ideasfarm.net

As an exciting new era in qualifications begins this September the Ower’s Lecture this year will ask - Can Diplomas Cure the ‘English Disease’?

Will they overcome the ‘English disease’ which sees vocational and practical learning as less worthy and improve the status, number and quality of recruits into industry generally?

What can we do to help the engineering diploma overcome our society’s failure to recognise the intellectual and creative challenge demanded by careers in industry?

Dr Stan Owers’ thesis addressed the reasons for previous failure and this lecture series is designed to maintain a focus on the action that should be taken to rectify it. The format includes two short focused presentations by our guest speakers followed with a response by Mick Waters leaving ample time for discussion.

Pete Williamson of the Warren School, Barking and Dagenham, will provide valuable insight into development of the engineering diploma and the challenges of teaching it.

Jamie Tuplin of Barking and Dagenham local authority has oversight of all the diplomas programmes in his authority and is working with the related agencies

Mick Waters, as Director of Curriculum at the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is charged ‘to develop a modern, world-class curriculum that will inspire and challenge all learners and prepare them for the future’. Mick will respond to the presentations of the guest speakers.

For further background information, please visit www.core-ed.org.uk/tools/lecture-2008.html

If you would like to attend please email enquiries@core-ed.org.uk by Wednesday 17^th September. Attendees will be sent more details nearer the event.

This lecture is supported by Make Your Mark in association with Enterprise Week 2008 www.enterpriseweek.org.uk

Sponsored by, and held at, The Oracle HQ London

Click on the image to view the PDF The URLs are live links.

Imagine a group of schools determined to adapt to the rapidly changing and unpredictable demands of the 21st century. Recognising, that together, they can benefit by pooling ideas and resources. Accepting that teachers need to be empowered to innovate and be reflective professionals, constantly reviewing their practice.

At ease in a constant cycle of review and improvement or ‘perpetual beta’.

Determined as institutions to embark on joint curriculum innovation and enlightened pedagogy, focused on citizenship with a global perspective.

Imagine being invited to join that group to facilitate their founding conference and provide an overview of how technology can enable that vision. I was, and I am still smiling. The experience was exhilarating.

It was a three day conference in the Netherlands. School leaders and partnership coordinators representing schools across Europe, including Germany, Holland, Belgium, Lithuania and Romania, met with a determination to establish a deep and long-term collaboration. Schools in Turkey, England and Sicily could not attend but asked to be considered in the plans. Each school had a further global network of schools which cooperate on exchanges and other activities.
The focus is on European citizenship but with some exciting twists including international enterprise and entrepreneurship. This group, with huge potential, recognises the role of continuing professional development in transforming education. They are keen to extend teacher job shadowing teacher exchange and international student work experience.

The principle of distributed leadership and shared responsibility was accepted as necessary to achieve the objectives. Too many projects have failed when key staff have moved on. This conference, crucially, included headteachers and coordinators who could commit to a long term and enduring relationship on behalf of their schools. They also acknowledge that all stakeholders need to be consulted, informed and engaged in the process - parents, teachers, students and not forgetting education officials and politicians.

With all these connections the possibility of creating a robust networked cluster system, for sharing expertise ‘virally’, becomes a possibility.

This group need and deserve support to establish this relationship which could be a model for others to emulate. Please contact me if you can offer sponsorship of any kind or know of an organisation that may.

Some key issues arise here.

How do we accredit and reward practitioners who rise to this challenge?

When students seek, as they are, to personalise their experience and access part of their education from an international source how is that to be funded and accredited?

Where is the accreditation system and agile structure to support this? I have some ideas, so do these schools and they have the vision. I hope I can be useful.

At last common sense and not a little research evidence has prevailed. The proposal to increase CPD is the single best investment a government can make in education. Now please don’t waste the opportunity.

Scattered among the excellent conclusions of this report are some preconceptions based on a failed historical model which I hope will not survive as regulations.

“Twenty days” is seriously good provision. I hope that carries the postcript ‘of funding’ which would enable some creative innovation in approach to flourish.

“Course” Please stop talking ‘courses’. Courses are notorious for failing to result in impact UNLESS they are followed up with refreshers, reflection and dialogue between practitioners of mutual respect. The practitioners already embody a huge and largely untapped reservoir of experience, intuition and knowledge. They are professionals let’s respect them and recognise their contribution. Better still reward those who do support others

“decisions … taken away from schools and given to teachers” Teachers will not have true professional status until they are in control of their own standards and professional learning. It is not healthy for the teacher or the employer if the school controls ‘what’ and ‘how’ or even the ‘when’ of all professional development which takes place. I would like to see teachers take a wider global view of professional development. There are many good things happening in other countries from which we can learn. Some enlightened schools already encourage that by supporting teacher visits abroad.

“…making it compulsory for all teachers to watch colleagues teach four times a term.” First define ‘watch’ and then justify the number. Lets stop dictating and start recommending. Learning from other teachers is essential but leave the how and how often, as if it were a course, to creative teachers. This need not be a rigidly defined serial activity. It is possible with existing technology, for teachers to actually work with others continuously.

“Money would go to individual teachers who would select their own courses, conferences or visits for 10 days of external training every year.”

Replace “courses, conferences or visits” with ‘professional development activity’. Then this looks very much like the Dutch model which I admire. See what I mean about learning from others, globally?

“could create financial challenges for schools paying for cover.” and
Derek Davies, head of Stretford High, Manchester, said: “I agree with the principle of more training but increasing it to 20 days a year is just not going to be practical. It isn’t a problem that more money for extra cover would remedy; it is the break in the consistency of teaching that can be damaging for pupils.”

Both of these statements assume the method of operation will be based on traditional practice. The principle of more CPD is good but we need a ‘can-do’ attitude and an open mind. It can be done, other countries do it. Our country, our teachers and our students need deserve a better CPD approach.

I drafted the blog comment below several months ago but didn’t publish it. As you will gather from previous posts it’s topic I feel strongly about.

“Shirley Williams was the first Secretary of State for education to suggest that teachers should have guaranteed professional development time. Ken Baker claimed to deliver it by removing 5 days of school holidays for teachers. They are still called ‘B’ days (bidets) by older staff. Funding for PD has increased in the past decade. It was once ring fenced but is now subsumed in school budgets. The reality is that many staff will have limited opportunity to engage with their peers beyond their own school environment. To share ideas, discuss tactics and describe impacts. We have broadband for ICT but only a narrow band system for the sharing of tacit and explicit knowledge by professionals. England does not take PD seriously.”

My spirits lifted when I read this report heralding Institute for Public Policy Research in the Times Educational Supplement

There are a number of key points:

• will recommend that all teachers receive 20 days in-service training per year.
• decisions about what course they go on taken away from schools and given to teachers
• The IPPR will also recommend that responsibility for in-service training budgets is taken away from schools and given to the Training and Development Agency for schools (TDA).
• once a child’s background was taken into account, the quality of their teacher was the single most important factor determining the pupil’s performance
• It recommends making it compulsory for all teachers to watch colleagues teach four times a term
• Money would go to individual teachers who would select their own courses, conferences or visits for 10 days of external training every year.
• could create financial challenges for schools paying for cover.
• Derek Davies, head of Stretford High, Manchester, said: “I agree with the principle of more training but increasing it to 20 days a year is just not going to be practical. It isn’t a problem that more money for extra cover would remedy; it is the break in the consistency of teaching that can be damaging for pupils.”

See my next posting for comment on these points.

I think I have discovered a new mathematical constant to join many others which are more familiar such as the circular constant Pi and the golden ratio (phi) or 1:1.6

The new one is less precise and will immediately be rejected by mathematicians but I still thinks it’s significant.

Naturally you will want to know how this discovery was made. For many years now I’ve taken a close interest in tracking change in education and often paused to make a permanent entry in my brain - multitasking is a challenge for me, I’m male.

I have a habit of asking those I meet, who visit many schools and have seen many teachers in action, a number of questions which include:

How many…

• teachers are ready to adopt new approaches to learning and assessment
• schools have ICT embedded as a tool for learning and management
• schools are learning schools, encouraging and empowering innovation

Almost without hesitation the reply is 15-20% usually followed by a pause and the comment “maybe nearer 15%”.

So this new constant is 15% and I feels it deserves a Greek letter but there isn’t one called ’sigh’ but we will call it that anyway.

As you will have noticed this is not a scientific survey, it is anecdotal, but it is also indicative of a perceived problem.

The conversations I have mention new teachers who, confronted with a school and department which will not allow them to teach as they expected, become frustrated and leave the profession. I also hear of headteachers who seek new funding under the BSF programme but are unwilling adopt the spirit of the reforms and innovate.

We have some startlingly good schools and teachers who push the boundaries to create to create vibrant schools and new pedagogies. I knew some when I first started teaching ….maybe 15% were like that. Those schools are not the same ones leading the way today the change never became established.

The truth is the changes are dependent on key staff and governors who have engaged the support of parents and students and enthused them. Once those factors change, often by key players being promoted, the school slips into cautious, default mode.

This is not a revelation, twas always thus, research has shown over decades that teaching is cultural, teachers teach as they were taught and will default to that model if inhibited by the education system.

Do we know how to overcome this? Yes, that has also been known for decades too, sadly we have a situation at the moment were research to rediscover it is still being funded.

Teachers and schools need to feel empowered to take risks and innovate. They also need continuing support and to be trusted.

Unless we do change the constant constraints on innovation in education we will simply not achieve real change no matter how much is spent. If that happens I will sigh with relief.

It doesn’t seem so long ago that we called a vacuum cleaner a Hoover now many call it a Dyson. James Dyson has achieved cult status as an designer entrepreneur and icon for engineering not only in this country but also worldwide. This country produces some of the best engineers and designers in the world yet we take them for granted and believe they will continue to to blossom in the UK - wrong!

The greatest and best in manufacturing tend to have a practical, hands-on background to design and engineering and James Dyson recognises that fact. He is struggling to establish an inspiring vision, a very different kind of school but one with a designers pragmatic solution to an educational challenge. Designers and engineers need to have incredible persistence to succeed. If you need an illustration of this listen to the podcast below.

“What do we mean by engineering? Many people think of Mr Fixit as the bloke that fixes your washing machine or comes to the rescue when you dial the AA. In fact, the most famous engineer in Britain is rumoured to be none other than Coronation Street’s Kevin Webster, a car mechanic. And yes, maintenance is an important part of engineering, and thank goodness for the people that take care of our trains, boilers, cars and cookers. Without them, the wheels would stop turning, and our dinner would go uncooked. But it’s not the main picture. Engineering for me is about being inventive, solving problems, being creative, and actually making things. Like making the Maglev, or designing jet engines, or engineering more efficient wind turbines, or saving a life with a new kind of kidney machine. That’s engineering. So don’t let anyone fool you into thinking it’s dull, or that it doesn’t matter. It does.”

Podcast: http://podcast.timesonline.co.uk/serve.php/1499/dyson.mp3

A possible model to support the ideas outlined in previous posts. This version is suited to 11-19 education sectors. I also have a possible funding model for this which uses existing resources and would only need finance for the initial setup. The description is brief but a fuller model description is available.

The Practitioners are at the heart of the structure with their own community (or several) facilitated and supported by the HE sector. The practitioners have integral links to other specialist communities such as subject associations or an opportunity to enter dialogue directly with the DCFS. That would enable direct and democratic consultation by DCFS, QCA, TDA and others when necessary.

The model requires that every practitioner is required to be a member and that is reinforced by providing a clear unavoidable purpose. In this model all communication for student examinations uses the same platform. It also supports the notion of online learning and examination for students with the teacher/facilitator interacting with their own students and even other students they are assessing or supporting. These students need not be in the same country. It also provides a mechanism for sharing the knowledge and support of specialist teachers and others both with students and practitioners.

An example:

Some ’subjects’, computing and electronics are but two, are struggling to survive as taught entities. That may be because of a shortage of specialist teachers and or low students numbers making a class in a school unviable. The specialist teacher need not be in the school. This approach also supports the notion of an expert supporting a teacher new to a subject or one wishing to develop expertise in that subject while in post. That teacher or learning facilitator could take the plunge confident that an expert was on hand to support them with difficulties and insight. The sharing of insight, experience or tacit knowledge depends, crucially on direct, timely and non-judgmental communication. Without this, research consistently shows, real change in learning and teaching is very limited.

Ask any school if they have a CPD programme for the staff and the answer will be yes. Each school should have a CPD coordinator but I know of teachers who rarely leave the school for CPD. Funding is included in the overall budget and schools can formulate their own policy. In practice that means that CPD funds may be the first to be reduced in a crisis.

In Holland CPD is supported with good funding and a specific time allocation.

An example of a Dutch teachers annual contracted hours:

Contracted to work 1659

Teaching 498

Marking and preparation 312

Professional development 116 (Teachers have considerable control over how this is exploited)

‘Other tasks’ such as management take up the remaining time.

Teacher are given a more detailed breakdown of their own allocations each year and can apply internally for funding of courses which they select. That is limited but appears to be considerably more generous than is typical in England.

Teachers appear to be more autonomous and have considerable authority when marking examinations for example. There will be a meeting each year at which standards are revisited but then are then left to exchange scripts with a teacher elsewhere in the country. A discussion may take place between them but the marker decides the level.

I asked who moderates the marking - there was silence which I interpreted as disbelief that I would consider that necessary.

Before we leap to a conclusion we may wish to think about what that means for the standard of education. The English system is quality controlled an approach which lends itself to monitoring by numbers, output and league tables. The Dutch system at least in the subject area in question is quality assured there is scope for professional judgement and therefore an onus on the professional not to embarrass himself or his profession. The teacher is the upholder of standards.

Where will you go for a meal? MacDonald’s were you know every aspect of the process meets precisely controlled standards wherever you are in the world or one which has a good reputation even a star rating? That is a star rating awarded by the customers or critics which is an indication of quality with meals as creatively diverse as sushi, Indian or French? I would rather eat where the staff have freedom to innovate and where they have confidence in their product, able to respond to the local clients and create an experience which may be very different from the restaurant next door. The customers decide.