to Totten & Pedersen (2012), two of the most significant areas for research in science and technological education in the 21st Century were constructivism and gender. In the early years of schooling, gender appears to be a contested issue. For example, Faruqui, Hassan & Sandri (1991) argue that gender differences in science and technology are most evident in primary schools. The effects of unequal treatment and gender-role stereotyping is already evident when children enter primary school (Eccles 1999). On the other hand, Fine (2005) believes that gender differences are not very visible in the early years. OECD (2015) states that much of the gender research has focused on girls’ social contexts by examining the way in which science and technology is portrayed through the media, school practices and textbooks and by surveying the relative proportions of males and females in various educational programs and types of employment. The paper from NSW Parliamentary Research Service (Gotsis 2017) on gender and technology, although targeted mainly at a secondary teacher audience, contains valuable insights into a range of classroom gender issues which are equally applicable to the early years of schooling. It has been argued that gender differences to do with technology are already visible by Kindergarten (Hallström, Elvstrand & Hellberg 2014). Some of the topics included in the paper are the male dominance in access to classroom resources; male images portrayed through textbooks and resource materials; preferred learning styles for girls; types of assessment methods used (competitive or non-competitive); socio economic class; and, cultural and racial differences. For some students, their lack of experience with some areas of technology may need to be addressed through the implementation of special measures that are sometimes referred to as affirmative actions (McInnis 2006). It has been claimed that girls do not seem to have the same chance to develop understandings of technological concepts that boys learn through their tinkering and playing with construction sets and mechanical toys (Browne 1999). It would seem that girls do not have the same opportunity to develop some of the understandings of systems and machines that boys learn through playing and tinkering with mechanical toys (Rogers 1997). Yet boys are more likely to have had prior experience with constructional toys and using tools and resistant materials to make models and objects (Bindon & Cole 2016). They play more intensively with construction toys than girls (Blakemore 2005). Also, boys tend to be more interested in the physical and technological aspects of the world, while girls appear to be more interested in the human and natural aspects (Kohl III 2013). Because many girls initially appear to be less adept than boys at construction activities, Wyn (2009) suggests that they need to be provided with additional catch-up time to enable them to gain confidence and self-efficacy and to feel comfortable to freely express their ideas. This notion is supported by Claire (2002) who believes that girls need a lot more teacher support in construction activities and project-based learning. Special measures may also be needed for boys who may be unfamiliar with technology associated with textiles and food preparation (Rennie 2001). These special intervention measures (or affirmative actions) need to be supported on a whole school basis (Rogers 1997).
104 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The issue of gender inclusive curriculum materials has been addressed in a case study about the development of technology materials (Kinnear, Treagust & Rennie 2007). The study found that an awareness of gender bias needs to be present from the earliest stages of developing inclusive technology curriculum materials. Technology teaching materials need to be attractive and effective for both girls and boys. The fact that different students have different interests and all students possess existing knowledge are important considerations when planning technology courses (Jones & Carr 2002). NESA (2017) states that all students during their compulsory years of schooling must engage in design and technology activities requiring the use of a range of materials that encompass Design and Production, Agriculture and Food Technologies, Digital Technologies, Engineered Systems, Digital Technologies and Material Technologies. The use of such a broad range of mediums should help overcome some of the restrictive traditional views about which aspects of technology are appropriate for boys and which are for girls (Bindon & Cole 2016). References ACLA, 2019. Australian Council of Learned Academies. Definition of tinkering. Available at: https://acola.org/ wp-content/uploads/2018/08/9-tinkering-with-technology.pdf [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. Barnes, B., Barnes, R., Morley, J., Morley, J. and Sayers, S. 2002. Issues in Teaching Design & Technology. London: Routledge Falmer. Bindon, A., & Cole, P. 2016. Teaching design and technology in the primary school. East Kilbride, UK: Blackie. Blakemore, J. 2005. Characteristics of Boys’ and Girls’ Toys. [ebook] MIT. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/ sp.778/www/Documents/ToyGender.pdf [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. Browne, N. (Ed.) 1999. Science and technology in the early years. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University. Cai, Z., Fan, X. and Du, J. 2017. Gender and attitudes toward technology use: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 105, pp.1-13. Claire, H. 2002. A child centred technology curriculum - a primary school case study. Design and Technology Teaching, 24(1), 17-22. Collins, 2019. Definition of Technology. Available at: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/ technology [Accessed 5 Oct. 2019]. Eccles, J. 1999. Bringing young women to math and science, in M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds.), Gender and thought: Psychological perspectives (pp. 36-58). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Faruqui, A., Hassan, M. and Sandri, G. 1991. The role of women in the development of science and technology in the Third World. Singapore: World Scientific. Fine, C. 2005. Delusions of Gender. New York: Icon Books. Fleer, M. 1996. Talking technologically in preschool and school: Three case examples. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 21(2), 1-6. Greenberg, S. 1986. Does scientific literacy begin in the doll corner? Instructor, 96(4), 18 & 22. Gipps, C. and Murphy, P. 2003. Equity in the Classroom. London: Falmer Press. =Gotsis, T. 2017. STEM education in NSW schools. 5th ed. [ebook] NSW Parliamentary Research Service. Available at: https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2017/09/apo-nid108291-1158256.pdf [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. Hallström, J., Elvstrand, H. and Hellberg, K. 2014. Gender and technology in free play in Swedish early childhood education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(2), pp.137-149. Jenkins, E. W. 2000. Editorial. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4, 1-3. Jones, A., & Carr, M. 2002. Teachers’ perceptions of technology education: Implications for curriculum innovation. Research in Science Education, 22, 230-239. Kinnear, D., Treagust, D., & Rennie, L. 2007. Gender-inclusive technology materials: A case study in curriculum development. Research in Science Education, 21, 224-233.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 105
Kohl, III, W. 2013. Educating the Student Body Taking Physical Activity and Physical Education to School. 1st ed. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US). McBeath, C. 1996. From the bottom up: A curriculum dissemination strategy in practice. 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: http://www.clare-mcbeath.id.au/pubs/mcbeath97a.html [Accessed 5 Oct. 2019]. McInnis, S. 2006. Girls, Schools . . . . . and Boys Promoting Gender Equity Through Schools: Twenty Years of Gender Equity Policy Development. 1st ed. Twenty Years of Gender Equity Policy Development Research Paper 2006: Schools and Curriculum Division of the Department of Employment, Education and Training. NESA, 2017. Technology Mandatory 7–8 NEW | NSW Education Standards. [online] Available at: https:// educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k10/learningareas/technologies/technology-mandatory-78-new-syllabus [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. OECD, 2015. The ABC of Gender Equality in Education Aptitude, Behaviour, Confidence. [online] Available at: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-gender-eng.pdf [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. Rennie, L.J. 2001. Research in Science Education 31: 455. Rogers, C. 1997. Children’s choices. In L. Tickle (Ed.), Understanding design and technology in primary schools: Cases from teachers’ research (pp. 145-155). London, UK: Routledge. Ryan, J. 1993. I spy technology practical ideas for gender equity in primary technology studies. Carlton South, VIC: Directorate of School Education. Totten, S and Pedersen, J. 2012. Educating about social issues in the 20th and 21st centuries. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publ. Pickford, T. 1992. Girls and science: The effects of some interventions. Primary Science Review, 25, 22-24. University of Sydney, 2019. Definition of Constructivism. Available at: https://sydney.edu.au/education_social_ work/learning_teaching/ict/theory/constructivism.shtml [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. Wyn, J. 2009. Touching the Future: Building skills for life and work. 1st ed. [ebook] ACER. Available at: https:// research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=aer [Accessed 6 Oct. 2019]. Zarins, D. 1996. Positive discrimination. Is there a case? in Tickle, L. (Ed.), Understanding design and technology in primary schools: Cases from teachers’ research (pp. 201-212). London, UK: Routledge. Zimmerman, B. J. 2000. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 82–91, (2000).
106 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
The controversial classroom: Making understanding visible with no hands up.
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Amanda Eastman Assistant to the Director of Research in Learning and the Barker Institute Learning Support Teacher Abstract In Term 3, a large portion of Barker staff from the Junior and Senior Schools attended a day-long workshop by Dylan Wiliam, Emeritus Professor of Educational Assessment at University College London. Wiliam used both research and experience to prove that formative assessment strategies have a bigger impact on student improvement than any other pedagogical intervention. Having used Wiliam’s strategies for over five years in both the History classroom and in my Learning Support role, I can attest to the fact that these strategies are indeed, transformative. This article reflects on the author’s experience of using a ‘no hands up’ strategy in order to engage more students in the learning process and make understanding more visible. Through their Professional Learning strands and coaching partnerships, the Barker staff will continue to explore how formative assessment methods can become more ubiquitous across the School. What is the most effective thing educators can do to engender effective learning? This question has been asked by many researchers over many years, with varied results. A clear and consistent suggestion from contemporary literature is formative assessment (Black & Wiliam 1998; Wiliam, Lee, Harrison & Black 2004). It is commonly assumed that this means administering traditional-style tests at various points in the learning journey (rather than just at the conclusion). However, formative assessment actually means regularly gauging the level of understanding amongst students in order to inform how teaching and learning should proceed. Contrary to popular misconceptions, it does not have to take the form of written tests. Rather, it involves rethinking teaching strategies to quickly gather a snapshot of understanding from all students in the class. The effectiveness of Wiliam’s strategies is partly due to the fact that they allow data to be captured immediately, they require all students to engage, and they are an efficient use of the teacher’s time. Asking students to raise their hand to give an answer is one of the most ubiquitous strategies in the history of teaching. A few years ago I would have struggled to imagine a classroom functioning any other way. To my surprise, engaging a ‘no hands up’ policy has transformed my classroom. When taken at face value, the idea of minimising hands up may appear controversial, and even counterproductive. Contrarily, it can be used to great effect to ascertain, and therefore deepen, understanding amongst all students. Using hands up means that decisions about the learning direction are based on a small number of confident responses rather than evidence gathered from the whole class. Rather, Wiliam recommends gathering evidence from the whole class every twenty minutes of instruction. The strategy first came to my attention in a departmental professional development session by Greg Longney, who was Head of History at the time. Initially, a range of objections raced through my mind: students will hate being put on the spot; the quality of their responses will decline; they will be afraid to come to class; there will be chaos! However, as I began to watch clips of Dylan William applying this strategy, my scepticism began to dissolve. As Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 107
I came to understand effective alternatives to asking for hands up, I was amazed by the results. My students appeared to follow a similar journey. My announcement of the change was met by gasps of horror, but within weeks student surveys showed that even the most reluctant members of my classroom had been converted. What is wrong with asking for ‘hands up?’ In so many classrooms, it is the same small handful of students who answer every question. The teacher then assumes that all students comprehend and moves onto the next point. When I began observing my own students more closely, I realised that I was often guilty of this misconception. In my Learning Support role, I attended a range of classes and realised just how common it can be for students to be quietly lost or disengaged while the teaching strategies catered for those with their hands up. Alternatively, in his workshop at Barker, Wiliam referred to formative assessment as a ‘pedagogy of engagement and a pedagogy of responsiveness’. Removing hands up forces all students to take ownership for their own learning and this allows the teacher to make more informed decisions about how the lesson should progress. What are the alternatives? Initially for me, it meant writing each student’s name on a paddle pop stick and choosing randomly who would give an answer. I was wary of putting students on the spot, so I preceded questions with thinking time and discussions, then crafted questions requiring opinions rather than facts. I have since come to understand a variety of other ways to illicit student responses without asking for hands up. Ideally, integrate key checkpoints in lessons to gauge the understanding of every student in the class and determine whether or not to move on. They can then use ‘show me boards’, flip cards, exit cards or even just their fingers to indicate their preferred response to a question and thus give the teacher immediate feedback about their understanding or misconceptions. Regardless of the methods used, the following considerations are crucial for the success of no hands up: •
Give students time to think about their response. For example, ask them to discuss in pairs, or allow them to brainstorm in their books.
•
Make sure they know it is alright to be wrong. In fact, being wrong and working towards understanding should be celebrated as it results in very effective learning (Metcalf 2017)
•
If a student doesn’t know, they are not off the hook. Ask them if they can eliminate any possibilities, or consider coming back to them for an analysis or summary of the other responses.
‘No hands up’ marked the beginning of my journey in using Dylan Wiliam techniques. The staff workshop with Dylan Wiliam in Term 3 2019 demonstrated a whole range of transformative strategies that will be outlined briefly below. Some of these included: •
Eliciting discussion through the use of observations and statements that encourage students to elaborate on their thinking, rather than using direct questions. Examples could include ‘I’m curious about your choice’, ‘I’m interested in hearing more’ or ‘You chose option A…’
•
Increasing thinking time before asking for responses (Rowe 1986; Stahl 1994)
•
Removing grades from tasks to elevate the status of feedback and help students become self-regulating learners
•
Making feedback more effective by ensuring that it engenders future improvement rather than reflecting on past performance
•
Making feedback more work for the students than the teacher
108 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
•
Delaying answers to questions in order to increase engagement and retention of knowledge
•
Minimising simple tasks, as a certain amount of struggling actually enhances deep learning
•
Co-constructing rubrics with students so they understand what success looks like
•
Ensuring that rubrics focus on outcomes rather than context or processes
•
Differentiating success criteria so that the learning goals are accessible for all students
•
Activating students as learning resources for one another through cooperative learning where all students make a visible and quantifiable contribution (Slavin, Hurley and Chamberlain 2003)
•
Explicitly teaching students to give valuable peer feedback through methods such as ‘two stars and a wish’ or ‘choose-swap-choose’
Each of the staff who attended Dylan Wiliam’s workshop committed to trying at least one strategy in the classroom and will continue to meet to discuss their progress. At a strategic level, the assessment program continues to be reviewed and transformed to ensure that it reflects research about best practice. Overall, it is hoped that a greater focus on formative assessment across the School will increase students’ understanding, wellbeing and preparedness for life-long learning.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 109
References Black, P. J. & Wiliam, D. 1998. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7-73. Metcalf, J. 2017. Learning from Errors. Annual Review of Psychology 68(1), 465-489. Rowe, MB. 1986. Wait Time: Slowing Down May Be A Way of Speeding Up! Journal of Teacher Education, 37(43). Slavin, R., Hurley, E., & Chamberlain, A. 2003. Cooperative Learning and Achievement: Theory and Research. Handbook of Psychology. Stahl, RJ. 1994. Using “Think-Time” and “Wait-Time” Skilfully in the Classroom. ERIC Digest. Wiliam, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. J. 2004. Teachers developing assessment for learning: impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 11(1), 49-65.
110 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Pastoral Care Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 111
112 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Student wellbeing in a coeducational context
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Rowena Dudgeon Director of Wellbeing Abstract Wellbeing is an essential element of a thriving school community. This paper outlines what wellbeing is, why it is important for learning and how positive peer and studentstaff relationships enhance wellbeing and learning. Pastoral care structures that support, connect and create a sense of belonging for all students are also touched on as an important element in student wellbeing. What is wellbeing? The wellbeing of our students, staff and wider community is determined by the five domains of human wellbeing and is at the heart of the mission and values of Barker College. Five Domains of Human Wellbeing
Physical
• Physical safety • Health
Social
• Positive relationships • Connectedness
Emotional
• Self awareness • Emotional regulation
Cognitive
• Positive learning experiences • Motiviation and achievement
Spiritual
• Sense of meaning • Purpose
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 113
Student Wellbeing Learning to Be is one of the four pillars of education described by Jacques Delors in his report for UNESCO on Education in the 21st Century. The others are Learning to Live Together, Learning to Know and Learning to Do (Roffey 2017). The Department of Education defines student wellbeing as: a sustainable state of positive mood and attitude, resilience, and satisfaction with self, relationships and experiences at school (DEC 2015). Staff at Barker are committed to creating and fostering a caring and positive Christian environment for every student in order for our young people to be known, supported and equipped with the social and emotional tools needed to thrive. The foundation of an effective education is wellbeing. Barker aims to create an environment that affords all students experiences of connectedness, a sense of belonging and positive and respectful relationships based on equity and safety The purpose of the student wellbeing program at Barker is to empower students with social and emotional skills and attributes, developed through an holistic program of care, so that they can thrive throughout their lives. It is hoped that the legacy of the student wellbeing program at Barker produces graduates who are resilient and equipped to make a difference in their world and who have given more than they have received. Wellbeing is expressed in all areas of School life at Barker and is underpinned by Barker’s Thriving Framework: Inquiry, Rhetoric, Service and Gratitude. Students are immersed in holistic learning experiences where wellbeing is considered carefully and integrated into academic learning, outdoor education, service learning, Connect groups, the House system, cocurricular programs, sport, student academic care and support and through Christian faith development. A thread of wellbeing runs through many aspects of life for each student at Barker via: •
Quality teaching and learning
•
Student academic support and care
•
The house system
•
Counselling
•
The Clinic
•
Boarding
•
Outdoor education and service learning
•
Co-curricular programs – sport, creative and performing arts, STEAM
•
Connect groups
•
Parent engagement
•
Strong policies and procedures
•
Quality staff
•
Professional learning
•
Support from leadership
114 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Benefits of wellbeing programs in schools There are considerable benefits to student outcomes when wellbeing is at the heart of teaching and learning and when social and emotional skills (SEL) are explicitly taught to students. The Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning describes the benefits of SEL as follows: Research shows that SEL can have a positive impact on school climate and promote a host of academic, social, and emotional benefits for students. (Empowering Education 2016) Durlak, Weissberg et al.’s recent meta-analysis of 213 rigorous studies of SEL in schools indicates that students receiving quality SEL instruction demonstrated: •
Better academic performance: achievement scores an average of 11 percentile points higher than students who did not receive SEL instruction;
•
Improved attitudes and behaviours: greater motivation to learn, deeper commitment to school, increased time devoted to schoolwork and better classroom behaviour;
•
Fewer negative behaviours: decreased disruptive class behaviour, noncompliance, aggression, delinquent acts and disciplinary referrals; and,
•
Reduced emotional distress: fewer reports of student depression, anxiety, stress and social withdrawal. (Durlack and Weissberg et al 2011)
John Hattie famously highlighted the profound effect that teachers have on student learning and wellbeing in his acclaimed book, Visible Learning (Hattie 2008). The teacher-student relationship is pivotal in not only developing deep academic knowledge and skills, but in helping to develop social and emotional skills that enable students to learn more effectively and in turn improve academic outcomes. A caring and supportive classroom environment with a focus on pro-social values and behaviours makes it less likely that students will behave in anti-social ways (Wentzel 2003). Benard (2004) argues that positive teacher-student relationships contribute significantly, not only to student wellbeing and pro-social behaviour, but also to their learning outcomes. Good student-teacher relationships are important in the wellbeing of students, but students can also enhance the wellbeing of their peers in school settings as well. Pastoral care structures and student wellbeing It is evident that relationships count in the wellbeing of our young people. However, school culture and operational structures in schools can have significant impacts on student wellbeing. Pastoral care structures that promote social and emotional learning and encourage robust discussion and thinking around relationship skills, resilience, ethical decision making and self and social awareness are essential in providing safe and responsive environments for young people. In conjunction, having identified and articulated school values that are known and promoted, provides the framework for a common language of care within schools and highlights expected student behaviours. There are many pastoral care structures that operate in schools. Most commonly, they are horizontal (year level based) or vertical (multi-year level). At Barker, the current structure is horizontal. There are many benefits to this. Students in each year group get to know each other well and social and emotional learning programs are developed at appropriate age developmental stages. However, one of the drawbacks of a horizontal pastoral system is that students do not connect beyond their year groups and do not experience the incredible benefit of working and learning from older children.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 115
In a coeducation setting, vertical pastoral care groups where groups are of a mixed age, can help to promote gender equity and appropriate pro-social behaviours. Graham Best argues that students in vertical pastoral care groups in coeducational settings are the least likely to experience poor age-related behaviour patterns (Best 2014). Older pupils are quick to intervene to prevent bullying both within the pastoral care group and outside in the school playground and older students also share their expertise, reassure and stick up for younger students. Best also argues that young people who are grouped in vertical pastoral care groups also share school space more equitably, are more embracing of diversity and develop greater self confidence in the wider school community. He also argues that vertical pastoral care groups can provide important academic mentoring opportunities and research in some UK settings have seen academic improvements as a result. Young people learn pro-social and caring behaviours from each other and there is evidence to suggest that vertical pastoral care groupings can not only improve academic performance, but can also enhance the other domains of human wellbeing as well. As Barker moves to be fully coeducational by 2022, it is important to consider what will be the best structures for our students so that they can live and learn together in life and thrive. References Benard, B. 2004. Resiliency: What we have learned. San Francisco: WestEd. Best, M. 2014. Activities and Prosocial Behaviour in Vertical Tutor Groups. Institute of Education, University of London. Department of Education and Communities. 2015. The Wellbeing Framework for Schools. Durlack and Weissberg et al. 2011. The Impact of Enhancing Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Social and Emotional Learning: A MetaAnalysis of School-Based Universal Interventions. Loyola University, Chicago. Empowering Education. 2016. Benefits of SEL. Available online: https://empoweringeducation.org/benefits-of-sel. Roffey, S. 2017. The Aspire Principles and Pedagogy for the Implementation of Social and Emotional Learning and the Development of Whole School Well-Being. International Journal of Emotional Education, v9 n2, p59-71, Nov 2017. Wentzel, K.R. 2003. Motivating Students to Behave in Socially Competent Ways, Theory into Practice, 42 (4), 319326.
116 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Training, support and growth of pastoral leaders in the Middle School.
Learning in Practice 2019 Vol. 3 (1) © Barker Institute 2019
Tim Eastman Dean of Middle School Abstract This article explores many of the avenues that were undertaken and continue to be explored to train, support and grow pastoral leaders in the Middle School at Barker. It aims to highlight some of the initiatives that took place in the lead up to the expansion of the Middle School, beginning in 2019 with new pastoral structures being adopted. The quality of pastoral care provided in the Middle School has always been an integral support mechanism for students in some of the most formative years of their schooling journey. With the Middle School expanding over the years 2020-2022, new structures and practices were implemented, whilst existing practices improved upon, to ensure that students continued to thrive. This article aims to provide insight into what is happening in the Middle School to train, support and grow pastoral leaders. The lack of time for training is always identified as a hindrance to growth in the teaching profession (Buchanan, Prescott, Schuck, Aubusson, Burke and Louviere 2013) and this is also true for those in pastoral leadership positions. With the Middle School expanding gradually between 2020 and 2022, Heads of Houses were allocated the full 0.2 FTE allowance to perform their duties, but with fewer students in their House group for the initial period. This effectively provided more time that could be allocated to development; a great initiative by the school. The appointment of three Deans of the Middle School in line with the Senior School model, also freed further time across the Middle School to facilitate growth. Mentoring has been a long-proven method of facilitating growth in teachers (Moar and McConney 2015). With this in mind, a pastoral mentoring program and the time for mentoring to occur was prioritised in the Middle School. All Heads of House were allocated to a mentor, with each of the Deans and the Head of Middle School working with four Heads of House. Heads of House meet with their mentor once a fortnight on a one-on-one basis, giving them the opportunity to discuss their role, students in their care and their own professional development. Where professional development needs have been identified, the School has provided opportunities for staff to attend courses. One such example is the AIS Middle Leaders’ Course which two Middle School Heads of House attended this year, feeding back what they learnt to the pastoral group. Additional to this one-on-one mentoring time, the mentor and the four Heads of House have time allocated at the beginning of Head of House meetings which are held three times a term to meet as a small group (mentor groups). This is essential for quality mentoring to occur (Feiman-Nemser 2012) and has been proven to be a successful way to allow open conversation between peers with varying levels of experience and expertise. When the decision was made to move from eight to sixteen houses in the Middle School, this brought with it the need to increase the number of Heads of House. This process saw ten new Heads of House appointed, all with varying levels of experience and expertise. In order to continue building capabilities among Heads of House (new and experienced alike),
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 117
a Middle School Pastoral Day was organised during Term 4, 2018. On this day, essential training occurred around Child Protection, Restorative Practice and Record Keeping. Further to this, time was given to working in mentor groups, looking at common pastoral scenarios and discussing approaches to dealing with them. It was invaluable to have counsellors, senior staff and the Director of Wellbeing involved in these discussions. Mental health issues continue to be prevalent in youth (Lawrence, Johnson, Hafekost, Boterhoven De Haan, Sawyer, Ainley and Zubrick 2015) and Pastoral Leaders need to be acutely aware of these in their dealings with students. It is essential for these staff to understand mental health issues, be able to recognise them and assist students to seek the help needed (Jorm, Kitchener, Sawyer, Scales and Cvetkovski 2010). With all these factors considered, the School determined that it was essential for Heads of House to be trained in Youth Mental Health First Aid, yet again putting in place measures to train staff. Pastoral Staff were given class relief for the 14 hours of training needed to complete this training. The chance to meet as a Middle School team has always been imperative to the efficient running of the Middle School. However, the timing of the meetings (once a fortnight during lunchtime), has always meant that administration has been the priority, rather than specific staff training. This year, the School’s commitment to growing pastoral leaders saw a change in timing and purpose of these meetings. As mentioned above, some of this meeting time is allocated to meeting in mentor groups. However, there has also been greater priority placed on growth initiatives. One such initiative was to have staff complete a work preferences’ survey to give them a clearer understanding of how they prefer to work. In doing this, the Heads of House were provided with a clearer picture of what this meant for their leadership and what it meant to others who would be working with them or led by them. Heads of House were given the opportunity to compare approaches and thoughts in these meetings across terms. A second initiative, which is still ongoing, was to provide all Heads of House with a copy of Henry Cloud’s book “Integrity”. A highly-engaging book on leadership, staff were encouraged to read through it at their own pace. However, particular areas were taken out and explored during Head of House meeting time, again providing opportunities for development of leadership in the Middle School. Overall, a thorough process was and continues to be put in place to develop pastoral leaders in the Middle School. Through mentoring, training, professional development opportunities and meeting time, pastoral leaders have been upskilled so that they may provide even better care for the students in their care. It is a great blessing that the School has provided and continues to provide appropriate structures, resources and time to facilitate the growth of pastoral leaders in the Barker Middle School.
118 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
References Buchanan, J., Prescott, A., Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Burke, P., & Louviere, J. 2013. Teacher Retention and Attrition: Views of Early Career Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3). Feiman-Nemser, S. (2012). Beyond Solo Teaching. Educational Leadership, 69(8), 10-16. Jorm, A., Kitchener, B., Sawyer, M., Scales, H., & Cvetkovski, S. (2010). Evaluation of Mental Health First Aid Training for high school teachers. BMC Psychology, 10.51. Lawrence, D., Johnson, S., Hafekost, J., Boterhoven De Haan, K., Sawyer, M., Ainley, J. & Zubrick S. R. (2015). The Mental Health of Children and Adolescents. Report on the second Australian Child and Adolescent Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. Department of Health, Canberra. Moar, D. & McConney, A. 2015. Wisdom of the elders: mentorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perspectives on mentoring learning environments for beginning science and mathematics teachers. Learning Environments Research, 18(3), 335-347.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 119
About the Authors Melissa Brady is the Director of Coeducation Transition. She has a Master’s degree in Educational Leadership and is a Nationally Accredited Highly Accomplished Teacher. She has been a member of the ISTAA Experienced Teacher Assessment Panel and she assisted in writing the Experienced Techer Evidence Guide for NSWIT. Melissa is a member of the College of Teachers and in 2016 she completed the National Emerging Leaders’ Program through the AIS Leadership Centre with a focus on coeducation and emerging trends in educational research and practice. Currently Melissa is overseeing Barker’s 2019-2023 Strategic Plan which has coeducation and the long term future of Barker as its focus. Alex Butt is currently a PDHPE teacher and Assistant Director of Girls’ Sport. She is the co-ordinator of Barker’s Touch Football, Rugby Sevens and Netball programs and has been involved in various administration roles at both ISA and NSWCIS sport’s level. Her passion is using evidence-based research to guide emerging practice in sports development and performance in schools.
Alison Cox is Currently Director of Girls’ Sport. Within this role, she has had the opportunity to influence a change in the perception of girls’ sport not only for the Barker girls, but also the broader Barker community. Alison has a clear passion for the promotion and development of schoolgirls’ sport and her ability to do this at multiple levels is evident in her appointment to a variety of administrative positions across the ISA and NSWCIS representative sporting pathways. Kathryn Driver is a Dean of the Middle School with particular oversight over Year 9 in 2020. She has an MA in History and is interested in the teaching of History for the purposes of fostering critical thinking, developing empathy and exploring the formation of identity. She was responsible for co-leading a Project Group set up to consider best practice in pastoral care as Barker moves towards comprehensive coeducation. She has recently participated in a review of Barker’s behaviour management policies and practices, with a view to equipping teachers to promote student engagement. Rowena Dudgeon is the Director of Wellbeing at Barker College. Rowena came to Barker from Wenona School where she held the position of Deputy Principal (Academic Learning) and was responsible for the curriculum and teaching and learning for K-12. Prior to her tenure at Wenona, Rowena was the Director of Staff Learning & Research at MLC, Melbourne. Rowena was also previously employed as the Director of Innovative Teaching & Learning and Acting Head of Middle School at Roseville College between 2007-2014 and was the Head of Boarding and a teacher of Social Science at Pymble Ladies’ College from 1996-2007.
120 • Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Amanda Eastman commenced her career teaching History and currently works in Learning Support. From 2012 – 2014 she was the Assistant to the Director of Studies, overseeing the implementation of the Australian Curriculum. In 2017, she began working as the Assistant to the Director of the Barker Institute, contributing to initiatives such as the ‘Barker Journey’ longitudinal research project and the editing of the Barker Institute journal. She has also enjoyed participating in a variety of Barker’s cocurricular activities such as Softball, Touch Football, Hockey, Snowsports, Boarding, Crusaders and Focus On. Tim Eastman is currently a Dean of the Middle School and a History teacher specialising in Ancient History and Extension History. In 2018, he acted as the Head of Middle School where he oversaw the final term of transition from 8 to 16 Houses. In his pastoral roles, he has focused on student leadership development, innovation and positive education. He completed his Master of Education in Educational Leadership in 2017 as well as the Arrow Executive Leaders’ Course. His Master of Educational Leadership degree focused on mentoring in schools, while his Master of Teaching degree focused on differentiated instruction. He is currently undertaking the AIS Flagship program. He has a passion for seeing students thrive inside and outside of the classroom and helping them think beyond themselves. Sally Filtness is a Senior Head of House for Butters and has been a senior pastoral carer at Barker College since 2002. She has a Master’s Degree in Technology Teaching and is a Nationally Accredited Highly Accomplished Teacher. She has been a member of the ISTAA Experienced and Highly Accomplished Teacher Assessment Panels and she has written three textbooks on Design and Technology for Stages 4, 5 and 6. Sally is a member of the College of Teachers and is currently finishing off her Doctorate in Education based on Online Learning Resources in the Design and Technology classroom. She also lectures, writes and marks for Technology teaching degrees at Southern Cross University, NSW. When not doing all of the above she enjoys playing with her five year old identical twin girls, Zara and Chloe. Dr Matthew Hill is the Director of Research in Learning & The Barker Institute with a focus on professional learning, research and innovation in the School. He teaches Physics and the new Science Extension course at the School which introduces students to scientific academic research. Matthew's doctorate reflects his passion for science education focusing on Representational Fluency amongst physics students at school and university. He has published in leadership, education and science journals and been involved in course development and teaching at The University of Sydney and The University of Western Sydney. He has also completed a Graduate Diploma in Divinity at Ridley College in Melbourne.
Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 121
Dean Johnston is a Science teacher, specialising in Physics. In 2019 he was appointed to the role of Assistant Co-ordinator of Science (Stage 4). He holds a Bachelor of Science (Physics) and a Diploma of Education from Macquarie University. He was excited to join the Barker teaching staff in 2017, particularly as he is a former student whose character and intellect was substantially developed by the teaching and guidance he received whilst at Barker. He is passionate about instilling a deeper appreciation of science in young students and is continually seeking ways to challenge the status quo of science education in secondary schools. Kester Lee is a mathematics teacher and has been the Director of Studies at Barker College since 2015. He is currently nearing completion of a PhD from the University of Sydney in behavioural statistics and education, and holds a Bachelor of Science (Advanced) and Master of Teaching (Hons I). Having taught all levels of mathematics from Year 7 to Year 12 Mathematics Extension 2 in his 11 years at Barker, Kester also contributes to the cocurricular life of the School by supporting the music program as a violinist. Greg Longney is a teacher of History and the Director of Learning and Enrichment. His Masters of Education (Research) focused on how History teachers understand disciplinary knowledge and how they communicate it to their students. In 2018 Greg worked with a team of staff on the AIS Elevate program to investigate high potential learning at Barker College. He continues to teach History from Years 7-12. Dr Brad Merrick is the immediate past Director of the Barker Institute & Director of Research in Learning at Barker College having created the Barker Institute in 2014 under the leadership of Mr Philip Heath, AM. He has a keen interest in developing quality learning opportunities through the use of emerging technologies, ongoing professional learning and creative pedagogy. His doctorate investigated the relationship between student self-efficacy and self-regulation in creative learning environments. His professional experience in music and music education has also involved casual academic roles at the University of Sydney, University of NSW, Western Sydney University and the University of Queensland. He has held the post of National President of the Australian Society of Music Education and currently sits on the World Commission for Music in School Teacher Education combined with the ISME International Advocacy Committee. Having relocated in 2019, his current academic role is Senior Lecturer in Music (Master of Music - Performance Teaching) and Course co-ordinator at Melbourne Conservatorium of Music within the University of Melbourne. Andrew Mifsud is digital learning leader and a music teacher. He is currently researching student perceptions and experiences of secondary school blended learning environments as part of his Doctor of Education studies at The University of Sydney. He has also been involved in a number of action research projects based on social learning sites and he has presented his work at national and international education conferences. Andrew is the NSW Secretary of the Australian Society for Music Education and he is a past recipient of the ASME Music Educating for Life Award for his work promoting professional learning in the music educator community. 122 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Dr Timothy Scott is an experienced history and modern languages teacher. His PhD investigated socio-political influences on contemporary German conceptions of history and archaeology. Most recently, Dr Scott was the Director of Academic Affairs of an international school in Germany. In this role he shared the responsibility for setting the school’s strategic direction for intercultural teaching and learning, and for building and sustaining an interlingual learning community focused on delivering quality international education. Dr Scott returned to Australia in 2018 and he currently teaches History at Barker. Jamie Shackleton is currently the Campus Co-ordinator of Darkinjung Barker College, a position he has held for the past four years. Darkinjung Barker is situated in the Yarramalong Valley on the Central Coast of NSW. Jamie graduated from UWS Nepean and has been teaching at Barker College for fourteen years. He is married to Amy and has three children, Molly 20, Cooper 15 and Scarlett 12. During his time at Barker, he has spent time in the roles of Co-curricular Co-ordinator and Grade Co-ordinator. He completed the National Emerging Leaders’ Program and is continuing his education in the areas of leadership, management and wellbeing. He is passionate about Indigenous Education and is looking forward to what the next challenge holds. Nonie Taylor is a Physics, Earth and Environmental Science, Mathematics, and iSTEAM teacher. Prior to teaching, she worked for fourteen years as an advanced wastewater engineer for a water utility company. During this time she was concerned by both the absence of female representation in the water industry as well as the shortage of creative, passionate young people pursuing engineering as a career choice. This drove her career change to education, where she now loves being involved in helping students find enjoyment in understanding the world around them and contributing to finding solutions. Joshua Toth is an Economics, Business Studies and Commerce teacher at Barker College where he is teaching for his twelfth year. Prior to his time teaching, Joshua worked as a Rehabilitation Counsellor and worked in both the public and private sectors. After a few years in the allied health industry, he commenced teaching in the Catholic education system in 2003. Since then he has worked at Rosebank College in Five Dock and Waverley College. Joshua has coached Cricket and Rugby at Barker College and has recently taken over as the CCC of Cricket. He became Head of Wade House (in the Middle School) in 2011 for 6 years, then in 2017 become the Co-ordinator for Economics, and in 2020 will change to the Co-ordinator for Business Studies. He has also enjoyed participating in other aspects of the life of the School, having been coach of the 1st XI Cricket side for 6 years, a Boarding Duty Officer and a Connect Group leader for Holt House in the Middle School. Daniel Woolley is currently Assistance Co-ordinator for iSTEAM at Barker College. He teaches science, specialising in Physics and the stage 5 iSTEAM elective. He holds a Bachelor of Engineering (Hons) and a Bachelor of Science (Physics) from Australian National University and a Graduate Diploma of Education from Australian Catholic University. He taught Mathematics prior to joining Barker College in 2017 and is passionate about students developing skills they can use across disciplines and throughout life. Barker Institute Learning in Practice • 123
124 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice
Barker Institute Learning in Practice â&#x20AC;˘ 125
@barkerinstitute facebook.com/barkerinstitute www.barkerinstitute.com.au
126 â&#x20AC;˘ Barker Institute Learning in Practice