Creativity or standardisation - the choice we face.

It seem a given that schooling is a good thing but is it? Schooling has both the power to open learners to new horizons or restrict them to past thinking; the reactionary ‘new’ national standards are case in point.

From Homer Simpson: ‘How is education supposed to make me feel smarter? Besides anytime I learn something new it pushes old stuff out of my brain. Remember when I took that course on home winemaking and I forgot how to drive.’

Let’s hope that the exciting new New Zealand Curriculum isn’t sidelined by an unhealthy emphasis on National’s standards which are more political than educational. An emphasis on standardized ‘best practice’ teaching (which morph into ‘fixed practice’) has been growing since Tomorrows Schools and, as a result, an emphasis literacy and numeracy has crowded out other equally important learning areas. There is all too often a terrible sameness in many classes I visit. Who really wants to see classrooms full of ‘standardized’ charts, language and paintings? Too many schools have overdone ‘teaching intentions’, ‘success criteria, ‘scaffolding’, and ‘feedback’ to the detriment of creativity. National standards are the last straw in this managerial approach to teaching.

We desperately need a return to the creative teaching best exemplified by the writing of Elwyn Richardson in his wonderful book ‘In the Early World’. The teachers I have admired over the decades always believed that it is vitally important to establish classrooms where students’ experiences, voice, questions, and points of view are valued, celebrated, and expanded by thoughtful teaching.

My advice is not to be hoodwinked by the standards but to focus on developing classroom as creative learning communities that value the reality of the students. We need to escape from current trends towards standardization and move to a more personalized approach. In a creative future all students need to have their gifts and talents developed and their desire to learn kept alive and well.

Thankfully there are still teachers in our schools with valuable insights to share about how to develop creativity. The challenge for us is to find such teachers and develop informal networks to share their ideas. In the past teachers could look to the advisory services but this is no longer the case; in the future schools will be swarming with ‘best practice’ literacy and numeracy advisers.

Now is the time to focus on what is known about establishing success orientated learning environments. The politicians like to talk about ‘achievement tails’ ( created by their collective inaction about facing up to the well research effects of poverty) and offer simplistic solutions no matter that they have failed when applied in other countries. Those who understand how people learn know better.

David Perkins, along with others, suggests that the key is for students to be involved in realistic whole tasks and to learn appropriate skills (such as literacy and numeracy) in context. Creative teachers have always known this but all too often schooling is fragmented, particularly as students move through the system.

Eliot Eisner, Howard Gardner and Sir Ken Robinson all believe in creativity and that students need to interpret and express their ideas by tapping a range of talents, or intelligences. Creative teachers have always appreciated such individual differences and reject a standardized ‘one size fits all’ approach

From people like Art Costa and Guy Claxton we gain insight into the importance of developing positive ‘habits of mind’ or ‘learning power’ – the ‘key competencies’ of our sidelined New Zealand Curriculum. Once again this is nothing new for creative teachers who have always understood the importance of developing positive attitudes.

There is a vital need to return to the neglected research of the 1980s Waikato University ‘Learning In Science Project’ (along with the more recent research of Graeme Nuttal). Both illustrate the importance of valuing students’ prior ideas and skills in any area of learning. Personal constructivism is the essence of creativity.

And we need to look to Kelvin Smythe who has long believed in the power of creative teachers rather than technocratic solutions. Smythe writes about the importance of developing in students a ‘feeling for’ whatever they are learning; when students become so involved they are transformed in the process. This is about learning by doing fewer things well. Mihaly Csikskentmihalyi calls this ‘flow’; hard to measure but vitally important to experience for failing learners.

Daniel Pink’s latest book, ‘A whole New Mind: Drive’, subtitled ‘the surprising truth about what motivates us’, is truly exciting. He writes that for too long school have relied on an extrinsic ‘carrot and stick approach’ (or ‘name and blame’). The three things, he writes, that motivate us all are: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Real learning is achieved when the joy of learning is its own reward We need to help our students ‘direct their own lives’, to ‘learn and create new things’ and to continually ‘better themselves’ and his challenge to us is apply this to education. Students need clear purposes, immediate feedback and challenges well matched to their abilities Creative teachers, like Elwyn Richardson, have long appreciated the power of personal purpose.

Pink writes to develop creativity teachers need to focus on introducing their students to interesting, challenging and absorbing tasks that, by deepening learning and by doing ones best, are reward in themselves. An obsession with goals ( implicit in our governments standards) and extrinsic rewards are problematic to Pink as they narrow focus, reduce risk taking, encourage dependency, replace intrinsic motivation, and crush creativity.

Quoting Deci and Ryan (experts on intrinsic motivation) Pink writes that, ‘If there is anything fundamental about our nature it’s the capacity for interest. Some things facilitate it. Some things undermine it.’ It is this inner drive to follow interests that must be protected all costs. As Jerome Bruner wisely wrote many years ago, ‘teaching is the canny art of intellectual temptation.’

What creates failure is something as simple as what Pink calls lack of ‘grit’ – the ability to persist and not give up. Young children, he says, are born curious and self directed but all too this is lost because formal schooling has ‘flipped their default setting’. Students need to learn to make choices over what they do and how they do it .We are all born to be players not pawns and we all resent compliance.

Pink writes enthusiastically about the research of psychology professor Carol Dweck who believes that the ability to learn or fail is in our heads. What we think shapes what we learn, or fail to learn. If kids believe they are born ‘smart’ (or ‘dumb’) learning is difficult. Smart people don’t like new learning that involves risk and ‘dumb’ kids just don’t even try. In contrast, if students see learning (working towards mastery) as a result of their continual effort, they find learning easier and take setbacks in their stride.

Developing positive mindsets in our students would be preferable to wasting time and energy implementing doubtful standards.

Principals ought to keep these well researched ideas about teaching and learning in mind and focus on creating ‘flow friendly environments’ ; motivating environments for both teachers and students to achieve autonomy, personal mastery and a sense of purpose. Unlike Homer Simpson we must not let the distraction of ‘new’ standards cause us to forget what education for a creative age is all about.

Motivation - the drive to learn.

Daniel Pink’s latest book, ‘A whole New Mind: Drive’, subtitled ‘the surprising truth about what motivates us’, is truly exciting.

He writes that for too long school have relied on an extrinsic ‘carrot and stick approach’ (or ‘name and blame’). The three things, he writes, that motivate us all are: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Real learning is achieved when the joy of learning is its own reward We need to help our students ‘direct their own lives’, to ‘learn and create new things’ and to continually ‘better themselves’ and his challenge to us is apply this to education.

Students need clear purposes, immediate feedback and challenges well matched to their abilities. Creative teachers, like Elwyn Richardson, have long appreciated the power of personal purpose.

Pink writes to develop creativity teachers need to focus on introducing their students to interesting, challenging and absorbing tasks that, by deepening learning and by doing ones best, are reward in themselves. An obsession with goals ( implicit in our governments standards) and extrinsic rewards are problematic to Pink as they narrow focus, reduce risk taking, encourage dependency, replace intrinsic motivation, and crush creativity.

Quoting Deci and Ryan (experts on intrinsic motivation) Pink writes that, ‘If there is anything fundamental about our nature it’s the capacity for interest. Some things facilitate it. Some things undermine it.’ It is this inner drive to follow interests that must be protected all costs. As Jerome Bruner wisely wrote many years ago, ‘teaching is the canny art of intellectual temptation.’

What creates failure is something as simple as what Pink calls lack of ‘grit’ – the ability to persist and not give up. Young children, he says, are born curious and self directed but all too this is lost because formal schooling has ‘flipped their default setting’. Students need to learn to make choices over what they do and how they do it .We are all born to be players not pawns and we all resent compliance.

Pink writes enthusiastically about the research of psychology professor Carol Dweck who believes that the ability to learn or fail is in our heads. What we think shapes what we learn, or fail to learn. If kids believe they are born ‘smart’ (or ‘dumb’) learning is difficult. Smart people don’t like new learning that involves risk and ‘dumb’ kids just don’t even try. In contrast, if students see learning (working towards mastery) as a result of their continual effort, they find learning easier and take setbacks in their stride.

Principals ought to keep these well researched ideas about teaching and learning in mind and focus on creating friendly motivating environments for both teachers and students to achieve autonomy, personal mastery and a sense of purpose.

We must not let the distraction of ‘new’ standards cause us to forget what education for a creative age is all about. Developing positive mindsets in our students would be preferable to wasting time and energy implementing doubtful standards. Personalisation of learning by developing every students' passions , gifts and talents , rather than standardisation and conformity, are the future.

Daniel Pink's book is a must for all those schools and teachers who value creativity .It is an ideal antidote to the current imposition of conforming educational standards

Highly recommended.

Wrong 'default' position?

A lot of people students still know lived their formative years in the 1940s and such individuals would make a great primary source to research to note similarities and differences between then and now. Such topics make authentic, or rich, research studies for children in upper primary and middle schools and would to help such students get a 'feeling for ' life in such times as well as reinforcing inquiry mindsets.

When visiting primary and middle school classes it is not hard to see the 'default position' of most teachers.Literacy and numeracy times take up the 'prime time' during the day - study topics and the creative arts are all too often a 'tack on'.

This is the opposite to my own position and the creative teachers I have worked with over the years. For 'us' the current study topic played a central role and provided the 'energy' for much of the rest of the day - particularly the language block ( now called by the narrower term the literacy block).

If I were to ever be a teacher again ( not very likely as it all looks too hard to me) I would place inquiry central to almost all learning and make use of a language arts or experience based approach to develop students deep understanding. Language time needs to be integrated with the afternoon inquiry programme. I know this happens but it is the emphasis that worries me; the lack of emphasis on the study content in literacy time.

Maybe it is times to give up literacy and numeracy almost ruling supreme.


I was pleased to read recently of how a research based organisation that had outlined how their innovative strategies could be applied to learning ( ironic because this was once the case for many teachers).

The 'default' position to achieve this would be to place student creativity at centre and see literacy and numeracy as means to achieve in depth learning - a change of emphasis; a 're framing' of literacy.

The problem solving research model suggested was:

1 Start with project brief - the set of challenges and questions that give the class a framework to begin and some benchmarks by which they can measure progress. The final results , class, group, and individual, become authentic assessments of the learning that has been achieved. At this stage it is important to gauge the current understandings ( 'prior knowledge')and skills the students have. Some of the outcomes will also include aspects of creative language and the arts.


2 Ask 'How might we..?' Well crafted inquiry questions will drive the process. If answers can be provided by 'google' they're the wrong questions! By requiring such things as similarities and contrasts such superficial learning can be avoided. It is at this stage the language arts time can be used to introduce content and to teach necessary inquiry and expressive skills. A range of resources that contribute to the study needs to be gathered as primary resources to sift and sort through requiring real information gathering skills. The classroom walls can begin to show the inquiry process and be added to as ideas are developed. Displays can be set up to motivate thinking.

3 Form research teams. All good projects require both individual and team effort. Such teams in business are typically small, focused and interdisciplinary. Groups will be working to research different aspects and requires considerable teacher input to see tasks chosen are focused and suitable.

4 To begin teams might start with brainstorming to develop ideas to follow up. To work well rules need to be in place - defer judgement, encourage wild ideas, stay focused on the topic and , most important of all, build on the ideas of others. Such brainstorming and idea clarification make ideal language time tasks.

5 Embrace the mess. Nothing in real life works out as planned.New ideas and directions will emerge and may need to be followed up. This 'emergence' is at the heart of real research. Design thinkers learn how to embrace the mess - such research is a creative process not one of following pre-set plans. Students need to be helped to see the patterns and relationships as they present themselves and a creative teacher is great asset to assist students draw things together.

6 'Go with the flow and learn to let go'. As the project unfolds ideas will come together to produce finished pieces of research, art , language or whatever media students have settled on. There are range of media available for students to present their idea to each other (and to their parents and the wider community). The classroom walls need to show progress, completed artifacts and work in progress. Keeping all the 'stuff' visible is important to assist students see patterns and possibilities. It also gives students opportunities to see and talk about each others work.

Many teachers currently use aspects of such an inquiry model but to work well it needs to be the 'default mode for' all teachers. Learning is an 'emergent' activity and not one that can be planned in advance as is all too often the case.

It is how some of us used to work in the past.

Big ideas about school leadership

At a early New Zealand Principal's Conference I heard Australian educator Hedley Beare say the an ideal 'leader' principal would be a customised Indiana Jones - ready and able to take risks and happily cut through red tape but aways on the side of righteousness.

Such 'leadership' is not part of the DNA of many principals who prefer to play it safe and comply with imposed regulations. I see schools going along , to get along, with National Standards.

Recently I read on the Internet list of ten big ideas of school leadership written by a Middle School Principal of the Year.They seemed to make sense to me So I have picked them over to share with whoever reads this.

1 The focus of 'your' school must be on the success of kids 100% of the time. All too often, it seems, we try to fit kids into our expectations and in the process ignore the ideas, questions, points of view, and talents the students bring with them. And we see any conflict with students as a problem rather then as a means to work out a mutual better solutions.

2 Leaders need to create a vision,write it down,and start implementing it. It is important not to put your vision in drawer and forget about it and hope for the best. Every decision must be aligned against the vision and beliefs that underpin it. The whole school community is watching when you make a decision so consistency, by referencing decisions against the vision, is important.

3 It's the people stupid. The secret of managing is to keep the people who hate you away from those who are undecided. Hire people who support your vision, who are prepared to learn and who like kids.

4 Keep the paddles in the water. When navigating dangerous rapids in raft the only way to succeed is for everyone in the boat to sit on the edge and paddle really hard even though everyone would rather sit in the centre where it is safer. In times of school crisis everybody must be involved.

5 Find time to think and worry during the day. You are never always going to have a good days so it is OK to stare at the wall, reflect on the vision, and think about how to make necessary changes. Value input from other but ask those who provide it to provide possible solutions as well.

6 Take responsibility for the good and bad. The solutions to problems are almost always right in front of you; the genius of the school lies within the school. Imposed solutions have their consequences. Don't give away your responsibility.

7 You have ultimate responsibility. Have very clear expectations derived from the school vision and beliefs and then make sure people have the knowledge, resources, and time to accomplish expectations. Autonomy is the goal but actions need to be within the bounds of the vision.

8 Have bias for yes. The only progress you ever make in life involves risk.Ideas that teachers and others may suggest may seem a little crazy but try to makes such requests into a yes. Use the vision as a self reference and encourage others to do so.

9 Consensus is over rated. Twenty percent of the people will be against anything. When you realize this you avoid compromising what really should be done because you stop watering things down.If you always reach consensus you are being led by the 20%

10 Large changes need to be done quickly. If you wait too long to make changes to a school culture you have already sanctioned mediocre behaviour because you are allowing it.That is when change is hard. Define with the staff the behaviours required by the vision and belief and hold people accountable to them.

Seems like good advice if principals want to be real leaders!

A lesson from the UK re Standards

Our Government is determined to going ahead with imposing of National Standards against the advice of teachers and reacted New Zealand educators. Only John Hattie is with them (I think) .His organisation is setting itself up to provide ( distort) the future direction for education in New Zealand with its obsession on 'objective' testing.

The technocrats, fragmenting and measuring learning bits, are wining over those with a holistic progressive educational beliefs.

In the meantime the standards experiments are being shown to fail in the UK and the US while the most successful country, Finland, wins the literacy and numeracy race without them.They have put their faith on trusting a well educated teaching profession! Ironically New Zealand is well ahead of of the UK and the US.

I received the following message to one of my recent blogs and thought it worth sharing.

'I have been reading and using parts of your blog for a couple of years and it has inspired me to change how I teach.

However, when I read of what is happening in New Zealand I despair.

Here in the UK the system of standards, top down curricula, league tables has failed.The profession - at the grass roots, teachers and heads - have lost confidence in the government but appears to have no influence on policy makers.

In New Zealand you should be very sceptical of this political dogmatism. It will paint your system into a corner over the next decades.Politicians should have nothing to do with curricula, standards and testing - this should be purely a professional matter.

Strike!
Campaign!
Protest!'

A lesson for Mrs Tolley?

Education is all about changing your mind when facing new evidence. Mrs Tolley ( NZ's shrill Minister of Education) by this definition fails relying on simplistic sound bites to answer all critics. She would , however, do well to read about Diane Ravitch's astonishing about face before it is too late and we all head down the American failed way to a standardised McDonald's approach to learning.


Diane Ravitch has long been a passionate advocate of injecting greater competition and accountability into the US education system but she realized, three years ago, that her ideas had evolved to a point that she had changed her mind. In her latest book 'The Death of the Great American School System; How Testing and Choice are undermining Education' she makes it clear she no longer supports market orientated reform strategies in education and the current national testing regime.

Diane Ravitch may not be well known in New Zealand but she gained a formidable influence in the Republican -dominated 1980s becoming assistant secretary of education in the 90s and since then has become a much sought after policy analyst and research scholar. In the nearly 20 books she had previously written she has weighed in against progressive education focusing on free market solutions to educational problems.

Her turnaround has become the buzz of school policy circles; lets hope it can be heard as far away as our beehive!

Ravitch, who once supported requirements for testing in maths and reading, now writes that this emphasis has squeezed out other vital subjects and has encouraged teachers to narrow their curriculum by teaching to the tests. This emphasis , she now believes , is undermining public education.


This is ironic because no one has done more in the past than Ms Ravitch to drive home the messages of accountability and testing. She now knows the testing agenda has not raised student achievement and now sees that testing has became not just a way to measure student learning, but an end in itself.

'Accountability', she writes, ' was not raising standards but dumbing down the schools'. 'Accountability has turned to test cramming and bean counting, often limited to reading and maths'. She told a convention of school superintendents that the accountability programmes were ' ill conceived, compared with those nations with the best performing schools. Nations like Finland and Japan..we are on the wrong track'.

Mrs Ravitch traces the start of the deterioration from the effort to introduce top down balanced literacy approaches to reading - it became a formula that was replicated in increasingly heavy handed ways. When such an approach was tied to accountability ( 'league tables') she began her turnaround and her criticism of such a narrower approach. A scenario that is being replicated in New Zealand - and one that has already failed in the UK.

She writes, 'School reform is like a freight train, and I am out on the tracks saying, you're going the wrong way!'

How can we ignore such a revelation in New Zealand?

Along the way she also skewers much of President Obama's agenda for improving the nations schools with the president's keenness to introduced national standards ( an improved version on No Child Left Behind testing) and the growing emphasis on using test school data to guide educational decision making. Standards based reform is a 'formula for incoherence and obfuscation'. It is she says, 'A high jacking of public education'. 'You can't have a rich and full education by teaching only basic skills'.

It is not often that one of the fields most influential thinkers publicly reverses themselves. But it does show that Ms Ravitch has the courage to do so .She now believes that a collaboration and trust model would work better than a market and competitiveness model. She now appreciates that the previous competitive model was a threat to the traditional public neighbourhood schools and democracy itself. We need reform that supports the professional wisdom of teachers. One of the worst ideas Mrs Ravitch now believes is to make our schools work like a business' That trend, she says, 'threatens to destroy public education' - 'Who will stand up to the tycoons and politicians and tell them so'?

Mrs Tolley,and her Ministry apologists, cannot write off Mrs Ravitch's new position as 'mischievous' as she has sidelined those who have dared criticize her within New Zealand

Ravitch's epiphany needs to be taken seriously before it is too late in New Zealand.

Is Mrs Tolley up to it?I fear not but we have been warned


Post script: an extract from Diane Ravitch's blog 6th March 2010.

' My hope for the book is that it will provoke a counteroffensive against misguided policies.These misguided policies...have the support of the most powerful people in our society, including our best known pundits and editorialists'.

'I do not agree that our schools are overrun with terrible teachers.Part of the goal of my book is to discredit the current knee jerk reaction of editorials and public officials, who blame teachers for everything that goes wrong with the schools. Blaming the teachers lets everyone else off the hook: families, the media, the popular culture, policy makers, and the students themselves. The overwhelming majority of our nation's teachers are doing the best they can under difficult circumstances with not enough support from society, parents, the media.'

Wish there was the moral courage for some Ministry people I used to admire to speak with such honesty - but then they would lose their jobs.

Weighing the Pig -an exercise in national Standards testing

Another fable from my guest presenter Mac. It is obvious that the idea of each school working out each kid's standard will be become a nightmare of data collecting and inter school moderation and that, sooner or later, a national test system will be imposed. And then on to league tables...


It was Wednesday 9.30 a.m. the 5th week of Term 3 and in all classrooms, in all schools throughout Aotearoa, children were preparing to commence their National Standard test in Writing. Teachers were now able to open the sealed instructions and start their children on the test taking care of course not to give any instruction.

Janice read through the instructions and rolled her eyes skyward as she realized what her class would be writing about “What I Did Last Night.” “How absolutely pathetic”, thought Janice, “after all the interesting writing we have completed this year to ask my kids to write about this. Well Johnny will be OK he will just write -‘keeping out of Dad’s way’. Wonder what level that gives him when it’s marked? Nathan will be fine too he will make up a wonderful story about last night, most of it untrue yet very readable. He has the makings of a politician or a real estate salesman!! and the majority of the girls will be fine. Oh well let’s get this over with.”

George was thrilled when he started his class on the writing task. “Great, we’ve been practicing this all year”, he thought to himself,“the class should do well and their results should help the school’s overall scores. I’m sure my class will remember the stuff I’ve shown them for completing a test like this and the boss will be thrilled with the outcomes.”

“You poor kids,” thought Leanne. “All year we have worked on your creative writing, using your wonderful ideas and expressing yourselves in a lively and colorful style and now you are asked to write this boring stuff. Oh well I’m sure you have remembered enough of the work we did on adjectives and such like to be able to handle this task. If only those who implemented this sort of time wasting had come and asked me I could have provided them all the information they needed on the achievements of my class including those for a range of competencies in addition to just Writing.”

Meanwhile in an office far removed from the classrooms of Aotearoa, both physically and philosophically, the Minister with Responsibility for Eliminating Creative Teaching was discussing with her colleague the Minister with Responsibility for Lowering Unemployment the outcomes of the surveys both their departments had just completed. “Its easy for you,” stated the MRECT. “If your results come in worse you just issue a statement that says it’s because there are less jobs and the public accept this. The results of the testing we have done so far show that the achievement tail is still sitting at 5% with another 20% somewhat below expectations and it doesn’t matter how I spin it the outcome has remained the same over the last two terms. I wonder if we introduce two tests a term if this would help? I will go back to the experts in my Ministry and ask them.”

Janice headed off to morning tea sombre, but not distraught, about what she viewed as a farcical waste of a morning in terms of kids’ learning yet by the time she had finished her coffee was thinking about the Maths lesson after play and how she would make it interesting for the class and cheer up herself, and them, by making it a fun time.

George was careful to sit next to the principal at morning tea time and told her how well his class had handled the Writing test. In his usual “eager beaver” manner he was looking forward to getting on to Maths after play and giving the kids the necessary skills to handle the Maths test later in the term. It was no surprise that after play when the principal visited his room the class were all working quietly from the same page in the Math's text book practicing algorithms that could possibly appear in the next National Standard test.

Leanne whistled as she quickly planned the rest of her day. Natalie bringing the baby rabbit to school gave her the ideal motivation to fill the rest of the day with some child-centred activity. Onto the whiteboard she wrote the outline of activities for the class so that they could work at their own pace on research, observational drawing, creative writing, music, dance and other forms of presentation. I’ll catch up with the Maths tomorrow she thought this is too good an opportunity to miss and will give me the chance to work with those who need some additional help- the help my own assessment indicated. She sipped her tea and added her planning notes into her planning folder just in case someone wanted to see why she had not followed her original day’s plan.

Meanwhile in an office far removed.…

Kids from Chaos - our achievement tail?

In education we are often quick to label students with the intention of assisting them but all too often labels end up as an excuse for not helping such students by placing the blame outside of the teaching learning process- deficit theory. One writer has added another group to the list KFC kids( kids from chaos). Kids with no boundaries - like living in spaghetti!


I have always thought that it is the lack of authenticity about our programmes that all too often create the various categories of failing students in our society. Such students do not fit into 'our' preplanned programmes - success being assessed as students going along with what is offered. 'One size fits most of the students' - the rest are sacrificed; standardization only suits standard kids!

Even so called child centred primary classrooms , as friendly as they look, are strongly teacher determined as a result of imposed formulaic 'best practices'.

Students of chaos have their own definition. Like other 'at risk' students kids from chaos suffer but they have some important differences. They are frequently from poor or historically marginalized families but in addition to this they came from where chaos reigns.

In such homes adults are often absent busy working at low paying jobs, unemployed, or simply emotionally struggling to survive. As a result such students miss out on substantive relationships with powerful adults. Their lives are full of turmoil and unpredictability.

Such students struggle academically ( not having acquired the pre-requisite literacy skills schools demand of them) ; they have no experience at self organising skills gained through positive parental routines; as a result they feel alienated from school and all to often fall back on their default behaviours of acting out or withdrawing; they relate to similar peers for approval; rarely experience school success and, when all is added together, have little vision of a positive future and live for the moment.

If teachers reflect back to the needs of students, as outlined by William Glasser and others, some ideas of how to help such students succeed might come to mind. Whatever is decided a personalised approach to learning will be required - one that really values the experience each students brings the learning experience.

Glasser outlines five basic needs that all students need to be able to learn: power, mastery, belonging, safety, and fun. Unfortunately 'kids from chaos' ( KFC) all too often satisfy such needs with behaviours that are counter-productive to school learning.

When students behave inappropriately, as defined by the school, such students are labelled as 'at risk' and begin their career of school failure. From a personalisation perspective it is the schools that fail.

To ensure such children succeed teachers need to appreciate the circumstances that have created 'the areas of concern' and then to do everything they can to hep the KFC students gain the learning attributes that other students already have in place before they even enter school.

These students (all students) need benign routines to help them structure their day and any learning tasks. It helps such students to break down complex tasks into 'bite sized bits' ( 'scaffolding' or modeling learning) and for teachers to interact with them providing specific and immediate feedback.

Any such help needs to value each students 'voice' and point of view. If this is not a focus students can lose their individuality and creativity, a mark of a standardised programme.

The best studies will be those that come form the students own interests and questions (an 'emergent' curriculum) , so that, with appropriate help, students can feel their views are valued. This is important for all students and is the essence of personalised learning.

To gain involvement in class studies, or explorations, students need to be encouraged to make use of all their senses as, through such experiences, missing oral,and language pre-literacy skills can be developed. This is far preferable to remedial work using disconnected phonics approaches.

Such studies are a means to teach KFC students the basic research approaches that underpin discovery learning. With appropriate teacher assistance students will be able to produce work that they are proud of and that will inspire them to do better next time. This also applies to the various expressive activities that 'emerge' as possibilities . Students need to be reattached to the idea that they are their own 'meaning hunters and makers'. Displaying the work they have achieved will further reinforce the idea that they are all creators.


Such a personalised programme, combined with positive teacher assistance and benign routines, will provide the opportunities for KFC students to develop their own set of unique gifts and talents and help then see learning ( and school) as positive experience affirming their sense of self.

Such teaching, important for all students, is particularly vital for KFC students so as to fill the gaps that their chaotic lives have developed.

For me this is a validation of the discovery type programmes that were once a feature of our schools in 60/70s before the imposition of the standardised curriculum of the 80/90s.

We need to return to such powerful pedagogy - a pedagogy that values the 'artistry' of the teacher and the real lives of the students. If we do this we can make classrooms powerful learning environments for all students - but especially for 'at risk' and neglected kids.

It is these kids that will eventually contribute to the so called 'achievement tail' - one created by the impoverished teaching our schools provide, and one that will not be solved by further standardised teaching.

All students need to be helped to develop strong learning identities though such enriched experiences.