Joyful Learning

Children enjoying a science experiment.Marina Bay School


I was sent an article recently by Steven Wolk, from the Educational Leadership magazine, that should be compulsory reading for all teachers.

Wolk introduces his article by saying, 'joyful learning can flourish in your school if you give joy a chance'.

John Dewey, in 1936, wrote that 'to what avail if students absorb prescribed amounts of information.... if in the process the individual loses his own soul'. More recently, in 1984, John Goodland in his book 'A Place called School' after surveying high schools, wrote that he found an 'extraordinary sameness' and that 'boredom was a disease of endemic proportions, ' he asked, ,why are schools not places of joy?'

Even our 'new', progressive, NZ Curriculum dropped out of its final copy that schools should develop 'a love of learning', present in an earlier draft.

Although written for an American audience Wolk's ideas are relevant to us in NZ. Schools, he writes, should 'be joyful places where the minds of young children are wide open to the wonders of learning and the fascinating complexities of life'.

Wolk provides ideas for teachers to action to avoid the destructive powers that Dewey mentioned. Wolk writes,'what happens in schools has a deep and lasting effect on the mindsets that children develop towards life long learning.'

It gets back, Wolk writes, to the purpose of learning. What dispositions, he asks , do we want to cultivate? 'Is joy mentioned in any list'?

Wolk does not equate joy with simply having fun seeing it as being gained as the result of doing something personally satisfying.

Wolk outlines eleven essentials to put more joy into learning.

1 Find Pleasure in learning. With pleasurable learning we don't mind possible difficulties invoved in any in learning; we tend to see them as a natural part of learning, so we are far more open to taking risks. Schools need to tap into what children enjoy learning about and also make all school learning more enjoyable.

2 Give Students Choice. How much choice ( or 'ownership') do students have about their learning? Students can be given choices during the school day. Students can be given choice in their studies, the questions they want to explore, and how they wish to express their ideas. Schooling ought to inspire children to ask questions able to design their own tasks.

3 Let Students Create Things. People like to make stuff. Creating something original gives us a tremendous sense of agency and pride. As well, creating things gives us an appreciation of the creative process in action.

4 Show off Students Work. Our schools, and classrooms, should be brimming with wonderful, original student work. Classrooms should 'speak' to visitors.

5 Take Time to Tinker. We all learn by fooling around. Student's imaginative ideas , their intuitive leaps of imagination, should be encouraged. All too often our schools are too planned, leaving no room for spontaneity. We need to free teachers to take risks, experiment, to play with the art of pedagogy, and to feel the joy that comes from such on open approach to teaching.

6 Make school Places Inviting. All spaces, inside and outside of schools, need to be seen as learning spaces.

7 Get Outside. More of the school day should be outside. Fresh air and a sunny day can do miracles for the human spirit. Children need to have their sensory awareness expanded.To sit under a tree to read, draw, think, or talk. Much of our science could directly include the outdoors. Ecosystems are all around.

8 Read Good Books. Make sharing good literature an important feature of all classrooms. Give students time to share their own stories. All study topics have themes which provide opportunities to introduce good literature.

9 More Physical Education and Arts. In America many students have no art, music, and drama and little time for PE. For many students these are the areas that many children have strengths in and gain joy from.

10 Transform Assessment. Assessment is a pert of life and students need to see it as an important part of the learning process. We should make more use of immediate feedback, narrative assessment, self assessment, portfolios of authentic work, presentations, exhibitions and performances.

11 Have Fun Together. Teachers need to take a break from the seriousness of the school day and have some fun together. Anything that tears down the walls that often get built inside schools and builds more caring relationships is to be encouraged

Wolk concludes by referring back to John Dewey quote and says that schools can sap our souls is just as true for teachers as it is for students


If principals can help teachers find joy in their work, and help their teachers strive to 'own their own teaching' the teachers can enter their rooms every morning enthusiastic to help their students experience joy in their learning.

Myths of Inqury Based Classrooms

Students, as a part of an intensive bird study, undertake detailed observational study based on a 'stuffed' pheasant.

Canadian educator Sharon Friesen outlines myths of inquiry based classrooms in Canada in her video presentation.

Her ideas about how 'knowledge is created' are worth sharing.

1 Some teachers see no place for the teacher.This results in a lack of engagement by teachers and can be seen as a form of abdication. I can't see this as a problem in New Zealand where teachers, all too often, have been encouraged to apply intrusive 'best practices' teaching. Thankfully it is mostly restricted to literacy and numeracy teaching.

2 Teachers who do not learn alongside their students do not give their students timely feedback. Once again not such a problem in New Zealand where teachers over 'coaching' all too often results in quality work lacking in any individuality or real creativity!

3 Teachers do not act on student misconceptions. In new Zealand this would not apply in the literacy and numeracy programmes but applies in the, all too often, 'lightweight' content studies students undertake.

4 Teacher act as just facilitators. This role is not enough to ensure deep understanding in content areas. Teachers need to act as guides, coaches, advisers, co-learners, mentors, co- inquirers.

5 Teachers who feel they don't have to have in depth knowledge themselves as inquiry is about 'how to learn' not content. Teachers need to know both process and knowledge if their students are to develop in depth understandings. This is an issue in many New Zealand classrooms in content areas as science and social studies.

6 Students can learn by themselves. This myth is an abdication of teacher responsibility and is a form of abandonment.It is akin to handing the asylum over to the inmates. Hardly an issue in New Zealand literacy and numeracy programmes.

7 Teachers believe all student's answers are equally valid. This is obviously not so and teachers need to challenge and expand students ideas and theories. Once again this only applies in New Zealand to 'shallow' content studies.

Freisen is writing about Canadian teachers and from a position that develop a spirit of inquiry is central to all learning. Students need to be helped to create, through inquiry, their own knowledge so as to develop in depth understandings.

Inquiry teaching needs to be cultivated if we are to develop students able to thrive a unpredictable, but potentially exciting, 21stC.

Inquiry as a disposition

Students at Opunake Primary School dig deeply into life in Captain Scott's Antarctic hut as part of their in depth inquiry learning project about Antarctica.

The following blog is taken from a video presentation given by Canadian Sharon Friesen. Well worth spending five minutes to listen for yourself.


The biggest myth, Canadian educator Sharon Freisen says, is that inquiry is not just something you do, it is a disposition that underpins all teaching. Inquiry is a vital means of ensuring students develop deep understanding of what they study. Far too much of what is called inquiry, Sharon says, is shallow teaching.

This is certainly the case of much of what I see when I visit New Zealand classrooms. Unfortunately in our classrooms all too often there is simply not the time left after literacy and numeracy demands are taken care of. An inquiry disposition needs to be central to all learning.

Inquiry, Sharon outlines, involves a number of processes.

It is about students and teachers bringing their experiences to the learning situation.

The it is adding information to the mix

From this creating knowledge.

All in order to develop deep understanding.

This fits well with the New Zealand Curriculum of seeing students as 'seekers, users and creators of their own knowledge'. I would add to this phrase 'and their own judges'. It also links to the thinking of the creative New Zealand teachers of the 60s and 70s, before the imposition of standardized curriculums and accountability pressures.

Inquiry learning, Sharon continues, is about teaching and learning for deep understanding.It is knowledge, learner, and assessment centred teaching. In many New Zealand classrooms, if inquiry teaching is to be seen, it all too often centres around 'how to learn' processes and seems to downplay an appreciation of valuing deep understanding. Both, of course, are required.

Sharon makes the point that having an 'inquiry disposition' applies as much to teachers as the students. It is all about 'keeping the spirit of inquiry awake'.Teachers, she says, need to challenge themselves as well as their students. Once again this is in the spirit of the New Zealand Curriculum. Unless teachers model inquiry processes in their actions they cannot cultivate it in their students.

Sharon makes the very important point that you 'need something worthy of inquiry' to engage students. The topics students involve themselves in need to be worthwhile to avoid inquiry becoming 'trivial'.

Sharon reminds us that a time when the spirit of inquiry was fully awake was the Renaissance. At this time of awakening everything was questioned at a fundamental level. We are, she states, exactly at the same point again with the development of new information technology. In the Renaissance the inventions of the telescope, the microscope, the printing press, and navigational tools all inspired a total rethinking.

The spirit of inquiry is at centre stage again. It is important that schools do not trivialize this challenge. What is required , she says,is major transformational shift. Inquiry must permeate all aspects of our teaching and learning if students are to understand themselves and their world.

The end product of an inquiry should not only result in deep understanding but in new questions to explore. Inquiry is a continual disposition to question everything. It is about going deeply into what is to be learnt. To be truly engaged, Sharon concludes, is 'hard fun'.

Sharon's challenge aligns well with the spirit of our 'new' New Zealand Curriculum.

All we need now are for our schools to become 'communities of inquiry'.

Guy Claxton- 'Learning Power'

If you want to read a book that may change your mind about teaching and learning - or confirm intuitive thoughts you have always had, get yourself a copy of this book. I note I bought my copy in 2001 and my copy is almost falling apart with re-reading and underlining. I also note that he has a new book out called 'What's the Point of School'? published 2008. I am hooked - I must get a copy.

On the cover of Guy Claxton's book there is a quote from actor John Cleese, 'Just occasionally I get the feeling that somebody has said something important.

I have to agree.

I have never met Guy Claxton but once when I was working in a school in Hastings(NZ) the principal went off to a seminar to hear him speak. On return he passed on to me the 'messages' that he picked up.

Since then I have done my best to read everything he has written .I now have three of his books, each one challenging my thinking further than the previous. First I read 'Wise- Up', then 'Hair Brain Tortoise Mind' and most challenging of all, for me, 'The Wayward Mind'. I would recommend 'Wise-Up' or do a search of for his articles on 'google'. Maybe his latest book might sum up his present ideas about teaching and learning and be the one to get?

For those, who do their best to keep up with the ideas that 'trickle down' from the Ministry, they will recognise many of Claxton's ideas. He is evidently on their list of approved thinkers but this is not surprising for his thoughts align well with the direction of the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum. Claxton's ideas make a great antidote to all the standardized curriculums that the Ministry was previously in favour of and insisting that schools comply with. Thankfully, for creative teachers and schools, the Ministry 'experts' have changed their minds.

Claxton is to return to New Zealand in November to run seminars and work with lucky schools and the Ministry.

Claxton is a believer that to thrive in the future students need to develop their 'learning power', or as we so often hear these days their 'learning capacity'. The NZC calls these future dispositions the 'key competencies'. Art Costa, in his writings, calls these future dispositions 'habits of mind'. Some us will be more familiar with the phrase 'learning how to learn' as against focusing only on content.

Claxton outlines in 'Wise-Up' his four 'Rs'; resilience, resourcefulness, reflection and reciprocity.

He also believes that Western thinking has focused too much on logical rational thinking ( which he calls 'fast', or 'hair brained', in his second book).This kind of linear thinking, he writes, is useful for solving problem to which there is an obvious answer. Unfortunately for most of the real problems facing individuals and nations such thinking is inadequate. Instead he believes in the power of reflection ,or meditation, of letting the mind have time to come up with its own answers. To solve such problem his advice is to 'prime' the mind and then to stop thinking and let answers just 'come to mind'. Go fishing, he suggest and who knows what you will start thinking about. The creative process is at best messy. This , he says, is how many of the important ideas have come to many of our great thinkers and creative individuals. In fact all of us. This 'slow-thinking' he calls our 'tortoise-mind'.

This 'slow thinking' is the realm of the unconscious and has been neglected by Western thought. Through exposure, and through the myths and stories we share, ideas seep into our unconscious and becomes available as and when required. The history of how we have seen the unconscious since the beginning of history is the theme of his book 'The Wayward Mind'.

Claxton believes that 'young people need to mull and drift as well purposefully problem solve, and therefor believes flexibility, adaptability, resourcefulness and creativity to be the qualities through which we can become truly educated. The key to being a life long learner is to have the confidence to 'know what to so when you don't know what to do'. One of his saying, that is now a,favourite of mine, is that, ''learnacy' is more important than literacy and numeracy'.

I do like the sound of his most recent book,'What's the Point of School'

Does maths deserve its time

Even Einstein worried that modern schooling had the potential to destroy the joy of learning. What is about maths that makes it worth keeping in our curriculum? Why are so many students 'turned off' mathematics? Are we using maths time wisely?


I am no expert in mathematics. I retain within me negative attitudes towards the subject gained from my schooling that stay with me to this day. There must be countless other adults who have similar feelings about school maths.

For all this the place of mathematics is rarely questioned.

As we enter the 21stC schools ought to be reflecting about the attributes and disposition that they want all students to gain from their school experiences. This surely is what is being asked with the introduction of the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum?

All learning experiences need to be judged as to how they contribute to the overall vision of education that each school is being asked to define for itself to suit the needs and talents of their students.

All too often, however, how time is assigned to various subject areas remains unquestioned. Long after the Industrial Age has past, with its need for an elite of clerical workers, the Victorian 'three Rs' still remain central to learning. For those who failed in those days there were plenty of low skilled jobs available. This situation no longer exits. All students now need to gain success from their schooling.

Future students face an ever changing unpredictable complex world that will require new sets of attitudes - or key competencies as defined in the NZC.

As educationalist Guy CLaxton writes 'learnacy' ( or 'learning power') will be more important than traditional literacy and numeracy.

Looking around schools little has really changed. Literacy and numeracy still rule supreme and little time is left to introduce a range of rich learning experiences needed to provide contexts to develop future 'learning power'.

It seems only an outsider can see that the Emperor has no clothes because those in the system have no inclination to challenge the assumptions about how time is apportioned nor the the 'messages' that such an uneven approach gives to their students.

Mathematics ( leaving literacy aside ) seems to have claimed an unassailable place, as of right, in the daily timetable. But, according to Guy Claxton, 'its warrant is under scrutiny'. As the core purpose of education is being contested, he writes, 'powerful new models of teaching and learning are being proposed, and mathematics is in need of a new rational'.

He provides three challenges about the place of mathematics.

First it is not clear that much of mathematics is as directly useful as it has traditionally claimed to be. Many people, he writes, lead happy and successful lives with only basic maths. Research indicates that many people learn what they need through experience or need ( to play darts in the pub). Other research shows that children with a 'playful exploratory approach' to maths develop confidence in the future to involve themselves in more abstract maths later in life. If students are 'turned off' maths them they withdraw from future maths experiences.It seems many students, when faced up to a maths problem, give themselves a few seconds and then give up.

The message for teachers is to find ways to make maths fun and to teach maths in rich meaningful contexts. Less maths done well may mean deeper lasting understanding; much of what is currently taught is soon forgotten if not used regularly in meaningful situations.

Perhaps doing fewer things well would be a valuable idea as would, integrating maths in other areas of learning and defining what aspects of maths ought to be in place at any level, if positive attitudes are to be retained. If teachers focus on introducing fun exploratory maths then time can be reduced and used for other neglected learning areas such as science ? Seymour Papert , the computer educationalist, believes all maths( and science) should be applied.

A good idea is to make it clear when they are doing 'practice maths' and when they are doing real maths - applying it in real situations so they understand what maths is.

The second point Claxton makes is that their is no evidence to the claim that maths provides valuable generic training of the mind ( an argument once used for Latin). To achieve 'transfer' teachers have to highlight where and why maths is used in other problem solving situations.

The third point made is that there is no reason that maths should retain its central role in the school day. The worldview that sees mathematics as so central to learning is archaic.

Teachers need to be alert to see the maths potential in any learning experience including exploring the maths potential of the natural and man made environment.

The best maths, or any learning, is 'just in time' learning, rather 'than just in case', where the need to learn the maths required to solve a worthwhile task is obvious. During such learning students are able to construct their own meanings making what is learnt 'stick' in their brains available for future use; it seems it is a matter of 'use it or lose it'.

In such a classroom the boundaries between the traditional 'disciplines' becomes increasingly permeable. Mathematics becomes a valuable learning tool to solve problems.

According to Claxton, the the fixation of intelligence with literacy and numeracy has been shattered beyond repair. 'Learnacy', the desire to continue learning, is the real issue.

The important issue is to develop the positive appropriate habits of mind - the key competencies of the NZC. It is such attributes that schools should be focusing on achieving. To achieve such a vision will mean 'disrupting' current ways of assigning time to such areas such as mathematics.

Everybody ought to get a feel for mathematics and have the necessary skills and attitudes to make use of maths as necessary. No one is arguing that maths needs to replaced just redefined to suit the 21stC. Many mathematical topics are themselves ideal means to develop future dispositions as well as being embedded into other learning are problems.

Thankfully there have always been educationalists who have seen mathematics as creative and aesthetic and practical to provide resources and guidance. As well there are many creative teachers who have aways seem maths as both a creative learning area in its own sake and who integrate it creativity in the learning problem that provide the learning 'energy' of their classrooms.

Maths in this sense is creativity in action.

Powerful processes or in depth learning - or both?

Developing 'learning capacity' or developing students interests, talents, passions and dreams - or both?


A few things have been worrying me of late.

One is this emphasis on 'learning capacity' ( as seen by key competencies) as the central purpose of education . Another is the sidelining of in depth knowledge and the neglect of developing students talents and passions and the last is, what has really changed in primary classrooms to develop this learning capacity? Currently literacy and numeracy 'gobble up' most of the learning time. Is it all just rhetoric?

Learning, Mary Chamberlain from the Ministry says, has been strengthened in the New Zealand Curriculum through the inclusion of the key competencies and by an emphasis on pedagogy. She asks what is it that makes us want to learn? Her answer is if we feel have competencies and a positive disposition, it is these things that influence who we become.

Do they?

Is how students learn just as important as what they learn? Reading Mary's talk it seems the former but my experience of interesting people it is what they know and can do that singles them out. Obviously it is both.

Mary sees the competencies as 'the enablers' but I question is what what drives students to want to learn, and in the process develop these 'enablers'.

Students, Mary says, need to know you believe in their ability to learn and that you will support their dreams and encourage them to value effort and practice. No one would disagree with the above. I would just put more emphasis on the dream bit.

My worry is that the new emphasis on learning capacities and competencies is encouraging teachers to neglect in depth content. I see too many shallow studies where all that can be observed is an emphasis on learning capacities students have developed resulting in 'fragile' learning.

I do agree with Mary that plastering classroom walls with 'mind maps' and 'thinking hats' etc is not the answer, although, unlike Mary, I would not include Gardner's multiple intelligences because they are at the heart of what drives learners to learn.

To achieve in depth learning, Mary says, students need to be able to set goals, persist, work with others and look for links with other learning areas. Nothing new in any of that.

Quoting Margaret Carr ( University of Waikato) Mary continues that for a student successful learning is also a matter of inclination, of confidence, of knowing what is appropriate, and believing you have right to be curious to ask questions.

The right to be curious and to ask questions is, for me, the key to all learning.

Curiosity is an evolutionary drive as is the need to continually learn about whatever attracts the learner's attention. Curiosity is at the heart of all disciplined learning and leads into idiosyncratic talent development, or specialisation, and a growth of in depth of 'know how'. As A S Neil wrote , 'true interest is the life force of the whole personality'.

Competencies are obviously important but the development of lifelong deep interests are as important.

A few changes of emphasis in Mary's talk and I would have few arguments. Students obviously pick up learning habits from those around them who talk about their own learning. Fair enough but they are also inspired by seeing talented people demonstrate their skills. Students do need to be surrounded by adults who model and articulate competencies but are more impressed when such people demonstrate admirable talents that appeal to them.

Teachers need to focus on creating learning situation that inspire learners, that tap into their curiosity as well as focusing on developing learning capacities. I guess I am making a case not to lose the power that is gained from achieving ones personal best in an area that is meaningful to the learner as a compensation for an unbalanced approach to process. As Elwyn Richardson, one of New Zealand's pioneer educators wrote, ' a study without content is a study at risk'.

How the content is learnt is the issue and this is where a co-constructivist pedagogy comes into play; teachers rightfully being seen, as Mary says, as 'learning coaches' who are able to subtly 'scaffold learning' through feedback and focused assistance. Process and content knowledge are both vital. In my argument the coach does needs to know, his or her, content if fragile learning is to be avoided. A good 'coach' Mary says uses a 'split screen approach', an idea attributed to Guy Claxton, where the teacher teaches content/concept development with one part of the screen and strengthens learning capacity with the other. This is a valuable metaphor.

It is obvious that Mary has been influenced by the writings of Guy Claxton who has written that simply achieving does not make better learners. To be a competent learner students need the disposition to support their own continual learning and this is where the competencies come into the equation. Being a self learner, equipped with strategies, is vital.

I am simply making a case to value students interests and potential talents and to help students 'dig deeply' into such areas; to do fewer things really well.

Mary suggests that to develop learning as an active process it is important to look carefully about how time is used in the classroom.

This brings me back to classrooms I observe where the day is almost given over to literacy and numeracy leaving little time to expose students to a wide range of potential interests and ideas. This ought be impossible to justify but it does not seem to concern many principals or the Education Review Office. Or even the Ministry.

Mary shares idea about classroom environments from Claxton and Carr where they talk about 'inviting' and 'potentiating' classrooms. Inviting room make learning attractive but not necessarily 'stretching' while the latter are both appealing and challenging - developing capacity and new content.

Such rooms are aligned to the creative classrooms I have aways believed in. Guy Claxton believes such classrooms develop 'learning power' based on four Rs: Resilience, resourcefulness, reflection and relationships. He has written that 'learnacy' is more important than literacy and numeracy.This is obviously not what school are currently reflecting!

Mary concludes that 'expanding capacity to learn in these ways is a key goal of education' and that 'openness to learning is a key to success'.

I am just reminding people that another vital component is for students to develop their own set of personal interests and talents and to dig as deeply as they can into all they learn about.

I agree with Mary that if the curriculum is successful we will see our kids becoming more confident and more capable in the face of uncertainty and complexity.

I just want talented future orientated citizens as well.

Schools for talent development

The New Zealand Curriculum places great emphasis on ensuring all students leave school with the 'key competencies' in place but perhaps the real emphasis ought to be placed on the why students would want to use them - the inspiration to learn.

In the future we will need every kind of 'specialist' mind . Minds that excel in a few things even they may be inadequate at others. Everybody, it is now appreciated, has their own mix of talents and weaknesses. Developing strengths of individual students, and helping them compensate for weaknesses, is the role of education.

Imagine a school where all teachers dedicated to finding out what affinities,talents or gifts each student brings with them and then doing their best to value and amplify them. This has always been the dream of creative teachers throughout the ages. Such an approach would really value student individual differences and would result in the personalisation of learning.

Teachers should celebrate students strengths because such strengths provides students meaning in their lives enabling them to make worthwhile contributions to class life. For the most part adults who are leading worthy live do so by mobilizing their strengths and affinities. Teacher and parents should seek a consonance between a students education and their future career.

Providing experiences that have the potential to uncover and amplify such talents is the task for creative educators. It is not that strengths need to be seen as fixed as they will change and develop with age and experience.

Brains are extremely plastic and everyone learns in an idiosyncratic way .Many children fail to learn because traditional teaching methods are not in 'synch' with their individual needs, or simply ignore the motivating power of using students interests to learn. If students want to achieve something important to them they will often be prepared to learn whatever is necessary.

All too often those children with specialised minds are neglected as they are forced to achieve what their teachers have decided they need to learn. Education suits the well rounded academic learner at the expense of the strangely creative who in later life often prove their teachers wrong.

When students become involved in areas of strength, or personal interest, they are prepared to push themselves far beyond teacher expectations. In such purposeful situations students are often prepared to develop missing skills they once might have rejected. The best way to learn to read well is to read about something you know a lot about or want to learn more about.

Wise teachers will work with students and their parents to discover possible areas of interest. The eight intelligences defined by Howard Gardner make an excellent model to assist identification of areas of interests.

To value students strengths students need to be given time to develop their learning projects. It is important that all students do what they choose to do as well as they can and that they be given help to achieve quality learning according to particular needs.

This does not mean that every students will be following up only their personal set of interests but rather when topics are introduced into the learning environment teachers take advantage of individual students strengths to explore and express ideas. This approach aligns with teamwork in adult learning situations.

If school focus on uncovering student affinities from an early age students will find their education more relevant and will continue to remain life long learners with the possibility of ending up in occupations that match their talents.

By age eight or nine affinities should become obvious to teachers and parents and there is nothing wrong with students digging deeper in to such high personal interests are in consecutive years. This is how anyone with a deep interest progresses. Some children will become well known as school 'experts' in any number of things from spiders to computer use.

At the very least, every year after say year two, students ought to be given the opportunity to research a problem or topic that is of personal interest to them. Such a study would make an ideal way for teachers to assess whatever they count as inquiry learning competencies.

For such personalised projects students would need to plan and discuss how they are going to go about their project and what they hope to learn or find out about. They will need to consider how they intend to present, communicate, or demonstrate their learning. They will need to define their 'key questions' and consider their first steps.They then need to consider what information they will need (and where they will get it from) so as to gain some depth of insight to their chosen task. Finally they need to define who their intended audience will be.

For students to develop quality results teachers will have had to have introduced to the students, in previous class or group studies, all the information processing and expressive techniques for students to choose from.

Tapping into students affinities and talents is something that all teachers can include in their programmes. For other teachers it could well become a way of working that underpins all their teaching.

If this were the case teaching would become an artistic and creative activity a redefining education as we currently envisage it.

Tidy desks vacant minds?

Albert Einstein apparently maintained his desk in stupendous disarray. When it was suggested to him that a cluttered desk equates to a cluttered mind he replied,'And what does a tidy desk signify?'

I was returning from doing some work in one of our major cities when I ran across a principal I used to know in earlier years. He had just returned form the annual New Zealand Principal's Conference. I asked him what did he pick up from it all. He went on to talk about tidying his desk, passing more executive work onto his secretary and getting into the classrooms more. When he saw the look of amazement on my face he changed the subject.

Back home I asked the same question of another principal friend of mine and he went on to say similar things and how it had changed his life as a principal. I couldn't resist pulling his leg and I hurt his feelings. Didn't he already know this? I thought it was common sense? But it seem all over New Zealand principals are now Malachi Pancoast converts.

I had to search 'google' to find out Pancoast's hardly new 'powerful' message. It seems principals worldwide have become locked in their offices managing, or complying, obsessively to everything that goes on in their school with no time left to focus on what Steven Covey many years ago called, 'the main thing'. Covey wrote about the unimportant but urgent taking up time that ought to be spent on the important but not urgent; focusing on learning and teaching rather than fighting fires.

A few years ago a fellow principal asked me how many hours I spent on the job ( this was following a graph showing some principals working every hour God gave them!) and I said I was at the bottom of the graph. He admitted so was he and we both wondered what were the others actually doing? We, of course, agreed we were both effective pricipals!

Back to Pancoast 'enlightening' advice. It was all about reducing principals workloads; to work less but to be more effective. He told the principals that that they had absorbed the secretaries job as well as their own; that they needed to be out in the classrooms as a learning coach for their teachers.

Then came the big stuff.He advised principals to clean out their offices of anything personal and reeducate the secretary to take over work that they had been doing. Get her to handle all mail and paper work, get her to decide who gets to see you, meet with her daily to sort out actions for her to complete.

This was followed up principals re assigning two days to classroom coaching and support, three days in the office and and no work to go home in the evenings or weekends.

This is one book I could have written. Not the neat and sterile office stuff but leaving as much to other as possible so as to focus on being in classrooms. This is how I used to work and was also the case for other creative principals who believed it was all about teaching and learning - not endless clear folders. I was just discussing yesterday with my old secretary how we worked. She thanked me for empowering her.

I take up defence though for messy offices and thinking. Messy is just more effective than neat and tidy when it comes to creativity. Obsession with order is becoming a malady in modern management. Compulsive tidiness has its downsides and although it might suit the left brained 'control freaks' it is counter productive for right brained individuals who thrive in a mess that makes sense to them. Ironically when people tidy up things you often hear them say,'Since I have tidied up I can't find a thing!'

I can't see Pencoast's ideas being much use at a creative environment such as Google Headquarters which is anything but sterile and impersonal. There creative disorder is the name of the game to powerful effect. Google has a lot of 'play' in their system. The talented and trusted individuals who work there are given 20% of their time for their own pursuits. For all this Googles over all aim is the fierce pursuit of creativity, excellence and innovation; the results are anything but a mess.

So my advice is for principals, by all means return your focus to where it always should have been - teaching and learning but don't lose your creative soul in the process.

Remember a pinch of mess is an important ingredient in the creative process. As Einstein is claimed to have said , 'an empty office may only be the sign of an empty mind'.

Saving our Chidren from Nature Deficit Disorder

Visiting principals from Gisborne exploring the bush environment being established in the grounds of Spotswood Primary school New Plymouth.


There are those who are bringing to our attention that our children are becoming the first generation without a meaningful contact with the natural world. One such writer is Richard Louv author of 'Last Child in the Woods'.

Within the space of a few decades, Louv writes, the way children understand and experience nature has changed radically. Children today are aware of global threats to the environment but their physical intimacy with nature, he says, is fading.

There was a time when young children roamed free, exploring their immediate environment without fear but things have changed. Today, Louv writes, children can tell you all about the Amazon rain forest but little about their immediate environment. This would be true in our own country. Few children these days can recognise native plants, local bird life, or common garden plants.

There are those who suggest that an association with the natural environment is linked is positive mental, physical and spiritual health. Louv writes that we need to strengthen the bond between our young and nature and that, by doing so, this will lead to the development of positive attitudes towards conserving the natural environment.

Exploring nature is an ideal antidote to spending too much time 'plugged' into virtual worlds. Unlike television nature does not steal time it amplifies it, providing sensory experiences that children can interpret in their own way. Nature inspires creativity and poetic responses. Children whose curiosity is captured are in a position to develop lifelong interests. Once such things were a feature of New Zealand classrooms of earlier times.

Louv writes that when he was young exploring the natural world was his Ritalin. 'Nature', he writes. calmed me, focused me,and yet excited me.' This lack of experience of the natural world leads to, what he calls, 'nature deficit disorder' and, he believes, contributes to the growing problem of 'attention deficit disorder'. 'Nature deficit disorder' he describes as the human costs of alienation from nature, the diminished use of the senses, and attention difficulties.

There is a great need to reawaken or inspire children's awareness of their natural world. It seems that this 'back to nature' movement is finding some purchase in our education system. Innovative schools need to tap into this growing trend and begin exploring their immediate environment as if through the eyes of scientists, artists, historians etc and, in the process, develop in their students a strong sense of place and a growing protective attitude to the natural world.

Louv wonders how much richness of life has been traded for a daily immersion in indirect technological experience? A visit to many classrooms shows how the 'primary experience' of sensing, touching and feeling has been neglected leading to an inability of students to experience their world directly. Young children are equipped to experience their world through their senses but, to do so, they need continual encouragemnt. Through such sensory experiences new ideas and new words arise for them to communicate and think with. These 'internal thoughts' make the ideal first books for beginning readers. This is another idea that creative teachers once made use of when classrooms featured a strong language experience approach. Today, all too often, literacy has been separated from such personal and sensory experience. Schools need to introduce more direct sensory experience to heighten their students powers of observation and to compensate for a distracting 'Internet addiction'.

The power of nature to inspire creativity has been long known. Most of our schools have an untapped resource 'just outside their window' but, to take advantage of such opportunities, teachers need to develop their own nature awareness ability. Every day, to the observant, provides some small starting point for a discussion or observation.

With the growing fear of parents to let their chiden play in outdoors unsupervised schools have an added responsibility to developed nature awareness in the young. The freedom of a 10 year old in 1990s in England is now comparable to a 7 year old in the 60s.

Another issue is that all too often schools fill their students minds with environmental disasters ( 'saving the whales and rain forests') while at the same time ignoring ecological studies linked to their own environment. This results in, what one writer calls, ecophobia. Those who grow up wanting to protect their environment have been taught to love nature from an early age not through exposure to 'virtual nature'. Passion does not arise from a videotape!

Experiential education needs to become a priority once again in our schools and, unlike technological education, it comes at lesser cost. As Rachel Carson wrote in the 60s, 'If a child is to keep alive his inborn sense of wonder' he or she, 'needs the companionship of at least one adult who can share it, rediscovering with him the joy, excitement, and mystery of the world we live in.' By this means such adults let nature enter children's imagination providing material for creativity and personal expression.

Experiential education provides opportunities for the development of studies that access all forms of knowledge.

Schools are beginning move in this direction with 'eco' schools, developing natural environments in school grounds, propagation of native plants, and reintroduction of school gardens. Many schools are developing in-depth ecological studies that once we feature in schools before the introduction of standardised curricula. Such school are re-learning the necessity of 'doing fewer thing well' rather than current 'cut and paste' projects.

Our schools in New Zealand, with their past reputation for environmental education, are well placed to once again take the lead and, in the process, reconnect children with their natural world.

The balance between consistency and creativity.

A group of Gisborne principals posing with a statue of Peter Snell in Opunake during their Taranaki tour to observe local 'best practices'.

For three days the Gisborne principals visited selected schools in Taranaki. Their task was to look for each schools 'cc' rating: consistency and conversely creativity across classrooms. Consistency because this indicates shared language of expectations and creativity, for without celebrating each teacher and child's creativity, it all can become mediocre.

The balance between the two is vital.

I also wanted them to keep an eye out for examples of children's 'voice' in personal writing, research writing and in response to environmental experiences. All too often the students creativity has been sacrificed by too much focused teaching or intentional teaching, exemplars and criteria. One way to solve this would be to have an overriding criteria that each piece of work work child does ought to reflect his, or her, own unique style.

A very important issue was how much the current content study contributes to the 'energy' of the class. Unfortunately 'inquiry' learning has little time given to it due to literacy and numeracy 'gobbling up' most of the available learning time. One solution would be to develop content information research and writing in the language block, and the same applies to ICT. Evidence of in depth inquiry learning was a little thin in many classrooms.

Old fashioned as it may sound I wanted the visitors to see student book (and chart) work as evidence of learning and to appreciate that such books are actually 'portfolios' that show continual quality improvement ( 'kaizen'). It was good to see schools teaching students design 'scaffolds' to assist their students but, once again, care needs to be taken that they do not end up looking all the same.

Learning 'how to learn' , for students to be able to involve themselves in in depth inquiry learning, able to 'seek, use and create' their own knowledge, ought to be a real feature in a 21stC classroom. Time seems to be the issue. It is by means of such studies that students develop the 'key competencies' they will need in the future. Such studies also open pathways for students to develop their unique talents and interests. As A S Neil wisely wrote, 'true interests are the life form of the whole personality.'

The key to such studies is to 'fewer thing well' and 'in depth' and to value individual differences. If this is done then quality work will be be found.

The visiting teachers saw examples of all the above. It is important that quality products are seen as equally important as quality process. Students need to see, demonstrate, and exhibit worthwhile results for their activity.

A real feature of most room were clear task boards for literacy and numeracy and school, class and individual goals. What was missing were similar group planning grids for the current study. Once again this is possibly a time issue? Students do need to know what ,when , why and how - and some idea of what quality 'looks like' in all they do. Many classes observed start and finish the day with reflective periods which is a useful idea to develop security and continuity.


What stood out in most of the rooms we visited were classroom environments that both celebrated student's thinking, art and language; displayed in a way that informed visitors exactly what the classes were involved in. The classrooms, in this respect, can be seen as the 'third teacher' and a major 'message' system for demonstrating what the school stands for. A number of rooms had quality learning tables featuring students personal best work.

One thing that couldn't be photographed was the positive caring and respectful relationship between all students and their teachers but it could be felt. What could be seen was the result of high expectations for all students and the importance of doing fewer things well.

Quality teaching isn't 'brain surgery'!

Inquiry learning - so what is new?

A better heading for this poster is: 'Thought is caught here; learning is contagious'.

I have always liked Art Costa's title for one of his books, 'A Home for the Mind'. Costa sees schools as a places to develop thoughtful students.

Inquiry learning seems to be the in thing at the moment as school come to terms with the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum. There seems no shortage of 'experts' available to supply the answers but is it all so difficult? Inquiry is what students are born to do. The 'new' curriculum says, 'intellectual curiosity is at the heart' of learning. and asks teachers to encourage 'students (to) reflect on their own learning, draw on personal knowledge, ask questions and challenge' their assumptions and perceptions'.

Rather than introducing inquiry learning into our classrooms the question is why do so many students lose this natural desire to learn ;what has dulled their intense curiosity to find out about things that attract their attention? Two things come to mind:teachers too busy teaching students what they think ( 'the curriculum') their students should know and too much time eaten up by literacy and numeracy demands, both, all too often, divorced from the student's personal reality.

The solution is for schools to create all their classrooms as 'communities of inquiry' and that sustaining this culture comes above all else, including literacy.

If this were the case then the focus of all teaching would shift to the valuing every child's personal world and their individual responses to negotiated class, or group, experiences. This is the essence of 'personalised learning'.

The current trend of leading all students through a number of steps, or processes, of inquiry ( as is often suggested) is as unrealistic as it is contrary to the way real researchers work. Even if the goal is clear at the beginning ( for scientists as well as students) as the study progresses it needs to be open to new developments. New question will arise and new developments will occur that need to be considered. True problem solving could be called 'enlightened trial and error'. Teachers need to take advantage of learning opportunities as they arise and will need a 'prepared mind' so as be able to take advantage of whatever arises. Teaching such an environment is a form of 'artistry' and teachers need to practice,'the canny art of intellectual temptation' (Jerome Bruner).

In such an environment a curriculum 'emerges' or evolves and continuously 'mutates'. Whatever is studied needs to be researched deeply and ideas that eventuate need to reflect thoughtful responses by the students. It is important to do 'fewer thing well' to achieve such in depth thinking.

John Dewey developed a model for a good thinker early last century. He believed that conscious models of thinking could be taught through example but that later the work is taken over by the unconscious mind. This is very much in line with modern brain thinking. He believed that an approach to thinking could be applied to a range of situation but all situations have specific skills.

Dewey wrote that all thinking begins with a state of doubt about what to do or what to believe. All thinking, he wrote, has its genesis in uncertainty when an individual is confronted with a problem.Thinking is, he writes, a search for meaning.

When the problem arises we usually have goals in mind but when doubt arises we may find new goals.Implicit in each goal is a question we want to answer.

We then set about for a search for possibilities or possible answers. Each possibility will have its own strengths, the value of which will depend on our personal perspective. We will have to make choices.

We then set about searching for evidence relative the choices we have made. We use any evidence to revise our choices and may need revise our plans and to make new choices.

When we decide the goal has been reached we take appropriate action. Our minds will have been changed in the process.

Dewey reminds us that there are three search processes: the search for goals; the search for possibilities; and the search for evidence.

If schools were to really value student inquiry, and it seems few really do, then what would be observed would be positive changes in student behaviour ( 'key competencies') and rooms full of students' questions, action plans ( research) and examples of their enhanced understanding.

In such communities of inquiry 'thought is caught' and the school truly becomes 'a home for the mind'.

Teachers learning from teachers

Teachers from Puketaha School visiting schools in Taranaki -an opportunity for seeing new possibilities and affirming their own teaching.

It is aways interesting to observe teachers as they visit other classrooms. The four teachers involved in this particular visit are part of very innovative school team and were thus well placed to appreciate the value of what they would be seeing.

There is no doubt in my mind that 'focused' visits to other schools are a very valuable means of professional development. Being involved in the discussion following the visits, and listening to the in-depth thinking and future planning that the visits motivated, confirmed the value of such experiences.

Such visits are time consuming and ought not to be taken lightly. Having a guide, or a particular purpose, to focus observations make such visits all the more worthwhile. And back at school ideas gained should be integrated into school programmes.

The point I wanted the teachers to observe during the visits was the importance of the class study to supply the 'energy' for the inquiry work of the class. This is in contrast to the current emphasis where literacy and numeracy are the most important elements - the remainder of the day left over to cover all other areas of the curriculum. This is not to say that literacy and numeracy are not important, they are, but they should be seen as 'foundation skills' required to allow in depth thinking in the total curriculum. As educationalist Guy Claxton writes 'learnacy' is more important that literacy and numeracy. Education is about progressively developing each students innate talents and 'learning power'.

The schools visited illustrated this point well but, even in such schools, far too much time is 'eaten up' by literacy and numeracy programmes. The 'Victorian three Rs' curriculum is still alive and well in this age of inquiry learning . This is ironic as the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum, with its emphasis on key competencies, is asking schools to develop students as 'innovative' and 'creative' - active 'seekers, users and creators' of their own knowledge.

Such an emphasis would require the negotiation ( to ensure 'ownership') with students to introduce 'rich' learning experiences to challenge their thinking. Although the 'process' of learning is important, if learning is successful, then the students ought to be able to produce quality finished thoughtful work - both creative and scientific. Such studies were a feature of the classes we visited not withstanding the lack of time to focus on such important areas.

Quality student presentation of students ideas, both in students bookwork ('portfolios') and on the classroom walls in the rooms were another feature of the rooms we visited. Room environments need to celebrate student creativity and thinking as well as informing class visitors. Some rooms we visited were simply inspirational. Quality work is seen when teachers do 'fewer topics well' and really encourage students to think , or better still reflect, hard about what the are inquiring into. The room environment needs to be seen as the 'third teacher' ( the second being the activities students engage in) reflecting the 'messages' that the school thinks is important.

I would've liked to have seen a greater use of the immediate environments a resource ( even just to capture seasonal events) and also a greater emphasis on valuing students 'voice' and creativity generally. I am often disappointed by the lack of originality in student art and language which seems far too teacher ( or 'criteria') dominated. It is aways a mystery to me as to why teachers develop purposeful group timetables for literacy and numeracy but do not continue this approach into the content areas. Maybe it is this time thing again?


A few other things I liked:

Examples of powerful language experience writing ( usually as a result of an environmental visits) in a few junior classes. For students, with less than wonderful language ability, this is vital. It once was a feature of New Zealand junior rooms.

Student book work that shows 'continual quality improvement' ( the 'kaizen' of the Japanese) and believe that these are the best form of student 'portfolio'.

A range of content students which features students achieving three or so focused outcomes - a piece of research based around a few key questions, a piece of creative language, and a piece of expressive art. Research and information ideally should be taught during the literacy block as well as relevant maths to gain more time for studies.

The positive role of the teacher in providing feedback, design scaffolds, and most all all really valuing helping each student express their own idiosyncratic point of view. The development of an 'emergent' curriculum evolving out of student interests and concerns might be a future development -another lost idea? If 'key competencies' are so important this would make sense.

The visits provided lots of intense discussion amongst the visiting teachers. The most powerful conversations were motivated by a school which is developing collaborative and inquiry learning across the whole school.In this school students of all ages work together to create a powerful end of term parent exhibition.

It will be interesting to see what ideas the visitors gained will be added to the visiting schools already impressive approach.

All in all a powerful learning experience - there is nothing to compare to teachers learning of other teachers.

Do we really believe in creativity?

Art work created by a students in the class of New Zealand's most creative teacher Elwyn Richardson in the 1950s. Elwyn's school was centred on helping students realize their various talents through environmental studies, the arts, creative and descriptive language. His 'curriculum' 'emerged' out of the felt experiences of the students themselves. Time to return to such teaching? Elwyn's inspirational book 'In the early World' is still available today from the NZCER.


Developing students creativity is the real challenge of the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum.

The curriculum presents a vision of a future learner as being 'confident' and 'creative', as 'active seekers, users, and creators of knowledge'. A vision that requires learners to have their 'talents recognised and affirmed'; where 'intellectual curiosity is at the heart' of learning; with students who 'are able to reflect on their own learning processes and to learn how to learn'. Students, the 'new' curriculum states, will be involved in 'making meaning and creating meaning' in all areas of the curriculum.

Creative students, the curiculum states, will need to develop the 'resilience' and 'confidence to take risks' as they 'learn to use their imagination' to 'generate multiple interpretations'. Schools in turn are encouraged to develop creative curriculums 'in response to the particular needs, interests, and talents' of their students.

A great vision but are schools up to it?

If we want to develop confident creative students then we first need to develop confident create teachers. Developing this capacity must be the ultimate role of the principal and, in turn, those who work within the Ministry.

The trouble is that both teachers and principals have been progressively moved into the background over the past two decades and the Ministry is more known for requiring compliance rather than creativity.

Developing system wide creativity will require courage at all levels.

So what is creativity? It certainly isn't obsessive planning, goal setting , teaching intentions or pre-determined criteria - all these 'best practices' 'deliver' conformity and mediocrity.

Creative people have the confidence to trust their intuitions and hunches, to switch between conscious thinking and tapping unconscious thoughts. Young children are more adept at thinking creativity, able to make interesting connections, than adults because their frontal lobes ( the area of conscious thinking' and judgement) is less developed.

Creativity is more a 'right brained' activity accepting unfocused ambiguous thoughts, open to ideas that the more logical 'left brain' would ignore. Creative people like poets, and artists and creative scientists, are more open to their experiences. The secret of creativity is to be able to access both left and right brain thinking, to suppress prejudgement until ideas have been developed. At this point is the time to be more judgemental, to sort out ideas to work on. Creative individuals, however, remain open to serendipitous moments at all times. Creative ideas, it seems, 'pop into our heads out of the blue'.

Some of us are just too inhibited. And it seems we learn this aversion to 'risk taking' at an early age.

This 'risk averse' attitude is unconsciously picked up by the 'messages' given to us by our environment including teachers, principals, and students teachers. And of course the Ministry and the Education Review Office.

To be creative teachers (and principals) need to encourage their students to think of lots of ideas ideas, to explore widely, and to uncover interesting connections, giving time for ideas to 'gel', without making judgements. Being creative mean trying things out and keeping what works; an attitude of 'enlightened trial and error'.

All this 'messy thinking' inspirational thinking is in contrast with logical left brain of with its adherence to the well worn safe path of planning.

When ideas move into the elaboration stage of creativity is the time for the brain to behave differently , to be more selective and and purposeful to ensure ideas are actioned.

Creative people know when to dream and when to shape up.

To be creative a school needs a creative principal prepared to allow ideas to emerge and be given fair trial before rushing in to ask for evidence to prove its worth. The same environment is required in the classroom for students.

Such a learning environment requires caring relationships between all involved and lots of 'learning conversations'.

It will require real leadership to provide both the security for teachers to feel free to take learning risks and to negotiate, with all concerned, a clear sense of direction to focus the creativity.

To achieve this the purpose of the school needs to be clear to all involved. Everyone needs to believe in the vision of their school as a place where all students can be helped to become confident and creative learners; where all students can see themselves as their own 'active seekers, users, and creators' of their own learning.

It will require a lot of 'mind changing' to achieve such a vision but it can be , and is, being done, in schools that have the wit and the imagination to trust their own creativity.

The learning brain

What does your class know about their brains? Their theories or 'prior' knowledge. Run off this photo and ask them about what they know and their questions.Then research their questions.

It is said that we are entering the 'age of inner space'; the great challenge for the future is to explore what 'lies between our ears'.

As teachers we ought to at least understand how our brain learns and what exactly is our mind; is it different from our brain? Weighing about 3 pounds, or 1400 grams, it looks like a rubbery convoluted fungus and contains up to 100 billion cells and, strangely, feels no pain. Today the brain is appreciated as an integrated mix of chemical 'soup' and electrical neural 'connections' which absorbs up to 20% of the bodies energy to keep it active. Learning is truly about being 'turned on' to make new connections!

Two excellent books are available for teachers 'The Brain and Mind' by Eric Jensen and 'The Human mind' by Robert Winston. The book that has really impressed me however is the 'Wayward Brain' by Guy Claxton.

Although the structure and how the brain works are interesting to learn about what is more important is to consider how we can create the conditions, or the environment, to ensure we develop all the potential that lies within each individual brain. The brain is now seen as a open system that is continually learning, for better or worse, through continual feedback. And, to make teaching challenging, no two brains are alike.

This growing brain, continually evolving and adapting to experiences is a different metaphor from the 'blank slate' ( Locke's tabula rosa ) mind, or the 'factory brain', or even the 'computer brain', all to be stocked up with knowledge to be learnt and measured.

The metaphors we choose are important - we now need to 'see' the brain as a continually evolving 'learning brain'. A 'learning brain' programmed by evolution to make the best meaning it can, continually changing in response to the challenges 'it' is exposed to.

Although basic 'building blocks' are provided by genes ( 'nature') the full potential of this genetic heredity cannot be fully realised unless the right experiences are provided ( 'nurture'). Interestingly our personality style is established before birth but not our character.

We know know enough about our brains to transform education as we know it if we, as teachers, changed our minds first.

We know that optimal learning occurs best when: it is active; when learners are challenged; when their attention is captured; when their ideas and questions are valued (a 'constructivist' learning model); when students feel good ( when positive emotions mediate learning); when they learn with others ( collaborative brains) ; when they get feedback; when they are given time; when their personal mix of talents and learning styles are tapped; when learning is intrinsic ( to develop a love of learning); when teachers and learners have respectful relationships; when plenty of practice is given ( to establish 'groovy' neural connections); and by the experiences of life they are exposed to. Students, it seems, need to be helped to 'make up their own minds'; to retain the innate capacity to be 'life long learners' they were born with.

If schools do not provide these 'personalised' conditions then many students will 'disengage' from school learning, and are. Failing schools will need to change dramatically; the problems of failing schools is how they treat students.


The most important and neglected aspect is the hidden power of the unconscious mind and this is where Guy Claxton comes in. The important part of the conscious brain is the frontal cortex which allow us to stop and consider before acting, it acts as a brake, or an internal policeman, to dampen down impulsive behaviour. We may not have 'free will' but we all need to develop 'I won't'. These conscious processes are important but are best only half the story.

As an aside autistic individuals are seen as having an over emphasis on male chemistry and thus are poor at relationships, ADDHD individuals having attributes that might be valuable in a hunting situation but problematic in formal schools, and dyslexic individuals as slow processors who get easily confused with the pace of learning. Tourettes Syndrome students have no ability to think before talking and over careful students can 'freeze' facing new learning situations. Savant individuals ( like the character Dustin Hoffman played in the film Rainman) have one strength taken to an extreme while other areas are neglected. This proves that a brain can develop mathematical genius, for example, through its own actions without any teaching. All these differing individuals can be helped if we had a greater understanding of their brains.

The unconscious brain, Claxton writes, has had bad press over the centuries. Conscious reason, in the West in particular, has been given pride of place since the replacement of unquestioned religious beliefs by scientific thinking. As a result the unconscious brain/mind has been largely ignored, or at best useful only for dreaming, for mood swings, for being lost in our thoughts, or, at worst, a place full of Freudian fantasies ( the 'beast in the basement').

It is as if the conscious brain has a hidden mind of its own that wanders off while we are trying to concentrate. This unconscious mind dreams at night - processing the days adventures. It brings things to our conscious mind at the strangest of times; it provides intuitive answers to difficult problems by providing insightful creative connections without conscious thinking, and it allows us to go into 'automatic pilot', lost in the 'flow' of things.

These less obedient qualities are too important to ignore, according to Claxton. Claxton believes we have over emphasized the rational rather than the reflective brain in Western culture. This false division provides conflict for the creative amongst us and those from different cultures and provides a clue as to why so students are failing in our rationally orientated academic schools?

The slower conscious brain is but the tip of the iceberg. The unconscious, according to Claxton, is far more important. The ideas from the subconscious, occurring to us in 'a flash', are absorbed from our culture and the institutions ( such as schools) we live in. As educators we ought to give more thought to the 'messages' our schools are unconsciously giving their students about life and learning. We urgently need to consider the ideas we want our students to absorb and then how can we ensure our actions match up to our intentions?

These unconscious thoughts enable us to 'know what to do when we do not know what to do'( Jean Piaget). It seems 'we know more than we know we know' ( Michael Polanyi). It is in our subconscious where our beliefs, memories and desires are to be found.It is in our subconscious where hunches, intuitions and creativity arise. Unfortunately the creative advantages provided by our subconscious are too often lost by the premature judgement imposed by our overly trained rational 'risk averse' brains and the pressure to prove or plan things before acting.

Creativity arises between the relationship between the two brains. Creative people value the insights offered for free while rational people distrust whatever cannot be observed and measured and inhibit such thinking. Ironically thinking too hard, or articulating what has been learnt, or worrying about imposed criteria, all limit creativity. Too much 'focused', or 'intentional' teaching, pre-determined goals, and linear problem solving, may be creating, via so called 'best practice', the mediocrity we currently see in our classrooms!

The unconscious brain provides answers without stopping to think making 'priming' this 'under-mind' so important. Strong cultures provide this 'priming' through literature, stories , myths and art - weak culture open young people up to ideas provided by the mass media.

Well 'primed' creative people are able to put their inhibitions to one side and trust their hunches and intuition. Students are inveterate eave droppers copying what they see going on around them. Students to be 'primed' need to be exposed to a wide range of creative thinking. This requires creative rather than compliant teachers and principals.

We all develop an identity of ourselves as learners for better or worse. As educators we need to focus on encouraging our students to 'be active seekers users and creators' of their own learning. The core of our identity largely lies hidden in our subconscious and is the heart of of who we are. How 'smart' we become depends on the 'stuff' we are surrounded. Our subconscious is continually interpreting and informing our choices. When we are not consciously thinking we are, according to Claxton, at our 'most grooviest'. The conscious mind, he says, may be seen as 'a dashboard for the mind' only able to provide limited information. This is a relationship similar to schools tests which can only ever measure a limited aspect of each students learning capacity.


It is time, writes Claxton, to overturn the reliance on the default rational model of the mind. All intentions arise from the depths of the subconscious if they are allowed to be actioned. 'How can I tell what I think until see what I say', to quote E. M. Forster.

We all have 'invented' ourselves from the experiences we have been exposed to. The more relaxed about who we are the more we are able to absorb new experiences and create new ideas. If we learn unconsciously then, as teachers, we need to be thoughtful about the stories and messages we share with our students.

What we believe as a society and what is accepted as 'right and wrong' needs to be embedded in our students brains/minds to allow them to act automatically. The subconscious, if primed positively, acts as a internal 'moral compass' allowing students to say 'I wont' without thinking. Such students are then in a position to be held accountable for their own actions even when in situations in which they do not know what to do.

Perhaps the thoughts hidden in our powerful 'under- mind', if fully valued, might provide time for reflection thinking and, in turn, provide the 'wisdom' missing in our fast paced information age?

Thinking about the best ways to cultivate thoughtful unconscious brains is a worthy ideal for all educators to consider?

Children as scientists

If children are aways asking questions then ought not our classrooms help them in their search for answers?


I recently came across an extract from an article called 'Children are Scientists' written in 1947 by Herbert Zim.

That we haven't yet created schools based on assisting students research their own questions and concerns just goes to show how much 'our' curriculums, what 'we' think is important for them to learn, has ignored the source of real motivation for students to learn.

No wonder many students become 'disengaged' - they were never 'engaged' in the first place. And to make it worse imposed curriculums now reach down to the very young. The situation is not helped by the pressure felt by parents to make certain their chiden succeed. There is no time for children to explore to satisfy their potentially ever expanding curiosity.

Herbert Zim says:

'That children are scientists is a truth worth repeating with emphasis. That they are also artists, musicians, and social beings we know. But young children particularly are more scientists than they are anything else.

The child starts to become a scientist with those basic reactions that first make him ( and her) aware of cause and effect.

To go further, all normal children possess curiosity about their environment, a quality that is essentially scientific. Children persistent questions,although sometimes motivated by a desire for security, are an outlet for curiosity which expresses itself in activity patterns as well as verbal...

Young children never hesitate to offer an explanation of even complicated phenomena.They may be completely in error but they develop a surprising logic in the hypothesis they set forth...It has been repeatedly suggested that scientists have made their great creative progress because some have been able to preserve and use these very qualities that we see so clearly in the young child.'

Just imagine a class that really values students questions and utilizes them to create an emerging, ever evolving, curriculum. Imagine teachers dedicated to helping their students research answers to their questions appropriate to their developmental level. Such a teacher would ever be on the alert to tap into students' natural curiosity,environmental events, as well as providing potentially stimulating experiences that might capture students' attention.

In such a classroom such creative teachers ( because teaching is in essence a creative act)would interact to help students 'dig deeply' into things that concern them. Such teachers would challenge their students to consider other possibilities always leaving the final choice to the students themselves. A wise teacher knows that students will change their minds when it makes sense to them.

In such classrooms students would be seen as 'scientists, artists, poets, and social beings'. They would see their students, as it is suggested in the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum, as 'active seekers, users and creators of their own knowledge'.

Maybe the time has come for teachers to throw away their curriculums and work along side the students to develop learning around what captures the students curiosity.

Too much teaching simply goes against the grain of the way students naturally learn. It would be easier to go with the flow.

Observation - a missing skill?

A book by educator/ botanist Bill Clarkson that every teacher who wants to help students learn to observe closely and then to ask insightful questions needs to have. Contact me bhammonds@clear.net.nz for a copy NZ$15

Walking into any classroom these days it is easy to get distracted by the latest piece digital technology - these days more often than not an electronic whiteboard.

Those who really value students deeper understanding need to really look around the room to see 'evidence' of students focused observation, their in depth thinking about whatever they are studying, their 'voice' in their personal writing, and the creativity of their artistic expressions.

All too often visitors will be disappointed.

Helping students develop their observational skill is a simple way to remedy the situation. Bill Clarkson's book 'Observation at the Outset' offers insightful and practical ways to make use of observation in the classroom

Drawing, Bill writes, is an ideal way to introduce a study to the class. His book provides a number of ways to make use of drawing to develop student's thinking.

Observation he notes is a facility scientists have developed as they exhibit their need to know about their world. From their observations arise questions, preliminary ideas and theories. Young children have the same innate capacity to explore their world and need similar opportunities to explore their world, to ask their own questions and have their views taken seriously.

This curiosity, or need to make meaning, is the basis of a constructivist approach to learning where children 'prior views' are challenged and new understandings developed.

Students need to be taught to observe carefully, to notice things and to ask good questions. Children's questions, Bill states, provide the most valid openings to a child centred path of learning.

The act of drawing is an ideal way to begin the learning process. Drawing, another educator writes, is a way of asking questions and drawing answers. As well drawing is the ultimate reflective act because as the 'artist' draws his, or her, mind is free to wonder about what it is is being observed. In an age of attention deficit behaviour this is a valuable activity.

The act of drawing, whatever is chosen, helps develop a 'mental set' to get things started. Bill Clarkson suggests drawings fall into four categories to sustain inquiry:

Direct drawings from living things.
Direct drawings of inanimate abjects such as museum artifacts and man made objects.
Indirect observation through drawing photographs or other illustrations.
Drawing from memory.

I might add one other, extending observed information into the imagination.

Bill makes it clear that drawing requires close and sustained observation; that the process of drawing develops a sense of ownership and heightened personal interest, curiosity and desire know more about the object; that there is intrinsic satisfaction to be gained through the act of drawing; and, finally, when children draw from memory( before or after the study) their drawings will reveal a lot about what they understand to be true.

Memory drawing at the beginning of a study indicates what students already know about the study . Observational drawing from real life, or a photograph, fosters curiosity and leads to the development of possible study questions to select from ( Bill suggests selecting two or three to focus research). Some drawings provide valuable data such as the growth stages in bean seed germination. For activities such as studying an old house drawings are a way of gathering information that can be used as the basis for further research at school, or to extend into imaginative art or language. Imaginative work, writes Bill, 'rings true' when it extends, transcends, enriches, or personalizes perceived realities. Drawing is also a means to facilitate and strengthen factual or descriptive writing and, while drawing, students can be encouraged to make inferences about things they notice.

It seems there is more to drawing than what meets the eye.

The teachers role in the process of students drawing is vital.Students need to be encouraged to take their time ( to 'slow the pace' of their work) to allow details to be noticed. At first students may rush their work but as they gain experience they learn that time is required for quality results. It is important for teachers to appreciate that every student has their own way of drawing and that this individuality needs to be valued.

In classrooms where observational drawings are valued the results will be clear to see. Little equipment is required ( pencils, black biros, coloured pencils and perhaps watercolour paints).

In such rooms digital technology an be easily integrated with observational experiences to research questions ( those that are unavailable to be researched through first and observation) to extend and share what has been learnt.

And, when established, observing nature becomes a life time activity and contributes to the valuing and protecting of the environment in natural way.