Learn Create Share

To kick off the year we came together to improve our collective understanding of our Manaiakalani pedagogy 'Learn Create Share'. 

Six of our seven Outreach schools were present, with approximately 115 teachers plus Uru Mānuka Trustees (Garry Moore, Jason Marsden, Rose Crossland and Jane Ross) and Manaiakalani Education Trust (MET) Chair Pat Snedden.

Pat Snedden described the historical background that drove the Manaiakalani pedagogy's inception. We need to lose the deficit thinking...

He held the room spell bound as he gave insight into our obligations to right the wrongs of the past and break down barriers which have been inadvertently imposed over generations.

As one of our Uru Manuka Cluster Leaders of Learning, I spoke about how Learn Create Share has changed my practice:

Kia ora koutou. Ko Mel Raisin taku ingoa. Ko Ara tu Whakata (Gilberthorpe) toku kura.

Adapting my practice to follow Learn Create Share pedagogy has reawakened my excitement in education.

I’m acutely aware that I may run the risk of either preaching to the converted or prompting minds to close, however I want to begin with a provocative challenge in thinking.
Must Do’s/May Do’s; Task Boards or to do lists for learning tasks… We’ve all used them in some capacity within our learning environment.
Are we wanting our students to be busy with a number of superficial tasks via machine gun learning, by asking them to complete a large number of learning tasks whereby there is bound to be some form of learning “somewhere”.
OR
Do we want learners to develop an in depth understanding about a context where they have been required to draw information from a variety of sources; critically reflect, question and discuss their interpretations, seeking to synthesise and test theories and so on. Finally, share their learning in an appropriate and purposeful way to an authentic audience for the purpose of gaining feedback and feedforward that they actually want to act upon.
What I have discussed could fall under literacy, numeracy, topic… Actually… it could describe our own research, planning or teaching as inquiry.

Adopting Learn Create Share pedagogy has changed my practise in that there is a focus on depth of learning and understanding rather than quantity of completion. I strive to look for ways to make learning fun, like I believe it can and should be, or what’s the point?

There is a misguided perception that changing practise to align more with Learn Create Share pedagogy means increased teacher workload.

Every person in this room has access to a resource bank containing a wealth of DIgital Learning Objects, context based texts at every level. This gives everyone a place to start, regardless of where they are at on their journey. The idea being that the resources can provide a scaffold for teachers to modify to fit their own needs, then add their own to the bank for others to access and utilise. The collaborative partnerships between our Uru Manuka schools epitomises the rationale behind communities of learning before they even became a thing. Teachers being open to sharing makes teaching and learning smarter and more time effective. For me it’s a no brainer.
We’re not talking about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. But we do need to remind ourselves why the baby is actually in the bath.

Defaulting to a digital platform doesn’t replace effective teaching practices, which is an outsiders misinformed critique. Instead, it successfully supports them by optimising teaching time and minimising frustrating interruptions to re explain, reiterate and redefine a task. Learners can engage with content ubiquitously, the number of times and at the speed which best suits their needs at the time. I wonder what Vygotsky would have made of modern scaffolding.
The akonga are afforded an element of choice, (please note, choice doesn’t mean open season, but a few guided appropriate options)this increases potential for engagement and experimentation. Learners can individualise their learning experience to a certain degree, while working within set parameters.
Digital learning allows for the use of tools to break down barriers such as specific learning difficulties. Leveraging allows akonga to be exposed to content they are often excluded from as it’s deemed too hard.
Often our at risk of underachieving learners are unwittingly blocked from accessing curriculum by us, through our own best intentions and inadvertently placed glass ceilings.

There’s huge value of setting authentic purposeful tasks, whereby the learner understands the point or the why. Embedding a mindset where our young people are seeking a meaningful audience which is hopefully not passive, and gives honest helpful productive feedback. In our modern era, blogging is an invaluable tool for educating our young people to be safer cybersmart citizens. We’re needing to prepare them to deal with perils that social media platforms have that most of us never had to worry about throughout our mistake making years.

In a nutshell, I believe that Learn Create Share pedagogy enables my learners to be better equipped to be prepared for a future beyond our imagining.

We were placed into groups, consisting of a mixture of year levels and schools. We were then allocated either Learn, Create or Share and asked to define what that was. 

Our group chose, rather than to group ideas or cluster them, to draw a double koru to depict the pre-existing knowledge and the new learning to come. 

One of the frustrations that cropped up for many of us Leaders of Learning was that we had spent a great deal of learning around the Manaiakalani definitions of Learn Create and Share. The actual definitions weren't mentions or acknowledged. In many instances, groups had paraphrased stating "Learning is..." rather than "Learn is". This is a common misconception as it places a dictionary definition around Learn which centres on Learning as a Verb, which is far removed from the Manaiakalani definition.

There is a real fear that the baby may be thrown out with the bathwater purely because of the ignorance, albeit unintentional, of many. 

The Manaiakalani definitions are what they are due to a great deal of research, data and trial and error. They are what they are due to more than ten years of nitty gritty analysis. I feel it would be extremely arrogant (and ignorant) for us as a cluster to deviate from it due to a lack of understanding by members.

Time will tell what comes of it... 

We finished off our session with a powerful impromptu performance of Smash Poetry by Daisy Lavea-Timo.

You can read reflections on the day from Gary Roberts, Principal at Hornby Primary School, here

You can read reflections on the day from Robin Sutton, Principal at Hornby High School, here

IYT Session #1

Session 1 of Incredible Years for Teachers kicked off.

In an impulsive act, I'd volunteered our school to go first to open and close the session. My rationale for doing this was that I like to set the benchmark, rather than trying to live up to other peoples preconceptions. That's my theory anyhow!

During the session, some key gold nuggets emerged:

• "2 for 10" - 2 minutes of 1:1 with an individual child for ten days in a row.
• Instead of asking for hands up... hands on chest with a thumbs up (or one digit for each idea they have). It's non confrontational, low key and doesn't interrupt thinking or opting out.
• Dialling "0197" then the phone number when making a phone call ensures that your number remains private.

My To Do List:

1. A weekly phone call home to one student (or more) sharing a positive for that week.
2. Consolidate "hub rules" rather than each classes individual ones, to ensure and cement a united front within the collaborative space.
3. Behaviour Plan... I need to begin to put the strategies in place.
4. Ask for feelings to be added to our "Kei te pehea koe?" kupu bank, on the wall which the akonga use for roll call.

Teacher has personalised handshake with every single one of his students

Designing and implementing Change ideas, with NoTosh

So, this hit my Facebook feed this morning. I duly saved it, along with the screeds of other "Saved Stories" that sit in limbo until time (Or holidays) afford them attention. A sick son intervened today, so I was able to afford it the attention it had been seeking... The immense productivity that can be achieved on a "sick day" is cause for far more in depth self assessment and a further blog post!

I have been a fan of NoTosh since having the pleasure of professioanl development around Design Thinking, as well as attending 2 ULearn Confernce Worshops around it in 2014. I really identify with the lens that they view education through.

This video has some great quotes along these lines:

"Education is about evolution. If you're not changing, what are you doing?"

Speed of Change:

The speed of change is often bandied about as an excuse to place a boulder in the water. I challenge that, when that overwhelming sensation begins to set in, when there is so much going on all at once... Perhaps we just need to take a step back. Change the lens that we are viewing through... Think of the changes we are implementing as "prototyping".  

Some people are quick to adapt a mindset where they view the amount of changes taking place in education as "treating our åkonga like guinea pigs". We want our children to learn to test theories and make mistakes and then learn from them... Why are we afraid to do this as teachers. We are no longer the keeper of knowledge that we were, even just twenty years ago. We are no longer delivering education from the front and centre of the room. 

This video prompted me towards a number of considerations, which are very topical at the moment. We have been in our new space just a few weeks, heading into the holidays. We have the luxury of a term where we can begin to set some key objectives for the term. We often set objectives for what we want the students to achieve... but why not what WE want to achieve, in terms of pedagogy and practise.

If you are making structural changes, you are making pedagogical changes.

• What are the "Pain Points"?
• If you are making structural changes, you are making pedagogical changes.

"If you're making structural changes, you're making pedagogical changes." Teaching in post quake Christchurch, has enabled a transformation of learning environments. The schools who have been fortunate enough to front-load the transition with developing the pedagogy have, I believe, been far more successful in implementing change. So many changes have taken place, all in one hit. Those who have been fortunate enough to view it with a "prototype" mindset, who have perhaps been more open to adapting to change, have been far more successful in the way structural change has occurred. There is some fantastic stuff going on down here, in little ol' Christchurch New Zealand. Flexible bell times; play first, eat last initiatives; modifications toward ILE or MLE or whatever we want to call it next week... Most of these schools are sharing their journey too!

Prototype Culture

Heading towards planning for Term 4, I prototype mindset makes logical sense as a lens for mapping out what needs to be covered: Curriculum coverage; AO's; Topic/strands etc... The ability to map out when this "might" happen in terms of timetable or term plan... Stressing the word "MIGHT"! By mapping things out... Prototyping, it gives clarity on what the outlook is, providing frameworks for all teachers to work within. We all need fences sometimes. Some who get intimidated by change or new thinking ideas etc, are made more comfortable by knowing the perimeters that they are working within... Some of us, probably need the framework to minimise the tangents and keep us on the same track as everyone else (Which probably helps everyones ability to cope with us and our foibles too!)

Incubator

"What do we want to change and let's change it."

Set key objectives for Term four.

• What do we want to achieve in terms of Teaching and Learning?
• Prototyping Teaching Approaches?
• Developing Student Voice?
• Assessment Capability?
• Shaking up the programme?

Unpacking Learn Create Share, in a way that's not so scary

Recently, I ran a staff meeting around Learn Create Share.

Ironically, it was the first staff meeting that I'd attended since joining my new school. The upside to this was that there was no precedent to follow... No pre-existing notion of what it "should" look like.

Here's the basic presentation to guide the discussion:

We looked at each definition, without the "Learn" "Create" or "Share" attached to it, in order to ensure that we weren't overthinking it. 

Within our cluster, our Uru Manuka Leaders of Learning PLG has identified that we do have a shared understanding of what Learn Create Share is... it just differs slightly from what it should be, by the Manaiakalani definition. After much robust discussion, we came to the conclusion that the initial definition was accurate and we needed to align our own understandings with it. After all, the immense research that has gone into the concept backs it up... who are we to question it through our own ignorance!

What next... How on Earth were we to take this eye opener back to our schools!

We were all in agreement that going back and telling our colleagues that everything we had thought about what Learn Create Share was wrong (after two and a half years of building that pedagogy, I might add...) was not an appealing option.

My approach, was to utilise the feelig that I had that everyone was doing a lot of things already, but they didn't understand how their great practise actually aligned within Learn Create Share.

I decided to take each definition and put it to the teachers: 

What happens in your hub that falls under this heading?

We compiled our ideas onto large sheets, using post-it notes...
Here's what we came up with... Compiled into a piktochart Infographic:

My next step is to align my Critical Inquiry etc, with a lens that accommodates a Learn Create Share view, from a teachers perspective also:

Learn Create Share flipped on its head!

So... it's Friday. You walk into a room of your colleagues, leaders of learning within your cluster. You all have like minds; excitement and passion to drive successful practice etc... Within an hour, we were all sitting back thinking we'd all been on the wrong mindset for the ast two and a half years!

We cracked a can of worms (which obviously needed to be cracked!) around whether, as a cluster, we had a shared understanding of Learn Create Share.

On the bright side... It was quite apparent that the schools across the cluster DO have a shared understanding. However, our shared understanding does not align with the Manaiakalani definitions:

Learn: any activity where the objective is to access and engage with existing knowledge.

Create: any activity that results in remixing existing knowledge, the development of new knowledge, and the use of imagination.

Share: any activity that involves the sharing of knowledge.

The result is often building new knowledge

We had huge discussions... and came to a few conclusions.We questioned their definition... but by the end, concluded that the definition was sound, but we needed to shift our thinking around our own understandings. We believe that we (as teachers/schools) have been operating under a literal definition of each term, with a heavier weighting on the "Learn" component.
I challenge that, in actual fact, the gold nuggets... the Direct Teaching Practices actually occur within the "Create"phase as this is where knowledge and understanding is synthesised. When looked at with a visual, until now the Learn bubble would have been larger, with the Create and Share bubbles feeding into it and each other... Now It is the other way around.

Under this thinking, If the direct teaching and learning opportunities aren't utilised then the Create phase in just skimmed across the top.

So What...

Well, we are certain that there are a number of teachers who don't understand what Learn Create Share is. They probably believe that they "don't do it". We are quite sure that they do, without realising where it fits.

The danger is that if this was brought back to our teachers, they would freak out!

However, if they were given the definition only (without the title) e.g.:

• Any activity that results in remixing existing knowledge, the development of new knowledge, and the use of imagination. (without the word "create")

and asked to find things that they do that falls under that category...

...Repeated with each of the other two definitions... And then place the "Learn" Create" or "Share" above afterwards, this may draw understanding.

It may still install panic attack or ten!

An Eye-Opener For All

I like to think I'm fairly Cyber-Savvy. It's a huge part of my role, within my school... I impart it to my own kids, as well as the parents of their friends. My best friend refers to me as the "clever nerd" that can educate her. Today, as I sat listening to John Parsons speak to the teachers from our cluster... I was awakened to my ignorance.

I'm not keeping myself safe!

How often have I... 

• signed into my home google account and thrown one of my own kids on my "Teacher Laptop" to get something finished for school? 
• needed to upgrade software or an app on my "Teacher laptop" then and there, but not had access to the school Apple ID... so I used my own? - The same one that our family iPads (including my own childrens') are linked to...Thereby adding a synced dimension...
• Shut the lid on my "Teacher laptop", leaving it in the unlocked classroom, available for any bystander to open...
• Ducked into another room, again with the "Teacher laptop" available...

I could endlessly go on...

As teachers, we put endless thought into how we can best equip our akonga to learn. How we can make an impact. Teachers are usually a selfless breed, never really stopping to think about how the little things could impact on ourselves. John Parsons outlined, using real examples, of how things can go horribly wrong for the most well-meaning people. He highlighted simple behaviour changes or key things to take away that we can do to protect ourselves and our schools.

Key stakeholders, within the school, are all equally empowered with protecting it's identity. Within the room, we had teaching staff and principals... yet no support staff, administrators, caretakers, Board members... These key members of a school are often taken for granted when considering the identity of the school. The teachers are considered the front line. Without these, how on earth would our schools survive. John Parsons was adamant that all stakeholders be involved and equal in the process.

I encourage anyone, who has an opportunity to listen to him, to leap at the chance.

John Parsons, Internet Safety and Risk Assessment Consultant

If you are interested in a workshop for your organisation contact

John Parsons
Internet Safety and Risk Assessment Consultant
Mobile: 027 746 9877
www.s2e.co.nz

The importance of laying down the foundation for learning

Just as we place a high importance on getting the foundation right when building houses, equally important is building the foundations for the learners to be able to begin to build their success as learners. A flaw in each foundation equals instability when building upon it.

Last year we placed a huge emphasis on teaching the akonga how to learn within the various classroom spaces, as we moved into ILE mode (or MLE as it was then labelled). As a team, we have identified that it was remiss to have not laid this fundamental foundation at the beginning of this year. In hindsight, it was probably due to the immense changes that we were moving into. We were leaping out of our comfort zone, and into the Learning Pit.

We threw ourselves into a collaborative four, for core curriculum… moving to a collaborative three in the afternoons (due to losing a team member for this part of the day). It was interesting to draw a comparison between the three “magic numbers”.

Two:

Two was easy. It felt natural and both pairs in our learning space seemed to function very well and successfully, as individual pairings. Therein lay the crux… It was too easy. Two very different learning environments developed, which made it difficult for akonga to transition between. Different expectations. Differing visions around student agency vs “getting it done”. It proved problematic in that divides were created and voices began to, at first not be heard… then later not be voiced.

Four:

Four has felt hard. Draining, confusing…

We decided to ensure that the students got used to moving between the spaces by ourselves moving to a different teaching space for each curriculum area.

It worked, in that the learners began to feel able to use the entire block, although the breakout spaces weren’t effective this year, due to the akonga not being taught (or part of a co-construction process) how to learn within the spaces. This came down a push for us to get on with the learning, rather than taking the time to build the foundation for learning within a new space and delivery of teaching. The hurdle arose due a difference in philosophies amongst the team, whereby one pair placed huge value on the students co-constructing the learning spaces in order to be able to take ownership of how they learn within them, using it as part of the vital setting up of routines for the school year. In contrast, the other pair wanted to hit the ground running on learning, as we had identified that we had a number of below National Standard learners, across a number of learning areas. This was valid, however in hindsight, I believe that learning would have been further enhanced if we had set up the foundation effectively to utilise the spaces before building the knowledge within.

Four also brought its share of hurdles.

- Four felt watered down. We had to be constantly vigilant of which learners we needed to develop a stronger relationship with. It's a whole different ball game ensuring that you have developed an effective relationship with 85 individuals, compared to 45!

- Communication breakdowns. Messages need to be communicated among a number of staff members, Teacher Aides included. It’s easy to forget, or innocently not pass on, information to all parties when there are so many people to ensure they are in the loop. It’s easy to “meet in the middle” and catch everybody up on anything that crops up if there are a smaller number. The bigger the group, the harder it is to find a time when everybody is free to meet. These before school, or after school, impromptu informal meetings became an integral part of pastoral care and best supporting individual learners. It enabled us to be aware of things that crop up, as they crop up.

- Relinquishing ownership over the learning spaces. As we moved into a different space for each block of the day, we had to be vigilant of leaving things lying around, out unfinished, or on whiteboards etc. Things that you take for granted in "your own space" became real bug bares. Problems arose when one persons frustrations were fobbed off or not valued, leading to a build up in frustration and a break down in relationships. Picture all of the things that used to be "on your desk"... then you suddenly have no desk... where do they go? How do you have them on hand when you need them, when you move between four classroom spaces? It's very easy for these little changes to build up into bigger problems, like the boulder that falls into a river... creating a dam... slightly changing the long term path of the river.

Three:

Three became the middle ground. While we only really put this into practice in the afternoons, with art/inquiry/athletics etc… It seemed an easy transition. In these sessions we used a variety of ways to split learners.

• Offering three options, then letting the akonga select their preferred option, then working with one teacher in a learning space.
• Each teacher taking a topic/skill, then rotating the akonga through, so that each teacher would teach the same lesson series/understanding, with each different group.
• Two teachers would take the larger group, while one was able to take a smaller group for a specialised area e.g. Writers Club, Radio, etc.

Three offered a variety of different Collaborative teaching and learning strategies to be successfully implemented depending on the situation or requirements. It felt as if everyone was aware of what was happening in the space and more respectful of making each other aware.

To sum up...

• Non-negotiable's are important. Everybody needs to know the parameters they are working within. This could be:
• wall spaces - teacher created resources vs student work vs used as giant wonder walls or think spaces. How will they be used to cater for all, across all spaces? What needs to be up? What doesn't?
• Resources - is there an expectation that these will be put away before each session ends, or can things be left out for students to return to? How will this be managed to minimise impact on the next group using the space?
• Conflict resolution - How will the inevitable conflicts be dealt with to achieve resolution? Prepare for the worst, before you find yourself there! That way there is a system in place to fall back on to make things right.
• Clear systems - I believe a chain of command is vital. When individuals start deviating around immediate leaders and heading for the top, or other management... it leads to a lack of trust which begins to snowball. If it is clear who has responsibility for what, toes aren't tread on so easily. Sometimes people think that they are "helping" by taking on tasks to share the load, when it can actually lead to more frustration as others are left "out of the loop" purely because the usual system or process hasn't been followed. There needs to be clear lines of responsibility.

These are just a few, and all seem excedingly simple - even ridiculous... But the little things are what cause the breakdowns. Teachers are strange creatures of habit. While prone to having to multi-task and be flexible, they also have there own systems and quirks which often make them the fantastic teachers they are. It's not about breaking those habits and quirks... It's about finding ways to best utilise and make them work together.

Sometimes developing the ability to listen for twice as long as you endeavour to be heard, is the difference between maintaining those relationships effectively.