St Paul’s Primary School has been on a learning journey to build a Culture of Thinking for over six years. Have we made it? Will we ever be there? What does the journey look like?
This is our Cultures of Thinking learning journey. What is culture? Culture was described by prominent organisational consultants Terry Deal and Allan Kennedy in the 1980s as ‘the way we do things around here.’ It is also described, as Sir Adrian Montague, former Chairman of Aviva, says, “Culture is the glue that binds an organization together.” The greatest influence on culture is the organisation’s leadership. In schools, that would be the principal and his/her leadership team. Cultures of Thinking come from the work of Ron Ritchhart and the Harvard Graduate School of Education. In essence, Cultures of Thinking is an approach to teaching and learning that values and promotes thinking, as learning is a consequence of thinking. It is not a program or something extra to do in the classroom, but a way to get children more involved in their learning, and therefore, learning more effectively. Why did I believe that St Paul’s should become a Culture of Thinking? I had attended a professional learning day with Ron Ritchhart back in 2015. I had worked in a school as assistant principal with a principal who played with the ideas of Cultures of Thinking. And I had done much reading. I could see the benefits but wanted to take it much further. Few teachers have time to explore overarching philosophies or theories of action, like Cultures of Thinking, Fullan and Joanne Quinn's Deep Learning, Trevor Mackenzie and Kath Murdoch’s Inquiry Learning and Michael McDowell’s Rigorous Learning. Teachers are so busy with lesson planning, assessing, reporting, marking, meeting with parents and learning new curriculums that they don't have the time or energy to be looking at the big picture. They often “can’t see the forest for the trees.” It is up to principals and system leaders to read current research, best practice and overarching pedagogies, synthesise them and champion them in their schools. Gerard Mowbray, former Director of Schools for the Maitland Newcastle Diocese coined the phrase “our forever work” when he referred to the use of Lynn Sharratt’s Clarity approach. Of course, it can only be ‘forever’ until current research says that there is something better or that proves this approach incorrect. But the commitment to see an idea through is paramount! It’s not about committing to the ‘next shiny thing’ that comes along. “This stability of commitment is rare in the churning waters of public education, and it had permitted the work to become gradually sewn into the fabric of the work happening within schools, helping... to prevent the “this too shall pass” ethos that frequently characterizes reform efforts.” (Fine & Mehta p.7) I was committed to implementing Cultures of Thinking and seeing it through. I started with the leadership team. In 2017 we used leadership team meetings to read Ritchhart’s book, Creating a Culture of Thinking. We discussed, digested, and wondered, and at the end of that year I asked if they were committed to moving forward with the ideas and engage the whole staff to build a culture of thinking. They were. The next year we introduced the concept to the whole staff. Each year, discounting the Covid years, we have engaged the Cultures of Thinking specialists Simon Brooks or Ryan Gill. Simon is an independent education consultant based in the UK who “works with schools and educators around the world interested in building cultures of thinking, where children delight in their learning and develop deep, meaningful and lasting understanding through the process of becoming critical and creative thinkers.” Simon has visited St Paul’s at least half a dozen times to work with teachers and our leadership team. Ryan is Deputy Principal and Head of Senior School at Masada College in Sydney. Ryan has visited St Paul’s twice. Both educators are passionate about building a Culture of Thinking. They have facilitated powerful professional learning with St Paul’s teachers. Over the years we have taken one of the Eight Cultural Forces as focus for the year. So far, we have concentrated on time, environment and expectations. At least one professional learning staff meeting per term is dedicated to continuing to build a culture of thinking. Following the publication of Ron’s latest book, Cultures of Thinking in Action, 10 Mindsets to Transform our Teaching and Student Learning, our current focus for this year is one of those mindsets, ‘Questions’. In 2020, Simon led an action research group of four of our teachers. While COVID made this a challenge, Simon met with the teachers to set goals. The four teachers met regularly that year, honing their practice and improving student outcomes. An important part of building a culture of thinking is the modelling I do as principal. I consciously avoid using the word ‘work’ when referring to what children do in the classroom and make sure we use the word ‘learning’. Most days at morning assembly, I send the children off to class with the sign off, “Have a great day of learning!” As a leadership team, we try to use thinking routines in our weekly staff meetings. As Ritchhart says in The Power do Making Thinking Visible, teachers will ‘mirror’ the culture of the leadership team. It is important that we model to our teachers the thinking that we want to see in our classrooms. We are conscious to bring parents on our journey as they are integral to the culture we create. We inform parents both in newsletters, kinder orientation days, open days and other opportunities when we interact with parents. We want parents to value the thinking of their children. We encourage parents to ask their children what they learnt today at school, not what they ‘did’ or what work they did at school. Creating a culture of thinking is never a complete task. But it needs a ‘champion’ to continue to promote it. Ideally this should be the principal, otherwise it must be a key person on the school’s leadership team. After a recent professional learning day with Simon Brooks, I asked the teachers of St Paul’s to reflect on our culture of thinking journey. Are we a culture of thinking yet? Is your classroom a culture of thinking? This is some of what they said:
But the clincher for me that we are on course was this comment from an assistant principal from another school who attended the professional learning day:
The real test will be when I eventually move on to another school. It is my hope that St Paul’s will remain a Culture of Thinking. References and Further Reading: Church, R. (2020). Power of Making Thinking Visible: using routines to engage and empower learners. S.L.: Jossey-Bass Inc ,U S. Morrison, K., Ritchhart, R. and Church, M. (2013). Making Thinking Visible: how to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass. Ritchhart, R. (2015). Creating Cultures of Thinking: the 8 forces we must master to truly transform our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Wiley. Ritchhart, R. (2023). Cultures of Thinking in Action. Jossey-Bass. Sarah Fine & Jal Mehta A “Big Tent” Strategy for System-Wide Transformation. Seeking Deep Learning in Ottawa New Pedagogies for Deep Learning - A “Big Tent” Strategy for System-Wide Transformation.pdf - Google Drive [Accessed February 11, 2024]
1 Comment
I’ve recently had the honour and privilege to attend the Garma Festival in the red dirt of East Arnhem Land. I listened to story, sat with Elders, watched ancient dance, heard politicians, danced to contemporary indigenous bands, and experienced indigenous and non-indigenous Australians live together and interact together with a spirit of unity, two cultures working on telling the one story.
I was born in a time when indigenous Australians were still considered fauna. I was just starting school when the 1967 Referendum took place. No one at school in my time identified as Aboriginal; it would have led to bullying and discrimination. The terms ‘full blood’ and ‘half-caste’ were common. It was easier, acceptable and commonplace to claim that you were ’Spanish’ or from the sub-continent rather than Aboriginal. Aboriginal jokes were still acceptable, and we all sadly laughed. At school I learnt about the government’s policy to integrate and assimilate Aboriginal people; we were just going to ‘breed’ them out and the ‘problem’ would go away! There was no talk of stolen generation, massacres, or pride in culture. Thanks goodness we have matured! Garma is a cultural festival held at Gulkula on Yolngu country, the home of Yothu Yindi founder and Land Rights activist, Dr Yunupingu. This part of the country can be accessed by air from Darwin or Cairns, or a 700-kilometre dirt road trip to the nearest bitumen road. I flew, with sponsorship from the Catholic School Office, DoMN, as part of my professional renewal as a school leader. Garma has been going since 1999 and brings together indigenous clans from all over East Arnhem Land, indigenous leaders from all over the country, politicians and everyday Australians passionate about social justice for Aboriginal and Torres Strait peoples. The theme for this year's Garma festival was ‘Djambatj’, a Yolngu word meaning brilliance, skill and excellence. And of course, the festival took place in the shadow of the upcoming referendum of the Voice to Parliament. In fact, the referendum and its implications were on everyone’s lips. The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, flew in and reiterated his determination to bring about real change for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders by giving our first Australians recognition in our Constitution and forming a permanent Voice to Parliament. With such contention amongst the voting public, arguments for the Voice in such an idyllic location with intense media scrutiny were at the fore, but at the same time at odds with our immersion in the local culture. Aboriginal language was commonplace, indigenous and non-indigenous mixed and mingled. Racism had disappeared for the endurance of the weekend. We seemed ‘one’. But as released recently, the Report on Closing the Gap disclosed that only four of the 19 targets are on track to be met: preschool enrolment, youth detention, employment and land subject to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s legal rights or interests. The ‘Gap’ was there for all to see when we visited the local township of Yirrkala and later when I visited Wurrumiyanga in the Tiwi Islands. The townships were tired, the houses falling down, and services we take for granted in the city were limited. How do these people access health services? How do they attract quality teachers and nurses? How do they get to the dentist, optometrist or chemist? The ‘Gap’ was obvious. Indigenous Australians die eight years earlier than the rest of us, and as the prime minister keeps iterating, young indigenous males are statistically more likely to go to gaol than university. As a teacher I know the importance of education in breaking the cycle of poverty. Noel Pearson, Guugu Yimithirr man, lawyer and advocate from Cape York, promotes a direct instruction approach to indigenous education as part of his Good to Great Schools initiative. This makes sense if indigenous student attendance rates are around 50%. Inquiry learning won’t work if kids aren’t in school for the whole process. While the teachers have the kids at school, direct instruction is the most efficient pedagogy if time is of the essence. Noel is putting this into practice; Good to Great Schools particularly targets schools in remote Australia and indigenous communities and is having a great impact. We need to fix the root causes of youth violence, poor school attendance, drug and alcohol abuse. Those root causes are in poor education, housing and health. No wonder youth are walking the streets when their houses are overcrowded, food is scarce, kids don’t have their own space to chill out or do their homework. How can education be successful? Part of the Garma Festival was a youth forum. Indigenous and non-indigenous youth, both local and visitors, engaged in a range of activities including songwriting, creative workshops, robotics and e-safety, and cultural activities. Educating the leaders of tomorrow is so important. The youth of today don’t see people of different races like some of us ‘oldies’ do, they just see people of one race, the human race! Our own Maitland Newcastle Diocesan Reconciliation Statement says: We believe in the value of human dignity, which provides people with the capacity to develop fully. We hope that the Reflect Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) and future RAPs, will help the Diocese deliver reconciliation actions aimed at closing social and economic gaps to ensure the human dignity of all First Nations Peoples we engage with, employ, educate or assist. In our first step in our reconciliation journey, we are committed to.... Including and listening to the voices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in decision making and leadership. The Catholic Bishops Conference, together with other mainstream churches in Australia supports the Uluru Statement of the Heart calling for the Voice. On May 11 this year they released this statement: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples have lived in this land for many thousands of years. Their custodianship, however, is not recognised in the Australian Constitution. This is an omission which needs to be rectified... To guide all Australians at this important time, we encourage everyone to read and discuss the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which we endorsed in 2021 and which the Fifth Plenary Council of Australia endorsed in 2022. In particular, we recommend that Catholic parishes, schools and agencies arrange opportunities for people to come together to read and discuss the Uluru Statement. Today’s children learn about the rich 65000-year history of our First Nations people, the changes colonisation brought, stolen generations, and massacres. We regularly have Acknowledgement of Country. Families are proud to claim their Aboriginal heritage and know who their ‘mob’ is. We celebrate NAIDOC Week, Reconciliation Week and Sorry Day. Our Aboriginal Education Teachers do an amazing job embedding indigenous education in the curriculum and the life of the school. It is just a normal part of the rhythm of school life. One of many profound moments of the Garma festival was when local leaders invited the balanda (non-indigenous) participants to dance during ceremony. As Djawa Yunupingu, elder of the Yolngu clan said, “We are more determined than ever to find unity in our nation: to see the people of this ancient land live side by side, and walk side by side under the southern stars.” Not only walk together, but dance together! In his recent book, The Dreaming Path, Worimi man, Dr Paul Callaghan says, “Had the new arrivals (in 1788) built relationships instead of armies – listened to people born of this land and learned from them – the past two hundred and thirty years of Australian history, and current-day Australia, would be a far different story. Instead of a story of invasion, massacres, murder, disease, dislocation, pain, loss, trauma and disadvantage for Aboriginal people. There would be a story of collaboration, life, respect, growth, celebration and equity. It isn’t too late to shape the next chapters of this story.” As I return to Newcastle, I am struck by the challenges faced by our first Australians. The ‘status quo’ for ‘Closing the Gap’ is not working. It is so unfortunate that the Voice referendum has become political. In the 1967 referendum there was no ‘No’ campaign and 91% of Australians in a ‘White Australia Policy’ era voted ‘Yes’. We have an opportunity to finally give constitutional recognition to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as the first Australians. And we have an opportunity to give first Australians a permanent voice in the matters that affect them. I hope and pray that we take this ‘once in a generation’ opportunity. I am left with the words of the Peace Prayer of St Francis ringing in my ears: Lord, make me an instrument of your peace: where there is hatred, let me sow love; where there is injury, pardon; where there is doubt, faith; where there is despair, hope; where there is darkness, light; where there is sadness, joy. References and Further Reading: Bishops Back Call for Indigenous Voice Bishops Back Call for Indigenous Voice (catholic.au) Bishops issue statement on Indigenous Voice to Parliament Bishops issue statement on Indigenous Voice to Parliament (catholic.au) Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle Reconciliation Action Plan – Reflect: 1545-dio-reconciliation-action-plan_2022.pdf (catholic.org.au) 2022 Callaghan, P. and Uncle Paul Gordon (2023). The Dreaming Path. HarperCollins Mayo, T. and O’Brien, K. (2023). The Voice to Parliament Handbook. Hardie Grant Publishing. Our Diocesan Reporting Committee is reviewing our current student report to parents. Under learning behaviours, the disposition ‘Creativity’ has been put forward a number of times. Each time the listing of it causes conjecture. Why is this? Where does it come from? Should it be there at all? And how do we assess creativity? Creativity has for many years now has been one of the ‘C’s in twenty-first century or contemporary learning skills. Just Google ‘twenty-first century skills’ and go to images. Creativity is in practically every image. As a twenty-first century skill, together with most common ‘C’s of collaboration, communication, critical thinking, we are saying that creativity is an important skill that our children need to navigate the ever-changing world that is here and now! Creativity is one of the ‘Six Global Competencies’ in Fullan et al’s Deep Learning. Fullan describes creativity as “having an entrepreneurship eye for economic and social opportunities, asking the right questions, pursuing and expressing novel ideas and solutions, and leadership to turn ideas into action.” (2018, p17) The six Global Competencies (6Cs) describe “the skills and attributes needed for learners to flourish as citizens of the world. They provide clarity on what it means to be a deep learner. When students focus on the 6Cs, they learn more—much more—and this learning contributes to their own futures and often to the betterment of their communities and beyond.” Creative thinking is one of the Australian Curriculum’s General Capabilities. “Creative thinking involves students learning to generate and apply new ideas in specific contexts, seeing existing situations in a new way, identifying alternative explanations, and seeing or making new links that generate a positive outcome. This includes combining parts to form something original, sifting and refining ideas to discover possibilities, constructing theories and objects, and acting on intuition. The products of creative endeavour can involve complex representations and images, investigations and performances, digital and computer-generated output, or occur as virtual reality.” https://www.bloomstaxonomy.net/ In Bloom’s revised taxonomy (2001), the verb ‘create’ is placed at the highest level of thinking and includes such endeavours as ‘design, assemble, construct, conjecture, develop, formulate, author and investigate’. As a hierarchy of learning tasks, Bloom is challenging teachers to embed creativity in children's learning journeys as the ultimate goal of learning. Creativity is certainly becoming a more valued learning disposition in recent years. An OECD Education Working paper from 2013, co-authored by Guy Claxton, describes the disposition of creativity as “generating ideas, digging deeper into ideas, openness and courage to explore ideas, and listening to one’s inner voice.” It goes on to say that research into the disposition of creativity “reveals clear evidence to suggest that the embedding of creative dispositions into lessons actually raises achievement, with attempts to enhance creativity and develop more powerful learners leading to increases in measured test results.” In a Culture of Thinking ‘opportunities’ is one of the cultural forces that enable a learning culture to build whereby creativity is given space in a classroom. “Such opportunities provide students with the chance to apply their skills in novel contexts.” (Ritchhart, 2015, p.9). Creativity “is not necessarily a direct act but a compilation of activities and associated thinking” (Ritchhart, 2011, p.8). Creativity is not a ‘one off event’, but something that should permeate our classrooms and the children’s learning. Thinking routines are another cultural force. Thinking routines are a set of questions or a brief sequence of steps used to scaffold and support student thinking.They can enable children to see creativity in others as well developing their own creativity. Examples of thinking routines that promote creative thinking are Creative Hunt, Creative Questions, Option Explosion, What Can Be, and Imagine If. More can be found in Project Zero's Thinking Routine Toolbox. Lynn Sharrat’s Parameter 11 calls for classrooms to be places of collaborative inquiry. She extols the virtues of Problem Based Learning, Project Based Learning, Integrative Thinking and Knowledge Building. All four pedagogies call for a “culture of innovation” (2019, p. 200). Integrative Thinking encourages children to explore possibilities: “Students move from understanding...to imagining several new, integrative possibilities…They leverage the tools of design thinking, such as prototyping and ideation.” (2019, p. 207) Trevor Mackenzie in Inquiry Mindset says, “taking on a new challenge can be extremely empowering for learners. Our goal...is to encourage our learners to design, problem solve, and create.” (Mackenzie 2019 p.77) He also encourages children to create an ‘authentic piece’ as they present their inquiry. Is it creativity we should be assessing, or creative thinking? Traditionally we see creativity as the ability to demonstrate one's creativity as an art work, sculpture, or piece of creative writing. But creative thinking is so much more. I see creative thinking as the ability to imagine new ways, of seeing new perspectives, coming up with new solutions. The most important word here is ‘new’. Creative thinking is about innovation! If it wasn't for our love of alliteration and obsession with ‘The Six Cs’ we might call it innovation! So can we teach creative thinking and can we assess it? I believe we can and already are, but we haven't thought of it as ‘creative thinking’. When we plan learning tasks that ask children to design a new game, invent a new toy, design a new playground, make up a new ending to a story, plan a celebration, write a song, create a new flag, develop a new way to conserve water, or code a new video game, we are teaching creative thinking. As Einstein said, “Creativity is intelligence having fun!” The important thing is that we give children the opportunities to demonstrate their creativity and creative thinking. So how do we assess creativity? The same way we assess any other classroom endeavour....success criteria and rubrics. Grant Wiggins in his 2012 blog says it should be done carefully. Teachers need to know the purpose of their learning task when creativity is being asked for. John Larma concurs: “First, let me be clear that I don't think students should be given a grade for how creative they are. But they can and should be assessed and given feedback on how well they follow a process for innovation. And I think it is possible to assess a product (not a student) for creativity.” The current thinking in education is certainly saying that we should assess creativity. But of course we should only assess it if we are giving our children learning opportunities to develop and demonstrate their creativity and creative thinking. Perhaps this is our challenge! References and Further Reading https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/ https://www.bloomstaxonomy.net/ Larmer, John. (2014) How Can We Teach and Assess Creativity and Innovation in PBL? https://www.pblworks.org/blog/how-can-we-teach-and-assess-creativity-and-innovation-pbl Lucas, B., G. Claxton and E. Spencer (2013), “Progression in Student Creativity in School: First Steps Towards New Forms of Formative Assessments”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 86, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k4dp59msdwk-en MacKenzie, T., & Bathurst-Hunt, R. (2019). Inquiry Mindset: Nurturing the Dreams, Wonders, and Curiosities of Our Youngest Learners. Elevate Books Edu. Fullan, M., Quinn, J. and Mceachen, J. (2018). Deep learning: engage the world, change the world. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin, A Sage Publishing Company. Ritchhart, R., Church, M. and Morrison, K. (2011). Making Thinking Visible : How To Promote Engagement, Understanding, And Independence For All Learners. San Francisco, Ca: Jossey-Bass. Ritchhart, R. (2015). Creating cultures of thinking : The 8 forces we must master to truly transform our schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass & Pfeiffer Imprints, Wiley, Sharratt, L., Harris, A. and Hattie, J. (2019). Clarity : what matters most in learning, teaching, and leading. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin ; [Ontario. Wiggins, Grant. (2012) On assessing for creativity: yes you can, and yes you should (https://grantwiggins.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/on-assessing-for-creativity-yes-you-can-and-yes-you-should/) There has been a drive over the last few years to display and proclaim ‘learning intentions' at the beginning of each lesson. John Hattie’s Visible Learning gives high effect size to teachers knowing exactly what and why they are teaching a particular lesson and espouses the use of learning intentions.
Hattie agrees that ‘learning does not happen in neat linear sequences..and is sometimes complex.’ ‘Learning intentions are what we intend students to learn...Students learn other things not planned for, so teachers need to be aware of unintended consequences.’ (Hattie 2017 p.43) Lynn Sharratt lists learning intentions as an important aspect of Parameter 3, ‘Quality Assessment Informs Instruction, in her comprehensive and influential book Clarity. Learning intentions are the top of her ‘assessment waterfall’, connecting success criteria, descriptive feedback, peer and self-assessment and individual goal setting. She champions the need for ‘big ideas’ and essential questions as they ‘need to cause and stretch students’ thinking.’ (Sharratt, 2019, p.125) But how should learning intentions be framed? While all educators would agree that a teacher must know the intent of a lesson before he teaches it, are there dangers in telling the children what they are about to learn for every lesson, especially in the primary setting? Firstly, by telling the student what they're about to learn, risks a number of children in the class ‘switching off’ and disengaging from the start. What about the gifted child who already knows that information or has that skill? What about the disengaged child who isn't interested in learning it anyway? ‘What is the most efficient or easiest way to add three-digit numbers?’ is much more engaging than saying, ‘We are learning to add three-digit numbers.’ Dylan Wiliam explains this well in his video, 'Clarifying, Sharing, and Understanding Learning Intentions' Secondly, by telling children what they are about to learn takes curiosity and inquiry out of the equation. Children are by nature curious. The learning intention ‘We are learning to use adjectives to make our writing more engaging’ can be easily be switched to an inquiry mode by the learning intention ‘How can we make our writing more engaging by using adjectives?’ Thirdly, by telling children what they are about to learn gives the message that the teacher has all the knowledge and is going to ‘fill the empty vessel’ with knowledge. In this case the power stays with the teacher, rather than the children directing and owning the learning. Where is the student agency? If we pose learning intentions as questions, or even wonderings, we open up a world of discovery. We prick imagination. We encourage curiosity. Trevor Mackenzie says, ‘Whether a problem statement, a wondering, a curiosity or debate, questions shape the learning.’ Catering for gifted children is an essential part of classroom differentiation. We want to facilitate ‘high ceiling, low floor’ learning experiences. Learning intentions such as ‘we are learning to ……. disenfranchise gifted children from learning. Why participate in a lesson if you already know it! Learning intentions posed as questions can prompt the thinking that is required for the learning. Alice Vigors suggests ‘we must also share with students what kinds of thinking they will be asked to do’. A science learning intention could change from ‘We are learning to classify invertebrates’ to a inquiry approach such as ‘How would you classify invertebrates and how does it differ from scientists’ classification? Sometimes in the primary setting, a lesson, with the best of intentions, can go off on a tangent that leads to amazing learning for children. It may have been an interesting question a child asked. It may be a bulldozer coming through the playground for a building project. As primary educators we often go with the children’s interests knowing we have to come back to the planned lesson at a later date. Sometimes the lesson may be a pure investigation. The children explore a concept and discover new learnings. Sometimes we let them ‘play.’ As a teacher we may pose the question in reflection or ‘plenary’ time at the end of the lesson, what do you think my learning intention was? The answer may lead to more teaching points. At St Paul’s, where we are building a ‘culture of thinking’. We want children to be curious, critical and creative thinkers. We want them to learn how to be good learners and we value and make visible the thinking, rather than just looking for answers. For these reasons we pose learning intentions as questions, not statements. As Kath Murdoch, an expert on inquiry learning, says, ‘a question rather than statement can help us stay in that lovely, intriguing space – and doesn’t make us any less intentional.’ At St Paul’s we see them more as learning invitations, rather than learning intentions! References: Fullan, Michael, et al. Deep Learning : Engage the World, Change the World. Thousand Oaks, California, Corwin, A Sage Publishing Company, 2018. Hattie, John. Visible Learning for Mathematics, Grades K-12 : What Works Best to Optimize Student Learning. Thousand Oaks, California, Corwin Mathematics, 2017. Sharratt, Lyn, et al. Clarity : What Matters Most in Learning, Teaching, and Leading. Thousand Oaks, California, Corwin ; [Ontario, 2019. It’s still ten months before your pre-schooler goes to big school, so what should you do to make sure they are ready? Teach them to read? Teach them to spell? Teach them how to add up?
The short answer is no. But what should you do? Here are my big four! The most important thing is to read to them every day. If you read one book a day, your child will have read 1825 books by the time they start school. We all know the connection between reading and learning. Children who struggle with reading generally struggle with learning. By reading to your child every day, you instil a love of reading and all the conventions of reading, such as the direction of print, that words make up sentences, that reading makes sense and conveys same meaning every time. The children will pick up all this information without being taught it. Don’t teach them to read. That will happen at school. But if you have read to your child every day they will take off with their reading once they get to school. There is nothing more exciting for a child to come home in the first couple of weeks of school to exclaim to their parents that they can read! Reading fosters curiosity, teaches empathy, stimulates the imagination, is relaxing, and of course is entertaining. Snuggling up in bed with mum or dad and a good book at the end of the day is one of the greatest gifts you can give your child! The second most important thing to do to prepare your child for school is to play with them, especially board games. Any board game is good; children learn to take turns, learn to follow rules, learn what happens when you break the rules, learn counting, learn positions, and learn directions. Play enables children to learning without them even knowing it. Play becomes a practice for life…playing families, playing doctors, playing dress ups, playing with building blocks, playing with train tracks, the list goes on! Research tells us that children learn concepts five times quicker through play. The third most important preparation for children coming to school is helping children to regulate their emotions. There nothing wrong with strong emotions. They are part of life! We all get sad, angry, anxious, excited, scared, and elated. We want our children to feel these emotions too, but when our emotions get in the way of our normal everyday life, then they need regulation. When a child in a classroom has an emotional outburst that affects the whole class and their learning, that is not good for anyone. We can teach our children emotional regulation by practising mindfulness, having quiet time in the house, giving children choices, teaching children to cound to five before they have an outburst, teach deep breathing, and most importantly, talk about emotions with your child. Use lines like, “I see you are angry. What is making you so angry? What good choices can you make now that you are angry?” In other words, get your children to ‘use their words.’ It will hold them in good stead! And finally, foster the curiosity of your children. Curiosity is our ability and drive to keep asking questions. If children are curious and keep asking questions, they will learn. Pre-schoolers ask between 200 and 300 questions at day. Lots of them are ‘why?’ questions. Asking ‘why?’ questions help children to clarify their thinking, build on their current knowledge, and develops their critical thinking skills. While ‘why?’ questions can be exhausting for parents, they essential for children. By the time children are five, the numbers of questions has dropped dramatically until they get to high school and they ask none. Keep answering their questions and keep supporting your child’s curiosity! Most parents would say, “Yes, I do those things!” Great! Keep it up! These are the things that will set your child up for success at school. Children are at school for a good chunk of their lives. Let’s together, in partnership, make it a great experience! Here’s some useful links: https://welcometothefamilytable.com/10-reasons-you-should-read-to-your-children-every-day/ https://amorebeautifulquestion.com/why-do-kids-ask-so-many-questions-but-more-importantly-why-do-they-stop/ https://www.auessays.com/essays/young-people/theories-surrounding-learning-through-play-young-people-essay.php https://www.lifehack.org/844538/emotional-regulation When St Paul’s current nine permanent classrooms were built in 2002, they were designed and built in the twenty-first century for twentieth century pedagogy. Today these buildings are limiting the effectiveness of current practice with a cells ‘n’ bells layout designed for factory type education. As the classroom environment is the third teacher, twenty-first century classrooms must enhance learning.
By 2021, on current projections, we will require 14 learning spaces for a school enrolment of over 330 students. Today’s best practice pedagogy calls for flexible learning spaces that can be adapted and re-adapted to suit student-centred learning, student voice and learning intentions, with plenty of natural light and ambient temperature control. In 2018, St Paul’s introduced flexible furniture and flexible learning spaces to its Stage 3 classrooms. As the school was expanding and needed to purchase new classroom furniture, it seemed only natural to purchase contemporary furniture. Before purchasing, the option was presented to the Stage 3 teachers to see if they believed that their pedagogy could fit with flexible furniture and flexible learning spaces. After undertaking some research and discussing the effect of spaces on pedagogy, it was decided that we would purchase flexible furniture. Initially teachers found the change challenging, but as one teacher said at the end of the year, ‘I couldn’t go back to teaching in a traditional layout with traditional desks.’ Research into the effectiveness of flexible learning spaces is in its infancy, but is starting to show that it does make a difference to student outcomes. Barrett’s 2015 study found that the use of flexible learning zones had a high effect on student outcomes. This combined with natural light, ambient temperature, and a physically inviting environment had a positive effect on learning. But can we take this even further? Our traditional rooms and demountable buildings limit how flexible we can be. Small doorways between rooms or no linking doors between demountables means teachers are limited in how they can collaborate, students cannot move easily between learning spaces, and students have less control of their learning. We know from Hattie’s research that factors such as small group instruction, peer teaching, classroom discussion, students jigsawing learning, and seeking help from peers all have high effect sizes. These factors can all be enhanced with flexible learning spaces. By having learning spaces that deprivatise classroom spaces, teachers are able to collaborate, team-teach, observe each other’s practice, and learn from each other. This encourages reflective teachers who engage with professional learning, take time to reflect on their practise, and engage in professional dialogue with their peers. Better teaching results in better outcomes for students. In 2018, following a trial the previous year, St Paul’s introduced Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) 1:1 devices for Stage 3 classrooms. As the school was expanding and required more devices in classrooms, and since our students feed into a secondary school that uses BYOD in Stage 4, it seemed logical to use BYOD as a teaching/learning strategy at St Paul’s in Stage 3. BYOD 1:1 meant that students could learn using the OneNote learning platform, together with the Microsoft online suite and Google GAFE suite. The ability for students to research, collaborate, communicate, create content and share their learning in digital forms had been enhanced many-fold. The use of 1:1 devices has made learning more student-centred, blurring the lines between classroom learning and learning. Students are able to access learning anywhere, anytime. Thompson’s 2015 report shows that students in a 1:1 environment are more engaged in their learning, therefore more motivated to learn. Flexible learning spaces are essential in a 1:1 learning environment. Students are required to move about within the classroom/s to engage in their learning, making decisions about where they can learn best and how they can learn best. St Paul’s commitment to the use of technology to enhance learning is demonstrated by our collection of 3 different types of robots, a 3D printer, and green screen studio. As St Paul’s engages more with the General Capabilities, it is imperative that we teach the skills of critical and creative thinking. To this end, we are participating in the professional learning of Cultures of Thinking in 2019. We have engaged international speaker, Simon Brooks, who worked with the teachers and staff in Term 1 to enhance their skills in developing classroom routines and cultural forces that teach the skills of critical and creative thinking. Simon will return in 2020 to continue this learning journey with the staff. Throughout 2018, St Paul’s K-1 teachers explored the concept of play-based learning. Through their PLC, they have researched play-based learning, as well as engaged with CSO Early Learning Education Officer, Kim Moroney. While play-based learning can take place anywhere, it is enhanced by a variety of learning spaces, including indoor and outdoor spaces. Kim calls for “school environments to be re-imagined in ways that invite children to play.” Our Kinder and Year 1 classrooms are starting to look more like ‘preschool’ rooms to allow for a less dramatic transition from preschool to kindergarten, and the learning tasks within the rooms are starting to better reflect the Early Years Learning Framework. At St Paul’s we strive to create an environment where teachers can innovate. Hattie’s latest List of Factors Influencing Student Achievement shows that teachers collective efficacy has one of the highest effect sizes. Students can’t be expected to collaborate, communicate, be creative, be risk-takers, and follow their curiosities and passions if we don’t allow our teachers to. By creating Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) and ‘expert learning teams’ in Stage groups, teachers have a mechanism for working together, sharing ideas and using their classrooms as ‘action research’. St Paul’s is part of a growing Gateshead Pre-12 Educational Precinct consisting of St Paul’s, St Mary’s Catholic College, Felton Street Pre-School and Goodstart Early Learning Centre. As four educational institutions, we are continually looking at ways to work together for the benefit of the children of the area. At present the two pre-schools regularly use St Paul’s playground spaces and library, St Paul’s and St Mary’s share the Roger Kennedy Centre multi-purpose hall and sporting complex, and St Mary’s music students tutor St Paul’s band members. In the future we plan to implement an indigenous student mentoring program between St Mary’s students and St Paul’s students, and St Mary’s VET students will work with St Paul’s and the local pre-school children in the areas of Sports Coaching and Early Childhood Education and Care. In April we held our first gathering of the leaders of the educational institutions within the Precinct. St Paul’s is a future+thinking school: We are nurturing creative and critical thinkers and learners, able to navigate a future yet to be discovered, with Jesus as our companion. Our learning spaces need to reflect our imperative. |
AuthorGreg Cumming is a Primary Principal in the Diocese of Maitland Newcastle, NSW Australia Archives
March 2024
|