I cannot travel so much anymore, but I am always happy to explore the world around me. At the beginning of this year, I endeavoured to explore Education in 2011!
1) to learn about what Education in Queensland really means in 2011 (I was getting confused at to what the teachers were trying to achieve with my kids), and 2) to perhaps become a secondary school teacher
I have now almost completed the first semester, but I decided that I will not pursue. I have withdrawn from the course on April 30th, the census date before academic penalties apply in case of withdrawal. I did complete all the assignments due, but I will never got the results. It took me a long time to decide if I should pursue or not, but I finally decided on the 30th of April at 19:45 pm that I would leave it it there. I am happy I learned quite a few things; I certainly did not waste that time in evening classes, but I do not see myself as a Secondary School teacher. I do not posses some of the skill I would need, like the entertainment skills, the relentless behaviour management to impose my will on people who 'have to be there', neither the hours outside of school to prepare elaborate interactive, stimulative, multi-purpose, up-to-date lesson plans. I will therefore pursue other interests.
What is important is what I learned in this short journey at the University of Queensland, and I thought I may share with you my Reflective Journal below.
This Reflective Journal was actually one of the assignments sent for the Teaching & Learning subject. This may interest some of you, who have kids in the Qld Education system and may want to understand like me, what teachers are trying to achieve. This may interest my overseas friends who would like to compare Education systems as well, but it looks we are all going in the same direction.
You will not find a criticism, if anything, it is a quest for understanding. I believe that a lot of parents have no idea about what the teachers are trying to achieve.
Avant Première/Intro : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U
(Although this had been presented to us 220 prospective secondary education teachers, in a lecture room at UQ, earlier this year, please take with pinch of salt, especially the ADHD - non specialist argument. It is about current visions on the future of Education.)
What I learned now ...
What is expected from Teachers is
Time of entry - Feb to May 2011
(Please note this is my understanding, this means a mere interpretation of what was presented to me)
1) to learn about what Education in Queensland really means in 2011 (I was getting confused at to what the teachers were trying to achieve with my kids), and 2) to perhaps become a secondary school teacher
I have now almost completed the first semester, but I decided that I will not pursue. I have withdrawn from the course on April 30th, the census date before academic penalties apply in case of withdrawal. I did complete all the assignments due, but I will never got the results. It took me a long time to decide if I should pursue or not, but I finally decided on the 30th of April at 19:45 pm that I would leave it it there. I am happy I learned quite a few things; I certainly did not waste that time in evening classes, but I do not see myself as a Secondary School teacher. I do not posses some of the skill I would need, like the entertainment skills, the relentless behaviour management to impose my will on people who 'have to be there', neither the hours outside of school to prepare elaborate interactive, stimulative, multi-purpose, up-to-date lesson plans. I will therefore pursue other interests.
What is important is what I learned in this short journey at the University of Queensland, and I thought I may share with you my Reflective Journal below.
This Reflective Journal was actually one of the assignments sent for the Teaching & Learning subject. This may interest some of you, who have kids in the Qld Education system and may want to understand like me, what teachers are trying to achieve. This may interest my overseas friends who would like to compare Education systems as well, but it looks we are all going in the same direction.
You will not find a criticism, if anything, it is a quest for understanding. I believe that a lot of parents have no idea about what the teachers are trying to achieve.
Avant Première/Intro : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U
(Although this had been presented to us 220 prospective secondary education teachers, in a lecture room at UQ, earlier this year, please take with pinch of salt, especially the ADHD - non specialist argument. It is about current visions on the future of Education.)
What I learned now ...
What is expected from Teachers is
‘prepare students for continuous learning with clear purpose and connection to the real-world, being critical to developing the capabilities, dispositions and literacy required to participate in society and deal with the complexity of issues and change’ (MCEETYA, 2005, p.5).
In the twenty first century, there has been a major shift from individual learning to learning as part of a community, a classroom community. Team building techniques, problem-solving and cooperative learning should foster and provide such opportunities to learn in a supportive manner. This means that as a teacher, I should move away from didactic teacher-centered models, and become a mentor and facilitator of learner-centered classroom for active learners. Students determine the problem to be solved and use the teacher as a language* and culture resource.
Note: language' or 'a coded system' specialist; whatever the subject is, it is always about codes, systems and conventions, and interestingly enough Maths and Languages are now taught under the banner of 'World of Codes' in the experimental 'learn through computer games' Q2L (Quest to Learn school) - New York school- opened in 2009 by Katie Salen.
The teacher is not there to provide answers but to provide structures and strategies for finding answers. Students are assisted in working out answers for themselves — for example, what to look up in a dictionary — rather than always being given answers. Student also uses her/his imagination and experience. Suitable for ill-defined problems when you have to persist finding solutions, very much like real life problem solving situations when there is not only one clear cut perfect solution, and you need to negotiate your way through ‘the most suitable'.
My Reflective Learning JournalTime of entry - Feb to May 2011
(Please note this is my understanding, this means a mere interpretation of what was presented to me)
First lecture – What is Teaching / what is quality Teaching ?
This week, I reflected on what quality teaching means in the light of dominant learning theories. Three major pieces of research I came across this week inform my understanding of how to teach.
The first one comes from behavioural psychologist, Piaget (1972) who observed that children construct their understanding through interactions with the environment that triggers assimilation and/or accommodation. The second is the theory of constructivism, which places the Learner at the centre of the teaching process, so that learners construct knowledge rather than absorb it. The constructivist idea is expressed as learners using ‘their experiences to actively construct understanding in a way that make sense to them’ (Borich & Tombari, 1997). Lastly, the latest research in neuroscience support this approach, as it emphasises the interactions between an organic environment and the learner’s brain: ‘Rather than thinking of the brain as a computer, the brain is now seen as a far more flexible, self adjusting, ever-changing organism that grows and reshapes itself in response to challenge, with elements that wither through the lack of use’ (Abbott & Ryan, 2001:10).
We also saw two videos of Australian inspiring teachers in class.
How it Relates to my Subject Area
I am not sure yet how this is going to translate in Teaching Languages, but integrating knowledge across subjects sounds like good news to me. In one video, the humanities teacher was good at showing how knowledge can be linked across disciplines, finding ways of integrating knowledge across subjects, making learning relevant. If I can talk with the other subjects teachers, I can find straight away what the students are interested in at a given moment, and build my lessons on their prior knowledge of sophisticated concepts in first language. I could easily use SOSE or Sciences topics to build on French vocabulary.
Commentary and Reflection
The teacher therefore becomes a facilitator of learning by fostering the creation of personal meaning on existing ones, by helping grafting new elements and constantly reshaping the learners’ web of understandings.
In the first teacher video, I noticed that the science teacher was trying to make it fun (using prop-ups like a mad scientist wig) in the purpose of engaging each pupil. Her effort was only the preliminary towards a more serious goal of encouraging her students to think in particular ways about the things she wanted them to learn, the students could not have been able to take this scientific approach to ‘looking at things’ on their own, but now they would be able to replicate a scientific approach to observing nature. She was definitely a facilitator of learning. The second teacher appeared to me as ‘a teacher’ as opposed to ‘a teacher of a subject’, to such extend that I don’t even remember what his subject was!
They were both good at engaging the students with important ideas and explore their relationship, rather than presenting the students with chunks of information and fragmented ideas. They could engage their student in what is called ‘deeper learning’.
I would say that new Australian teaching practices encourage students to be an actor rather than a passive recipient, so that they can own their knowledge and reshape constantly their outlooks in a safe and fun environment.
Week 2 lecture: Why becoming a reflective teacher?
Summary of Material
Killen (2009)’s Chapter 4 gives many reasons why I should become a reflective teacher. First, Reflexion is a constructivist activity (Le CornuKillen, 2009, p.105) so I may have to revisit these sets of beliefs.
There are many ways to go about it. I was especially interested in the ‘reflect-on-action, reflect-in-action after and/or during each lesson’, using the notion of frames (Shon, 1983, 1987), framing and re framing constantly problematic situations. This is a method of self evaluation.
How it Relates to my Subject Area
At the classroom level, after each French Lesson, I could take notes of what worked and what did not (facts), and try to analyse the reasons why. I may find, for example, that they’d rather talk about the latest current affairs event rather than my current topic. I should then adjust my lesson plans or my teaching strategy for next time.
I believe that this process can also be done in partnership with other teachers of my subject area. I would be very interested in replicating a reflective procedure developed in Japan known as ‘lesson study’ (Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004). One teacher presents the lesson to the students and the group of teachers, then, the teachers discuss what happened in the lesson, they modify the lesson and another teacher presents it again, until they are all satisfied with the result. I would love to find or create a group of French Teachers for that very purpose. I think this is especially relevant to language teaching when you may find yourself particularly isolated in the school for your specific language area.
Commentary and Reflection
As teaching is very context driven, your classroom is the ultimate testing environment.
What I like about the frame approach is that it is evidence-based. Through such reflective process, you can think about what you teach, how you teach it and why you teach it the way you do, and you can test your assumptions, and look for evidences to justify your approaches.
Although the Japanese ‘lesson study’ model may be time consuming, it has the advantage to look at my teaching practices through more than one perspective.
It would be good to be able to look at my teaching from the students’ perspective as well, so I think it is important to listen to their criticisms.
I will try to keep a balanced approach. In my opinion, this self reflective work should not only involve my own journal or notes, it should involve the students and colleagues, and I should try to keep this in mind when I will become a practitioner. Once I master better this reflective work, I intend to teach my students to do the same for themselves.
Week 3 - Principles of outcomes-based education
Summary of Material
I have learnt in the lecture, that there are three ways to structure a curriculum: content-based (the one I am used to and which consists with identifying suitable content), experience-based (which consists in identifying learning experiences), or outcomes based.
OBE or outbased education is what the new approach of the Australian curriculum. It means that curriculum design starts with the question: ‘what do we want learners to be able to do by the end of their learning?’
In Outcome-based education: Critical issues and answers, Spady, W.G. (1994) explains that the advantage of this approach is that it focuses on the end result (what Spady calls ‘clarity of focus’) for all subjects, rather than on what learners may achieve in each subject, and the content and learning experiences are chosen after outcomes have been determined. Then you worry about time allocation and finally resources.
The major critique comes from Brady In Curriculum development, (1995) who laments that learning is trivialised and fragmented, therefore student do not develop a deep understanding of what they learn. OBE believers argue that it depends on the quality of the learning activities and content selected.
How it Relates to my Subject Area
Down to QSA curriculum for languages for Queensland schools, the curriculum formulates the outcomes with ‘action words’, like identify, synthesise, analyse, ‘do’ ... by the end of that lesson, the student should be able to ‘identify the major differences between French and Australian student daily school routines’, for example.
And, as it happens, these outcomes often have inter-disciplinary value. So I should keep in mind that I am not only teaching a language: each class activity does not have only as a purpose content assimilation; it must also foster other skills acquisition like analysing, critical thinking, in other words, the student will have to demonstrate he is able to perform ‘actions’.
I understand that there has been a major shift: ‘Outcomes are not the score, label, grade, or percentage that someone attaches to the demonstration, but the substance and actions itself’ (Spady). I have to incorporate this in my way to assess work.
Commentary and Reflection
My worry, at this stage, is that of practicability of this very multi-focused approach: it becomes very difficult to design a lesson when you have to take into consideration so many desired outcomes for the teacher, but also for the students who may not easily perceive clearly what is expected from them, and what is being assessed.
It seems to me it will become all the more important to consult with my peers when I plan a lesson to make sure that I have not forgotten any aspect, and that I am on the right track. It also means that I have to be able to modify my lesson plans, in order to keep in tune with the varieties of contexts, and how they evolve, to present the student with reasonable segment of possible contexts. Designing lesson plan is much more complicated and time consuming than I first thought!
This is an important learning step stone for me, because it revisits the teaching framework of my childhood. The education system of the 80’s (when I was young) had been criticised in the USA because school leavers had not only low literacy and numeracy skills, but they did not possess life skills such as the ability to manage finances or plan a career plan. So the focus became: ‘What and how students learned at school should matter when students engaged in life after school – that is the ultimate test of learning success!’ (Spady, 1994).
I agree with the statement in Killen (p. 63) that one of the reasons OBE can lead to successful student learning is that it encourages teachers to be well prepared. There is no doubt in my mind that you cannot improvise a lesson with such multi-faced desired outcome.
Week 4 - Learning and Teaching styles: Direct Instruction and Discussion
Summary of Material
This week, Killen (2009)’s Chapter 5 & 6 introduces the concepts of Direct Instruction and Discusion, giving us a totally different approach to the constructivist approaches to teaching that we have seen so far. Direct instruction is based on explicit teaching through very structured lecture, demonstration and explanation by the teacher.
Although research shows that ‘Direct instruction is one of the most effective approaches for teaching explicit concepts and skills to low-achieving students’ (Berliner, 1982; Ross & Kyle, 1987), and that it is useful for students who are ‘poor readers and who are not very good at locating, organising and interpreting information’ (Killen, p.120), there are some evidence that ‘direct instruction may have a negative impact on students’ problem solving abilities, independence and curiosity (Berliner, 1982; Ross & Kyle, 1987). In the video we saw during the lecture, the philosophy teacher, Chris Poulsen demonstrated a directed approach with her year 9, and she used a different strategy, discussion, for her seniors’ class.
How it Relates to my Subject Area
I would agree with Chris Poulsen approach; I think that Direct instruction is most effective to develop basic knowledge when students have limited or no prior knowledge of the subject, which is the case of most students who will be starting French in Year 8. Nevertheless, because language teaching relies on Listening and Speaking as much as Reading and Writing, we cannot use Direct instruction per se. Although the mode of instruction in early stages of language acquisition are more Teacher-centered than later on, students have to be able to produce language (Speak) as soon as possible. Our STA French class recommended mode of instruction is the Communicative approach where language is acquired through interactive communicative use that encourages the negotiation of meaning.
Commentary and Reflection
Direct instruction is a very important approach because, despite its limitations, we have been told during the lecture that it has been and still is the most commonly used method of teaching in the classroom. It is easy to understand why: the appeal to teachers is that it gives them maximum control over what, when and how the students learn.
It provides a non-threatening environment for those who are shy, not confident or not knowledgeable; it may save time on teaching when the curriculum is heavy in Senior years as learners focus on learning rather than on the procedure of learning. Like Annette Hilton, I think that the students sometimes ‘just need a break’ from teaching methodologies which are more demanding from their part.
Both methods where appropriate in their respective contexts of learning as the younger students need careful guidance, a more structured environment in order to construct meaning and older students while the older students can built on prior knowledge to answer broad questions.
Nevertheless, I would not generalise that discussion and constructivists’ approaches should be used in senior classes at all time. I personally would use both methods depending what I want to achieve rather than based on their age-group solely.
So diversity of methods and materials is best irrespectively of age groups, it seems.
All being relative, let not forget that it seems that it is not so much the method of teaching but ‘the amount of time’ that students spend engaging in appropriate academic activities that determine outcome, Brophy and Good (1986).
Week 5 - Literacy, Numeracy, what else? The Cooperative teaching approach.
Summary of Material
Literacy, as it is defined and understood in the Australian Teaching vocabulary, has a broad meaning: “Literacy practices are everyday social activities carried out in a particular cultural context in the home, school and community” (Anstey & Bull, 2004, p.27). Numeracy, as well, has a huge scope as per OEDC (1999) definition: “Numeracy is the capacity to identify and understand the role that mathematics plays in the world, to make well-founded mathematical judgments, and engage mathematics in ways that meet the needs of the individual in their current and future life as a constructive, concerned and reflective citizen”. Furthermore, literacy and numeracy are not restricted to Maths and English at all since ‘every aspects of literacy and numeracy are inherent to each KLA” (QSA, 2009).
In Twenty Thinking Tools, Cam (2006) is calling our attention: students graduating from our school are literate and numerate, but insocratic. He derives the word insocratic from Socrates who was fond of engaging people of all ages in conversation, and that failing to do that meant that ‘unexamined life was not worth living’ (p.1). Cam defines Socratic teachings as the ability to think about the issues and problems we face in our lives, to explore life’s possibilities, to appreciate alternative points of view, to critically read and hear, make reasonable judgements. Cam states that you need insocratic teachings in order to think effectively and that literacy and numeracy should not suffice.
In Killen (2009)’s Chapter 8, it seems that Cooperative learning is the answer to Cam. This is a form of collaborative learning, setting team goal, peer modelling, exploring a broad range of perspective, develop communication skills.
How it Relates to my Subject Area
In my opinion, the main problem to this approach is that positive peer interactions and relationship should be established before cooperative learning starts, through team-building activities. As language classes are often composite classes, this may take a considerate amount of time. In order to teach languages, we use the Communicative approach which is not far off Cooperative learning. In both instances, language learning experiences are scaffolded and sequenced to build confidence and support risk taking.
Commentary and Reflection
I will argue that this is exactly what the Australian Curriculum is trying to achieve. In week 4, we have been presented with the AC seven general capabilities, namely Literacy, Numeracy but also Critical & Creative thinking, Ethical behaviour, Intercultural understanding, Personal and Social competence, ICT competence. Even if NAPLAN tests are largely focusing on literacy and numeracy, it should be understood that these terms are not understood in the teaching profession in the same way they are understood in the general community (see above definitions).
Let’s focus now on the Socratic teaching or Cooperative learning since it is the newest form of learning, most appropriate to the 7 AC general capabilities, and one of the most researched strategies in recent times. I saw its advantages: students providing one another scaffolds for thinking. Also, ‘every feature in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first between people (interpsychological), and then inside the child (intrapsychological)’ (Vygotsky, 1978).
In using this approach, I would definitely put emphasis on individual results as well as on group results because, as recommended, because ultimately, although many life activities are based on collective efforts and many others are based on individual effort, we must prepare the students for both.
Week 6 - Behaviour Management
Summary of Material
This week’s readings make reference to a number of theorists with classroom management philosophies. Krause et al describe the Rules and consequences interventionist philosophy, the Confronting-contracting interactionist philosophy, and the Relationship-listening non interventionist philosophy. Following the same logic, in the video we watched during the lecture, Christine Richmond (2008) describes authoritarian (rules/punishment), behaviourist (reinforcing positive behaviour), democratic (articulate risks and responsibilities) and constructivist (even less coercive) approaches to behavioural management.
How it Relates to my Subject Area
According to a Marzano, Marzano and Pickering (2003) study, over 100 classroom management research studies, effective management techniques can enable classes of students to achieve at up to 20% points higher than classes where effective management techniques are not employed.
As languages are not perceived as an ‘important subjects’ by many high school students, I may have to make my lessons particularly interesting and stimulating, while being particularly vigilant at using appropriate behavioural management techniques. My choice is for less coercive approaches.
On the practical level, there are preventative measures like setting clear expectation to the class, use relevant curriculum, chose engaging , 10-15mns short activities, follow challenging activities by easier ones (Premack Principle), include mini-breaks, acknowledging good behaviour, use good communication, gender and racial issues need be sensitively treated.
I will set up simple and clear rules that we could reasonably agree on (like a social contract) that we could even write down on attractive wall posters in French for all to remember. I may use French warnings like ‘Rien ne va plus’ as prompts to remind them of these rules at time, this may sound ‘less boring’. When more serious correction is needed, I should model the expected behaviour and make them reflect on what to do next time, so that they can have a chance to adjust. In some cases, I may have to seek advice from the Guidance Councillor or check the enrolment record of that child.
Commentary and Reflection
What I would use and why? As explained earlier, I would tend to lean for the more constructivist approaches. In this weeks’ lecture, we were explained that the more coercive authoritarian approaches only achieve to make people scared. Students go in a fight or flight mode. They won’t relax and engage. The ultimate goal, as explained by Christine Richmond in her presentation (2008), is to increase the level of Learning conversations proportionally in relation to Managing conversations.
More generally, I understand it is the duty of a teacher to enhance all students’capacities to be resilient in coping with social expectations like school work. In this purpose, it is expected he/she should teach them ways to self-regulate their thinking, re-picture a situation beyond conventional models, restrain their compulsiveness and adjust their behaviour, while they are still in the safe environment of school, keeping in mind realistic expectations. Ultimately, the only behaviour I (or One) can really control is MINE (ONE's). It is recommended a teacher should keep fit and healthy as much as possible in order to be able to handle things rationally, keep a sense of humour, generosity of spirit and some perspective and not forget who their audience is: they are children after all!
