Innovation - Term Reflection

"HPPS - wow!" you exclaim.

One of my first thoughts on heading there was how I would be able to push my creativity and innovation in the classroom. Naturally, I would look to include innovation somewhere in my personal goals. We have several goals to set, so within my own Personal Professional Development I decided that I would "Evolve my teaching through innovative and responsive practice".  I could achieve this through the following: 

• Attend regular professional development in numeracy and literacy.
• Implement and reflect on innovative teaching practice.
• Regular professional reading.

I completed all my Individual Education Meetings (IEMs) on Monday and naturally teacher brain decided to redirect its energies rather than relax, reflection on innovation became the focus. How might I have been more innovative? What if this had been my previous classroom? What barriers had I perceived/removed/battled? How might I change my practice in term 2? It is also worthwhile to think about what innovation means, for me it is not a synonym for technology in the classroom. I recently stumbled across a definition (battling to find the reference right now) that included all the 'radical or incremental change' stuff that seems to be always present but for the education context included the important addition that it would add value. 

During reflection I became dubious as to whether I had been innovative and responsive, or more importantly had I added value to Learning Common 4 (LC4) or any other part of HPPS. I decided a good old fashioned stock-take was needed. I needed to simply evaluate each and every tool or idea I'd used this term and make a judgement on whether it has added value.

Kidsedchatnz:
Have introduced twitter in the classroom to LC4 and LC3. After 1 term students now opt-in on the Wednesday as part of their independent learning activities. There are some regular participants, a few who have decided it isn't for them and for some it depends on the topic. I have remained very hands-off with Kidsedchatnz this term to allow for student voice (a concern I raised in an earlier post) but am needing to check-in with participants early term 2 so they can identify some purpose for their Kidsedchatnz participation, be it literacy, dispositional or topic focussed. 

Immersion Workshop:
Week 5 we held our immersion workshops where all of our staff ran a small workshop to give students an insight into a world they didn't know. This is to help our students find their passions for the Project Based Learning. This term we were focussed on Inventive Thinking. With Caine's Arcade in my mind, my workshop was construction we had Lego, wooden blocks and stacks of cardboard boxes. My workshop was targeted for our Y0-4 learners and from the looks on their faces they had a blast inventing some pretty cool things, including tanks, time machines, boats, mermaid robots (who knew?) and towns. Construction has continued as a theme for some learners as they have created projects inspired somewhat by these early steps. Learners in LC4 also had my lego out for a time which has led to great discussion and writing.




Food Tech Workshops - Burritos & Kebabs
I blogged about this experience elsewhere but since then several projects have been initiated where food is part of the solution. I was also quite proud to hear some students talk about my food tech workshops in their celebrations for the term! 
term! 

Cricket World Cup
Heading into the CWC I had identified that there were many possibilities for integrating this into LC4. I waited to observe that I had students interested before using this in any way. I initiated a workshop early on that several boys opted in for, we brainstormed ways that the CWC could be utilised as a learning experience. They were particularly interested in bowling speeds, average speed of a bowler, the impact of technique and the variabilities created by the type of ball that is thrown. For me, new to HPPS, this was an exciting moment. Student voice, responsiveness, integrated & authentic teaching, what an opportunity! Sadly, in the hustle & bustle of HPPS and the learning journey that I was on this didn't go much further. The students managed 1-2 independent time slots focussed on their CWC work before it fell on to the back burner as they entered the immersion and design process phase for their Inventive Thinking projects. This was definitely a missed opportunity for innovative and responsive teaching, it required more steering by me but I was busy trying to juggle my first term requirements.

Design Process 
Early on Amy and I discussed using the Design Process for forming our project groups in LC4, I was excited by this as I had not used as a teaching tool nor been part of the process in any other organisation. Here was an opportunity to make additions to my kete of teaching tools while in the classroom, surely a bonus of team-teaching. I read about Amy's Design Process work with LC2 in 2014, and readied myself for learning. We took several days to move LC4 through the various phases but they came out the other end with their projects and a good understanding of why they were doing their projects. Some students even celebrated various aspects of the Design Process in their IEMs, whether it was their contribution to the ideation, the solution they'd formed as a team or how their dispositions had been challenged or grown. I see this as my first iteration through the Design Process and could write a post about it, but I think this should wait until I have taken more of a leadership role in its use in LC4, that will come when we head into our second lot of projects late term 2.

Reading Opportunities - 40 Book Challenge & Book Chat
Working with several of my readers I identified that they needed some challenge for their reading. They are all very keen readers with well developed reading ability but all tend to read within 1-2 genres. I've talked with them about a 40 book type challenge, emphasis on reading not numbers. I've used the 40 Book Challenge in class before and know it can provide some of the impetus required to take a look at different genres, thus growing our reading skills, vocabulary and general understanding of the world around us. We haven't worried about a way of monitoring the challenge because its the reading that is uppermost not writing about our reading, although Amy and I are wanting to implement some ways to provide some evidence of learning within reading. The 40 Book Challenge awaits as an untapped tool that I have introduced to LC4.

A colleague in Christchurch has developed a twitter-based book chat with her students. I had two of my students participating last year as it provided them with an opportunity to regularly discuss the books they were reading and expand their reading horizons. I have mentioned the existence of this bookchat to some of my students but need to facilitate their participation early in term 2. 

Where to next:
As we reviewed Term 1, I shared my frustration with my self-diagnosed lack of innovative teaching. I knew that my first term would be challenging in a new school but that I didn't feel I'd met my own expectations. The conversation took an interesting spin as we considered the impact our planning had had on this. We'd started with the lofty goal of having every week well planned in advance but ended operating on a just-in-time model as we responded to the needs of our learners. We discussed how this would have a large impact as more planning equates to a longer lead-in time and therefore more time for innovative teaching. Twitter chats, food tech lessons and construction workshops all necessitate preparation and use of any technology is enabled by more prep time also. However, directing a child to a website or app upon a teachable moment doesn't require much prep, just that the tool is top-of-mind at the required point in time.

During these discussions I was reminded of a blogpost that our principal shared with us in our innovation community. It centred on the importance of finishing, that completing a process or inquiry of learning is powerful and allows the learner to practice, develop and understand the various components required for mastery. It provided a challenge, the idea that innovation can lead to lots of uncompleted pieces of work. This reading summed up a conversation I had with another colleague about artistic endeavours that can lead to vast quantities of half-finished work, and frustration for a teacher that the true learning hasn't taken place yet.

In the last week of term 1 Amy was busy downloading information to me that may be helpful in term 2. Learning to operate our robots and what she had done for Coding within HPPS was high on the priority list. It was exciting being the learner again and in the short space of time we spent on this, combined with the reflection about my own innovative practice I felt invigorated. 

I'm still not sure if this was just my own self-doubt created by higher expectations, but the goal deserves the honest reflection and now I have a clearer pathway for term 2. Student voice, innovative teaching practice that adds value, advance planning and all tempered by a renewed emphasis on finishing experiences fully. 

Day 24 #28Daysofwriting - Choice or Voice?

"What is the difference between student choice and student voice?

How you using student voice to inform learning in your learning common?

How are the activities you have in your learning common responding to the needs of your students? Or do they just keep them busy?"

These 4 questions were posed in our staff meeting this afternoon, the example being whether I had considered these in my enthusiasm to bring Kidsedchatnz to HPPS. I know that the example wasn't a personal attack, more an extension of the "Warm and Demanding" culture at the Hobsonville Point Schools. But as I quickly pondered these questions I decided that Kidsedchatnz does deserve this lens being put to it. Not just for its use at HPPS but for its role in schools as we seek to grow it. 

Some readers will know that I am one of the coordinators at Kidsedchatnz and love what we have done with participation increasing significantly since it began. I've posted about it frequently (e.g., here and here) and it has been integral in my own PD as my role and enthusiasm has grown.

I sat in the last block this afternoon running a workshop to introduce a variety of Yr 4-6 students to twitter this afternoon, in preparation for the first chat this afternoon. All of them would have a range of learning and dispositional needs. Without rambling through how each child's needs are met, I think there are still valuable questions and answers contained within a focussed reflection.

Core Education outline successful student voice (in relation to MLE's) as being:

• do students have ‘the power to act’ in the MLE?
• are all learners empowered to make choices and decisions about how, where, what and when they learn?
• are learners a part of their own learning support network within the MLE?
• Is the design of the MLE adaptive to learner needs and ambitions? (http://www.core-ed.org/professional-learning/mle-matrix)

Where does Kidsedchatnz fit within the lens of choice versus voice? Kidsedchatnz and the topics that have been used have always relied to a large extent on student voice, over time our team of coordinators have accessed our participants to establish topics, questions and activities. But is this the voice that is required? If I am the moderator for the week, I've always posted a topic using my class to generate the questions, but the weeks that I'm not the moderator I can't say that it is my student's voice, but this is where choice comes in I would argue. I've always given my learners the option to take part in a chat session, if you're not interested in talking about EOTC or Science you don't have to participate. 

Once in a session then student voice is obvious, the children have agency to express themselves within the topic, and can support, question and discuss the topic with other students. In the past, I have watched as different students engaged in quite different learning conversations based on their own interests.

How you using student voice to inform learning in your learning common?

I have to confess that Kidsedchatnz is a 'programme' I have experienced success with and is easy for me to fall back to/rely on. This is the worst form of teaching we've discussed with Daniel, when things are tough or we're in the Learning Pit, we can revert to what we know. However, while Amy will be confirm that I've been proactive in pursuing Kidsedchatnz being used at HPPS, I've been very pragmatic. I know that should demand (aka student voice) not be there, then I can not reasonably continue to dedicate time to Kidsedchatnz. 

If I am sensible about HPPS involvement in Kidsedchatnz and use student voice then I will be looking at student interests and where possible looking to create an opportunity for my students to really express their voice. 

We have also used flipped lessons and activities as a precursor to the chat sessions. Student voice could be used here, creating an activity that students want to do with the follow up being the discussion questions formed by the learner.

How are the activities you have in your learning common responding to the needs of your students? Or do they just keep them busy?

I once ran into a topic that my students at HNS just weren't interested in, but I also use to have 1-2 other activities on offer. At the time I would argue that these additional activities were responding to student voice and worked against Kidsedchatnz participation, a student even told me that I should make the options less exciting. Using the warm & demanding lens, I'm not sure I would now judge them as being responsive but hindsight is 20/20. At the time I'd blindly ploughed on and believed that the options needed to be less exciting, but if they were truly responsive then Kidsedchatnz should have been the option to remove.

I am confident that using voice & observation my learners will be able to meet many learning and dispositional needs though Kidsedchatnz. For some learners, participation in any given week may lean towards being stuff they do rather than a great learning experience. But if they were to exercise discretion around the topics they engage with, and fully extend themselves in those chat sessions then it ceases to be stuff and becomes the awesome collaborative and connected communication experience it can be.

Kidsedchatnz will be under intense scrutiny at HPPS, I think this is positive and if the scrutiny is warm and demanding then it may signal an awesome growth period for my beloved Twitter-based chat. In the afternoon, Amy and I run responsive workshops (e.g., Movie making or Garageband). The workshops are set up to help with a need that we have observed, students can lead them and they generally need to opt-in for these workshops. We will easily be able to identify if students are not opting in, each days planning is there for both Amy and I to see and it will quickly become obvious if my time could be better spent elsewhere. Although, if Kidsedchatnz was to truly become responsive then maybe there are some amazing opportunities that could be pursued.

Student voice or choice? Or just stuff?