Category Archives: Providing Instructional Leadership
The promise of revised curriculum continues to taunt Alberta educators, and we continue to prepare ourselves for the unknown; I believe my English 30 teacher would have called this a juxtaposition! As part of my own preparation, I decided to take the online Instructional Design course from Mount Royal University.
I was roused by its description, as it seemed to align with the work I currently do, and I hoped it would also support my future work of supporting implementation of new curriculum. The course description read: Instructional Design– “Explore instructional design principles, characteristics of adult learners and their implications in designing an effective instructional program. Apply information about learning styles to the design of instructional learning outcomes. Write clear and concise performance outcomes and competencies in order to direct instructional design.”
Much of the information in the first 2 weeks of the course wasn’t new learning, but rather, strong reinforcement of what I already knew about learners and learning. To be given the opportunity to articulate my thoughts on paper and to have someone else read and find value in my thinking was very invigorating! Weeks 3 and 4 refreshed my brain with new learning, and I had a particularly strong “aha” moment that I described in this post on our online discussion board:
Aha! Learning Outcome Statements are NOT the same thing as curricular learning outcomes! Learning Outcome Statements (LOS) are derived from analysis of curricular outcomes; LOS articulate what the learner is able to do to demonstrate the learning. In my experience as an “instructional designer” in the role of a teacher, the curricular learning outcomes were the drivers for designing my instruction, for designing my teaching, learning and assessment materials- yikes!
What an AHA moment when I realized TODAY that NO WONDER it can be an exhausting task for teachers to design these materials. Classroom teachers are not basing the design and development of our materials on strong LOS, we are basing them on curricular learning outcomes that may or may not articulate what students are required to DO to demonstrate their learning. We are designing and developing materials that have students demonstrate their learning, when we’re not really clear on what those performances need to look like. We’re missing a critical step between curricular outcomes and assessment tasks; i.e. developing Learning Outcome Statements!
As a teacher, it seemed easier to design and develop Language Arts and Math course materials when I used the “illustrative examples” and “achievement indicators” in conjunction with the learning outcomes. Well, it’s no wonder I found that easier! The illustrative examples are a logical “step” in the process of bringing vague curricular outcomes to life in the course materials, as they articulate what the learner should be able To DO as a result of their learning. As it turns out, the illustrative examples serve the purpose of the LOS that guide instructors to design and select effective learning strategies, learning assessments and materials that align with the specified curricular learning outcomes.
Why isn’t an Instructional Design course a requirement for the Bachelor of Education? It would help teachers be so much more efficient, effective and confident!”
The ensuing comments for this post were evidence that my fellow educators in the course were in total agreement, and one even noted that she was going to write the Dean of Education a letter in this regard. The comments that resonated with me the most, though, were from two of the younger learners in our course, as they are written from the perspective of a student, and not from the perspective of a teacher.
Colt: “Being new to the field of education, it is great when others share their experiences with the group! I can recall being a student, and seeing curricular outcomes on course outlines, rather than a strong learning outcome statement. As a learner, it creates confusion when determining your personal level of success, and knowing what the needs are that you are expected to meet.”
Alena: “I second that Colt. I’m still fairly new to education as well but after learning all these awesome things it makes me realize more and more that we are not using a lot of strong learning outcome statements in our courses to create a clear path for learners to know what is expected of them.”
Of course I spent WAY too much time on the discussion board, and even more time perfecting my assignments, thinking, re-thinking, editing, re-editing… The estimated 15 hours per week turned out to be 30+ hours per week. On top of my already full work schedule, the addition of the course resulted in a very tiring 4 weeks without any down time- but the learning was so worth it and I don’t regret a minute of it. New curriculum, I can’t wait for you to roll out- I’m ready for you!
January, 2015- My husband and I are in the midst of celebrating the completion of building a log home on our lakefront property at Lac La Nonne. Had it not been for the critical thinking inquiry framework that laid the foundation for our decision making, I’m afraid we would be celebrating its completion for the wrong reasons- i.e. we may be celebrating the end of a strenuous journey! Instead, we are reflecting upon the learning experiences we shared, and enjoying the product of our thoughtful deliberations and productive physical work.
From the outset, this overarching question framed our thinking:
“To what extent should we participate in the building of our house?”
Additional questions helped guide our decision making throughout the build. We worked through questions like:
- Would it be better to hire a contractor to oversee the build, or should we take on the responsibility of attaining all the subcontractors ourselves? When we considered criteria like ‘completion of the house within a reasonable time frame’ and ‘having access to reliable contractors’, we decided that hiring a contractor to oversee the project would be the way to go.
- What physical tasks would be best for us to take on ourselves? With criteria in mind of ‘doable within our time constraints of weekends and holidays’, ‘taps into our current skill set’, and ‘new skills are learnable for us and don’t require a journeyman ticket’, we decided to take on the following tasks:
- Co-design the floor plan (The design course I took a couple years ago came in handy for this!)
- Select all the materials for a custom build (We chose EVERYTHING – from the more obvious materials like the logs, stonework, flooring, cabinetry and light fixtures, down to the less obvious choices like the type of door knobs.)
- Stain the logs
- Do the stone work on the fireplace (interior and exterior- yikes, that roof was high for my husband- I was the ground crew!)
- Paint the drywall and the interior doors
- Acid stain and seal the concrete basement floor
- Lay and seal the slate tiling in the foyer, laundry room and bathrooms
- Stain the exterior trim
- Stain the interior trim
- Tile the back splashes (Selecting the perfect tiles was perhaps the hardest decision of all!)
- Build the closet organizers
- Install the mirrors
- Be the clean-up crew and take all garbage to the landfill (huge tasks in themselves that lasted throughout the course of the build!)
The other questions we considered were:
- What are the best resources to help us learn new skills?
- We knew our sources had to be reliable and instructionally sound, so we decided that face-to-face discussions with experts at home shows and retail outlets, along with carefully selected You Tube clips would be our best teachers.
- What would be an effective process for determining which materials we should select? Considering criteria such as effective use of time, minimal travel, accessing products that appealed to us and were of high quality, the process that worked best for us was this:
- Do as much preliminary research on the internet as possible, looking at product reviews and availability of the materials in our area
- Use this information to narrow down the multitude of choices to a few desirable selections
- Find which retailers in our area carried those selections
- Go to retailers to physically see the products and ask a few more questions
- Make the selection!
We now get to enjoy the fruits of all our mental and physical labor! As a result of this huge two year undertaking, we have a beautiful end product – a house we will temporarily use for weekends, holidays and family celebrations; the house we plan to call “home” after we retire.
Fall 2016 UPDATE: Over the past 2 summers, we worked on our landscaping. Here’s the iMovie of Our Landscaping at Lac La Nonne.
“Every time you call on one, you can call on everyone.” Dr. Spencer Kagan, February 2013
So, what did you learn today over the past 30 years?
Vygotsky suggests that “learning takes place through the interactions students have with their peers, teachers, and other experts. Consequently, teachers can create a learning environment that maximizes the learner’s ability to learn through discussion, collaboration, and feedback.” Learning Theories Website
It may have been Vygotsky’s research, or the misrepresentation of it, that lead to the group work bandwagon in the mid 80’s. This prompted many of us (including me) to change our classrooms from rows of isolated students, to clusters of desks where students worked together in groups. Unfortunately, this didn’t work out for me as intended. It lead to… a student or two in the group dominating the task while others sat back and let the learning take place around them ; some students finding more engaging tasks to occupy their time; a lot of noise that wasn’t always productive. Because “group work” didn’t produce the results I had expected, I decided that pairs would be the extent of my students’ group work experience, where they could work with their assigned partner some of the time. Unfortunately, my classroom was a “learn by yourself most of the time; work with your partner when I say it’s okay” environment. Boy, did I have a lot to learn!
At the time, I didn’t understand Vygotsky’s research AT ALL and I didn’t know about the brain research that helps explain why cooperative learning helps students process their learning. These 2 quotes in Eric Jensen’s book Teaching with the Brain in Mind, have helped clarify this research for me:
- “Either you can have your learners’ attention OR they can be making meaning, but never both at the same time.” p 36
- “What doesn’t make sense is constant one-way learning.” p 55
I also didn’t know about the teachings of Dr. Spencer Kagan or The Critical Thinking Consortium, but now I do…
Cooperative learning moved to the forefront of my professional growth in February of 2012, when a colleague and I attended the 4 day Kagan Cooperative Learning Institute. Spencer Kagan and his wife Laurie, a former school teacher, have developed a multitude of Cooperative Learning Structures that can be used to support student conversation that enables them to process their learning and articulate their thinking. Kagan’s research suggests that in order for cooperative learning to truly be occurring, 4 basic principles must be in place.
The 4 principles of cooperative learning, also known as PIES, are:
- Positive= one doing well helps others
- Interdependence= task completion depends on everyone doing their part
Individual Accountability- Students can’t hide; your success influences the success of others; everyone must perform the task
Equal Participation- Participation is approximately equal
Simultaneous Interaction- Highest percentage of students as possible are performing at any given time
The Critical Thinking Model also embraces cooperative learning. When we began our work with the Critical Thinking Consortium in 2009, I hadn’t realized that cooperative learning would be playing a role. I did know that when critical thinking is embedded into teaching and learning, students are engaged in solving a problem and as a result, they learn the content in a much deeper way. I also now know that one of the strengths of the model is that many of the Thinking Strategies that support critical thinking have students learning cooperatively. This can happen through students justifying their decisions to their peers in light of pre-established criteria. It can happen through peer coaching, where students provide specific feedback to each other in light of the criteria. It can also occur through Thinking Strategies that provide structures where students each express their own ideas, and then listen to the ideas of others in order to re-evaluate and expand their thinking.
What I love about the Thinking Strategies is that they are structured to push the thinking further; they go beyond just having students articulate their thinking, but are encouraged to allow the thinking of others to push their own thinking as well. Some powerful Thinking Strategies on the LearnAlberta.ca website that align with the principles of cooperative learning are: Four Corners Discussion and Placemat Activity .
A current approach to teaching that many teachers are embracing is “collaborative inquiry”. How can we ensure the PIES principles are in place as students learn “collaboratively” through inquiry? Perhaps we could explicitly teach the PIES principles while providing students with experience in Critical Thinking Strategies or Kagan Structures that embed the principles. Through a scaffolded approach, eventually students would have the skills to determine themselves ways of ensuring the principles are in place in any collaborative inquiry projects in which they engage.
I have come to realize the reasons why cooperative learning wasn’t successful in the way I had attempted to implement it. In my classroom, group work was about demonstration of learning in the form of a summative group project after independent learning; it wasn’t about learning together. In my classroom, group work was unstructured; I expected the students to know how to work together cooperatively when I hadn’t actually set them up for success in doing so. In my classroom, class discussion involved asking one student at a time to share their thinking. I now understand what Dr. Kagan means when he says, “Every time you call on one, you can call on everyone.” Class discussions take on a different meaning when they are treated as cooperative learning opportunities and structured accordingly.
Ultimately, it has taken me the better part of my career to fully appreciate Vygotsky’s work. It has taken much continued professional learning and deliberate reflection to develop my current understanding that “learning is a social process”. I am now able to articulate ways that we can build classroom environments and implement teaching pedagogies to capitalize on this foundational knowledge. And my learning is not over yet! I continue to learn from the teachers with whom I have the opportunity to work. Several teachers in Parkland School Division have recently participated in Cooperative Learning PD opportunities, and have shared some of the impacts they have noticed. I have documented their responses in this google doc.
So what have I learned over the past 30 years? Cooperative learning is NOT about putting students into groups to create a product to demonstrate their learning after the teaching and learning. It IS about putting students together to LEARN TOGETHER, and having structures and thinking strategies in place to facilitate the learning. Cooperative learning stimulates thinking; it is the means through which the learning takes place, and when cooperative learning is combined with critical thinking, oh… it makes my heart sing!!
Math Minds is a project committed to enhancing the development of numeracy skills in early years’ students. This post reveals some of the components of the Math Minds project, which I’m certain we’ll be hearing more about as the project progresses.
Canadian Oilsands Limited has invested $3 million as part of a 5 year commitment in this initiative to enhance numeracy competencies in young students, and to build teachers’ capacity to do so. Much of the $ is being used to fund teachers’ professional growth. The participating school(s) will use Jump Math as the lens for instructional practice and programming. Jump Math is also learning along the way, and will work to enhance their program based on the findings.
The goal is for Calgary to become an “excellence in math centre”, and if successful, Canadian Oilsands hopes to be able to replicate this model in other areas of the country. The project is working to create a model school(s) where guests will be able to visit to see promising math practices in action. They also hope that the model school(s) can be place(s) where teachers can participate in a possible residency program for a year to build their capacity, after which time they would go back to their own school and be a lead math teacher.
In addition to providing the model school(s) with the Jump Math training and other professional development, part of Math Minds initiative also trains volunteers (pre-service teachers from the University of Calgary as well as members of the community) to tutor students after school using the Jump Math Tutor program, through the Boys and Girls Club. During the conference, I was sitting with 2 people who are math tutors at the Boys and Girls Club. They shared some of the successes they are seeing through the use of Jump Math.
Jump Math is a not for profit organization that has developed grades 1 – 8 math programs, for classroom teachers, tutors and parents.
Several speakers at the MathConnect Conference spoke about their work with Jump Math.
The University of Calgary is endorsing Jump Math, saying it is a good blend of discovery learning and explicit instruction. It breaks down the concepts and teaches the teachers themselves the concepts, so they can understand them in a deeper way, and in turn, teach them in a better way. It helps teachers determine what early skills the students are missing, so those skills can be developed to enable students to learn skills further along the developmental continuum. It supports the research that shows that early deficits have a cumulative effect, and that success in early math skills are a better predictor of success in later years, than success in early literacy skills.
Elisha Bonnis, an elementary school teacher with Vancouver Board of Education shared how Jump Math helped her overcome feelings of inadequacy in math. It helped her learn the basic skills and knowledge she was missing, and helped her to realize she CAN indeed DO and TEACH math. The philosophy behind Jump Math reflects Dr. Dweck’s Mindset research. Elisha offered the advice that if teachers do decide to use the program, to follow the teacher’s guide, as its explicit teaching method helps uncover the skills that students are missing, and helps them develop those skills so they can be successful in learning and growing from the discovery activities.
If you’re interested, all the teacher, tutor and parent Jump Math lessons are available, for free, on their website. The student consumable books are available for purchase. http://jumpmath.org/cms/
All in all, Math Minds sounds like a very worthwhile project! I know I’m going to be keeping tabs on its progress. What do you think?