This is the title of a major conference taking place in Boston this month, organised by Alan November and which is being covered extensively by Ewan McIntosh on his blog. Ewan has been a real driving force for encouraging teachers to embrace the opportunities that “web 2.0 ” can offer.I have been reading his posts with great interest and want to find out as much as I can about how schools can use tools such as wikis, blogs and file sharing sites (eg Flickr,) to create exciting new learning communities. Ewan will be speaking at the conference, and his topics will cover:

1. The concept of Social Media-the idea of “connections”
2 How LT Scotland is looking at the use of social media in schools, ie how education can take advantage of social media, game-making and playing
3 An Adoption Strategy for Social Software in Education, citing the example of East Lothian, where Ewan and colleagues have used business strategies to successfully integrate new technologies and teaching into their schools.

Obver the summer I am putting some extracts from some earlier PG assignments on the blog, just out of interest, to compare what I regarded as important then with what’s happening now.

Here’s part of an earlier assignment I did in 2001, examining the role of ICT

“Effective management of teaching and learning reflect the current pedagogical paradigm; that pupils should be taught to think, and take responsibility for their own learning, precisely the thing that they do not appear to do very well, according to numerous HMI reports. Valerie Wilson, writing for SCRE stated that;

If cognition (thinking) is to be improved, then it is argued that teachers must make the learners’ thinking processes explicit by employing methods which intervene directly on the ‘thinking processes’. Part of this involves making learners aware of themselves as thinkers and how they process/create knowledge by ‘learning how to learn’
It is worth reflecting on the recent (2001) developments that have focused on the need to improve curriculum flexibility and extend the learning process in S1/S2. The revised National Guidelines on 5 to14 provide a framework for considering how progression and continuity might be implemented at the 10-14 “interface”. Setting out exemplars of what pupils at different levels should be able to do, these guidelines aim to “promote the teaching of a broad, coherent and balanced curriculum that offers all pupils continuity and progression as they move through school”. Behind these developments is the desire to raise attainment and improve the quality of learning.
Practical illustrations about what schools can do with the 10-14 curriculum can be found in the recent document, “Flexibility in the School Curriculum; Emerging practice”. Arguing for more curriculum flexibility, this collaborative paper by LT Scotland and HMIE cites evidence from ten secondary schools around the country of innovations in the curriculum. For example, in one school, the whole cohort of pupils is starting Standard Grade in SII, while in another, all first and second year pupils will be presented at Intermediate I or II core skills in ITC.
This is hardly new: articles in “TESS” and elsewhere over the past few years have consistently described remedies for the widely accepted poor pace of learning in SI and II.
The priority for the national assessments is firmly on the process of formative assessment, which will be developed through the Assessment for Learning Programme. This programme seeks to build a “streamlined and coherent system of assessment. (which) will ensure that parents, teachers….have the feedback they need on pupils’ learning and development needs”.The Programme, administerred by LT Scotland, is being trialled by several school-based projects, each looking at a particular facet of assessment, learning or reporting. It is encouraging to note that SCIS schools are included in funding to participate in such projects.

Formative assessment is seen as an effective way of encouraging learning, by focusing on assessment as the bridge between teaching and learning. Black and Willam make the essential point that marking pupils’ work should “cause thinking to take place”. They say,

A clearly productive way to start implementing a classroom-focused policy would be to improve formative assessment. [To do so, we need to] concentrate on several essential elements, namely the quality of teacher-pupil interaction, the stimulus and help for pupils to take active responsibility for their own learning, the particular help needed to move pupils out of ‘low-attainment’ trap, and the development of habits needed by all to become capable of life-long learning.”

Many educationalists believe schools should encourage the process of “metacognition”, that explicit awareness of thinking itself as an activity that can be taught and developed. Numerous textbooks and websites offer units of study based on “thinking skills”. In geography, for example, the work of David Leat and his “thinking mysteries” has been widely recognized, while Cognitive Advancement through Science Education (CASE) has been adopted in many schools as a way of moving pupils from “concrete” to “formal” ways of thinking.
Lipman believes that children are natural philosophers who constantly ask questions. Thus a programme is underway to introduce ‘Philosophy for Children’ to eight to eleven year olds in every primary school in Clackmannanshire, while East Ayrshire intends to introduce the Activating Children’s Thinking Skills (ACTS) programme, a method of teaching thinking skills, first developed in Northern Ireland.”

All this is allied to school improvement and effectiveness. School effectiveness is strongly focused on student outcomes and the characteristics of schools and classrooms that are associated with these outcomes whereas school improvement is mainly concerned about changing the quality of teachers and schools.”

i like this comment, which was in today’s TES http://www.tes.co.uk/2402843, 13.7.07), by a former head teacher who says,

“No. Today it’s all about distributed leadership, delegation and teamwork. And that’s fine, just so long as the senior management team doesn’t become a closed, inward-looking magic circle – like a mildly animated version of the Rollright Stones.

“Me, I’m with Caroline Badyal, head of Dartmouth high school in Sandwell, who believes that the right place for the leadership is around the place, being highly visible. And blow the paperwork. Describing to me once how she and her colleagues had improved behaviour and attendance, she said: “The most powerful tool is the profile of the senior team around the school.”

“And that really is something that’s borrowed from the world of business. The management guru Tom Peters discovered it in action at the technology firm Hewlett Packard, and christened it MBWA – “management by wandering around”.

This was the heading in today’s Independent, regarding the propsosed reform of the English national curriculum, but it clearly has resonance in Scotland as the CfE moves towards cross curricular themes

Here are what some of the points quoted in the paper

Yes…

* It makes the curriculum more relevant by introducing topics such as global warming and how to buy a home or open a bank account

* Teachers will have more freedom to introduce catch-up classes for slow learners, and more taxing programmes for high-fliers

* Youngsters will be given their own personalised learning plan, tailored to help them study at their own speed

the present curriculum does not do enough to prepare youngsters for the modern world.

No…

* Some teachers argue that the curriculum could be ‘dumbed down’, leaving less time for traditional subjects such as history or geography

* The national curriculum testing regime will make it impossible to fit in the new topics being encouraged by ministers

* Teachers brought up in the old system may not be sufficiently trained to tackle the new topics

Dr Boston, Chief Executive of the QCA paints a graphic picture of a teacher entering a lesson under the present system. “If the teacher covered the syllabus each term, and the syllabus for the year, then they could be judged to be ‘teaching’, even if few in the room were learning,” he said. Under the new system, there will be more emphasis on “personalised learning” – the mantra often repeated by ministers. It will work like this. In an English class, for instance, you could have some well developed readers and some less developed readers. Some of the class could be given easier books to start on (Dr Boston cites George Orwell) whereas others could spend their time on the novels of Thomas Hardy or HG Wells.

Ken Boston of the QCA revealed the new national curriculum for England on Wednesday 11th July, with similarities with the Scottish “Curriculum for Excellence”, in its more emphasis on teaching topics than traditional timetabled subjects.

This will enable students to research subjects in much greater depth and make learning more relevant to the big issues of the day, Boston thinks. He argues, for example, that because global warming straddles two subjects, science and geography, it should be taught as a topic in its own right. Pupils will be able to use what they learn about global warming in each of the subject areas later..

Boston, however, is adamant that teaching through topics makes sense in today’s world. “There is nothing ‘New Age’ about these proposals,” he says. “Books will still have to be read, and history will still have to be studied to give people a sense of their own culture and other people’s.”

There will also still be a list of authors that pupils should study in English at the key stage four (age 14 to 16). “For should, read must,” says Boston, showing that he believes it is vital for young people to study the literary canon.

This year, he is adding to the national curriculum a list of authors from non-English cultures and traditions whom the QCA believes children should be able to study. These include Chinua Achebe, Maya Angelou, Benjamin Zephaniah and Meera Syal The great classical writers and poets are still there, from Jane Austen to John Keats. The idea is that this approach will help teachers develop a personalised learning programme for each pupil, one of the key objectives of the Government.

To reflect the growing influence of China and the importance of the Middle East, the modern languages offering has been changed. No longer will young people between the ages of 11 and 14 be confined to studying only European languages. This reform should pave the way for an increased take-up of languages such as Mandarin and Arabic.

In history, there will be an increased emphasis on British history, and history students will have to take a topic described as “the development of political power from the Middle Ages to the 20th century, including changes in the relationship between rulers and ruled over time: the changing relationship between Crown and Parliament and the development of democracy”.

Next year will see changes to A-levels, including the new A* grade, awarded to pupils who start their courses next September and score 90 per cent on their exams in the summer of 2010. The number of modules going to make up the A-level will be reduced from six to four.

Exam boards have also been told to make their questions much more open-ended, to encourage pupils to use their creative thinking skills.
Boston, and the Government that has given the green light to his blueprint, will likely be attacked by those who argue that his changes mark a return to child-centred learning. Boston goes on the attack. “Why shouldn’t learning be child-centred?”, he asks.

“The old days when the teacher came into the room, delivered the syllabus as scripted to a row of seats and left at the end of the lesson without knowing whether learning had taken place are gone. In the future, you may still have a day where children are learning the pluperfect at 10 o’clock, doing quadratic equations at 11, going to lunch at 12, coming back to science at 1.30 and studying the cause of the American civil war at 2.30 – but that won’t happen all the time.

According to Boston, that kind of fragmentation of the timetable will not always be beneficial. If you introduce more topic-based work, children will still be learning, he says.

.The art of developing a valid pedagogy for ITC in schools is to marry technical expertise with a meaningful philosophy of education.  Education should be about engaging with ideas, being creative and learning how to think; technology needs to enhance this and not to become the focus of interest itself. David Hargreaves has called for a change in pedagogy altogether; which can only be achieved by a new approach to learning, in which students learn faster and/or learn more than one thing at a time (a richer curriculum) at the hands of more skilful teachers (a better pedagogy) supported by a reformed approach to assessment (assessment for learning). This inevitably entails changes to the structure and culture of schools, ones that are needed to provide the conditions for a better curriculum for learning and pedagogy for learning. There are those who argue for a paradigm shift in education, using IT as the engine for change, while others have genuine reservations about the “IT revolution.

Thus the HMIe

“The ever increasing pace of development in ICT presents the education system with a challenge to develop a capacity for change that will ensure quick and flexible response to new opportunities. The effective use of the wide range of facilities offered by ICT opens up unprecedented opportunities for invigorating learning and teaching in our schools and improving pupils’ attainment in coursework across the whole curriculum. Indeed, our thinking on the nature of the curriculum itself is likely to be challenged as the use of ICT becomes more effective and widespread. Skills in using ICT provide the potential for access to lifelong learning opportunities that can empower all learners to develop their own unique intellectual capacity and operate as effective members of a digital society. In the longer term, the very nature of schools and learning communities is likely to be altered radically by the influence of ITC” 

 (source: “The Use of ICT in Learning and Teaching: A Report by HM Inspectors of Schools” 

In similar vein, an article in McKinsey Quarterly felt that ”Technology has the potential (to make) education more interactive. When linked to clear educational objectives, IT can enable students to master traditional skills, prepare them for work in a technological age, and—perhaps more effectively than other means—help them to think creatively, solve problems, and make decisions” Significantly, much support for ITC delivery in schools comes from business and management sources. Coburn in “School Planning and Management” states that:   “technology is the backbone that will support the transition from didactic instruction to a project-based curriculum… (it) can facilitate a new kind of learning experience: children engaged in the active construction and use of knowledge, not passive  receivers of decontextualized facts” 

(Source:  “School Planning and Management, Dec 1999 v38 i12 p5.Technology on the Horizon. Author:  Janet Coburn) 

The alternative view is well expressed by Gertrude Himmelfarb who is concerned that the computer screen is, ”… too fluid, too mobile and volatile, to encourage any sustained effort of thought. The emphasis on computer technology in schools is overrated”, she continues “because whatever students learn is obsolete by the time they are working. Computers are more suitable for training than for education.” Sociologist Mark Brosnan considers the tendency of ITC to reinforce typical gender and social patterns of inequality when he discusses the issue of technophobia, a major problem among many teachers. Such teachers either avoid using computers with their class or they pass on their negative views to their pupils. Brosnan also notes that girls are less confident or have less access to computers and they are less likely than boys to have or use computers at home. A management issue that arises is that girls prefer to work collaboratively on the computer rather than on individualised tasks. From “Technophobia: the psychological impact of information technology”(Mark Brosnan;  Routledge 1998)  Computer and business guru Alan November makes the cogent remark that school ITC plans need to recognize one over-riding point: Instead of asking teachers, “What technology do you need?” ask them “Which concepts are the most difficult to teach and what information would help you teach these concepts?”

EDITING

Here is a useful piece from Mike Hughes, a Head Teacher in England, writing in 1999, about the importance of teachers in closing the learning gap.

“The Learning Gap is the difference between what we know about effective learning and what is currently happening in the classroom.  Quite simply, if attainment is to rise, this gap has to close.

All teachers, however effective, will have a Learning Gap.  It is the discrepancy between the way the brain learns and the way children are taught in the classroom that occurs when, for example, kinaesthetic learners are compelled to spend large parts of the school day reading, writing and listening; when natural and highly efficient contextual memory systems are ignored and overloaded with vast amounts of content which our brains are simply not designed to absorb, or when lesson activities fail to connect both hemispheres of the neo-cortex, so that the whole brain is involved in the learning process.

Lessons are for learning, and learning involves understanding and memory.  Too many lesson activities however, result in neither because they fail to engage or challenge the learner, emphasising the transfer of information at the expense of understanding and learning it.   The brain has an enormous capacity to learn – potential that can be realised when the environment and learning experience to which it is exposed stimulate and activate it and are compatible with the natural learning systems.

Learning is done by people, not to them.  Classroom activities that fail to ignite and fully engage the brain inevitably limit achievement and result in a Learning Gap.  It is a gap that is not always easy to detect.  Much can masquerade as learning: when children sit quietly, writing pages of notes and successfully completing low level comprehension exercises, particularly when their work is beautifully presented, the disguise can be a convincing one.

Identifying the Learning Gap and implementing strategies to close it is the key to developing the quality of teaching in a school and therefore lies at the very heart of school improvement…  Professor David Reynolds claims that the influence of the teacher and what he refers to as the ‘learning level’ is three to four times more powerful than that of the school.

The logic is not hard to follow; it is teachers in the classroom who are the key determinants of the quality of learning and the levels of attainment of the pupils they teach, the impact of whole-school policies and national initiatives paling into insignificance by comparison.  Teachers have both influence over and responsibility for achievement in their classroom but have virtually no bearing upon achievement in the rest of the school – a phenomenon of far greater significance and concern than variations in attainment between schools – it also provides us with the focus for school improvement strategies.

For if the most significant influence upon pupils’ attainment is the teacher, then the key to genuine and sustainable school improvement must be to develop the quality of the teaching.  Although many schools have achieved significant improvements in attainment in recent years, this has often been due to a combination of factors, including extra revision classes, reward systems, tightening procedures for handing in coursework and changing examination syllabus.  These steps are effective, immediate and easy to introduce.  However, they are relatively superficial and will only raise achievement so far, with the initial significant improvement in results quickly beginning to tail off.  From this point onwards, continued improvement will only occur if the quality of learning taking place in the classroom improves.

It is ironic, therefore, that in recent years the focus of our attention in the drive to raise standards has been at the macro level – the school and LEA.  Yet as a Headteacher I know that the English results in my school have very little to do with the LEA development plan, and everything to do with the quality of teaching pupils receive during their English lesson.  I also know that any further improvements in results are largely dependent upon teachers in the classroom.  As a school we can and must strive to create a framework, environment and ethos where learning is valued and can flourish.  However, this will only take us so far, for even within effective and improving schools, teachers have to develop and improve or attainment will plateau.  In short, teachers have to close their personal Learning Gap.

Encouraging teachers to reflect upon their practice and to engage in a process of continual self-improvement is by no means easy …..  Yet all teachers have a Learning Gap and aspects of their performance that can be polished and improved.  This is not necessarily a criticism and is created as much by the dramatic advances in our understanding of the human brain as it is by fundamental weakness in current practice.  Nor does the word ‘gap’ imply a chasm – often only relatively minor adjustments and a change in emphasis are required in order to enhance learning and close the Learning Gap.  But even if the difference between what we know about the brain and learning and what happens in the classroom is little more than a cavity, it still needs to be filled.

The developments that are taking place in neuro-science are staggering and until all teachers have heard these messages and can apply them in their classroom, then the learning potential of each and every pupil will remain grossly under-exploited.  It is the closing of this gap that should be top of every school’s agenda in the drive to increase levels of achievement and raise standards. ”

Here are some notes on background reading for a psot grad management essay about ICT and teaching I was researching in 2001. I thought it would be worth retaining these to track how, if at all, attitudes to teaching and ICT have changed in the last 7 years,

 Extract 1

“What comes out very strongly from a reading of the literature on ICT and classroom activity -is a stress on the need for human interaction and structured teaching and learning to accompany the use of new technologies in educational settings.  Learning involving ICT applications must be carefully planned, clearly set out and well sequenced (and in this respect the requirements for a successful lesson using ICT are no different from those of a good lesson generally) ”

 Peter Rudd, SETT 2001

  Extract 2

“Why is ICT used in schools?

Schools are using ICT to enhance and add a new dimension to the learning process, and also to increase communication between the home and school. Some schools use their own web sites to make learning resources available on line. With the functionality and capability of ICT, some schools are also able to provide parents and pupils with data relating to attainment, attendance or other school/community-related information. From a learning perspective, the effective use of ICT can lead to benefits in terms of:

• greater motivation
• increased self esteem and confidence
• enhanced questioning skills
• promoting initiative and independent learning
• improving presentation
• developing problem solving capabilities
• promoting better information handling skills
• increasing time ‘on task’
• improving social and communication skills.

More specifically, ICT can enable children to:

• combine words and images to produce a ‘professional’ looking piece of work
• draft and redraft their work with less effort
• test out ideas and present them in different ways for different audiences
• explore musical sequences and compose their own music
• investigate and make changes in computer models
• store and handle large amounts of information in different ways
• do things quickly and easily which might otherwise be tedious or time-consuming
• use simulations to experience things that might be too difficult or dangerous for them to attempt in real life
• control devices by turning motors, buzzers and lights on or off or by programming them to react to changes in things like light or temperature sensors
• communicate with others over a distance.

Dorothy Coe, , has picked up on the comment I made on “ACE” in which I referred to an article by Professor Lindsay Paterson in TESS, which criticises some aspects of “A Curriculum for Excellence” Her comment is worth reading and it has prompted me to look further at the kind of curriculum design (architecture)we want to develop in our schools. In my reply to Dorothy I made the point about how schools should manage the transition from the kind of general/integrated curriculum of Primary and lower secondary to the subject specific demands of an SQA led examination system of which the Highers are, largely, the end product. The SQA has just completed a seried of stakeholder meetings to flesh out its idaes for an examination system for S3 and S4 while various schools have explored new models of timetabling, some with apparently greater success than others, acording to the HMIe.

In my readings about curricular matters I came across Read/Write Web, which is a blog that provides news and comment on web technology. The  Post on 22nd June on e-learning is particularly interesting. In it, author Richard Mcmanus contasts  traditional e-learning with that of E-learning 2.0, which  takes a ’small pieces, loosely joined’ approach that combines the use of discrete but complementary tools and web services – such as blogs, wikis, and other social software – to support the creation of ad-hoc learning communities. The post goes on to give specific examples of how this might work, but to me three  key questions are

 (a) Is e-learning 2.0 a “good thing”?  (On what evidence?)

 (b) how we convince colleagues that  e-learning-2.0 is worth developing?

 (c) how can we evaluate its effectiveness as a means of enhancing learning and teaching?