Category Archives: Teaching

Educator wellbeing: Creating schools where staff flourish

Posted on by
Reply

It seems that everywhere educators turn there is a news piece, recent study or professional learning opportunity about educator wellbeing.

Facilitating schools and education systems that support staff to sustain their care, energy and enthusiasm – and thrive as fulfilled, healthy professionals – is an ongoing and oft-discussed challenge for schools. There remain ongoing and increasing concerns around the wellbeing of teachers and school leaders, and system-wide attraction and retention challenges in teaching and school leadership. The International Baccalaureate’s Wellbeing for Schoolteachers report (Taylor et al., 2024) points out that teacher wellbeing has an unequivocal impact on both teachers’ professional performance and the wellbeing and academic success of students. Yet staff cannot flourish without sustainable workloads, appropriate support, and a safe environment of trust, care, open communication, growth, recognition and feedback.

I have had the pleasure of chatting with Helen Kelly and Amy Green on The Edu Salon podcast, who both provide useful insights to those considering staff wellbeing in their organisations. The OECD (2013) defines wellbeing as made up of the following elements.

  • Life evaluation – a reflective assessment on a person’s life or some specific aspect of it.
  • Affect – a person’s feelings or emotional states, typically measured with reference to a particular point in time.
  • Eudaimonia – a sense of meaning and purpose in life, or good psychological functioning.

Martin Seligman’s PERMAH model (Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishments, Health) also provides a helpful framework for thinking about what contributes to human flourishing.

Patrick and colleagues (2024) highlight the importance of fostering positive relationships in schools, active wellbeing teams, leaders addressing their own wellbeing, building trust within staff, and ongoing initiatives rather than stand-alone wellbeing events. Karnovsky and Gobby (2024) criticise deficit approaches to educator wellbeing that encourage teachers to look after their own wellbeing without addressing systemic and workplace issues “that are complex, institutionalised, entrenched and unlikely to be readily remedied.” The longitudinal Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey (Dicke et al., 2024) continues to show declining principal wellbeing; increasing physical, verbal and cyber attacks against principals; and increasing principal sentiment to leave the role altogether. A recent meeting of Australian Education Ministers focused, in part, on teacher and school leader workload and wellbeing.

Additionally, in Australia, the Closing Loopholes Act, or ‘right to disconnect’ law, now offers an opportunity to reshape workplaces and workplace boundaries. The Act means that an employee may refuse to monitor, read or respond to contact (or attempted contact) from their school or a third party (which could include parents or students) outside of their working hours, unless the refusal is unreasonable. The new right does not stop schools from sending emails to employees outside of work hours, but seeks to protect employees who choose to ignore attempts to be contactable from being disciplined or terminated as a result. Schools can review their communication and collaboration practices, and be clear about how staff are supported to disconnect from work after hours.

Despite the swirling mass of talk about staff wellbeing, context, as always, is Queen. Any attempts to address the wellbeing and flourishing of staff need to be embedded in the school and system context, and to include the voices and participation of staff in that school or system. Schools need to ask their staff what their preferences and concerns are, and work alongside staff to find practical ways to address these.

Taylor and colleagues (2024), point to school climate as key to teacher wellbeing, including staff voice in school decision making, work autonomy, good teacher-student relationships, feelings of belonging with the school, and sufficient resources to carry out duties. At my school, in response to a range of staff feedback and the work of our Staff Wellbeing Committee, we are undertaking a process of reviewing and refining our policies, practices and resourcing with a view to how these impact our staff, their workloads, their sense of purpose, their experience of joy, their professional satisfaction, and their emotions about work.

Our school is dedicated to creating a safe and nurturing environment that prioritises the safety and wellbeing of all individuals, treats staff as trusted professionals, and attempts to flexibly and compassionately address individual staff circumstance, and facilitate staff autonomy and growth. Open communication is key to individualising flexible work options that balance empathy, compassion and flexibility, with accountability, high standards and practicality.

We have released our first go at a ‘Staff Wellbeing and Flexible Working Guidelines’ document that makes explicit the school’s approach to supporting staff wellbeing, and outlines flexible work options, while acknowledging that each staff member’s personal circumstances is different, and there is no ‘one size fits all’. These guidelines are an iterative work in progress and will evolve alongside ongoing opportunities for staff to provide honest, respectful feedback to inform decision making.

When speaking about school culture, I have often referred to the words of Peter Drucker (‘Culture eats Strategy for breakfast’), Herb Kelleher (‘Culture is what people do when no one is looking’), and David Morrison (‘The standard you walk past is the standard you accept’). Recently I came across this from Bill Marklein: “Culture is how employees’ hearts and stomachs feel about Monday morning on Sunday night.”

In schools we need to be asking ourselves: How can we all contribute to cultivating an environment where everyone–students and staff–looks forward to coming in on Monday morning? How might we foster cultures and practices in which we celebrate our purpose, find the joy in our work, and think creatively about schools as places of learning, caring, leading and working?

References

Dicke, T., Kidson, P., & Marsh, H. W. (2024), Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey: 2023 data, Institute for Positive Psychology and Education, Australian Catholic University

Karnovsky, S., & Gobby, B. (2024). ‘How teacher wellbeing can be cruel: refusing discourses of wellbeing in an online Reddit forum’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 1-19.

OECD. (2013). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Wellbeing. OECD Publishing.

Patrick, P., Reupert, A., Berger, E., Morris, Z., Diamond, Z., Hammer, M., … & Fathers, C. (2024). ‘Initiatives for promoting educator wellbeing: a Delphi study’. BMC psychology, 12.

Taylor, L., Zhou, W., Boyle, L., Funk, S., & De Neve, J-E. (2024). Wellbeing for Schoolteachers (Report No. 2). International Baccalaureate Organisation.

Why a girls’ school?

Posted on by
Reply
Source: justDIYteam, pixabay

Schools in Australia offer parents plenty of choice, and when choosing a school for their child there are many questions parents might ask about a school. Is the school culture one based in shared values? Are the teaching, academic opportunities and learning outcomes of high quality? Do pastoral structures and programs cater for the wellbeing of students? Is the school community one with which the family feels aligned and that promotes belonging? Are the sizes of the school and classes conducive to the level of care the child needs? Is the school committed to valuing and catering for each child?

With the Australian news currently publishing stories about some schools changing from single sex to co-education (mostly boys’ schools becoming co-ed), a question that is yet again in the limelight is: which is better, single sex education or co-education? I reflect below on the reasons that single sex education for girls and young women plays a vital role in serving the wellbeing and educational needs of our girls.

Schools are segments of society and the wider community, and, as pointed out by advocates of co-education, a mixed-gender environment does replicate our world. However, that means it can also replicate the inequities of the world into which our girls enter, post-school.

The 2023 United Nations’ Gender Snapshot points out some worrying figure for girls and women, including the following.

  • At the current rate of progress, the next generation of women will spend on average 2.3 more hours per day on unpaid care and domestic work than men.
  • Globally women hold 26.7% seats in parliament, 35.5% in local government and 28.2% of management positions in the workplace.
  • Women are twice as likely as men to report instances of discrimination based on sex and almost twice as likely as men to experience discrimination on the basis of marital status.

The 2023 Global Gender Gap Index places Australia as:

  • 29th for Political Empowerment;
  • 38th for Economic Participation and Opportunity;
  • 78th for Educational Attainment; and
  • 89th for Health and Survival.

Australia is ranked 71st in the world for women’s income as compared with men’s, and 53rd for wage equality for similar work. In Australia, the gender pay gap is 15%, and 34% of board positions are made up of women. The OurWatch website cites terrifying statistics about violence against women in Australia, including that 39% of women have experienced violence since the age of 15.

These sobering figures demonstrate that the gender gap in power, leadership, earnings, domestic labour, and violence remains entrenched. Bridge (2022) writes:

“We will not find gender justice by replicating the injustices and inequalities of society in our schools, and until we can reach equality our girls simply become collateral damage.”

There is a range of research demonstrating the benefits for girls of single sex education. A South Australian study by the Commissioner for Children and Young People (Connolly, 2022) found that girls reported that teachers use female students to moderate and monitor the behaviour of boys, including being asked to sit between boys to disrupt interactions between them, as well as taking boys to the principal’s office when they have ‘done something wrong’. The report found that school policies can promote the message to girls that boys can’t manage their own behaviour and that girls are responsible for the behaviour of their male peers. It additionally found that girls and young women in co-ed schools feel anxiety about playing sports at school. Sadker and Zittleman (2009) assert that in co-educational classes, boys have been found to get more of a teacher’s attention; and that boys are more likely to volunteer and to call out, while girls who know the answer are more likely to wait to be called on. When girls feel safe, Sadker and Zittleman say, girls are more likely to speak up in class and less likely to minimise themselves or ‘play dumb’. Bleidorn et al.’s (2015) study across 48 countries found significant gender gaps in self-esteem, with males consistently reporting higher self-esteem than females. Franklin and Rangel (2022) found that girls attending all-girls schools outperformed their peers at coeducational schools in mathematics and science.

As the principal of a girls’ school, I see first-hand every day the benefits of single-sex education for girls and young women. Earlier this year, I wrote about my observations, including that girls at my school tell me they can ‘come as they are’. Students say they feel they can be themselves, express themselves, and be accepted for themselves. Single sex education can disrupt gender norms, providing safe spaces for girls to grow and develop, and encouraging girls to take up space, to make space and to see spaces for themselves in those arenas not traditionally dominated by girls and women. Girls in single-sex education contexts are more likely to view the STEM domain as a female one, and to speak more positively about their STEM learning experiences (Robinson et al., 2021). Thompson’s (2003) research found that girls’ school environments led to girls selecting post-school pathways beyond those traditionally seen as ‘female’. She notes that:

“There appears to be something about the all-female high school environment that socialises women to more feminist gender role attitudes. Girls may be socialised differently in an all-female environment where girls are the top students and leaders, and where school  personnel  are  proactive in resisting  the traditional gender system. Perhaps the absence of boys encourages girls to focus more on careerist goals and less on romance and popularity.” (p.272)

Girls’ schools are designed intentionally for girls and young women. Gendered assumptions and pressures are deliberately disrupted, and female leadership, voice, ambition, and achievement are normalised. Leadership development is strongly tied to increasing self-confidence (Fitzgerald & Schutte, 2010). The Australian ‘Hands Up for Gender Equality’ study (Fitzsimmons et al., 2018) found that those activities that most develop confidence and efficacy in young people and 1) travel, 2) team sport, 3) leadership experience, and 4) leadership education. Girls in girls’ schools are the leaders, leadership is purposefully developed, wellbeing and curricular programs are tailored to girls, and participation in all arenas—including sports and STEM—is encouraged.

All schools are responsible for creating environments where young people feel safe from discrimination and violence, are accepted as and comfortable to be themselves, can focus on their education, and are supported to achieve their best. Each child is an individual with their own gifts and needs, and girls’ schools provide a safe, intentionally-designed environment in which our girls can and do flourish.

References

Bleidorn, W., Arslan, R. C., Denissen, J. J. A., Rentfrow, P. J., Gebauer, J. E., Potter, J., & Gosling, S. D. (2016). Age and gender differences in self-esteem—A cross-cultural window. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(3), 396–410.

Bridge, L. (2022). Girls should not be collateral damage in the push for co-ed schooling. EducationHQ online.https://educationhq.com/news/girls-should-not-be-collateral-damage-in-the-push-for-co-ed-schooling-125714/

Connolly, H. Commissioner for Children and Young People, South Australia (2022). Stereotypes and Sexism: the views  and experiences of SA school students.

Fitzsimmons, T. W., Yates, M. S., & Callan, V. (2018). Hands Up for Gender Equality: A Major Study into Confidence and Career Intentions of Adolescent Girls and Boys. The University of Queensland.

Franklin, D & Rangel, VS 2022, ‘Estimating the Effect of Single-Sex Education on Girls’ Mathematics and Science Achievement’, Leadership and Policy in Schools, vol. ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print, pp. 1–18.

Robinson, D. B., Mitton, J., Hadley, G., & Kettley, M. 2021. ‘Single-sex education in the 21st century: A 20-year scoping review of the literature’, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 106, pp. 103462-.

Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. R. (2009). Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it. Simon and Schuster.

Thompson, J. S. (2003). The effect of single-sex secondary schooling on women’s choice of college major. Sociological Perspectives, 46(2), 257-278.

UN Women and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2023). Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2023.

World Economic Forum. (2023). Gender Gap Index Report.

Valuing growth

Posted on by
Reply
Source: @sannebaan via pixabay

At my school we recently undertook a review of our school values. Students and staff generated values, which were synthesised into themes, and then voted on by the students and staff. One of the values that emerged from this process was ‘Growth’. Despite recent years bringing the importance of wellbeing, and the connection between learning and wellbeing, into sharp focus, this value reminds us of the need to continue to strive and to grow. Being well is about more than comfort and ease of existence. It encompasses physical, emotional, social, cognitive and spiritual wellbeing. It includes purpose, belonging, sense of self, and and feelings of happiness, joy, hope and satisfaction. Being well means living well, and of living a life of positive contribution.

Valuing growth reminds us that those experiences that transform us are often those that require some struggle. My PhD research into professional learning, and my experience of the PhD journey, revealed the power of experiences of discomfort to create a shift within us, to change our beliefs and practices, to develop our resilience, and to see challenge as an opportunity to grow with grace and humility. Wellbeing can be built on a foundation of challenges faced and overcome. ‘I did it!’ realisations can lead to future thoughts of ‘I can’t do it yet, but I will persevere’. We learn over time that working through problems (cognitive, emotional, social, or physical) reaps rewards.

I recently attended a session by Adjunct Professor Erica McWilliam AM in which she quoted Michael Foley from his book The Age of Absurdity (2010):

“Difficulty has become repugnant because it denies entitlement, disenchants potential, limits mobility and flexibility, delays gratification, distracts from distraction and demands responsibility, commitment, attention and thought.” (p.113)

McWilliam observes that parents and teachers can, with good intentions, rush in and rescue young people too soon, and that doing so deprives them of the pleasure of rigour and the satisfaction of wrestling with complexity. Young people do not thrive when protected from difficulty. Rather, they benefit from being given the space and opportunity to be challenged. McWilliam asserts that our young people need to learn ‘strategic independence’, and she argues that schools and teachers should avoid the seduction of providing environments which are low challenge and low threat, with too many opportunities to retreat from what feels hard or uncomfortable.

The notion of a high challenge, high support environment, as optimal for learning and wellbeing, resonates with the concept from developmental psychology of a ‘holding environment’. Each individual benefits from being ‘well held’ in a nurturing and safe environment, and simultaneously supported to rise to challenges and to take risks.

Grit and a growth mindset appear in the recent World Economic Forum (WEF) white paper on ‘The Education 4.0 Taxonomy’, which outlines those abilities, skills attitudes, values, knowledge and information that students need for their futures. The WEF calls Education 4.0 an approach to reimagining education in a way that is inclusive, focuses on a broad range of skills to prepare learners for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and leverages technological and pedagogical innovation to put learners at the centre of learning. This last part is key: learners at the centre of learning.

The Taxonomy identifies the following elements as essential for future life, learning and work: Creativity; Critical thinking; Digital skills and programming; Problem solving; Systems analysis; Collaboration; Communication; Negotiation; Socio-emotional awareness; Physical balance, coordination, positional awareness, strength; Adaptability; Conscientiousness; Curiosity; Grit; Growth mindset; Initiative; Civic responsibility; Environmental stewardship; Empathy and kindness; Global citizenship; and Discipline-specific knowledge. These elements bring together knowledge, skills, dispositions, and a focus on compassion, inclusion, citizenship, social justice, technology and the environment.

The WEF identifies four teaching and learning domains on which schools and education systems can focus to develop the above elements. These are:

  • personalised and self-paced learning that engages each individual student’s context and interests, elicits engagement, and promotes active learning;
  • accessible and inclusive learning that embraces multilingual and multicultural learning opportunities, teaches the values of cultural competence, and enables access to learners across abilities and backgrounds;
  • problem-based and collaborative learning including experiential learning and service-based learning, which connects students with their communities, fosters awareness of political issues and social needs, cultivates the attitudes and values pertaining to global citizenship and civic responsibility, and promotes an understanding of interdependence in a group setting and personal accountability to the group; and
  • lifelong and student-driven learning within, and beyond, the formal classroom setting.

Being a lifelong learner who values growth mans being open to, and excited about, continuous growth and incremental improvement. It can mean working hard, being curious, sitting with discomfort, seeking to enjoy working through complexity, and seeing mistakes as learning moments. Parents and teachers can set an example of what growth throughout our lives can look like. We can give the young people in our care the space and support to grow enough so that we are increasingly redundant, and they fly on their own as independent, self-authoring people committed to their own journeys of growth.

Threads of 2022: Wellbeing, inclusion and agency

Posted on by
3
Source: Mick Haupt via unsplash.com

2022 has been a year in which we have immersed ourselves in deep reflection on the realities of the present, and pushed ourselves to think radically and realistically about the possibilities of the future.

The realities have been largely distressing: pandemics, war, climate events, economic instability, rising inflation, financial stress, skills shortages, and threats to democracy. Concerns about climate change, geopolitical turbulence, and health, abound. Technologies are providing risk and opportunity. Some professions are in crisis, while some industries are reinventing ways of working and pioneering hybrid alternatives.

In 2022, schools dealt with huge amounts of staff absence, largely from Covid-19, as well as significant profession-wide teacher shortages, and increasing student and staff wellbeing concerns. We have also seen young people and school staff rise to meet challenges, and hope-full conversations, research, and practice interventions at local, national and global levels.

The wellbeing of students remains paramount, with schools implementing multi-layered approaches to equipping students to lead fulfilling and flourishing lives. Many schools have been busy reviewing or introducing strengthened wellbeing programs, as well as bolstering human resources to support students’ physical, emotional, and relational wellbeing. Initiatives that focus on service to others are being integrated with work that focuses on knowledge of and care for self.

The wellbeing of staff, too, remains a top priority for schools. The ‘great resignation’ and ‘quiet quitting’ trends of the last couple of years have employees in all sectors asking themselves why they are doing the work they do, and what their alternatives might be. With teacher shortages and crises of teacher recruitment and retention, the workload and workforce conditions of teachers have been under the spotlight. At an education policy level, well-meaning but insufficient solutions have been tabled, such as reviewing initial teacher education (again), paying some teachers more, and providing pre-made teaching resources and lesson plans in an attempt to ‘unburden’ teachers of some of their work.

Schools have been digging deep into their cultures. They have been moving beyond bolt-on wellbeing initiatives and viewing wellbeing as a solely individual pursuit, to working on the complexities of community, belonging, and meaning, as ways to envisage and address wellbeing. Schools are focusing on clear strategic priorities, combined with cultures in which each person is supported as an individual who valued for who they are while being nestled as part of a connected whole.

Those of us leading in schools have been increasingly considering how we can make our workplaces sites of connection, purpose, wellness, and hope. This might be through considering the administrative burden on teachers and seeing what can be taken away – such as subject report comments, expectations of extensive written feedback on every assessment, and co-curricular expectations. Many schools have attempted to streamline communication through platforms such as Teams in an effort to stem the unmanageable firehose of emails. Parent teacher interviews, information evenings, and other meetings, have often moved online to enhance flexibility and accessibility. Some schools are building meeting times into the school day, rather than holding these after school hours. Schools are implementing responsive learning technologies, automated marking and feedback systems, and collaborative planning technologies. Reducing the number of summative assessments, and increasing student ownership over reflection and feedback on formative tasks, is one way to simultaneously support learning and reduce teacher workload.

As we watch corporate sectors reimagining their workplaces in ways that allow increasing flexibility for workers, the school as workplace is also being reconsidered, albeit more slowly. Some schools and systems have been generous in their leave policies and leave conditions, while others have been unable to do so due to financial constraints. Professional learning budgets are being spent on providing time for meaningful planning and collaboration, and on coaching and mentoring, as well as on opportunities for networking and connecting with those beyond the school gates and local community. While school timetables are notoriously inflexible, schools are considering how to allow staff more flexibility about how and where they work. It isn’t yet usually possible to offer teachers regular ‘working from home’ days. However, within the available parameters many schools are negotiating job-share and attractive part-time arrangements for teachers.

A focus on student and staff wellbeing has been bolstered by a focus on inclusion and agency. Education organisations have been interrogating the inclusivity of their language, physical spaces, policies, and practices. A focus on addressing the diverse needs of learners has led to continued work in differentiation and appropriate adjustments. Many schools are engaged in exciting work on increasingly one-size-fits-one approaches to learning, to success pathways, and to ways of demonstrating achievement. Students and staff are being offered opportunities for meaningful collaboration and a voice in positive change. Personalisation, voice, and choice, are being increasingly woven into the fabric of learning, leading, and working.

As we move towards the end of 2022, and into 2023, wellbeing, inclusion, and agency will continue to be issues with which schools grapple.

Feedback to maximise student progress and minimise teacher workload

Posted on by
2
Source: pixabay @Darkmoon_Art

Giving meaningful feedback to students is a key lever for improving student progress, and also a primary draw on teacher time. On the latest episode of my podcast, The Edu Salon, I discuss feedback with Professor Dylan Wiliam, including what feedback is most likely to be effective for student learning, and how feedback practices can address issues of teacher workload. Dylan reminds us that feedback is not to improve the work, but to improve the learner. It should not be a post-mortem dissection of past work, but rather provide understandable information about, and incite action towards, how to improve next time. For feedback to be effective, the student needs to engage with it, reflect on it, seek to understand it, and act on it.

Teachers employ a range of feedback strategies such as: marking and annotating student work; whole-class feedback through markers’ reports unpacking trends and patterns; marking keys showing what correct or good answers include; rubrics that describe what students can do and the next level of achievement; exemplars of student work to illustrate what good responses looks like; and videos of student practical or performed work for students to reflect upon. Teachers work towards provision and processes of feedback that allow students to do the thinking around feedback, rather than merely emotively reacting to a mark. This might be by protecting time for students to process and act on feedback, withholding marks until the student has acted on feedback, or providing opportunities for students to re-do tasks.

This week, I returned the marked mid-year examination to my Year 12 Literature class. This is a deliberately slow and intentional process that takes at least one lesson. First, I explain to students that what I am least interested in is the mark they received, and what I am most interested in is what they can learn in order to make improvements between now and their next exam. Then, the students receive the written reflection proforma, exam paper, and markers’ report (outlining the marking key and the whole-cohort feedback). Then, students reflect in writing about what they learned through their experience of revising, preparing for, and sitting the exam. For instance, was the exam paper what they expected? Were they adequately prepared? Were they familiar with the terminology and concepts of the questions? Did their exam strategy and time management work well, or would these benefit from adjustments? Next, students receive their annotated papers and build on their reflection. What were their strengths? On what could they improve? What could they do and what will they do between now and the next exam?

Once students have reflected as much as possible, shown me their reflection, and we have had a one-on-one conversation about their learnings and planned actions, they receive the rubrics that include their marks, as well as indicating where they went well and less well in addressing the criteria. They then complete their written reflection and upload a summary of what they did well, and what action they will take to improve. In the lessons following (and/or between lessons at other scheduled times), I make time to speak to each individual student about their understanding of the feedback, what they have done well, and how to best invest their time to improve. Students often re-write their least successful response, or set a plan for practising responses to questions and revising content.

Giving feedback, as important as it is, should be manageable for the teacher. In Western Australia, the curriculum authority is moving towards a rule of no more than eight assessments across the year (including examinations) for Year 11 and 12 courses. The move to fewer summative assessments is encouraging teachers to assess less, find alternate ways of gauging student understanding, and teach explicit revision strategies to support students being assessed on multiple topics studied over time, rather than topic by topic as they are taught and learned. (Also listen to the podcast episode for discussion of how to leverage students’ cognitive architecture to make the most of long term and working memory.) A bonus is that teachers and students feel less like they are hurtling from assessment to assessment, and more like time is spent learning, revisiting, and reflecting.

Fewer assessments for students to complete means fewer assessments to mark, and potentially more time for students to engage with feedback. Spending time on students working to understand feedback is crucial for student progress and also means that all the hard work teachers put into providing feedback is understood and utilised by the learner. In the podcast episode, Dylan discusses his suggestion that teachers do ‘four quarters marking’: about 25% marking in detail, 25% skim marking to inform teaching, 25% teacher-monitored student self-assessment, and 25% peer assessment. (You can read more about this approach in Carl Hendrick and Robin MacPherson’s 2019 book What Does This Look Like in the Classroom?) This is likely to be an approach that challenges traditional practices and expectations of students, parents, teachers, and school leaders. It is, however, a provocation that reminds us to consider how our feedback practices engage the student as self-regulated learner committed to continuous improvement. As Dylan says in the podcast episode: “Good feedback works towards its own redundancy.”

Key concepts for leading professional learning

Posted on by
2

A recent report purports to dispel myths about professional learning, including the apparent ‘commonly held’ beliefs that ‘professional learning is a waste of time and money’ and that ‘districts should implement research-based PL programs with no modifications’. These claims run counter to much literature around professional learning which argues that effective professional learning is a lever for improving student learning and achievement by improving teaching, and that context is crucial for any education model (and that therefore any model should be tailor fit to context).

This week I presented to a group of school leaders about leading professional learning. Part of my preparation for the presentation took me back to the roots of my work in this space, and those concepts I have come across that have stuck with me, become part of my thinking, and continue to anchor my work. I explain some of these below, in addition to others I discussed on the day, such as trust, context, teacher expertise, and teacher agency, self-determination and self-efficacy.

HOLONOMY

Holonomy is an ecological concept that has captured my attention for years, drawing together the individual and the larger system. Art Costa and Bob Garmston (2015) base their conception of holonomy on Arthur Koestler’s work around the word ‘holon’ as something which operates simultaneously as a part and a whole. Holonomy encapsulates the simultaneity that each person is both an independent individual and an interdependent part of the larger system, at once self-regulating, responsive to the organisation, and able to influence those around them.

This speaks to me of what we must consider when leading professional learning: balancing the needs of the individual and the needs of the organisation or system.

HOLDING ENVIRONMENT

Introduced to me through the outstanding work of Ellie Drago-Severson on leading adult learning, is the notion of the ‘holding environment’. With its roots in Donald Winnicott’s psychology concept, this is an environment of psychological safety in which members of the community or organisation feel ‘held’ in a culture of high care and high challenge.

Ellie was the first to really challenge me to consider how we honour where each adult learner is at, differentiate learning for adults in schools, and take an invitational, growth-focused approach to professional learning.

MEANINGFUL COLLABORATION

In Chapter 4 of Transformational Professional Learning, I explore that 1) collaboration does not happen by calling a group of people a ‘team’, or by organising for a group of people to be in a room together; and 2) feeling good working with colleagues is not professionally learning. Politeness, compliance, avoidance, and silence may make for an easy, harmonious-feeling meeting, but do not result in rigorous collective work that moves individual, team and organisation forward.

Rather, collaboration occurs when there is a clear shared purpose, collective accountability, collaborative norms, a focus on data to inform, and protocols for collaborative ways of working. Taking the time to create the conditions for skillful collaboration, to structure and nurture intentional collaborative practices, and to develop people’s skills in graceful disagreement and productive conflict, facilitates meaningful collaborative opportunities that develop teachers and positively impact students.

SEMANTIC SPACE

The importance of language is explored by Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey (2001), and Bob Garmston and Bruce Wellman (2016). The notion of semantic space—‘how we talk around here’—is outlined by Stephen Kemmis and Hannu Heikkinen (2012), and Rachel Lofthouse and Elaine Hall (2014).

Talk defines and drives emotions, relationships, belonging and action. Talk is a terrific barometer of professional culture, allowing us insights into beliefs, values and behaviours. We can ask: What are the staff water cooler conversations like at our school? How do we collectively talk about our work and practice? What questions do we ask? What contributions do we make? What shared language, and ways of speaking and listening, do we use? How do we talk around here?

In a recent episode of my podcast, The Edu Salon, Adam Voigt says: “The language that the leaders of a culture use, shapes the kids that grow in it, and they leave speaking that way as a result. If you’re looking to transform culture you can’t do it without changing words.”

I have this year written on my office whiteboard something I remember Rachel Lofthouse saying at a conference in 2017:

The talk is the work.

We need to value, focus on, create space for, and put effort, intentionality, time, and learning, into the talk in our schools.

References

Costa, A. L., & Garmston, R. J. (2006). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for Renaissance schools (2nd ed.). Heatherton, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.

Drago-Severson, E. (2004). Becoming adult learners: Principles and practices for effective development. Teachers College Press.

Garmston, R. J., & Wellman, B. M. (2016). The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing collaborative groups. Rowman & Littlefield.

Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2001). How the way we talk can change the way we work: Seven languages for transformation. John Wiley & Sons.

Kemmis, S., & Heikkinen, H. L. (2012). Future perspectives: Peer-group mentoring and international practices for teacher development. In Peer-group mentoring for teacher development (pp. 160-186). Routledge.

Lofthouse, R., & Hall, E. (2014). Developing practices in teachers’ professional dialogue in England: Using coaching dimensions as an epistemic tool. Professional Development in Education, 40(5), 758-778.

Netolicky, D. M. (2019). Transformational professional learning: Making a difference in schools. Routledge.

What matters in education: Reflecting on Flip the System Australia in 2022

Posted on by
Reply

I was invited to speak today as part of the Future Schools webinar series. In particular, I was asked to engage with the notion of flipping the education system, based in my work in co-editing the 2019 book Flip the System Australia: What Matters in Education.

That was then

Even though today’s conversation was for a group interested in future schools and the future of schooling, thinking about it required me to reflect back to 2018, when much of the work of the Flip the System Australia book was being done. Back then, my co-editors—Jon Andrews and Cameron Paterson—and I were experiencing the then- educational environment of measurement and surveillance. This included a distrust of schools and teachers, heightened accountabilities according to quantifiable measurables in education, policy rhetoric about educational quality assurance and effectiveness, competitive comparisons of performance in high stakes standardised tests, and a push for teachers to do ‘what works’ according to simplified and dehumanised lists of apparent best practice (although, as Dylan Wiliam says, everything works somewhere, and nothing works everywhere).

Our book built upon the Flip the System books that came before ours (from the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK) and sought to value and promote a diverse range of voices in education talking about what matters (or what should matter), over what works. We argued for the humanising of educational narratives, the democratising of educational policy and practice, and the development of deep and sustained trust in the teaching profession.

Teachers’ being and becoming

My Flip the System Australia chapter argues for elevating the professional identities and voices of teachers and school leaders in educational research, practice, and policymaking. In the chapter, I explore the quantifying and performative measuring of teacher work as limiting the complexities of that work and reducing teacher identities to a limited range of options. I define identity in my book Transformational Professional Learning as “the situated, ongoing process through which we make sense of ourselves, to ourselves and others” (p.19). It is a constant, context-embedded process of being and becoming, with professional identities inextricably linked to personal identities; we are our whole selves at work, and our lives influence our teaching.

Teaching as a performance disconnected from identity and purpose is unsustainable. Teachers need to feel that their identities are aligned with the purpose of the profession, with shared school values, and with their daily work. Rather than being required to fit themselves to a school, teachers need to feel that they truly belong in a school community in which they share a common moral purpose and are valued for their individual selves, including their gifts and imperfections.

Embracing authenticity and embedding inclusive practices are becoming increasingly important in schools. More than that, as Jelmer Evers wrote in the Foreword to our Australian book, a shared professional identity can transcend borders and nationalities, and can form the basis of reinventing democracy and our schools.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

A focus on the humanity and the positive contribution of education to the lives of all young people remains the core purpose of education. In Flip the System Australia, Carol Campbell describes the purpose of education as “the betterment of humanity” (p.81). In my chapter, I say that “education is not an algorithm but a human endeavour” (p.16). The betterment and care of each child, and thereby the betterment of humanity, includes supporting children to be their best, most agentic and self-determining selves, able to make positive contributions to their communities and to the world.

In Australia, the 2019 Alice Springs Education Declaration, and before it the 2008 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians, expressed two key goals:

  • Goal 1: The Australian education system promotes excellence and equity; and
  • Goal 2: All young Australians become: confident and creative individuals; successful lifelong learners; and active and informed members of the community.

Yet Australia remains far from an education system that promotes, for all young Australians, excellence and equity.

Melitta Hogarth’s Flip the System Australia chapter reveals the contradictory nature of policies and practices that appear to be unbiased, but that perpetuate conservative, colonial values, and the silencing of Indigenous voices in education. She argues for Indigenous representation at every level of education leadership and decision making in Australia. Kevin Lowe in his chapter argues for collaborative, productive engagement between schools and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. There remains ongoing disadvantage for Indigenous Australian children, in terms of education, social and health outcomes. Systemic inequities have been exacerbated by the pandemic and compounded by Western-centric curriculum and biased measures of educational success.

In Chapter 11 of Flip the System Australia, Andy Hargreaves, Shaneé Washington and Michael O’Connor shared findings on teacher wellbeing that now read as a prelude to the intensification of workload and the impacts of the pandemic that have followed. They commented that “teachers feel they are losing control over their professional decisions, … they are being asked to carry the mounting social problems of the world on their own shoulders, and, in the midst of all these things, they feel constrained and compromised by competencies and assessments they do not always believe in” (p.101). Their chapter asserts that there is no student wellbeing without teacher wellbeing. Since that chapter was written, wellbeing has escalated, making its way up the education agenda. Educators have been reminded of something we have always known that now needs our careful attention and action: that wellbeing is inseparably joined with learning and achievement.

This is now

Flipping the system is about flattening and democratising education. Three years on from the publication of Flip the System Australia, the world is facing unremitting and overlapping crises. We only need to turn on the news to see that our planet and democracy remain in peril. In education, governments are enacting fast policy (with teachers and school leaders often hearing about each new policy twist and turn during a press conference), with schools then quickly implementing the changing guidelines and protocols.

Although there are frightening data around teacher and school leader burnout and retention challenges, teachers and school leaders remain incredibly committed to serving their communities, through the most difficult of circumstances. There has been the need for, and therefore the rise of, school and teacher autonomy during the pandemic, as educators have made context-embedded decisions about what their students and communities need, and how to best work to meet these needs.

Schools have been revealed as places of connectedness, relationality, socialisation, and community, as well as learning. The last couple of years have led schools to develop innovative uses of educational technologies, flexible post-secondary pathways for students, and generous networks of educators collaborating together across countries and sectors to share, support and grow alongside one another. Effective leading has been shown to be an authentic practice of care and hope. Those working in schools have been literally changing education from the ground up, which was the catch cry of the original Flip the System book by Jelmer Evers and René Kneyber.

Who cares about pracademia?

Posted on by
1

Today I was part of an Educational Leadership Special Interest Group panel at the Australian Association of Education Research (AARE) 2021 conference, entitled, ‘Do we need pracademics?’ Fiona Longmuir was the moderator, and guest panellists were Scott Eacott, Virginia Moller, Dorothy Andrews and me.

The panel addressed questions such as:

  • Do we need pracademics?
  • Is labelling people ‘pracademics’ divisive and reductive, or full of productive possibility?
  • Do we care about pracademia?
  • To what extent might pracademia develop or dilute the rigour of scholarship and practice?
  • What role might pracademia play in the field of educational leadership specifically?

There was general agreement that the terms ‘pracademia’ and ‘pracademic’ require definitional clarity, and that a conversation about pracademia is worth having and worth continuing.

Scott challenged the motivations of those who might self-identify as pracademics, and suggested a focus on the inclusion of voices.

I explored the work I have done with Trista Hollweck and Paul Campbell (Hollweck et al., 2021, as our most thorough example) in defining and exploring the space of pracademia and the notion of an individual as a pracademic. For me, pracademia is about doing good work and about valuable networks and constructive collaboration between educators across and between education spaces.

Virginia described her role as ambiguous, complex and frowned upon, and explained that she was trying the identity of ‘pracademic’ on for size, to see if it fits. This notion of identity work, outsider-ness, and the nature of pracademic community is something I have heard from others who feel that their boundary spanning work is not valued or acknowledged in their professional contexts.

Dorothy challenged us to consider we needed to ‘just get over it’, and—as David Gurr suggested in the chat bar—do good work regardless of in what sphere someone works or what professional label is attached to them.

I asked the question about whether our systems and structures might be reimagined to allow for the valuing of work in multiple spaces.

Virginia and Scott discussed the notion of co-design between those in the academe and those in practice spaces. I mentioned the gap that Trista, Paul and I have noted around the need for policy to be explored more fully in the space of pracademia.

As in the other pracademia-focused conference panels and symposia of which I have been a part, the discussion was rich, energising, and resulted in calls from panellists and the audience for further exploration.

I will leave you with an excerpt from the final paragraph of our paper for the Journal of Professional Capacity and Community Special Issue (‘Pracademia: Exploring the possibilities, power and politics of boundary-spanners straddling the worlds of practice and scholarship’) we co-edited, that is mostly available via EarlyCite:

“The pandemic showed the possibilities of what collaboration between and working across multiple spaces in a field can accomplish. The concept of pracademia, and of working as a pracademic across and between spaces, suggests that we may be able to reimagine boundaries, fields, and roles in education and in other fields. For the work of pracademia to be sustainable, the space between practice and academia needs to be valued in terms of legitimacy, credibility, and even paid work. … Embracing the concept of pracademia may go some way to dissolving traditional dualisms of spaces that educators operate within, and increasingly across. It may be part of liquefying boundaries, so that rather than boundary spanning or boundary crossing, educators move back and forth along the Möbius-strip-style  continuum  comprising  the  multiplicities  of  research, practice, and policy. It may be engaging in multiple modes, spaces, and communities that open up learning, knowledge exchange, and mobilization of ideas and practices. It may be structural affordances from schools, universities, and policy bodies such as time, resources, avenues for recognition, and institutional support. For we authors, exploring and embedding ourselves in the identities and communities of pracademia is about making a positive difference in education; advocating for empowerment beyond the often-rigid structures, expectations and silos; and encouraging a valuing of alternate networks, contributions, and influences.” (Hollweck, Netolicky, & Campbell, 2021)

Preparing students for their future

Posted on by
1
source: @Jordan_Singh ipixabay.com

We absolutely need innovation in education, but does schooling need evolution or a revolution? There are those who advocate for small steps towards improving schools and systems, and those who call for dissolution of current systems and the birth of an almost unrecognisable education system. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we have become keenly aware of the social, relational, and economic roles that schools play in communities. We have seen the possibilities of remote learning and working, and also been reminded of the benefits of being humans in a space together. The optimal approach seems to one of hybridity and flexibility of when, where and how we learn, that harnesses technologies for clear and collaborative purposes.

Recently, UNESCO released its Reimagining our futures together: a new social contract for education report. The current context it describes is reminiscent of what I outline in the introduction to Future Alternatives for Educational Leadership: a planet in peril, democracy under threat, technologies presenting possibilities and problems, and a citizenry engaging in advocacy and activism.

The report calls for less teacher-driven teaching, less individual ranking and sorting of students, and less compartmentalising of curriculum. It argues for curriculum that is ecological, intercultural and interdisciplinary, and pedagogy focused on student agency and collaboration, rather than competition.

“Reimagining the future together calls for pedagogies that foster cooperation and solidarity. How we learn must be determined by why and what we learn. A foundational commitment to teaching and advancing human rights means that we must respect the rights of the learner. We must create occasions for people to learn from one another and value one another across all lines of difference whether of gender, religion, race, sexual identity, social class, disability, nationality, etc. Respecting the dignity of people means teaching them to think for themselves, not what or how to think. This means creating opportunities for students to discover their own sense of purpose and to determine what will be a flourishing life for them. At the same time, we collectively need to build a world where such lives can be realized and this means collaborating to build capacities to improve the world.” p.50

Schools are exploring these ideas in their own contexts, including flexible learning for students, student voice and choice in their learning, a range of learning pathways, and the building of learner portfolios, profiles and passports.

At my school, we have redesigned the secondary timetable for 2022 in order to align with our strategic priorities around learning and wellbeing, and also to make room and protect time for those things we know are important, but perhaps not mandated or measured. This includes a focus on health and wellbeing. It also includes the launch of Future Ready programs for students in Years 6-10, designed to support students in their development as lifelong autonomous learners and active compassionate citizens. Our Future Ready programs are underpinned by the Australian General Capabilities and Cross-curriculum Priorities, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and our school’s research-informed Learner Attributes.

In education we often talk about a focus on differentiation, personalisation, and agency. What I am finding most liberating as I work with staff to plan our Future Ready programs for their 2022 launch, is that these operate outside of the mandated curriculum and are not assessed or reported on in traditional ways. As a result, we can wholeheartedly focus on designing learning that supports students to follow their passions, initiate learning projects, design learning processes, and engage in solutions to authentic problems. We are free to focus on learning intentions, the role of the student in their learning, and student engagement and agency. We are embedding meaningful micro-credentials and life skills. We are considering the role of technologies for teaching, but more importantly for student learning, communication, collaboration, and creation. We are designing programs around what students need, who they are, who they want to become, and the skills and capabilities that will serve them throughout their lives. More than that, we are creating space for students to explore and experience success, curiosity, joy, and their desire to make the world a better place.

Our new timetable structure and Future Ready programs are not a revolution. They are a small, exciting, context-embedded step forward that allows us to serve our students’ multiple needs – to be simultaneously successful within the current schooling system, healthy flourishing people, and confident contributing citizens, ignited in their moral purpose, and well-prepared for lives of living, learning and leading.

Evidence-based practice for sustainable school change

Posted on by
1
Graphic representation of my keynote presentation, drawn live by Pat Grant

Yesterday I presented the final keynote at the Association of Independent Schools NSW Evidence Institute’s two-day Education Research Symposium: Wrong way go back: A wayfinding approach to evidence-based practice for sustainable school change.

The keynote was based in the current context in which schools are operating; one of relentless global uncertainty, disruption, and disunity. Teachers and school leaders are tasked with working towards change within schools that is meaningful, sustainable, and best serves the current and future needs of our students and communities. So I sought to draw theory and practice together to articulate how I approach school change that sticks, energises, engages critically with evidence, brings the community along, and improves education for the betterment of students.

My keynote explored the metaphor of wayfinding—a purposeful, directive process of determining and adjusting our route between an origin and a destination—as a framework for guiding evidence-based educators. This metaphor is one co-author Claire Golledge and I explored in our recent chapter ‘Wayfinding: Navigating multiple identities for sustainable school leadership’, in the book Future Alternatives for Educational Leadership: Diversity, Inclusion, Equity, and Democracy. While anchoring ourselves in where we are and what previous research can tell us gives us a starting point for our work in schools, change that is meaningful and sustainable needs to also engage in futures thinking and wayfinding practices so that we might navigate the complexities and tensions of the current education landscape.

This presentation provided insights into what it means to be an evidence-informed educator and the definitions, possibilities, and pitfalls of evidence-based practice in education. I recommended Gary Jones’ excellent, sense-making book Evidence-based school leadership and management: A practical guide. I explored how a wayfinding approach to evidence-based practice can allow educators to act with a balance of systematisation and responsiveness, drawing together research and evidence with practice, futures thinking, and deep knowledge of context.

It was wonderful to be part of a line-up of speakers including Christine Grice, Mark Rickinson, Connie Cirkony, Jenny Donovan, Mary Ryan, Pasi Sahlberg, Jim Tognolini and Amy Graham.

My slides are below.