Broader Professional Context

Week 27

TRENDS INFLUENCING EDUCATION IN NEW ZEALAND

When I think about the future and how I am to have a part in it as a teacher - I’m a bit unsure. Will I still have a job? Will the format of my job resemble anything I’m doing today?

Why would I consider these questions

That’s right - GLOBALISATION.

Upon reading the predicted global trends (National Intelligence Council, 2017), they can be worrying: disease, identify wars, resource wars - these all will affect education but for me globalisation and the development of technology may affect the very core of education more than the focus (compared to the other trends).

I’m thinking of a similar setting to Ernest Cline’s Ready Player One. What’s stopping education developing into an online platform? Computers are already better at gathering information and Bayesian Networks have predictive powers greater than ours. Could this be the future? Possibly.

This is far reaching, beyond the shores of New Zealand. Instead of having a local school or local teacher, what if you could chose to have the best instructor? This also challenges scaling. Globalisation links what we do in the classroom with the rest of the world, but the relationship is two-way. In Komlos’ (2014) article about the destructiveness of globalisation, he likens present jobs to those of antiquated jobs. Except, the antiquated jobs found in history books may have been viewed as a fringe occupation. Technology these days can impact the very bedrock of society.

While I can’t predict the outcome of this, I can ready myself in hopes of future-proofing the evolution of teaching.

1. Use of digital platforms

It is my obligation to use the best technology for the best outcome. I have to do research, I have to try and I will probably fail several times. But the ultimate failing is not trying and possibly falling into antiquity. Why fight technology? Why not use it, especially for the things that you suck at: remembering things, communication means, processing data? Thus, if the teaching platforms shift, we have shifted with it.

2. Coding

I like coding and using ideas but having my own twist on this. I believe this is the key to innovation - but also in teaching I can use what’s out there and tinker with it to better suit my needs.

3. Human side

There will always be a need for emotional competency and relationships. By improving this, I will always beat technology and there will always be a need.

As NCEA has defined their future, where assessments can be “Anywhere, anytime, anyplace” (NZQA, 2014), we have to put the time into solidifying our place.

Ok so that might not secure whatever happens to my profession, but these elements may keep me in the game and in the very least, equip me to move onto whatever else is waiting there in the future.

REFERENCES

Komlos, J. (2014). Has Creative Destruction Become More Destructive? (No. w20379). National Bureau of Economic Research.

National Intelligence Council. (2017). Global trends: The Paradox of Progress. National Intelligence Council: US. Retrieved from https://www.dni.gov/files/images/globalTrends/documents/GT-Main-Report.pdf

NZQA. (2014). An Independent Review of the Effectiveness of NZQA’s Implementation of the 2007 NCEA Enhancements. NZQA. Retrieved from
http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/qualifications-and-standards/qualifications/ncea/Report-of-the-NCEA-enhancements-review.pdf

Professional Context

 

Week 26

It’s interesting when you get a question to address and you wonder if posting it online will go down well with the leadership team at school…

I had to pose the question of “What is our school philosophy?” to one of our school leaders. While this is a far-reaching question, the intent was to determine our approach on the sports field.

My question was: are we a win-at-all costs team or are we a development team?

Knowing this, determines how I do my job. While there are merits in both (particularly if a marketing aspect of the school is their sporting pedigree), we have to think about the system as a whole. I wish this was an easy answer, but the reality is there’s tension between the two standpoints. And that is just on the sports field! How much more so in the classroom?

With our non-zoned school, students and stakeholders of the school have less identification with the immediate surroundings of the school. This somewhat agrees with Stoll’s (1998) summary of school culture factors. Our students, typically come from higher socio-economic backgrounds - which have their own challenges but are different from the immediate environment surrounding the school. The area around the school has a lower socio-economic background. Consequently, there has been tension and deliberate action was required by our school to prevent a proliferation of negative associations with our school.

Some descriptors that the school may be stuck with:

• Spoilt
• Entitled
• Soft
• Naive

Our students also needed to practice getting alongside people to help and play with younger students -  in a way this reduced the negative stereotype but also minimized those negative values that our students can embed. This mutual relationship had to be deliberate because it could not happen otherwise. As many have noted, school culture has to be a deliberate act.

This is all well and good but it needs stakeholder buy-in. The trickiest is probably the staff. While there is an expectation for Excellence, teachers have many responsibilities and it’s easier to take a passive role in the less pushed focuses.

Because let’s face it, doing more work on top of more work doesn’t convince change but being transparent and deliberate about the school culture might.

From the two scenarios, we see that school culture is important. This can often be identified if we ask ourselves how are we viewed and how does it play out? If we don’t like that image of us, what are we going to do about it? What can we try? And if it works, how can we introduce it for the whole school? (Loosely adapted from House, 1974)

#justfoundhowtodomemes #memecity #schoolrep

REFERENCES

House, E.R. (1974). An examination of potential change roles in education. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. p. 225.

Stoll. (1998). School Culture. School Improvement Network’s Bulletin 9. Institute of Education, University of London. Retrieved from http://www.educationalleaders.govt.nz/Culture/Understanding-school-cultures/School-Culture

Defining Your Practice

Week 25

Communities of Practice - Digital, Physical and Mental Space

Wenger first coined the concept of “communities of practice”, which is defined as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion or about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interaction on an ongoing basis” (Wenger, McDermott & Snyder, 2002, p.4) The fact that you are reading this, probably means we are part of a community of practice. This doesn’t have to be physically based solely in the workplace, but it is a good place to start. I have had some experience with different communities of practice due to different work and study opportunities.

• The departments I’ve had in my workplace
• Friends who are also teachers
• Mindlab

For these three groups we’ve had a common domain: teaching, the communication is balanced and two-way: mutual engagement and we can develop a collective response to challenges: shared repertoire

Mindlab has introduced me to the concept of digital communities of practice. I have enjoyed the digital communities of practice because distance is not a limitation. However, some incentives may need to be introduced especially if some aren’t naturally people who share how they are going on the internet - me included. Inertia may need to be overcome and depending if the person takes to it, regular amounts of energy is required to get the ball moving.

The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka” but “That’s funny...”

—Isaac Asimov (1920–1992)

This is how I would judge whether you are in a community of practice: if you have available people for you to say, “hmm… that’s weird,” or “I did not expect that.” I have found having people work within close distance can generate this discussion and conversely, not having a shared work space dramatically decreases these opportunities. Having a discussion with those phrases are bound to be interesting and generate a bunch of theories as to why students or the classes responded in such a way. Because we educators are scientists; we have to experiment to see what works best; for some people on some days they respond differently and require different needs to others. And just like Science, Education didn’t come about because of one person, it is a collective, connected system that should get better and better. And the great thing is that we are part of that and it mostly happens through conversation.

Cambridge, Kaplan, and Suter (2005) suggest that communities of practice provide an environment for people to connect, interact, build and extend the shared resources within shared learning goals. Questions such as:

How are you going?

How are you finding things?

What’s something cool that you’ve found with your class?

Can’t happen when you are too busy. You don’t have an available time to talk let alone reflect and if we do it seems restrained. Creativity needs some freedom. The short term memory can utilise 7 chunks of information at one go. If a teacher is bombarded with information during the day, how much space can be used for the nitty-gritty higher order task of wondering “wouldn’t it be cool if…”?

That’s my goal - by still doing my job - but reducing my mental workspace I can have generate conversation (first with myself and then maybe others) to enjoy my work more and hopefully increase my students’ enjoyment in the process. #selfishlynotselfish #notselfishlyselfish #shellfish

References

Cambridge, D., Kaplan, S. & Suter, V. (2005). Community of practice design guide: A Step-by-Step Guide for Designing & Cultivating. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/NLI0531.pd...

 Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.