Archive for reflection

“Good Practice”

31/01/2012 change, reflection 2 comments

I’m not sure about “good practice”. I haven’t been for sometime now. I used to think sharing good practice was a great idea, but I’ve slowly gone off it. I think this is partly because it rarely had much of an effect on me. In fact, if it had any effect at all it tended to be a negative one…i.e. something along the lines of “I’d never be able to do that”, or even worse “who do they think they are?” Of course, I would never say any of this out loud. I would nod and smile like everyone else and then get back to my own mediocre practice!

This perhaps isn’t surprising. Watching someone else’s practice will do little to change your own as you’re only witnessing the end product. You’re not seeing their context and the many ups & downs and small changes they made along the way in order to get to where they are now. Take the Australian Open Final this Sunday for example. I watched some extremely good tennis practice there…but I doubt I’m any better a tennis player as a result. In order to learn from them I would need to spend time with them and get to know how they got to where they’ve got to and begin at the beginning myself. Much of this relates to the excellent book I’m reading at the minute, Bounce [thanks to @dukkhaboy for the recommendation].

Syed points out that it’s the power of practice which makes people good at what they do. So, tell me about your practice. Tell me about how you ended up where you are. Tell me about the context, educational values and literature which have influenced your approach. Tell me about when it all went wrong and what you did about it. All of this will help me to relate your practice to my own and might just get me thinking, “do you know what, I think they’ve got something there…I’ll give that a try myself.”

Or in other words I suppose, start a blog!

Image by bourgol

Five Years of Blogging

18/01/2012 reflection 2 comments


It’s now five years since I started blogging. Wow. I would never have thought I’d still be going five years later. But then, I didn’t expect that it would become the best form of CPD I’d ever undertaken.

I mean that. I think that starting my blog had the single biggest effect on my as a teacher since leaving Teacher Training. It finally forced me to do that thing I always struggled to find time to do – reflect on my practice. Although I obviously still struggle to find time to do this, the audience (perceived or otherwise) encourages me to make the time to reflect more frequently than I otherwise would. The resulting learning has become addictive and has led directly to me signing up for the Chartered Teacher MEd, and my secondment as a CfE Development Officer.

In an age of increasing austerity, and in a profession which should be increasingly moving towards individual-led professional learning – a blog is a completely free, yet incredibly powerful solution. I would strongly encourage any teacher to start one. If you do though, please remember two things. Firstly, you are writing it primarily for yourself. Although the audience encourages you to write it and to try to make it somewhat coherent, you are the main beneficiary of the effort you put in. And secondly, you will go through highs and lows. There are many months when you won’t post a thing, and others when you’ll post lots. That’s ok. Just leave it there, and keep it turning over for when you need it/want it.

Will I still be blogging in another five years…I very much hope so!

The uncomfortable truth about Curriculum for Excellence

05/01/2012 cfe, change, Featured, reflection, secondment 8 comments

The problems facing Curriculum for Excellence have finally been identified. Carole Ford demonstrated them clearly in her recent article in the TESS.

If you know me your jaw may well now be on the floor. What? Fearghal agrees with Carole Ford’s piece!?! No, rest assured, I haven’t done a U-turn. No, I don’t agree with her points at all, but I think she unintentionally demonstrated why CfE is struggling to gain traction in so many parts of the country. Obviously there are many issues such as support, time, funding etc.; but perhaps the greatest barrier is the support for school leaders in understanding the change, which then impacts on their ability to lead the changes in their schools.

There are many points in her piece which I disagree with, but I’ll pick out a small sample to illustrate my point. In reference to literacy and numeracy she says:

pupils who fail to develop appropriate levels of literacy and numeracy skill in primary school rarely make good this deficit later in the educational process. The CfE solution to this is not, as one might expect, to focus attention on the primary years of schooling but to place responsibility for both onto secondary teachers. Thus we have physics teachers teaching literacy and French teachers teaching numeracy

I find this statement to be shockingly inaccurate for two reasons. Firstly, CfE is continuing to place a strong focus on literacy, numeracy (& health and well being) in the primary stages as well as secondary. And secondly, secondary teachers should not be ‘teaching literacy’ in place of their subject specialisms – but rather using their subject areas as contexts to develop these skills where appropriate. Throughout the broad general education the intention is to improve young people’s literacy and numeracy levels – this is not the sole domain of primary teachers, as any secondary teacher will tell you (bemoan)! Whilst there may well be a number of secondary schools around the country which are requiring their staff to be ‘teaching numeracy’ in place of their subject area, I would argue that this is not the fault of CfE, but of the school leaders who have misinterpreted the documentation.

She goes onto use a similar argument regarding interdisciplinary learning:

interdisciplinary learning, advocated by CfE, is a whole bone of contention in its own right. Why is taking a teacher out of his comfort zone a good thing? Do you wish to be treated by a doctor who is operating out of his comfort zone? The logic of interdisciplinary learning is that I will make better progress in German if the teacher is not fluent in German but pretty good at French or Spanish. In the language of Homer Simpson, “D’oh!”

It’s surprising that an article which criticises the lack of evidence presented to support CfE only itself contains a quote by Homer Simpson, but anyway, interdisciplinary learning. I personally don’t believe that interdisciplinary learning is the holy grail one might think it is if you listen to certain people, but I still think the quotation above misses the point. Interdisciplinary learning is not supposed to be about French teachers teaching German. It’s supposed to be about providing young people with opportunities to see their learning in a more joined up way and be beginning to make connections between the artificial barriers we’ve created between the subjects. This is a skill which I always say marks out the top candidates in Biology, and it is one which is becoming increasingly relevant in today’s world.

Once again, there may well be many teachers out there having to teach a subject outside their comfort zone under the banner of interdisciplinary learning and CfE, but I think Carole Ford is inadvertently highlighting an issue with her colleagues – not Curriculum for Excellence. Don’t get me wrong, I think there are many barriers facing the implementation of CfE, but not all of them lie with the policy documents or the national agencies – as demonstrated by this article.

Not Ability, Readiness

20/11/2011 reflection 5 comments

I dislike the use of the word ‘ability’ in schools. I have for some time, but I’ve never been able to propose a credible alternative. Until now.

Why do I dislike this commonly used word? I think it’s to do with the association ‘able’ has to a permanent state of being. It comes across as either/or – either you are able to study biology at a certain level, or you are not. For me, this links closely with Dweck’s concept of a ‘Fixed Mindset’. We have enough of a problem as it is convincing young people that they can change and it’s worth making the effort to learn and improve, so why therefore do we make it even harder for ourselves by constantly using language which implies the opposite?

I have a personal reason for disliking this term also. I was not a high flier at secondary school. For my GCSEs I found myself in the second from bottom sets for both English and Maths. As a result I became convinced that I was simply no good at these subjects, and never would be. Since leaving school I have slowly unlearned this. I learned during the course of my biology degree that I could cope with more challenging mathematical concepts once they had a context and a purpose. Since leaving Uni I relearned a love of reading which I’d lost during secondary school, and more recently discovered that I can read and write critically through the course of my MEd. So, it isn’t that I wasn’t able to do well in those courses…it was that I wasn’t ready to.

I realise that there are some young people who may never be ‘ready’ to do well in Advanced Higher Biology, but a great many of those we class as being unable to do it will be able to at a later date…especially if we haven’t locked them into a Fixed Mindset in the first place!

You’ll have noticed perhaps that I’m not actually arguing against setting here, which is a bit odd for me, I’m just suggesting we stop referring to these sets in terms of their ability…but in terms of their readiness instead.

What do you think?

A framework for learning & teaching

22/10/2011 cfe, change, Featured, learning cycle, reflection 2 comments

The current trend of giving a document a title which doesn’t match its contents is not new. Building the Curriculum 3 is guilty of this too, a ‘framework for learning and teaching’ it is not. As far back as April 2009, I’ve shared on this blog how I used my interpretation of this document to try to develop a pedagogy which would meet its aims and principles. Arriving at this interpretation was not easy, and I’m sure others have arrived at different ones. The subsequent implementation of this interpretation has not been straightforward either. It’s quite difficult to develop and change something as complex as your approaches to learning and teaching in relative isolation. All of which leaves me with little surprise that many practicing teachers across Scotland are still at a bit of a loss as to what Curriculum for Excellence is supposed to mean for them and their learners beyond the content in the Experiences and Outcomes and the infamous changes in approach to assessment.

It is for this reason that I think the introduction of the learning cycle model and learn2learn at my school is being so positively received. This actual framework for learning and teaching is filling the vacuum left by the Curriculum for Excellence documents by providing teachers with something concrete to build learning experiences around. The implementation of the model is also being supported by those who’ve helped develop it – and crucially – use it day in day out. I’ve already begun to demonstrate how this approach relates to the literature and my experience of using it so far suggests that it has a positive impact on learning (in its broadest sense). I’m also finding that this model is in no way restrictive and actually provides vast potential for development of practice – but in a focused way.

I think all of this provides us with lessons on how to move forward. It’s not, as some would argue, that all secondary teachers are resistant to change. It’s that they need clear guidance and support to make change. In an ideal world we’d all be able to develop our own practice collaboratively based on literature and evidence, within very broad guidance – but this is just simply not realistic. Can Scotland now learn from past mistakes and develop the guidance which will actually impact on classroom practice and the crucial support to make it happen? I hope so, but I have my doubts.

Educational Values

22/08/2011 cfe, change, MEd, reflection No comments

I wrote recently about the strange feelings I went through when changing practice in a way that shouldn’t have been strange at all, and I’m still mulling this one over. I’m beginning to come to the conclusion that it is all to do with our educational values as teachers and the status quo bias.

I’ve just started reading a book that has been sat on my bookshelf for ages – Nudge. In it the authors introduced me to the concept of ‘status quo bias‘:

The status quo bias is a cognitive bias for the status quo; in other words, people tend not to change an established behavior unless the incentive to change is compelling.

That is certainly something I recognise in my own practice, and I’m sure I’m not alone. So, what gives us this compelling incentive to change? This can obviously be many things…to save us time?…financial?…better results…?…better behaviour? But even then, sometimes these rewards simply aren’t enough to change our deeply ingrained practice as teachers. Which is where our educational values and beliefs step in. We will only make these perceived big leaps if we have a clear understanding of our educational values and a desire to bring our practice in line with these. You’ll see therefore why I like the following quote so much from James & McCormick (2009):

The tensions and dilemmas that teachers face and their struggles to bring their practice in line with their educational values, whilst coping with pressures from outside, were a strong feature of their learning in the classroom. Some appeared content with ‘going through the motions’ of trying out new practices but a small proportion (about 20%) ‘took them to heart’ and, with a strong sense of their own agency, tested and developed these ideas in their own classrooms in creative ways. The challenge for us was to find out what kinds of support within and beyond schools would allow the twenty per cent to grow to nearer one hundred per cent.

This, in many ways, is what my first module of the Chartered Teacher programme was all about way back in the first half of 2008…and I’m only really getting it properly now. This is why we need to stop rushing around looking for new ideas which we’ll never really embed properly, but take the time to examine our educational values and then develop our practice accordingly. Although it can feel like a waste of time in our ever busier lives, it’s crucial.

It’s the only thing that actually really works.

Striving for Excellence

24/06/2011 change, Featured, reflection, science 2 comments

Cramlington Learning FestivalI’m just in the door from my first visit to the Cramlington Learning Festival, and my head’s still swirling. Although this was my second visit to the school, it was still mightily impressive.

There are so many things to be impressed and inspired from today, that it’s hard to know what to reflect on and what I’ll do as a result. I attended five sessions today – the two keynotes and three workshops – all of which were quite different.

We started off the day with Alistair Smith, a long time friend of the school. We received a free copy of his new book in our conference pack and he spoke mainly around the ideas which have arisen from his discussions with leaders of successful schools which have formed the basis of ‘High Performers’. He talked a lot about the fabulous work of Carol Dweck and introduced quite a few new concepts to me, but unfortunately he had to speed through some of the more unfamiliar stuff. At least I can check it out in the book!

The second keynote was from David Price. He was both very entertaining and inspiring talking a lot about the idea of schools as learning commons. I definitely need to check out his blog!

As inspiring as these keynotes were, the really good stuff was the workshops. My first was with Darren Mead, who it was great to finally meet. He shared how they’re embedding both enquiry and project based learning into their year 7 & 8 science curriculum. I then heard how the key stage 4 science team have been developing a new GCSE science module from scratch based on a combination of backwards design and pathway approaches to curriculum development. My final workshop was on how CPD is led at Cramlington.

Whilst all of these workshops were on relatively different subjects, I’m thinking there was a common feature which really impresses. They keep trying things out, based on evidence and reflection, in a relentless pursuit of excellence. This is a school who I think has had straight outstanding inspections from OFSTED on the last three occasions, and yet they’re not convinced they’ve got it right. In fact, for every couple of examples they give of what’s working well, there seems to be another example of an improvement they’ve got in the pipeline. They seem to actually fully embody journey to excellence in a way I’ve never encountered before.

If there’s anything which inspires me most about Cramlington, it is their seemingly endless desire to improve to provide the best possible outcomes for the young people in their care.

The risk paradox

10/06/2011 cfe, change, Featured, learning cycle, reflection, science 7 comments

We changed our timetable this week and have made start on 2011/12, which means I got to meet my new classes and get going on their new courses. This is such a crucial time. Somehow, you’ve got to find the balance between setting the right tone with your new classes and the inevitable wind down towards the end of term. Two of my classes are making a start on their Intermediate 1 Biology courses and I’ve been fighting the strong urge to play it safe. I’ve decided to take what feels like a risky strategy, but why do I think it’s risky…?

To give a bit of context, this course kicks off by learning about the nature of health in terms of physical, mental & social health and then moves onto considering how physiological measurements of health can be taken. In the past, I wouldn’t have given too much thought on how to approach this…draw the health triangle…complete a worksheet on staying healthy…draw a table of methods of taking physiological measurements…and so on. My assumption had been that I would employ similar methods this time around, but I really didn’t want to. This was not the tone I wanted to set with my new classes and felt that if I started in this rather predictable manner, then I would struggle to ever break out of this in the future. Despite this strong desire, I was worried about taking a riskier approach. What if it didn’t work? What if the behaviour was awful?

The strange thing is, my old method wasn’t terribly successful. The pupils tended to find the content quite boring and would soon start playing up. Even worse, they wouldn’t be able to remember any of this particularly well in a few months time. So why on earth would I consider this approach to be the safe one? Is it because it resulted in a relatively quiet classroom with me in control? Or perhaps because it generated jotters filled with notes? Or maybe I just feel it’s what everyone, including the pupils, expect of me? It’s surprising how hard it is to break out of these drivers!

Anyway, despite this strange internal pressure, I managed to resist. I kicked off with some circle time to discuss how we should approach learning as a class. I followed this with a group challenge to draw the health triangle based on short 10 second individual opportunities to view one copy of it at the front. We then made a video of the whole class acting out the health triangle which we watched next lesson before designing posters for doctors’ surgeries to promote all three aspects of health. My plan for the next lessons was to break the groups up into expert teams to research and present on each of the four physiological measurements they need to know, but one of the pupils in one of the classes has suggested we make health promotion adverts instead so we’re going to do that first…

And the result? The pupils’ behaviour has been outstanding – they’ve been much more engaged and motivated so far than I would’ve anticipated from my old approaches – and more importantly, they’re really learning it. But why would I doubt that? All my experience and reading in the last few years emphatically point to these sorts of strategies being significantly more successful, but for some reason when faced with the reality of 40 new S3 pupils it still takes a bit of a leap of faith to take what feels like a risk, but really isn’t at all.

Second thoughts

27/03/2011 active learning, assessment, cfe, change, Featured, MEd, reflection No comments

In a recent post I outlined my proposal for the final part of my MEd. In it I provided a rationale for my intention to involve pupils in planning learning in order to increase their engagement and described the steps I intended to carry out to achieve this. However, as I’ve mentioned – I’ll be going to a new school pretty soon. So, should I continue with my plans?

My initial thought was that I would…and the school was very supportive of this, but that Cramlington visit has really begun to change my mind. The school is really going for implementing the accelerated learning cycle and learn2learn and I’ve become concerned that whilst my proposal is complimentary to these developments, it is coming from a different angle and could well become a bit of a ‘bolt-on’ for anyone I managed to convince to become involved.

So, what am I going to do? I’ve decided that I need to shift the emphasis of the intervention to be much more aligned to the direction of the school and the needs (and workload) of the staff. So I’m considering instead coming from the perspective of evaluating the impact of the learning cycle on learning. This could be in terms of knowledge, understanding and skills development, but also in terms of pupil involvement and engagement.

I’m even finding some really useful literature on this, such as Geoff Petty, Black et. al. and Paul Rose. Through this reading I’m becoming increasingly convinced that my intervention could end up becoming much enhanced by this change by adding a much greater depth to the learning process, and therefore the enquiry.

Having said all that, it is pretty daunting to make such a fundamental change after writing and submitting a 5000 word proposal…but I have to respond to the needs of my new school…

Writing critically

20/03/2011 Featured, MEd, reflection One comment

As always on my MEd, we’re being encouraged to both think, and also write, critically. We spent a lot of time on this on our previous module and I feel that I’m making progress with this, but I’m nowhere near being confident as yet – as demonstrated by yesterday afternoon…

There are two primary aspects to the work I am doing towards completing my MEd. One is surrounding evaluating the impact of involving pupils in planning learning in terms of their engagement in lessons. On this side I feel I have made significant progress in my ability to write. My ideas are getting to the point where they are informed by research and I even manage to do so critically occasionally.

Yesterday we were focusing on the other side of the work, which addresses working collaboratively. When writing about working with others I find that I am still some way short of where I’d like to be. To try to simplify the steps I need to take to make my writing more sophisticated I’ve devised a three part scale:

  1. Appending references: This is what a lot of my writing on collaboration is like at present. This involves writing what you’ve done or are planning to do, and then dropping in a reference which is vaguely related at the end.
  2. Literature informed: I have managed to do this occassionally. This is where I start with the reference and use this to plan and explain what it is I’m doing rather than tagging it on afterwards.
  3. Critically informed: I’ve not made it here yet. I imagine this is where you start as above but you don’t simply then follow on to explaining the positive link between the literature and your actions. You include a critique of the literature, outlining the limitations and explain why you’re still using this to inform your work – perhaps bringing in further literature to support your point.

I’m not sure if this is correct or not, but I think if I can move my writing up this scale then I’m likely to be more successful. It then dawned on me however, that this is not actually about the writing. It’s about the doing. The real point is to actually do the reading critically before planning what to do with others and then evaluate the outcomes against this reading. If I can embody this approach, then the writing will naturally fall into place. This is what I’ve begun to do with the other side of the work, and I need to bring this into the more intuitive aspect of the enquiry also – collaborating with others…

« Older Entries