Contribution of teacher inquiry topics to my communities of practice

Week 19: Contribution of teacher inquiry topics to my communities of practice

My two possible teacher inquiry topics:

1.  How can we effectively use our class iPads as a tool to support personalising learning in our junior classrooms?

2.  How can we use the digital technology we have to promote and support whanau engagement?

Both the inquiry topics above come out of my desire to see my students achieve to their fullest potential. I believe that personalising learning and strong whanau engagement are keys to student success.

In regards to my first topic, looking at my current use of my iPads in my classroom, using the SAMR model (see below), I am generally using my iPads as a substitution or augmentation. They are being used to enhance but not transform the learning of my students. To some extent I am using the iPads as tools to personalise the learning of my students in regards to different app choices for different ability levels but this is a very shallow form of personalising learning and not the "deep personalising learning"  (Ministry of Education, 2012) I am aiming for.

My second topic relates in many ways to my first in regards to fostering student achievement. At present we have a number of ways we try to engage our whanau, but not all whanau, for a range of reasonable reasons are able to engage in the ways we currently provide. An inquiry that seeks to find out what else we can do or what we can do better will be beneficial for our students, our whanau and our school.

Using Wegner's model I have identified communities of practice which would support both of these inquiries. My first community of practice would be my syndicate team because we are, as Wenger, McDermott and Snyder (2002, p.4) state, a group "of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interaction on an ongoing basis". We have frequently discussed the need to improve both the use of digital devices in our classrooms and the way we engage with whanau.
The second community of practice could be my students. If my aim is to personalise learning in my classroom then it most certainly needs to be an inquiry that involves my students. Future-focused learning includes both the teacher and the students building knowledge together (Ministry of Education, 2012).
Both inquiry questions also contribute to and link strongly to my current communities of practice, with our school and CoL focus being around raising student achievement and my Mindlab community of practice being related to digital and collaborative practice.

I'm looking forward to giving both of these inquiries a go. Exciting times ahead!

References:

Ministry of Education.(2012). Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching: A New Zealand perspective. Retrieved from https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/schooling/109306

Wenger, E.(2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization,7(2), 225-246.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press.

A Change in My Practice Towards Future-oriented Learning and Teaching

Week 18: A Change in My Practice Towards Future-oriented Learning and Teaching

Theme 3: Personalising learning

Theme 4: Changing the script: Rethinking learners and teachers roles

Over the past years I have been introduced to terms such as learner-centred, student advocacy, student voice, learner-driven. I have heard these terms used at PLC’s, QLC’s, PLD’s, and in MLE’s.  I heard it in conversations with colleagues and seen examples of the many interpretations of it on many classroom walls …and I have felt gladdened and very challenged by it.

In my quest to ensure the learning of my new entrant students is learner-driven I have tried a range of different approaches – Daily Five, student goals, annotated writing exemplars on the walls, math stage posters on walls, modelling books, math stages broken down into fine-grained progressions, WALTs, student created success criteria, asking questions designed to support student self-regulation, thumbs up, down, sideways, models of what ‘good’ looks like, student inquiries, and play-based learning - all with various degrees of success but all with little understanding of ‘why’ and a complete lack of understanding regarding ‘how’ to make this happen in my new entrant classroom.

Being involved in Mindlab has been like finding that pivotal jigsaw puzzle piece which helps the picture make more sense. My journey of change in my classroom began with my introduction to 21st^t Century Learning, particularly the ITL learning rubrics ( ITL Research, 2012). I started to see the links between the thinking behind the ‘buzz words’ (student advocacy, learner-centred, etc) and the need for my students, regardless of their young age, to be developing the skills and understandings they need for their future success in a world we can’t yet imagine.

In our classroom collaboration is beginning to look like collaboration not simply cooperation and I am starting to look more deeply at all aspects of my teaching practice for example:

·       Working from a student’s strengths rather than filling gaps or overly focussing on needs.
·       Inquiry rather than prescriptive content driven units of learning.
·       Co-construction as opposed to teacher constructed.
·       Student advocacy/voice is more than goal charts on the wall and reflective questions asked       at the end of learning just because they are required to be asked.
·       Ipads are beginning to look like tools for learning rather than a replacement for a piece of           paper, a book, a game or another activity on the task board.

With the learning I am doing in Mindlab, lots of talking with my students about their learning and thinking, and through reading research literature such as the “Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching: A New Zealand perspective (Ministry of Education, 2012)”, I am slowly developing new understandings about what it means to be a teacher in the 21st^t Century.

I still have a long way to go.

My challenge is, as stated in Ministry of Education (2012, p. 42),

“to move past seeing learning in terms of being "student-centred" or "teacher-driven", and instead to think about how learners and teachers would work together in a "knowledge-building" learning environment. This is not about teachers ceding all the power and responsibility to students, or students and teachers being "equal" as learners. Rather, it is about structuring roles and relationships in ways that draw on the strengths and knowledge of each in order to best support learning.”

References:

ITL Research. (2012). 21CLD Learning Activity Rubrics. Retrieved from https://education.microsoft.com/GetTrained/ITL-Research

Ministry of Education.(2012). Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching: A New Zealand perspective. Retrieved from https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/schooling/109306

Reflection on my previous post regarding my reflective practice.

Week 17: Part 2  - Reflection on my previous post regarding my reflective practice.


It has been about a week since I wrote my first post about my reflective practice. Since then I have spent sometime mulling over the post and have some more thoughts about my reflective practice.

Firstly, a critical reflection of my reflective practice was definitely not what my initial post was. It was, in effect, a simple summary of my reflective practice to this point. This realisation made me question the depth of reflection in the posts I have been putting on my school blog. I went back and looked at those posts and realised that the majority of them are also simple summaries.
So, what is it that I am missing? What do I need to do to ensure my reflections are meaningful and bring about new learning and change in my practice?
As I mentioned in my previous post, reflection for me is very much 'rapid reflection' and 'repair' as discussed by Zeichner and Liston (cited in Finlay, 2008, p.4). I am missing the depth of thinking or reflection that comes about from taking the time to review, research and re theorise and reformulate which sit at the higher levels of Zeichner and Liston's (cited in Finlay, 2008, p.4) five levels of reflection.
I think what I need to use is a model of reflection. A reflective model will guide my thinking and move my reflection from the what, when, and who descriptive thinking towards a more how, why and what now type of reflection. As Fewings (2015) states, "If reflective practice is to become anything more than random navel-gazing, it is advisable that the reflective practitioner employs a particular process or model."
So, what models are out there?
 Fewings (2015) talks about a simple approach that asks series of questions:

• what worked well?
• why?
• what did not work well?
• why not?
• what will I do the same next time?
• what will I do differently next time?

For me, I think these questions may still result in a less reflective reflection. I need something similar but with more depth.

 Peters (1991, pp.91-95) cited in Fewings (2015) talks about four step process, called DATA:

• describe
• analyse
• theorise
• act

I like this process but I think I need something with a little more guidance.

Brookfield (1995) talks about reflection using four critical lenses:

• our own view
• the view of our students
• the view of our colleagues
• the view of current educational theories and research literature.

I think Brookfield's four critical lenses would be a very useful reflective model as it encourages the user to consider of the viewpoint of others as well as themselves. 

Gibbs (1998) created a model of reflection:

The step-by-step nature of this model with the questions to support the action is something I could use to support my reflective practice.

I think the use of Brookfield's reflection model combined with Gibbs step by step directional model  could be what I need to ensure my reflections are more than ' random navel-gazing'.

Fewings, J. (2015). Brainboxx:Models of reflection. Retrieved from http://www.brainboxx.co.uk/a3_aspects/pages/ReflectionModels.htm

Finlay, L. (2008). Reflecting on reflective practice. The Open University.

Week 17 - My reflective practice

Week 17: My Reflective Practice

If I viewed my previous reflective practice through the lens of Zeichner and Liston's (cited in Finlay, 2008, p.4) five levels of reflective practice, then I would have to say that my reflective practice was mainly rapid reflection and repair with a touch of review in the form of discussions with colleagues.
I certainly did not spend time writing my reflections down or sourcing and reading academic research with the view to use it to critically examine my practice.
However, in the last couple of years I have developed some understanding regarding the importance of, and need for, reflective practice. Reflective practice for me began about four years ago when I was involved with the MST programme and, when the in compliance with a school initiative, I completed my first learning inquiry and started my reflective blog.
Initially my blog read a bit like a "Dear Diary", it detailed the activities I was doing with my class and briefly outlined activities I had been involved in at various professional development days. I guess it would be fair to say that the blog was all about, as Finlay (2008) terms "surface reflection".
However, as I have grown in understanding about reflective practice, supported by completing various learning inquiries and through professional reading regarding reflective practice, I have noticed that my thinking is more reflective. My focus is less on the what, where, when and more about the why and the how, as described in the week 17 Mindlab clip "Reflective Writing".





Reflective Writing.SkillsTeamHullUni. (2014, March 3).
Finlay, L. (2008). Reflecting on reflective practice. The Open University.

First Post

Kia Ora
Welcome to my Mindlab blog
I'm Donna. I teach Year 0-1 children at Ahipara School. I'm looking forward to sharing my blog with you.