Where are the teacher caves?

If you are interested in flexible learning spaces, you would’ve come across the concepts of campfire, waterhole and cave. It is a way for teachers and students to design flexible spaces to reflect the learning needs for an activity. Campfire involves learning from an expert. Typical furniture set up include tiered seating or ampitheatre style. Waterhole involves learning with and from others where each person has something to contribute while also listening to the group. Typical furniture set up for waterholes include seats in a circle or desks connected in groups. Caves are where students can work independently and quietly, away from other distractions. Typical furniture set ups include single desks with single seats, positioned in a quiet space.

One thing that freuqently pops up in discussions on learning spaces is the need to get rid of the teacher desk in classrooms. The teacher desk has become a symbol for old ways of teaching. If there’s a teacher desk, it is assumed you teach in a traditional way, most likely didactic.

While I agree that a teacher desk can take up a lot of valuable space, I think in reality teachers just need somewhere to put their things, like their laptop. A lot of teachers, including myself, end up working in a classroom outside of class times on any desk, regardless whether it is categorised as student or teacher, because it’s the only place where we can concentrate and be productive with independent work like giving feedback on student work, planning lessons and reflecting on how we can improve. Staffrooms are great as waterhole and campfire spaces, but they are rarely effective cave spaces. While many schools re-designing student spaces, many do not get an opportunity to do the same for teacher work spaces. When the walls are knocked down between classrooms to create open spaces and teacher desks are gone, are those destroyed cave spaces created elsewhere?

Companies known for their innovative spaces like Microsoft and Adobe have beautiful open, collaborative spaces. But they also have cave spaces. They have small rooms where individuals can use when they need to concentrate by themselves. Perhaps this is something schools can follow.

Makerspaces – Bringing play back into learning

A couple of weeks ago, I attended the Young Creators Conference, an event that brought young people from primary and secondary schools together to share their STEM/STEAM projects. One of the projects I saw is shown in the video. Many of the projects involved makerspaces, a space (and provision of time) for students to build prototypes, which may or may not involve digital technology. When I asked the Young Creators about the learning behind their projects, these stuck out to me:

“We have one STEM lesson a week. We go into a makerspace and we can create whatever we want.”

“We ended up making this by accident after mucking around with things we discovered this can happen.”

This struck me because many of the projects mirrored the concepts of play based learning, which “involves the construction and manipulation of various materials. Ideally, adults will provide a variety of materials, while also providing “just in time” incidental teaching“. Play based learning is a learning and teaching approach that is promoted in early childhood education. It often involves personalises learning and teaching around individual learners’ interests and passions. It promotes learning from trial and error, exploration and discovery. While play based learning is mainly suitable for early childhood education, the elements of personalised learning and learning from trial and error are suitable for learners of all ages. When learners are able to learn through their passions and interests, and are provided with the time, structure, process, support and guidance to create, evaluate and re-create, they are not only learning the STEM/STEAM concepts central to their projects, but also developing trust in themselves, a growth mindset, how to learn from mistakes, problem solving and critical and creative thinking. In comparison, more traditional subjects and ways of teaching often do not allow the time, space or processes to learn from experience. Learning looks almost the same for everyone and learners are pressured to ‘get it right’ the first time.

While not every school has a makerspace, or the timetable structure (yet) to  have STEM/STEAM in makespaces, teachers can most definitely bring play into learning. Playing and ‘mucking around’ aren’t just for pre-schoolers; everyone can learn through play. There’s enough of the so-called ‘serious’ learning already in other areas of the curriculum. It’s time that we make more space and time for play.

 

Re-thinking student-driven scientific investigations

lab photo

Scientific investigations are key to being a scientist. A typical high school science curriculum will have the scientific method as a key component. Students learn about the steps of designing a fair scientific experiment – writing an aim, devising a hypothesis, designing a method, analysing the results, scrutinizing the results, drawing a conclusion etc. This is then matched up with writing an investigation report.

In New South Wales, Australia, high school students are required to plan, conduct and report on a scientific investigation of their choice in the Student Research Project (SRP). I have always found the SRP to be a wonderful opportunity for student choice and personalisation of their learning because students can choose what they want to investigate and different students are able to design, conduct and analyse their experiments to different levels, according to their interests, ability level, passion and commitment. However what often happens with the SRP is that students are given a list of pre-approve “experiments” to do at home by themselves. Some popular ones are which kinds of sticky tape are the stickiest, what will keep flowers fresh the longest, what conditions will cause bread to go mouldy the quickest, etc.

While there is nothing wrong with these experiments (as they are effective in enabling students to understand the scientific method and how the write an investigation report), it does not not reflect how real scientists work. Real scientists don’t do research by themselves. They usually work with in a team, often with a mentor/supervisor who guides them in their research. Their research contributes to a bigger picture of research in their field. They don’t randomly pick a topic from a booklet and do an experiment hundreds of students have done before. When I was in third year university zoology studies, my classmates and I had an Honours student as our supervisor and we did a mini-honours investigation on whether skinks can identify predators through scent. It was something that has not been done before in that area. It was a topic that would contribute to the understanding of animal behaviour. It was one of the most authentic, engaging and valuable science learning experiences for me. And most importantly I was guided by another scientist who was more experienced than me. I learnt so much from that apprentice-master style of learning.

So how can we bring that type of experience to schools? I think now it’s easier than ever. With technology, it is now possible to create and maintain community partnerships. For the SRP, perhaps students can partner with universities? Can high school students help contribute to university research? Can high school students partner up with an Honours student or scientist? Perhaps students can use their SRP in citizen science projects such as monitoring the environment?

The SRP is a great opportunity for students to experience “real science”. The SRP is a great opportunity for students to pursue their own interests. The SRP is a great opportunity for students to contribute to scientific knowledge. It’s time to re-think the SRP and think about how can we do it differently to inspire our students.

What is future focused learning?

simple_light_bulb_graphic

Licensing info can be found here.

This week I started a new role with the NSW Department of Education. I am now the Secondary Advisor for Futures Learning Unit, an initiative of Innovative Education Reform. Since I started, I’ve been frequently asked ‘What is future focused learning?’ Other synonyms I’ve heard this week are ‘future-proofing education’ and ’21st century learning’. So what are these things?

Firstly, I don’t like the term “future proofing education”. Many things in this world cannot be “future proofed”. “Future proof” makes it sound like some kind of insurance. I much prefer the term “future focused” because it emphasises a process and culture. So let’s get back to it – what is future focused learning?

I think most of us have heard of how things are rapidly changing, how many of today’s jobs will be automated soon and won’t exist, how many jobs for the next generation are not existent yet, how globalisation is influencing economic growth and social structures. Here’s a video that summarises the changes our young people will face and why we need to re-think the current way we design learning.

For me, future focused learning is about looking at the way we currently implement learning and teaching and challenging ourselves at whether this is the most effective way at preparing our students for THEIR futures. Will learning each subject separately enable student to learn how to construct knowledge and create solutions for complex problems? Will a heavy focus on knowledge consumption allow students to think creatively and critically? Is a physical environment that is designed to have one teacher for every thirty students for a short period of time the best way to personalise learning?

I often hear that future focused learning is about learning spaces and technology. Yes, spaces and technology are important, but they work with an underlying key factor – learning and teaching design. You can have the most funky and colourful furniture. You can knock down walls. You can have the latest gadgets. But unless the school culture on learning and teaching is future focused, spaces and technology will make minimal impact.

I also often hear “But aren’t we doing future focused learning already? My students are engaged. I personalise learning for my students. We already have cross-curricular units.” I don’t disagree with this. A lot of things teachers and schools already so are making a massive impact on student outcomes for their community. However, we always need to be striving for ongoing improvement which means continuous change. An important part of future focused learning is for teachers to be researchers of their own practice and develop evidence-based practices that best suit their community of learners.

So that’s my very brief take on future focused learning. I’ll dig down more in later posts. I want to get it out there that it isn’t about colourful furniture. It isn’t about refurbishing a building. Future focused learning is about how teachers teach, how students learn, how learning is designed and how schooling is designed.

Using space as a learning tool

What are school libraries used for? I think it’s safe to say that most teachers take their students to the library for physical resources like using laptops, computers, books for research or books for reading. I use to do that too. But lately I have found that I take my students to the library not for these physical resources, but for space, learning spaces that are open and flexible. The colourful, funky, movable furniture also helps, but me and my students mainly use it for the space. We bring our own laptops if we need technology. When I think about it, it’d probably be almost as sufficient if the library was a large, indoor carpeted area. With WiFi of course🙂

Ever since I started project-based learning four years ago, it has driven more personalised, differentiated learning where students are working at different paces and at different tasks. During the one lesson, some students are working in pairs, others in small groups, and some individually. As the teacher, I might be working with an individual student, instructing a small group or instructing the whole class. What I am finding is that traditional classrooms are no longer sufficient for the pedagogy I have developed and grown into over the past four years with project-based learning. I am finding that being in a traditional classroom, that is designed to cater for 30 students, is now starting to restrict the learning of my students. We need an open space where students can find an area that suits their learning needs for the activity.

7A in library (2)

My class working in the school library in order to access an open learning space.

In the past two terms, I have been taking my students to the library for this specific purpose – space. The past fortnight has seen my students work in teams to design, conduct and report on an investigation to test factors that affect a parachute’s descent. For this project, students have to work in groups in some parts and individually in other parts. Students always end up progressing at different rates. This is where an open learning spaces is needed to enable this kind of learning to occur efficiently. However, teaching and learning in a open space has its challenges. The main ones I found are:

 

  • Students need to be taught and given the experience to learn how to work in an open space where there are other classes and school staff working as well.
  • Students need to be taught how to create their own little learning space in the open learning space. This includes knowing how arrange the funky, colourful furniture for the needs of the learning activity. This is why I no longer have seating plans for my classes. Students need to be given the opportunity to choose who they work with and where to sit or stand to work productively. If teachers always do this for them with seating plans, etc, students will never develop that ability.
  • Students need to be provided with the experience to develop self-regulation. The success of working in an open learning space is highly dependent on students to work individually, small groups and large groups simultaneously.

Eventually I’d like to be in a situation where there is team teaching of larger groups of students in large, open spaces. Where teaching and learning isn’t restricted an industrial model of one teacher per 30 students in a small classroom with a seating plan.

How do you use your learning spaces?

 

Field, tenor and mode – a literacy framework for all subjects

Literacy is a focus for every teacher, regardless of whether we are teaching primary school or high school, regardless of what subject we teach. Without strong literacy skills, our students cannot access the curriculum. Reading comprehension and writing are essential to succeed to every aspect of education.

One challenge I have always grappled with is how to create writers. I often feel like I have to continuously give scaffolds; a sheet to tell students this is how this text is supposed to be structured, you need to write this in this paragraph, make sure you use these connectives, etc, etc ,etc. I always asked how can I gradually remove these scaffolds so that students are 100% independent? It feels like I constantly have to provide scaffolds.

I think a reason why is the way I (and other teachers) approach extended writing. Too much focus has been on the overall text structure (eg.In a scientific investigation report, there is an aim, equipment then method. The method has to start with a verb and be in present tense.) There’s nothing wrong with this per se, but it is not enough. It is not enough to say to students “Use PEEL to write your paragraphs. You need to write this paragraph so that it starts with a point, then elaboration, then provide an example then a sentence that links to the question. Throw in a complex sentence because you know, NAPLAN (Australian teachers will understand the NAPLAN bit).” But why do we have to write in complex sentences? Why do we use nominalisation? The PEEL stuff and text structure do not teach students why some words and sentence structures are favoured for particular texts and purposes, particularly academic texts.

So what else what needs to be done? I think the field-tenor-mode framework needs to be the overarching strategy. I came across field, tenor and mode a few years ago and am currently doing a refresher course. Field, tenor and mode are components of linguistics. Every text, regardless of subject, can be viewed from the field-tenor-mode framework. To put it simply, field is the subject matter of the text; tenor is the relationship between the author and the audience; and mode is how the text is constructed, particularly whether it is written-like or spoken-like. I think tenor is something that schools do not do well. The relationship between the author and the audience is essential is what words you choose. For an example, an email to a friend and a book review have very different relationships between the audience and the author. Frankly, schools don’t do audience very well. Very rarely do students know the audience of their extended writing.

Mode can help students in moving their writing towards being more written-like. Many, many students write texts in a spoken-like manner when formal, academic texts need to be written-like. This is where the complex sentences come in. Written-like texts are more lexically dense. To write a text that is lexically dense requires complex sentences, which may also require nominalisation. Designing activities where students can learn this will enable them to know why and when certain sentence structures need to be utilised.

So I am now using the field-tenor-mode framework for my students whenever they are composing any text, for any subject. Here are some resources I have created so far. All resources can be used for any subject.

  • A short video to explain field, tenor and mode to students

https://spark.adobe.com/video/rJuTyhA4/embed

 

field tenor mode text composition planning sheet

Text composition planning sheet

Flipped learning isn’t about making videos

 

I’ve been getting a lot of questions about how I go about flipped learning for my Year 7 class since I blogged about it in a previous post. I teach my Year 7 class for English, Maths, Science, Geography and History and we use flipped learning in maths. Here are some misconceptions about flipped learning I’d like to address:

1. Flipped learning isn’t about making videos.

Flipped learning involves students watching instructional videos, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the teacher has to make those videos. Many teachers don’t want to try flipped learning because they are concerned about the time it takes to create instructional videos. This is a valid concern as creating instructional videos do take up time. Personally I have created some maths instructional videos using OfficeMix but only when I don’t find suitable instructional videos that are already freely available online. There are so, so many instructional videos on the internet that it isn’t necessary for each individual teacher to create videos and re-invent the wheel. Some of my favourite sites for maths instructional videos are ABC Splash and BBC Bitesize.

Flipped learning is not about creating videos, but rather a change in pedagogy. Instead of the teacher spending class time on whole-class instruction, whole-class instruction is done via instructional videos with students viewing those videos individually in class or at home. This enables more class time to be dedicated to student collaboration and students gaining guidance from the teacher. It enables more personalised learning as it doesn’t force all students to listen to the same instructions regardless of whether they understand it or not, like traditional instruction. It also allows students to work at their own pace. If they have been absent from school, it’s OK. They haven’t missed out on the instruction because they can watch the video. Personally I find that it works the best in maths lessons because my Year 7 class has students who are working at a Year 9 level and students who are working at a Year 5 level. Flipped learning enables me as their teacher to better personalise and differentiate their learning. The photo below shows the set-up of one flipped maths lesson where I worked with a small group of students near the whiteboard while the rest of the class used instructional videos to move on to the next concept. Flipped learning frees students from doing the same thing at the same pace.

flipped learning classroom setup

Classroom set up for one maths lesson where one group of students (near the whiteboard) needed small-group instruction and guidance from me as their teacher while the rest of the class moved onto the next concept.

So don’t let the video creation scare you off from flipped learning. Use videos that are already out there.

2. You don’t have to do flip all the time.

Just like all other teaching strategies, flipped learning isn’t the most appropriate all of the time. For me, my class has 3 hours of maths a week (a two-hour block on Wednesday and a one-hour block on Friday). I use flipped learning in the two-hour lesson and use the one-hour lesson to do formative assessment activities.

3. There’s no one-size-fits-all.

I think the “proper” flipped learning approach is for students to watch the instructional videos at home. For my students, that wouldn’t work for a range of reasons so they watch the videos in class.  Do what works for you and your students.

The key is to try it. Don’t let the video creation aspect scare you. Use videos that are already out there. Flip for a few lessons to start with and see how it goes.