Osterman
and Kottkamp (1993) contrast professional development by experts with a
reflective practice model such as blogging. They suggest the traditional
approach results in knowledge acquisition whereas reflective practice leads to
change in behaviors via self-awareness.
Step 1 (What): Identify one key change in
your professional practice
I have
chosen to identify (and implemented) in my practice has been collaboration
(Hack education research). I have learnt to appreciate the necessity for
learners (in my Year 7 & 8 class) to collaborate in all learning areas (at
primary) to enable them to understand other learners needs, thoughts, new ways of
looking at problems, listening to others with understanding and empathy, and
building up their social skills in the process. Students learn more from each
other than from their teacher, and given time to collaborate, children
inevitably make far greater connections and deepen their thinking. Learners in
my class appear happier and more cohesive at school.
Step 2: Evaluate the identified change
Reflective
practice: An Experiential Learning Cycle
The
cycle has 4 stages including problem identification; observation and analysis;
abstract reconceptualization; active experimentation.
Stage 1: Problem
identification
Learners below or
slightly below (without specific learning needs), did not appear to be making
any significant progress to bring them in line with the NZ curriculum levels
and their peers. In numeracy, writing and reading, the same individuals appered
on intervention sheets and planning, marked as ‘below curriculum level’. Previous
attempts of giving additonal home learning, focusing on specific needs (gaps),
providing extra tuition time worked to little avail. As Osterman & Kottkamp
(2015) state, ‘the drive to implement a change in practice is often started by
a gap in an educator’s desired condition and the reality’. The reality led to
questioning whether a different approach would work? This was important because
I wanted to make a difference to the learners, make their time at school valuable
and to provide equitable opportunities for all children.
Stage 2: Observation
and analysis
Data gathered during
Term 1, 2018 was compared to results from children’s learning in 2017. The time
extra time spent on these learners appeared to be wasted. Data was gathered
using standardised testing, for numeracy (PAT, GLoSS and IKAN), writing
(e-asTTle matrix) and reading (STAR, PATs, Running Records).
I considered the 21st
Century Skills learners need to be using and insights into previous learning I
had about (but not fully engaged with and implemented) began to surface. Collaboration and
teamwork
stood out as an area I could to do better in and implement. I realised that I
mostly ability grouped and used a teacher centered learning model that was not
providing enough opportunity for student voice.
Stage 3: Abstract re conceptualization
From gathering
assessment data and analysis of the learner’s situation, I had an insight into considering
collaborative learning (a process of re-conceptualization). I began to implement
gradually a tuakana teina model into the classroom. This consciousness raising
(coupled with exposure to new approaches) led to me making significant changes
to my program. It was an experiential process, lessons did not go according to
plan, with a lot of re-directing and guiding for learners.
Stage 4: Active
experimentation
It was exciting
implementing new ideas, not all learners embraced them and at times it was a
struggle to encourage students to work together with noticeably different
levels. Teaching social skills (patience, empathy and understanding) was important
and an area I had not counted on needing to do. It required a lot of active
modelling of what group collaboration looked like for example in numeracy:
allowing all members to have a turn at trying to explain their strategy and
ensuring that all members could show how the group solved a problem (rather
than one person solving the problem continuously). Slow implementation of
changes was more effective.
Step 3 (What next)
Learners who are ‘well
below’ the NZ Curriculum levels or those with special needs present a delima with
their involvement in mixed ability collaboration. Negatively, these learners
get lost in their peers working or leave to friends to solve problems and do
the majority of the work. The positive, that they feel included and are still
learning from peers. One solution was to have them collaborate in their own
group (similar needs), with some success, but this rquires further exploration.
The process of inclusion works for religious education, physical education,
inquiry learning, writing (using Google Docs and blogging), but not so well for
numeracy and reading (peers need to practice patience at this time).
A process of rotation mixing
groups up daily (currently have maths mates or groups for term), would give at
or above students a break from working too often with special needs or well
below learners. Another idea could be to make simpler entry level tasks for
maths that the special needs learners can do to make them feel capable? Remaining
open to new approaches, exploring and experimenting with them to test whether their practical application is
also a next step.
References
Osterman, K. &
Kottkamp, R.(1993). Reflective Practice for Educators.California.Corwin Press,
Inc. Retrieved from http://www.itslifejimbutn otasweknowit.org.uk/files
Osterman, K. F., &
Kottkamp, R. B. (2015). Reflective practice for educators: professional
development to improve student learning.(2nd ed.) New York: Skyhorse
Publishing.