Big discussions in education

There are some big discussions happening at the moment in education.  Australian Curriculum, standardised testing, year 7 transition, public private partnerships, emerging social issues, CAS calculator implementation.  Each are having a lasting impact on the way education is progressing.

Australian curriculum seems destined to repeat the primary mistakes of OBE in that it is being run to political timeframes, is being introduced without effective assessment policies and guidance is a bit haphazard about its implementation schedule.  The one size fits all model, being implemented across K-12 with missing blocks of understanding scattered throughout each year group indicates that the success will be limited to higher SES schools that already approached the norm expected by the curriculum.  The curriculum does not support our kids and the enforcement of A-E grading / inappropriate curriculum just ensures the feedback reinforces their position in society.  It will take schools to make a stand, change their approach and find innovative ways to smooth the learning curve to help these students succeed.

As schools struggle to reach the norms required they are trying publicly to show they are ready to maintain their competitive position in standardised testing.  Being based on averages, even if a low SES school catered well for its higher achieving kids, this result is hidden within the average.  To counter this effect small schools are putting vast amounts of effort "teaching to the test", something most teachers are vigorously opposed to.  I was hearing an anecdote last night from a friend talking about their kids playing schools and saying,

"And after maths we'll have NAPLAN"

Since when did NAPLAN become a formal class in year 3?  If we want this to stop, we have to stop publishing these figures.  By all means run the tests and direct funding to schools based on test results,  but schools are biasing the test so badly I question its relevancy as a standardisation tool.

Year 7 transition has become a non issue.  In many public schools there aren't any coming to high school.  The delay of the decision to move 7's means that many parents of higher ability students made the decision to send their kids (along with younger siblings) to private schools and get specialist teaching assistance.  The remaining kids in many cases lack support at home - many are the most at risk students.  Public school numbers that were quite stable at 500 are dropping sub 300 which makes smaller metro high schools unviable and there is no indication that this number will bounce in the next 5 years.  Smaller schools can't compete with private education and facilities, lacking a marketing budget or effective USP to drive students to the school.  The end result is that more public schools will close and our education system will become more and more dependent on private education, ultimately further disadvantaging and marginalising low SES students.

With smaller schools and reduced funding through lack of scale to minimise costs, our smaller schools will need to increasingly devote time to managing public/private funding agreements to maintain programmes.  This is a clear diversion from classroom first (as it diverts resources from the classroom), will bias schools towards areas required by industry or areas easy to support through volunteers.  This is an issue in itself as cyclical industries may leave highly at risk generations of kids in geographical areas without employment opportunities, potentially creating ongoing social issues for communities and creating situations for schools where difficult to staff specialist programmes or expensive subjects to teach will become unsupportable.

The marginalisation of the poor is already occurring with accumulations of cultural groups in low SES areas now not integrating with large sections of the community (as those children are in private education), something in the past restricted to exclusion from high SES students in a few independent schools.  Without any real hope of employment due to a lack of social support and poor levels of education, some low SES students are now focused on the quick wins available to them through crime and social loafing, others are facing low self esteem, poor job prospects and mental illness.  The lack of positive peer support is having a clear impact on our communities and schools.  The edges of this is starting to be reported in the media and has the potential to create another drug and alcohol effected generation that will again require large amounts of funding to address.

The last issue is a math issue and one we face right now, but is still related to the issues above.  Math itself is becoming marginalised with the cost of participation rising above the level of a growing number of students within the school.  CAS calculators at $200, revision guides, course costs and texts can account for 50% of year 11/12 fees.  Low participation rates are precluding students from higher study.  Able students are now choosing other subjects with lower costs as families cannot pay the cost (costs that may have been able to be found within the school when numbers of at risk students were lower, access to support bars were set lower and more discretionary funds were available).  A further question exists about whether we need these calculators as they are creating exams that test the corners of courses to create bell curves rather than teaching students solid mathematics.  Many teachers are still struggling with CAS calculator integration and I'm beginning to fall in line with the thought they are not  an effective teaching tool, tablet technology in the classroom (not in assessment) may be a better pathway for our high performing students.  I'm sure issues like this are apparent in other learning areas.

Public education is beginning to fail the students that it is most needed for, to ensure "the fair go" is still a national objective.  I hope we have the courage to address it early, rather than be forced into reactionary measures later.

Screencast on Linear Programming - feasible regions and sensitivity

I do the occasional screencast for my students, sometimes from scratch, other times explaining Saddler examples and then post them on the SLN for watching at home.  They seem popular and get watched by students.  I noticed the video button in blogger and thought I might see if they are useful to anyone else.  They only take about 5 mins to do, have the occasional error in them (which become discussion points in themselves) and have become a fairly positive addition to my available teaching pedagogy.

Here's two on feasible regions and sensitivity that I did the other day.  I have higher res versions available for putting on my IWB.

If anyone is interested, they are done using an iMac, quickTime and ActiveInspire.  They're encoded using the cellular setting for use on smartphones and tablets.

It's not about the aha moment.

This was a realisation this week.  My teaching is no longer about the Aha! moment.  I've come to the realisation that my students now expect an aha! moment any time I teach.   What's more, experience gives you the ability to construct these moments at will.

Teaching has become more can I get past the aha! moment to ensure retention of concepts and develop depth in learning.  Most teaching points can be taught, creating the motivation required to learn for life, rather than learn for the moment is where my teaching is now going and is starting to drive my thinking.

Where the process of huh?->aha!->embedded is used to scaffold new learning, the embedding is more critical as experience in teaching grows.  This is where exam results improve.

I talked with my teaching group this week and was challenged as to why we have exams.  I sat down after the discussion and wrote for nearly an hour as to why I believed they were important.  Being part of the group that re-embedded them in the school I needed to revisit why I thought they were important.

1. It is a part of the school year that provides inertia for the learning process: teach (learning) -> test (for understanding) -> exam (test for retention)
2. It forms a part of the expected scholastic disciplines
3. It prepares them for the pressures of performance
4. It provides reason for rectifying understanding after initial testing
5. It provides summative feedback on student performance
6. It identifies if students can select the correct strategy across a broader range of strategies
7. It is an opportunity for making consistent judgements across classes
8. It is an opportunity to develop revision, calculator usage and note preparing practices in students
9. It is how students are tested in the majority of upper school courses
10. It identifies areas that require reteaching or more attention in future courses of work

I'm a bit sad because whilst students were sitting their exams I created a more exhaustive list, but in my wisdom failed to save it.  Can't win them all.

Reporting Period and Supporting students

Everytime a reporting period goes by we have discussions with parents about how students are travelling.  A recurring theme is the support required by students and whether they are receiving their entitlement of support.

There is a community expectation that students will receive homework.  In most cases homework does not have a return on investment.

If you are a parent, right now you are likely to be having a conniption..... but hear me out - I too was a supporter of homework once but except under some quite specific exceptions I would argue that it is rarely appropriate in a low SES school, increasingly so in upper secondary.

1. Students lack academic support at home to complete homework.
2. The spacing between learning and practice is too short for measurable effect.
3. It takes 10+ minutes out of every lesson to manage effectively.
4. When given it is rarely done well.
5. Repetitive practice based resources reduce motivation for low ability students.
6. It causes unnecessary friction between parents, teachers and students.

There are types of homework that I would encourage:

1. Any form of regular reading
2. Preparation of notes prior to testing
3. Use of engaging online resources
4. Delivery of instructional resources via video
5. Revision resources driven by student inquiry
6. Rote learning of tables, number facts and exact values required for trigonometry
7. Assignment work that is being graded

There is a difference between the two lists.  One has cause and effect (I do this and I benefit from it) and is possible without significant assistance, the other is I do this (stuff I already know) or can't do this (and have no way to get help) and have little in the way of explicit benefit.  Regular homework all too often falls into the latter category.

I have been pleasantly surprised by the response to video instructional resources that I have written as they are universally watched by students.  I can't explain the effect (as they're not mindshatteringly interesting) but they do most closely relate to classroom teaching (as they are closest to teaching practices) and are in their preferred mode of learning.

SLNs have provided additional help with students gaining access to each other to get help with revision materials and access to teaching staff out of hours.  Online tools like mymathsonline and mathsonline also play their part.

That's not to say our students don't study in their own time.  I make myself available three days a week after school for an hour (along with most of my stupendously wonderful staff and support people), and in doing this we ensure students spend in excess of the expected study time.  It's effective, collaborative, targeted and supported.  It's optional (I tell parents to not force students to come if they do not want to - I don't have resources available for behaviour management) and we have had a clear quarter of the students in the school seeking assistance and not resenting it.

Survival

Sometimes teaching is about surviving.  Most teachers have war stories about years when it was difficult.  At the moment is one of those times for me.

There are many reasons for finding a cohort difficult.  Sometimes it's a class that doesn't settle.  Other times it's a student that has behavioural difficulties.  It may be the challenge of finding engaging relevant material.  It could be students that are not performing under test conditions... or the transition to a new curriculum, adjustment to the changing requirements of a new leader.. skilling up to the demands of a new role.  Then you get the flu and it all gets a bit much.

Sometimes it's all of these things. They're the things that get in the way of focussing on the majority of students that just want to do well.   When it gets to that point, my solution has always been to sit and reflect.  500 bits of reflection later, we are here.

The things that get you through are your family, your colleagues and the kids that respect what you do. When these fail, then you know you are in trouble.  Reflection probably is not enough.

I'm hoping this week has been a blip and not an insight into the time leading to reporting.  I love my job, but sometimes think I may have been promoted beyond my ability... I'm a good classroom teacher but an ordinary disciplinarian - I counsel students to death rather than berate them effectively.  

My thought has always been if I can get them to care about themselves, then I have hope.  The problem that I face at the moment, is that many pointy end kids are not reachable and live purely in the moment - with no real idea or fear of consequence. I envy them that a little, as we all know the time where this can be only exists as a child - even my four year old is passing through this stage.  How did it happen that some students are 13 and still struggling with the idea, challenging a system designed purely to help them transition to adulthood?

 Schools are not a quasi correctional facility and are poorly equipped for dealing with students that cannot be managed effectively.   Students now have the ability and authority to disrupt the learning of others - when students reach the don't care/defiance point, there is little left to defend education with.  I think it is an area that requires attention in the public system at least. 

Connect and ICT in schools

Creation of ICT is fraught with problems.  When government seeks to create applications they tend to be ill focused and narrow in their application.  In education ICT has continuously failed to live up to expectations.  IMHO the risk in application development is best left with private enterprise in commercial solutions and the government should take a "best practice" approach, being reasonably ruthless in what they ask for when spending each dollar.

Connect is the next generation of the education department portal, seeking to bring data together for use by students and teachers.  It is a mixed bag of applications seeking to replicate what is already done by commercial and department applications that for the most part are freely available.   I hate to think of the amount of money spent on it.

I think the reason for not using public money is multifold.

1.  Replication of software that already exists freely is illogical
2.  A created solution will lag features available in larger communities where scale can be applied
3.  A small solution does not have access to the required depth of developers and designers
4.  Small projects tend to be lead by programmers and technical capabilities rather than by need of users
5.  Early adopters get burned.  Established applications proven to scale to millions are less likely to fail.
6.  Infrastructure is expensive in closed systems and rarely scales well

The Connect solution is experiencing issues that we viewed today at a presentation promoting its use.

1.  Connect infrastructure is already struggling.  Other solutions use commercial clouds and leverage their infrastructure.  Users of connect are already being asked to restrict their storage or are required to use external servers (such as YouTube).  This is an issue similar to the current email problem where a small storage limit precludes teachers using email as a silo for information.  It seems counterintuitive to say we need a managed private closed solution if we are locating resources (and sending students) to public locations.  We watched Connect struggle under load when trying to log teachers into the system, something that would quickly derail a class if used.  Timeouts were frequent.  Given that this was run in a closed system (within a school) controlled by the department on a day when students were not present does not bode well for the design of the solution.

2.  Connect allows communication directly between students and monitors this through sending multiple emails to teachers.  This is problematic as it creates spam in teachers email and creates a significant monitoring overhead (something overcome by the approach of other solutions).

3. The interface is suboptimal and has not evolved from 90's thinking (even in the presentation style).  The Connect interface is generations behind solutions such as schoology and edmodo (which is expected as Connect is drawing on a much smaller user base of 100 users vs millions of users).  Connect needs to move beyond thinking of itself as a portal and think about being a user's experience (eg. an SLN).  Students do not need to see "Connect" advertising on the landing page, they need to see what they need to know.  If a landing page serves little purpose, put something on it that has purpose, preferably in colours linked to the school (as belonging is a key component in driving usage).  If Connect is seeking to be another SLN and use this to drive usage, then this needs to be the "centre" of thinking, not being a content aggregator.

4.  It does not do anything better than what already exists and appears to seek to copy or relocate features of existing applications (cynically I would suggest to bloat functionality).  There is not a single feature that I could see that was a significant benefit over other already existing solutions (other than they had been aggregated in one place moving administration overhead to teachers).  Many features were being oversold (single login, presentation, RTP integration, notice board functionality, submission of work online, access to the ill organised and predominantly useless resource bank, password changes) and features that are lost were undersold (familiar interfaces, access to wider communities, access across school sectors, marking student work online (a feature that is very unlikely to be implemented but that already exists freely in full workflow form), quizzes, online testing, polling, usage statistics, integration with other learning communities, tablet app integration).  Little of the actual student benefit (social interaction, making work available 24/7, increase in information flow, connectivity to the classroom, collaborative peer support, BYOD device support) or the requirements of successful implementation was discussed (high levels of teacher interaction, high levels of organisation/preparation, ICT support requirements within the school, deadlines for implementation, staged rollouts, student education).

5. Proposed usage is not timely and demonstrates a lack of understanding of student usage. If a student is stuck at home they can call a friend, facebook them, email them, re-read notes, ask a parent, ask a tutor or wait until class the following day.  What they are unlikely to do is log into a portal, navigate to a community, hope that someone sees the message and then wait for a reply.  The response time is too slow for this type of approach.

6. Something is good if it is readily adopted and seen as useful.  I sat and listened to an early adopter claiming that Connect was a good solution.  Once we dug a little further, his actual student adoption with Connect was inconsequential yet he claimed he had great success with equivalent commercial applications (then why change?).  It made me laugh as it reminded me of the letter I received from the department saying I was a frequent user of OTLS (complete BS) and thus was chosen to use Connect.  Saying something definite does not make it true.  What the presenter was really saying was that the commercial solutions was better but if we had to use Connect it was ok and the interface was not unusable like OTLS.  We need to use Connect as it overcomes legal issues relating to student data.  To this I would say a) success is only success if usage can be shown and that compromising by using connect when better solutions exist because of closed system requirements (that cannot remain closed due to infrastructure requirements and costs) is poor reasoning. If we allow the open internet in schools (and we do - check any library at lunch) with only limited filtering,  a commercial solution is viable.

7. Parent involvement is overstated.  If I said to a parent, I will have grades emailed to you they might say great and read the email when I push it to them at a regular interval.  If I say, here is a portal, log in (requiring finding a password) if you wish to check how your student is doing, it is unlikely to be used often (what was my password again?). There is not enough information here for parents to review to make regular use viable.  The same can be said for homework review - this would take a cultural change that is unlikely in the near future.

8.  It is promising more than it is delivering.  It promised better access to SAIS (not available), access to RTP (not available), ability to store resources (but is limited in storage), access to classes (but not all classes were accessible on the day), email attachments to students directly (not available).  The "tell us your wants" and we'll make it happen statement is scarily present implying that direction for the application is poorly defined and lacking direction (flexibility in development screams scope creep and cost blowout in public sector application development).

Many of these reasons disappear once we pass through stages of early adoption.  I just question whether the need for another portal or SLN exists.  I have often been wrong before, but I believe that better solutions only occur if we challenge what is being done.  The challenge for Connect is to become an indispensable tool. It still has some way to go.

Why teach?

Teaching in a relatively hard to teach school seems to be a place to test the mettle of young would-be teachers.  We get a fair amount, they are generally very good and we have to weed out a few.  The first difficult question I ask a wannabe teacher is "Why do you want to teach?"

It's a valid question and one that I still get asked weekly - both by students, friends and acquaintences.   You can predict the failure of a teaching practicum with a fair degree of accuracy with this question.

If the answer is I don't know, or it was all I could do, the motivation to overcome adversity will likely not be there and the student will struggle until they can answer it.

If the answer is I love students, they might make it through, but the "teacher as an entertainer" model better really suit them because teaching for love is a pretty stupid reason that hits a hurdle with the first class that doesn't like you.  You won't be doing what kids want to do most of the time (unless you have thrown the syllabus out the window from a math class) and in classes of 30 it is rare to achieve this.

If the answer is that I love learning or I think I could do a better job than my teachers, then there is hope.  It's not the answer that I'm looking for, but young teachers can get by with either.  One is based in the idea that I can learn to be better (reflective practice) and the second is based on a pre-conceived notion of what not to do.  Strangely enough either of these can work and lead to successful careers in teaching.  I feel for these teachers through, as the end product tends to be unhappiness, as learning is only one component in teaching and competing with a bad memory is hard to sustain.

The answer to my mind is I need to teach.  It is my vocation and my desire, it dominates my thinking and I get a real buzz out of seeing others achieve.  It gives you your connection to your students.  When you find the kid or mature age teaching student that understands that teaching is at its heart a vocation, mentor them, harden them up and find a way to get them through.  The concept is based in a selfless desire,  a fire in the belly that keeps many of us going even when we're battling to get students through and our own personal dilemmas.

Hand in hand with this idea, my grandmother taught me that the gift is in the giving, whenever I feel down, I look for a way to help others.  It's a key element to teaching and ties to teacher motivation.. She also taught me not to be a patsy and that goes together with it.

A more involved question is "why teach in a hard to staff school?"   The elephant in the room is that many will assume you're not good enough to teach elsewhere.  For some it is about ease of access to the rewards of seeing students fly (they've got further to go so it is easier to make happen), for others the ability to right a social wrong, for others the lack of teaching demands and for others it is returning to the community the time put into you.

They're a gutsy choice for young teachers, as they are far from the easy option.  With the right support though it is both rewarding and contributes to society in a way leafy green roles can't.  There is something special about watching a family escape poverty cycles through education.  Low SES schools are not for everyone but are the home for many of us that seek to make a difference.

Ideas vs proven methods

In any organisation my voice will be heard.  I don't fear offering an opinion and over time people learn how to use my opinions effectively.  I'm sure as hell not always right, but can be a good sounding board for ideas.

It always amuses me when someone argues a position and then gets sad when my position moves closer to theirs, undermining their argument.  I'm not as fixed as I should be, although probably more fixed in my ways than when I started teaching.

If someone has a better idea, I try to welcome it and embrace it (it is hard to give up an idea that has taken time to develop).  If someone attacks one of my ideas/ideals/opinions in the spirit it is given, then it is a welcome discussion - it can only create a stronger position (if only to better understand the counter argument).  The only time I really get frustrated is when ideas are attacked purely because of the person that is giving it.  I've been on both sides of this and get frustrated with myself when I catch myself doing it.  A colleague generally taps me on the shoulder to reconsider my position (and if they know me well enough) can snap me out of it.

The ability to offer an idea without fear of reprisal and the ability to develop ideas through dialogue is important to an organisation.  Developing ideas before implementation will increase the chance of success significantly.  Developing ideas in a vacuum can be a frustrating process of reinventing the wheel.

I feel to some degree I am doing this at the moment.  In developing better support for teachers, I am working with teachers with many years more experience - offering an opinion can either scratch wounds, state the obvious or sound naive.  Many of my ideas feel simplistic, to counter this I am actively looking and listening to successful strategies currently being used in our school in other learning areas and in other schools where I have colleagues in similar circumstances.

Creating a Math/Science department is also problematic, as I am trying to bring two teams together and I lack science experience.  Gaining knowledge of the needs and wants of the science team is drawing attention from the math team, also needing help, development and guidance.  I remind myself that I'm 10 weeks into a new job and can only do so much - yet it's obvious I need to do more to get the job done, and new responsibilities are on their way shortly.

I need to keep thinking about what I am doing, and do it better.  It sounds obvious, but if I keep focus on the big picture over time our learning programme will improve further.