Flashpoint change...

I don't believe in the flashpoint approach to change in education. I don't think it works in the long-run and it typically creates inordinate collateral damage.

A little context... I do believe that change happens despite what we do or do not do to effect it. Our world is organic, a living system, and our education world is no different. Trying to stay ahead of change in teaching and learning is akin to pulling an already speeding freight train with a big old chain- it aint easy! All this being said, I also believe that committed educational leaders can positively and pragmatically influence change, but it must be done in a systematic, strategic and tempered manner.

When attempting to influence the education system; to contribute meaningfully to improving the teaching and learning process, we need to ensure that our efforts include careful consideration and responsible forms of leadership. This takes time. Call it slow-boil change. On the contrary, flashpoint change represents the antithesis of the slow-boil. It's quick, turbulent and violent affecting a short term change to be sure, but not one that can be sustained. Like a pot of water that heats up too fast, all we're left with is a big mess after the flashpoint boils over.

I'm confronted with what I feel relatively safe saying is a revolutionary perspective toward change in education on behalf of a good number of my professional colleagues. I have written previously about my views on reform vs revolution. Revolution is most-definitely flashpoint change. Reform in my opinion connotes more of the slow-boil characteristics of sustainable change. A slowly boiling pot of water is controlled, it gets the job done and we're left with a result that we intended- no collateral mess. I can't think of anything within education that is so unacceptable and bad for kids that it requires immediate, violent change. When the issue of change takes on a bigger focus than the reason to change, this is not good. We get all fired up and foaming at the mouth over the need to change, all the while losing sight of why the change was important in the first place. This is when creative dissonance turns to disharmonious dissent and it goes nowhere fast.

I support the mission of public education and believe strongly that we have much to be proud of within our system that ultimately exists in the noblest of causes; to support the healthy development of mind, body and spirit in an ever-changing world. No small task. Each of us as educators must value what we do, advocate our cause and remain committed to the perpetual improvement of the system if we are to ensure that kids continue to benefit from the highest quality teaching and learning. Let's face it- we're all in this together.

I'm a teacher and educational leader who loves what I do.  I regularly reflect on my practise and contribute in many ways to the evolution of the education system. What I refuse to do in the interest of slow-boil effective and sustainable change is dishonor the efforts of my teaching predecessors by implying there are elements of the system that require immediate and violent reversal. We've advanced beyond the need for this approach- grossly unacceptable elements of education past like corporal punishment and segregated schools are no longer reality... the time for revolutionary efforts in education have passed. What contemporary education needs now is the ubiquitous will to change as a reality woven into the very fabric of everything we do. Are there aspects of the system requiring improvement? Undoubtedly... but a reflective, responsible and systematic effort is the only type that will get the job done sustainably and convincingly.

Let's take control of change in education. Let's be reflective and thorough in every decision-making process. Let's work together to control slow-boiling changes within our profession and rise above the reactionary, flashpoint perspective to accept that we are all part of a good and eminent institution that can only get better when we take a tempered approach to change.

Define questions; discover answers...

"The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing." - Albert Einstein
Traditional school curriculum defines answers and makes up questions. We need curriculum that defines questions and discovers answers... educators need to think differently. This came to me a while back as I was drifting through different Twitter conversations late one night. There is no exhaustive list of what we can know, but we've artificially created many lists of what we apparently need to know. In order to advance our practise beyond teaching to these lists, teachers would do well to revisit the domain of the question... we need to think differently.

I firmly believe that teachers understand the value of questioning, I'm not suggesting otherwise, but I am suggesting an adjustment to our perspective on questioning would improve our ability to practise teaching. The curriculum we establish in each grade is a great example of how we've become a bit controlling and predictable as professionals- we define the list of what kids should know, and then we make up questions to teach to the lists. I believe that we should state curriculum as questions needing to be answered instead of facts needing to be questioned. I envision curriculum statements not as outcomes to be achieved, but as questions to be answered. Making this change would change the culture of learning from a culture of standards that are exhaustive to a culture of standards that are limitless... limitless learning based on true inquiry, not the artificial inquiry we practise now.

Most teachers waste their time by asking questions which are intended to discover what a pupil does not know, whereas the true art of questioning has for its purpose to discover what the pupil knows or is capable of knowing. Albert Einstein

Caveat: I am not an expert. I shudder to think in the context of this post that expertise is even possible. The topic of exceptional teaching and learning is about as fluid a topic that can possibly exist in my humble opinion, and my opinion is what I am stating in this post; take it or leave it. I'm not telling you what to do as educators, or parents for that matter... or even how to do it. I simply want to  strike a chord of thought in you to reflect on as you develop your own perspective toward teaching and learning, and for the record, I don't believe this process ever ends for what parents and teachers should be first and foremost- conscientious learners.

I'm hearing much from my Twitter tribe about "what teaching is," and what defines a good teacher as major elements of the cognitive surplus running wild via the influence of social media. Teachers all have opinions on these points of discussion. We started to form them as undergraduate students in teaching colleges all over the world before we had any clue to an informed position. (As I think back to those days I wonder if it's a good idea to expect pre-service teachers to form a teaching philosophy... maybe it would be better to expose them to the myriad of teaching philosophies that permeate our craft, and let them pick one to start with, then begin to form their own... I digress.)

It seems to me that the entire process of contemporary education depends on what I will call the principle of predetermined principles. The profession of teaching and the process of learning is dependent on what we already claim to know about both entities. I'm not saying this is inherently bad, but it certainly can create some contextual problems as we define good teaching and learning. First-year teachers need a foundation to work from as they enter the profession; they benefit from the principle of predetermined principles as they experiment with different perspectives and ideologies on their way to defining their own. However, if they aren't inclined to question what they're doing and what they're believing constantly, then the context gets diluted. In the worst cases it gets diluted to the point of stagnation. Above all, good teaching and learning MUST include the element of questioning; we have to understand that discovery (learning) is an inquiry-based process, and not something that can have limits placed upon it.

Predetermined principles are important for students too. Humankind has built an incredible base of knowledge over our short history, and we can't discount this as teachers. We know what we know, and that's NOT a bad thing. (I'm growing increasingly disheartened by a stance among educators that appears to want to throw away virtually all previous practise and knowledge as if it were the 'wrong way' of our past to be replaced by the 'right way' of the present.) We need to understand that our past mixed with inquiry in the present will create many 'right' ways to do things in the future.

So here's my contribution to the discussions intending to define teaching and good teachers. (Wow... glad I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater on this one- Socrates knew this over two-thousand ago.) Teaching is the art of questioning, and it's not simple. Good teaching is nothing different. To me it's defined by the level of proficiency within the art of questioning one has developed. Even more importantly to me, great teaching is developed through a willingness to question not only our students, but ourselves; what we do and how we do it, everyday.

We grow as teaching artisans by using the Socratic method on ourselves in our reflection and review of our own practise. Don't accept your own comfortable place in teaching. Strive to operate in an environment of creative dissonance if you intend to grow as a learner along with your students.

Virtual tribes...

I had a brief Twitter conversation awhile back with George Couros (@gcouros) about the complex interaction between people and the technology we create. George commented that he was reading tweet archives from the International Society for Technology in Education 2010 (ISTE10) Conference, and noticed that very few were about technology.  Instead, many delegates at the conference commented about the human relationships they initiated or renewed. Interesting considering this conference is a massive education technology event.

My contribution to the conversation ended with the comment... "synergy between people and the technology they use creates ideas, collaboration... possibility otherwise unlikely." I have met many who assert that the use of technology in teaching and learning 'depersonalizes' the experience. I am compelled to disagree. As I grow with technology in my teaching and learning, I am finding that the opposite is true. The tribe I call my PLN (personal learning network) has grown exponentially since I started using Twitter a short seven months ago. I have had my mind stretched further than ever, including my time in graduate school. My network of passionate educators hails from all over the globe, and I am collaborating with them in ways never before possible without this simple tech tool.

Shortly after I began using Twitter, I started blogging here at KARE Givers. I have always kept a paper journal of reflections and ideas that cross my mind anyway, and I thought blogging would be a good way to collaborate with those who perhaps share my interest in teaching and learning. I had no idea how beneficial this would become, and I've barely gotten started.

My point is rather simple. Adults do well when they understand the power of inter-dependency. We have passed through the stages of dependence and independence in our lives, and hopefully learned that it's infinitely easier to handle the stresses and responsibilities of adulthood when we have others to count on, (and more enjoyable too.) We are social beings; we appreciate the value and benefits of tribes... it's a very basic element of human nature. Micro-blogging (Twitter) and blogging, two relatively simple technologies, have made it incrementally easier for me to connect with my virtual tribe, and I don't plan on looking back.

Using technology in my professional practise has done the exact opposite of depersonalizing my job; on the contrary, it's brought me closer to other teachers who share my passion for teaching and learning, and allowed me to belong to something so much bigger than myself- a global education reform movement dedicated to the perpetual improvement of the teaching and learning process.

I fail to see any downside to this.

Engaging classrooms "manage" themselves...

 I'm not too sure- do authentic, inspirational classrooms have to be 'managed?' When teachers use the term "classroom management," they generally mean managing behavior in the classroom. I've worked with the most challenging students imaginable from first grade through tenth grade and I have never understood this terminology.

The term management has many different connotations. From http://www.answers.com/, management is defined as:
n.

1.The act, manner, or practice of managing; handling, supervision, or control: management of a crisis; management of factory workers.
2.The person or persons who control or direct a business or other enterprise.
3.Skill in managing; executive ability.

There's a common theme in all three versions of the noun 'management' above. Each connotes an element of control... a word that also has an excessively broad spectrum of connotations. Of course teachers need to be in control, but what does that mean in a classroom context? To me, it's simple- teachers need to be in control of the learning process, and if they do this well, there will be no imminent need to manage student behavior at all because kids will feel so engaged in the process of learning that they won't have any idle time for their thoughts to wander.

Kids, no matter the age, need to feel engaged. They feel engaged in a classroom because the learning activities they are involved in capture their interest; they're fun and they don't feel like a chore to be endured. Teachers can create engaging classrooms in a multitude of ways, and I'm going to begin a new series of posts with this one dedicated to sharing those that have worked for me. They worked for me in classrooms that most teachers will never experience filled with kids who arrived there as the most disengaged students imaginable.

Before working as a middle school counsellor, and now as an elementary school vice-principal, I taught in First Nations communities and behavioral programs for fourteen years. My experiences weren't just career altering, they were life-changing. I wish to share some of my experience with you in the effort to initiate dialog surrounding engaging teaching. There should be no end to the professional conversation surrounding engagement in the learning process... the issue of engagement permeates everything teachers do. Engaging students is arguably our most important responsibility.

Rule of Engagement # 1: Talk to students.
This sounds so simple. Why then do so many teachers not understand this rule? My take is that we get so caught up in the scripted teaching we feel we're expected to deliver that we forget we're teaching young people; people with personalities... strengths, weaknesses, likes, dislikes, talents and challenges that may or may not jive with our scripted teaching usually designed inadequately to address the majority of faceless kids in class- the infamous cohort of kids who supposedly fit the mean. Here's a bit of news for us all- there is no average student in any class anywhere.

Every single child in every single classroom is unique, worth celebrating and needs us to talk to them sincerely and purposefully- not at them with our scripted teacher talk. When we do this we show kids we are serious about building a relationship with them as individuals; that we care and we want to help them be successful. We can't go wrong with this message.

Talk to kids about their strengths, their anxieties, their families, their lives away from school... and about the daily things that just happen. Forging on with the script knowing there are kids not really 'with' you, for whatever reason, is professionally irresponsible... we have to make sure every kid is engaged, and if not, we shouldn't be moving on without them, we should be talking to them about what's bothering them and hindering them from being present and mindful in class.

Talk to kids.

Assessment reform... are we going in circles?

I'm admittedly torn about the assessment thing... I'm left wondering whether opposition to perpetual reform of how teachers assess students is based more on a lack of understanding and poorly communicated strategy than fear or top-down direction to the contrary. Teachers need to find balance between high-quality current assessment practise, and action-oriented efforts to make future practise even better.

At the core of professional, responsible assessment is really strong and meaningful (real-time) communication (feedback) with students. Effective and solidly researched assessment practise (portfolio-based, two-way dialog between teacher and learner... group dialog has a place here as well- and perhaps even peer evaluation) is nothing new. Like many logical and pedagogically sound improvements to what teachers do, when we think we've discovered something new, some immediately and inevitably begin to resist out of ignorance. Seems to me the assessment issue is a black swan- we think we've discovered 'new' and better ways to assess students, and now we're busy aggressively trying to justify them and convince our colleagues that they need to follow our lead and implement the same assessment strategies because they are more effective than those that the "uninformed" utilize.

For decades, teachers have been doing assessment in relatively the same manner- summative, high stakes, 'bell-curved' tests have been the norm for a long time... and that's OK because these were what defined the limits of our understanding about how best to provide useful and positive feedback to students. Few would have predicted we would find better ways to evaluate students, (if the case were otherwise, it would have happened sooner...) but the reality is that today, we know more about how assessment works. Teachers don't have to justify pedagogically sound and responsible assessment, they just need to do it. Simply practising research-based, effective and meaningful assessment of students that surpasses previously-held understanding of what "works" is the best way to communicate best-practise with our colleagues...  morphic resonance will take care of the rest.

Teachers are professionally obliged to perpetually seek improved ways to do everything we do... including assessing students. Even more importantly, we are professionally responsible to share what we discover with others meaningfully, pragmatically and incrementally. The tipping point of assessment reform depends on how well we can display the effectiveness of new ways to evaluate students over time; and it will take time. It will also depend on our avoiding getting stuck in any "new" way of doing assessment. Like our limited perspective and conditioned acceptance regarding traditional forms of student assessment that have permeated our craft for decades, if we were to begin doing assessment differently, and then become resistant to critical analysis leading to even better ways, we'd right back where we started, wouldn't we?

I'm growing weary once again of the dichotomous perspective teachers appear to default toward on so many issues. There's the "old" way of doing something, and then there's the new (right) way according to the person making the claim. Instead of the old vs. new way of doing assessment, I think teachers should simply always be looking for the better way. To deny that this is a good, professional perspective would be ridiculous.

Change doesn't have to delineate right vs. wrong ways of doing things. When viewed as constant improvement, change never ends, and things never stop improving because getting it right simply becomes making it better... everyday. There are no meaningful static goals in the education assessment realm. To be truly striving for excellence, the bar must be continuously inched upward.