Michael Gove made some controversial remarks this week which caught my attention. He proposed that schools have longer days and shorter holidays partly to make working parents’ lives easier. There was obviously a very negative reaction to this idea, and I think given the way the idea was presented a negative reaction was more than justified. But when I hear this sort of idea floated in this way I get more upset that it’s actually made it harder for these sorts of changes to happen, but for the right reasons.
I actually think that a more flexible school year might be beneficial for both students and staff. We all know that our holidays are not entirely spent doing what’s shown in the picture above. I believe we have a relatively unhealthy working pattern which involves periods of high stress interspersed with fixed holidays which are spent feeling guilty for not getting more of the stuff done that you can never get done in term time.
However, it’s not just the staff that might benefit. I was very lucky to attend the Scottish Summer School on School Leadership a few years ago. It was a three-day event involving a large number of education folk from across Scotland led by the Innovation Unit. It was a fantastic three days with really challenging input and each group had to finish the event by producing a kind of rethought education system based on the practices of a company or charity. You can see the products from my group here, but what surprised me most was the almost unanimous themes from all the groups. There must’ve been a good 150-200 people in the room and we pretty much all came up with a more flexible approach to schooling. For example, our group wanted to do things like make better use of the web to allow some self-directed learning, have schools open for longer hours but students and staff only attend/teach classes for a proportion of the time that the school is open etc. It was really surprising that if you started with a clean sheet of paper and the needs of the learner at the forefront of your thoughts that there was a consistency of opinion across the room – and it wasn’t for the status quo.
Obviously these would be quite radical changes, which would therefore be hard to achieve at the best of times. And so it’s frustrating that our ability it have what I think is a valid discussion and debate about these sorts of ideas are diminished by the remarks made this week. It’s yet another of those occasions when an issue which should be being debated positively by the profession itself is instead hijacked by a politician. I do wish we could take the politics out of education, as suggested by Mick Waters, which would allow us to positively discuss the merits of ideas such as this.
EDIT
Just remembered about this video which perhaps says it better than I ever could…
When I first started this blog back in January 2007 I decided to focus it initially on my experiences of moving from teaching in England to teaching in Scotland. Obviously much has changed since then, but I do still keep a wee eye on what is happening down South and occasionally ponder the differences. Now, before I go any further I’m not one of those who claims everything is better in Scotland. I certainly enjoy living and working in Scotland (otherwise I wouldn’t be here!) but there were many things I thought England were doing better when I moved up and I’m sure this is still the case. They are surprisingly different systems; and better in different ways at different times in different places.
Having said this, I must admit to being a little concerned about the rise of the word ‘outstanding’ in England as applied to schools, teachers and lessons. It’s been a while now, but I don’t remember it being as part of the lexicon of teaching when I worked in England as it is now. Frustratingly, however, I’m not entirely sure what it is that’s even making me uncomfortable – which makes me very hesitant about writing this post. To try and help me out I decided to look up what it means in the context of a lesson. Here’s what I found from a 2011 Ofsted document on the TES website:
The quality of teaching and the use of assessment to support learning: Outstanding (1)
Teaching is at least good and much is outstanding, with the result that the pupils are making exceptional progress. It is highly effective in inspiring pupils and ensuring that they learn extremely well. Excellent subject knowledge is applied consistently to challenge and inspire pupils. Resources, including new technology, make a marked contribution to the quality of learning, as does the precisely targeted support provided by other adults. Teachers and other adults are acutely aware of their pupils’ capabilities and of their prior learning and understanding, and plan very effectively to build on these. Marking and dialogue between teachers, other adults and pupils are consistently of a very high quality. Pupils understand in detail how to improve their work and are consistently supported in doing so. Teachers systematically and effectively check pupils’ understanding throughout lessons, anticipating where they may need to intervene and doing so with striking impact on the quality of learning. The evaluation schedule for schools, Ofsted, 2011
Apart from a few of the details and perhaps the tone, this isn’t wildly different from the equivalent in Scotland – the level 5 illustration for Quality Indicator 5.2 ‘Teaching for Effective Learning’ in How Good is Our School:
✪ Building on our shared values, we create a stimulating learning climate using skilful and well-paced teaching and learning approaches. Learners’ experiences are well matched to their needs and sustain their motivation and attention. We develop learners’ abilities to be curious and creative and to think critically. Tasks and activities in our classes and home-learning activities are well planned and involve learners as effective contributors, working independently and with others cooperatively in solving problems. We make full and effective use of ICT during teaching and learning.
✪ We share the purposes of lessons with learners. Learners know what they need to do to improve and to become successful. Our explanations and instructions are clear and build on previous learning and real-life experiences. We ensure that learners have opportunities to take responsibility for aspects of their own learning and their relationships with others. Learners enjoy their experiences and make progress in their skills as learners. They are engaged in learning and aware of themselves as learners. We use feedback effectively to promote learning.
✪ Our teaching fully involves learners and encourages them to express views and ask questions. We use skilled questioning and discussion to stimulate learners’ interest, make them think and build their confidence. We value, encourage and build upon learners’ responses.
✪ In lessons, we make sound judgements and respond quickly to ensure that our teaching meets the needs of individuals and provides appropriate support and challenge. We identify and address weaknesses in learners’ knowledge and skills. How Good is Our School, HMIE, 2007
Although the above is a level 5 description, it is actually a 6-point scale, with level 6 being “outstanding or sector leading”.
So given the overlap in the actual standard, what is it that’s actually different? Well as far as I’m aware I’ve never encountered a teacher in Scotland who would describe themselves, or be described as, a ‘level 6′ teacher or as having taught a ‘level 6′ lesson in the same way as the word seems to be used in England to refer directly to the Ofsted grade descriptor. I’m not necessarily arguing that one approach is better than the other, but the difference does strike me as interesting.
Perhaps it is just the unfamiliarity with the approach in England which makes me feel concerned? Maybe it is better for teachers to be more familiar with their quality framework than perhaps teachers in Scotland are? Or perhaps it is concerning for teachers to be classified as ‘outstanding’ as it may lead to complacency and/or division?
I’d love to know what you think? Especially if you teach in England.
The above talk by Mick Waters at Westminster is worth a watch. He doesn’t start until six minutes in if you want to fastforward it. He’s sharing some of his ideas from his new book “Thinking Allowed on Schooling” which also looks as if it might be worth checking out.
Having heard Mick speak in the past, why anyone would ask him to read something out as opposed to speaking his mind is beyond me. Despite this he does make some very interesting points, and he does get to speak more freely in the second half of the video when he sums up the event. In the video, and presumably the book, he is calling for a radical rethink when it comes to education – which he summarises by calling for an ‘education spring’. Although much of the specifics of the discussion are very England-focused, I think much of what he says applies in Scotland too. For example, although we don’t quite have the same politicisation of educational policy, as there is largely cross-party agreement on the direction of travel – this is not necessarily guaranteed in the future. And, I’m sure his idea for a NICE equivalent in education would be just as applicable North of the border. Plus, much of what he says on the role and evaluation of the teaching profession is relevant in Scotland also.
I think Mick is right to highlight the complex and high-level changes which would be required to enact a radical change in educational policy, but a spring would also imply that it starts with the grassroots. Being as I am quite interested in this sort of thing through my role in Pedagoo, it makes me wonder where something like Pedagoo fits in to this idea.
Pedagoo began life as a place to positively share classroom practice and there have been discussions quite recently about the possibility that it could also provide a space for teachers to more vocally oppose the policies of governments and their agencies. Whilst I appreciate this sentiment I strongly oppose(d) this widening of our remit – there are plenty of other outlets to communicate such sentiments in my opinion.
However, Pedagoo for me can still fit into this idea of a grassroots educational spring. Obviously it doesn’t by any stretch of the imagination play a massive role in achieving a radical rethink in changing educational policy, but in a small way I do believe that it helps us to positively provide “clarity on what the role of teaching should be in our society“, which is one of Mick’s four things which need to change. It is also an example of “teachers contributing to their own profession”. And I also believe that by speaking positively and publicly about our practice that we could in a small way be countering the perception one could have of teaching from the media as described by Mick.
So if you’re a teacher who agrees with what Mick Waters has to say and you’re not yet involved in Pedagoo – you should check us out!
It took 17 months for the Scottish Learning Fringe TeachMeet to go from a tweet to reality…and so I’m not expecting this idea to happen anytime soon. However, there was quite a reaction to the floating of this idea on twitter this evening and so I thought it was worth trying to flesh it out a bit more as a blog post just now. However, this is a very embryonic idea…so feedback and suggestions are very welcome indeed.
It all started with the following tweet:
#TeachMeets are fab for sharing practice, but I still hanker after an event which more explicitly & deliberately *develops* practice…
Before I go any further, I’m not for one second criticising TeachMeets. I’ve attended loads, run three and am currently in the process of organising another. I think TeachMeets are fab, but they have their limits – as all things do. At a TeachMeet everyone arrives with their own personal experience and learning which they transfer onto others. So, although new learning is achieved it is quite individual and much of it is in the sense of transferring ideas rather than generating new ideas (although of course this happens too to different degrees).
I would just love to see an event which was explicitly about bringing teachers, and others with an interest in education, together in order to collaborate and create in order to support the generation and proliferation of new ideas. And so it is for this reason I’m proposing #TeachHack:
What would folk think of a #TeachHack? An opportunity to collaborate in the development of new practice….? Very embryonic idea…..
Although some folk are justifiably unsure about the inclusion of the word ‘hack’, I think it captures the spirit perfectly. I actually thought of it while watching this BBC Clip about hacking objects. There are all sorts of ‘hacks’ happening these days and to me it means the informal coming together of people to slightly subversively develop new ideas collaboratively. It also has the advantage of catching people’s attention.
So what would it be like? Well, I’m not sure. I’m very much thinking aloud here. It could be a one off event in one place. Or a series of events in one place. Or a series of events in lots of places. Or it could be entirely online. Or some combination of all of these!
Ultimately, the purpose for me would be to help us all to move practice forward for the benefit of our learners. I would expect us to be working on some big picture stuff which resulted in products which could be taken back and used by the participants and disseminated more widely also. It’s hard to plan out something like this in too much detail as a lot would depend on who was involved…you wouldn’t want to close down creativity. But, let’s take an example. Perhaps a team could produce a resource which provided the why and how to embed project-based learning, just as an example. They might produce a video and PDF resource which could be used with students and parents and a different resource for teachers. This might be largely produced at the event but might need taken away for trialling in their own contexts and completed online. Now, I know there’s some stuff out there for PBL…but I don’t think there’s a free coherent package which includes guides for parents and students too – and this is only an example of the sort of thing that might be produced anyway. The theme I think would be something like ‘Learning for the 21st Century’…or a cooler way of putting it than that! [Edit: Some folk seem to think that the whole event would be about PBL, I'm not suggesting this at all. I imagine the event would involve a number of different themes with each team working on a different one.]
Given that the event could occur in numerous different formats as listed above, perhaps I should outline one possible example. I do think it would be good, if possible, to blend multiple physical events with online participation. This is an ambitious way of doing this I admit, but, it could be run with two flagship physical events over weekends at somewhere like Society M in London and Glasgow [trust me, this is the perfect venue!]. However, all of the work could be managed online through Google Drive & Hangouts (Edit: or SkyDrive & Skype), which would allow for three things:
Groups could work together in London & Glasgow.
Other satellite events could join in too – folk could even participate on their own at home.
Groups could continue to work together online after the physical event, perhaps creating new online professional communities
This would also mean of course that we could potentially approach someone like Google (or Microsoft) for the sponsorship required to run the event in this way.
Of course, it wouldn’t have to be like this…but this would perhaps be my own “dream” option. No harm in thinking big
So where do we go from here? Well, I’m not sure…but at the very least you should let me know what you think as a comment below then we’ll take it from there… EDIT
As I’ve said already on here, I’m very much thinking aloud with this idea. The conversations I’m having in the comments below, on twitter and on email are making me wonder. For example, I began to think about how we could do this still without the big sponsorship given that big sponsorship is probably unlikely and everyone seems quite keen for it to happen.
So, we could instead model it on its mother: TeachMeet. TeachHacks could be local events organised by anyone following a shared approach. We could plan and promote TeachHacks on a wiki just like TeachMeets. Each TeachHack could decide upon its own theme and intended product and approach local organisations for venue sponsorship and to access support for creating their product. For example, a local web designer might come along and provide some tips on creating a website if that was the TeachHack’s product.
I think to go this way we’d need a second wiki or a collaborative blog in the style of TeachMeet TV as a place to upload, or add links to, products. The products would be categorised by theme so that if someone was looking for resources on PBL for example they’d easily find them all in one place.
I have to admit…the more I think about this alternative approach, the more I like it…what we might lose in terms of profile and quality of product, we might gain in sustainability and potential volume of involvement.
As I mentioned before, I’m broadly in favour of the recommendations in the #ICTex report…but that’s not to say I don’t have my worries still.
Until the final phases of the report, I personally felt that the excellence group who were producing the report were surprisingly quiet on the process and their progress. I’d hear of them arriving at a school on a fact finding mission but there was no online presence keeping us up to date on what they were thinking, what examples of practice they were wanting to examine and opening the debate to the wider stakeholder group. Things did improve a little at the end of the process when a draft version of the report was published for comment and the user stories were written on a blog for collaborative input. This was more of the sort of thing I was frankly expecting throughout.
In my opinion, one of the flaws of the development process with the original glow was that too much of it happened behind closed doors. As far as I remember, it was all quite secretive and developed within LTS/RM/SG with only a select few Glow Mentors allowed into the fold. Although Glow has rightly gone on to be heavily and permanently under development since a little while after its initial launch, I seem to remember it was presented very much as the finished product at the time. I really do not think this approach helped last time, and I really hope it doesn’t happen again this time.
I believe we all need to feel part of this development throughout its implementation. Each stage in the process should be shared online with ample opportunities to feedback. Obviously this can help to develop a better product by having a wider pool of expertise and opinion to draw from, but there’s another reason as well. Even if few new ideas or perspectives are gained from having an open and consultative approach, at the very least we will all feel more like we’ve had an input and that we have some sort of ownership over the product and will therefore want it to succeed. If it is done to us again, we once again will have no stake in its success, no desire to persevere and no willingness to feedback the inevitable bugs in the early days.
After all, this is a service for us, paid for by us…please involve us.
