Waikato Principals' Conference

Taupiri the mountain; Waikato the river.

Last week I was invited to present at the Waikato Principals' 2009 Conference.

It is important for leaders to keep alert to ideas on the horizon but it more important to return to school and to put some of them into action. It seems too many Waikato Principals didn't bother to attend. What does this tell us?

Such conferences provide an opportunity for both affirmation and challenge.

Whatever, on return, rhetoric needs to be translated into action.

Dr Stuart Middleton started the ball roiling by stating that education is a 'social promise' of a future for all students and then provided data to show that this promise was far from being realized. He wondered if current schools 'balkanised' structures were counter to the goals of the NZC. He showed that at a very young age student make a decision to take the high road leading to school success or the low road of school failure.

What we are doing isn't working. 'If schools are the answer', he asked, 'what was the question'? Currently there are approximately 20000 young people who leave with little to show for their time and who take up neither work nor training! This, he said, is hugely damaging to themselves and to society.

Education is a 'tough nut to crack' and many curriculum initiatives suffer from 'death by embrace.' School also suffer from having the faulty expectation that all students need to be seen as normal - 'one size fits all'. School are dedicated to 'riding dead horses when it is better they get off and try something new'.

What would it mean , said Stuart, if all students were to leave 'confident, connected, life long learners'? We need to think hard about the purpose of learning in the 21stC.

Leaders he concluded:

1 Need to challenge the process
2 Inspire a worthwhile vision.
3 Enable other to act
4 Model the way
5 Encourage the heart

Next up was Professor Geoff Southworth retired director of the UK Leadership Centre.

He told the story of a professor who visited a successful school and when asked what he thought of it just said 'very interesting'. When pressed for further comment he said he would have to return to the University to work out if it would work in theory!

Professor Southworth said there is strong agreement on a few things.

leadership matters; 'learning centred' leadership.

Perception matters - it is 110% the issue!

It is how principals respond that matters. The core tasks of a principal are: the need to build a compelling vision to set a strong sense of direction ( where and why); to develop people; to keep adjusting to circumstances; to manage teaching and learning; and to have a set of positive personal qualities -'unwarranted' optimism, an improvement orientation, and to ensure all involved gain 'meaning, recognition, and a life'.

Another thing that matters is that the 'quality of the school cannot exceed the quality of its teachers'. Unfortunately, he commented, many schools get distracted from their 'core business' of ensuring student learning.

Successful principals generate and sustain discussions about teaching and learning and do not leave anything to chance. They continually share, spread and move positive ideas around making it clear what the school stands for.

Successful principals distribute leadership ; 'the Lone Ranger is dead'.In some cases the 'best teacher' is the best leader.

The question , he asked,was how do we use our 'principal influence' get a whole school approach? Effective leaders work hard on indirect leadership qualities: they 'walk the talk'; they use gentle persuasion relentlessly; and they model, monitor and become involve in dialogue.

Modeling is vital. As Albert Schweitzer said 'Example is not the main thing , it is the only thing'. What three things do the staff know you are paying attention to? Two things Southworth said : 'he has never found a teacher who has nothing to say about the Principal and when they talk it is not about what they say it is about what they do! The modeling and monitoring is all about pedagogy.

The task of learning centred dialogue is to improve the quality of teaching in the school. Three high quality teacher in row can raise student performance dramatically and, conversely, three low quality teachers in a row depress learning. Monitoring is required to identify teachers' pedagogical strengths and developmental needs so as to improve their repertoire of teaching strategies.

Questions to ask are;

1 How is teachers craft knowledge shared?
2 How might this be strengthened?
3 What are the obstacles in the way?
4 Which of these can you do something about and will you.

Sharing this craft knowledge is 'professional capital' of your school. Such knowledge needs to be described, analysed, reflected on, and articulated.

Such 'learning conversations' are the 'heart of the constructivist approach. 'The key is, through articulation, to make thinking visible'.

The second day started with Dr Kevin Knight who leads a private teacher training organisation. He asked, 'what is the state of teacher training in NZ' and answered his own question with 'not flash'.

The trouble is that current teacher training operates on a 'one size fits all mentality' when what it needs is 'differentiating'.

Dr Knight believes there is a leadership vacuum in New Zealand about what the purpose of teaching is all about. As for the Teaching Standards they are are unhelpful and lack any real detail. The new 'draft' Standards are only marginally better. Schools need to define their own indicators.

As for teacher appraisals they are , he believes, 'cop out' appraisals. They only work if there are clear images of teaching and learning.

Teacher appraisals should centre on the fundamental purpose of school - to cause learning. We need systems that tell how good teachers are. Dr Knight's organisation has developed an appraisal system that ensures all student teachers acquire the necessary learning; no one graduates until a suitable level of competence is gained.

Each dimension of teaching has five descriptors each with five further definitions. Professional development focuses on identified areas of need.

Dr Knight had also developed a differentiated professional appraisal system with six levels of competence.

1 Survival Level - where controlling students is an issue. For such teachers this is where assistance needs to be focused.
2 Environmental Level - 'loose' teaching.
3 Learning - where it 'feels good' and students are on task.
4 Advanced - where teachers can articulate literacy and numeracy but do not apply this to other areas.
5 Leadership Level - this is beyond literacy and numeracy.This is the 'total package'.

To get teachers to change you have to know what to change.

1 Step one is to articulate a vision.
2 Live and monitor the vision
3 Principals have to create time to make it happen.
4 Specific targets identified for coaching/ training.

The second to last speaker, Professor Bronwyn Cowie, reported on the finding from 'early adopters' of the NZC. 'It is what happens when teachers and students meet'. Often there is gap between the 'official' , the 'planned', the 'taught', and what is 'learnt'.

Professors Cowies findings were 'all good stuff'. Implementing the NZC takes time and requires schools take necessary risks which will require leadership courage.

'Change is a complex, non linear, frequently arbitrary and highly political' she said quoting Fullan. All change involves creative tension between independence and autonomy. It will involve making mistakes. The key element is to ask what do we think about learning and what do we think about teaching?

The challenge is to 'connect' vision to practice.

Questions to ask are: Does the curriculum fit with us? And how do we fit with the curriculum?

Schools are currently 're visioning' their schools.It is important in this process to learn to say no and, the professor said, it will require 'hard conversations in safe places'.

I was the last speaker and I didn't take notes!!

It always amazes me how a group of speakers , without collaborating, end up all contributing, or better still, developing in the process, a common theme.

It was well worthwhile attending. Those principals who didn't take the opportunity missed out on some valuable insights.

Creative Education.

Not all learning is able to be measured and graphed to prove achievement. This simplistic scientific approach has all but killed, or ignored, the innate creativity of many of our students, creating unnecessary problems of 'disengagement' or 'behaviour' in the process. To study a bridge there are a range of 'frameworks' available to explore and interpret such an experience -many well beyond measurement of learning. First of all you have to find the time to introduce students to such an experience.


Elliot Eisner is a highly respected educator who champions the role of the arts and creativity in education.

What follows are some of his ideas presented at a John Dewey Memorial Address; ideas that have greatly influenced my own beliefs about teaching and learning.

Eliot Eisner is a critic of the primacy of current narrow view of literacy and numeracy that dominates learning today and argues for a more generous view of literacy, one that goes beyond verbal and numerical skills.

Eisner's more generous view is all about the power to encode and decode meaning through any forms humans use to represent what they know and how they know; a view that reflects the many faces of intelligence.

Our job as teachers, he writes, is to help all our student's extract meaning from their experiences.He believes we have neglected the senses as a means for students to extract ideas from their environment and to make sense of their personal felt experiences.

Unfortunately this creative approach does not lend itself to the current pre-occupation with objective measurement which has been a limiting factor the past decades.What has been ignored is the power of transformational experiences ; the emotional power that comes from being involved doing something really well. Valuing the quality involvement of any experience for its own sake has been missing.Ignoring the 'personal stirrings and strivings of self discovery...the involvement of learning with personal emotion and meaning' means missing out on what really changes individuals.

This is the creative learning Eisner wants us to return to. 'Currently achievement rather than inquiry has been triumphant'. Our current distraction of measuring learning has diminished the mind rather than expanding it.We, he writes, have been limited by an overly cognitive view of the mind. We need, he says,and eduction grounded in a view of how human extract meaning from their experience.

Today in our primary classrooms selected important subjects take up the 'prime time'. A wider view of learning is required to integrate inquiry and creative expression into literacy and numeracy and in turn to feed into the afternoon inquiry expressive arts programmes.

Sensory and emotional learning is part of all subjects - how people feel about their learning effects what they come to learn. Each sensory system provides its own unique contribution and cannot be left to chance as it currently is now.

For example a class studying bridges is a theme that can appreciated through poetry, interpreted through science, maths, technology and engineering, and recorded and expressed through the various visual arts and photography. Each way of interpreting the bridge provides different 'framework' to understand and express ideas.It involves all the senses, attracts curiosity, and motivates various forms of expression.


This is, Eisner writes, how we are programmed to learn from birth. We learn through experiences that cannot be fragmented to suit teacher's thinking. Language does not exhaust the possibilities of expression. The ability to explore the multiplicity of any environmental experience is what teachers should be aiming for. Even a simple topic like Autumn , or an Anzac Study, have a multiplicity of ways available to interpret.

What we interpret depends on the 'nets we cast' but all forms of expression are private until they are shared. A wide range of means of expression are available - sounds and music, words, number, dance and the like. And every form of expression is open to endless variety, all requiring personal decision making and skills. Our 'nets' determine the kinds of 'fish', or meanings, we catch and our skills the extent we can express what we want to say. To complicate matters the process of realizing one's ideas in any medium evolve through the editing process in ways that are not predicable.

The education Eisner is talking about is afar cry from the current determinist intentional teaching, or 'best practices' that comply with pre-conceived expectations and criteria; learning where the teachers control processes and determine and measure appropriate answers.

Eisner is arguing for a wider conception of learning well beyond the current narrowly conceived literacy and numeracy focuses. Teachers, he believes, need to free themselves from this technocratic and traditional view of teaching as it excludes too many creative individuals.

To be able to write, Eisner says, 'the writer must have something to write about. To have something write about the writer must be able to "read" the environment. The writer starts with vision but ends up with words.The reader begins with words and ends up with the vision'.

We need, he continues, to create learning environments that invite students to explore their experiences in whatever ways that make sense to them and in ways they can share with others. Surely this is the essence of personalised learning?

The eduction Eisner is encouraging teachers to think about would create an environment which would realize the full potential of all students to be actualized.

Such an education would have the potential to 're-engage' learners and to solve the current 'disengaged' learners and behavioral problems.

In the meantime our current government is trying to solve current problems by more of the same by returning to the false potential of standardized testing. This is Einstein's definition of insanity.

When you add Eisner's ideas to those of Howard Gardner ( we are all intelligent in a range of ways) and Sir Ken Robinson ( creativity is as important as literacy and numeracy) how is it that we want to return to past failed initiatives?

However, for me, the 'best evidence' of the power of Eisner's ideas are the creative teachers, past and present, that have shown, through their example, that it is all possible.

It is to such creative teachers we need to look to develop a truly creative education system able to 'invite' all students to develop whatever gifts and talents they might have.

Let's reach for the stars!

I have a few excellent quotes which are worth sharing.

The first from Stephanie Pace Marshall an American educator and space astronaut. She knows all about the courage to reach for the stars. She writes about creating 'new minds' for an ever evolving future.

'The liberation of genius and goodness of all children, the creation of new minds, and learning communities that invite and challenge the wonder and awe of the human spirit'.
'Is this,' she asks of her fellow teachers, 'the work you want to do?'

Continuing this evolutionary line Leonard I Sweet writes:

'The future is not something we enter.The future is something we create.'

And Physicist Ilya Prigogine who says:

'The future is uncertain, but this very uncertainty is at the heart of human creativity.'

American educator Glickman encourages us to reach for the stars and gives us a warning about the trap of rationality:

'Today, measuring the accomplishments of students, teachers, and schools by standardised test scores and handing out rewards and punishments for reaching or failing to reach sate and federal standards has become commonplace.

In such a climate, we typically err too much on the side of avoiding failure by relying on externally approved "Research based" programmes, teaching methods, and assessments...

What we lose in the bargain is imagination. Failure cannot go unchallenged, but what we have today is our own failure to imagine new possibilities and the worth of what has already worked well. There is no tragedy in reaching for the stars and falling short; the greatest tragedy is never reaching at all.'

Canadian educator Dean Fink writes 'we have to shake off the shackles of conformity and compliance and imagine, create, do something.'

As John F Kennedy said in the 60s:

'Some men see things as the are and ask why? I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

It was George Bernard Shaw who said 'that all progress depends on unreasonable men' ( and woman).

In the current environment of crisis it is time for new thinking and what better place to start than in schools that have the challenge to educate 'new minds for a new millennium'.


As Lucy said to Charlie Brown 'you cant solve new maths with an old maths mind! Or was that Einstein? He said you can't solve present problems with the minds that created them in in the first place.

Now is the time to be 'unreasonable' because we sure are in fine mess?

As Stephanie Pace Marshall asks, is developing such future minds 'the work you want to do'

Early warning for NZ!

This was just a simple drawing of a pine cone but in the process an ominous figure emerged. Are there things we can learn from mistakes made in the UK? It seems we are doomed to follow their political lead when we should be focusing on the true purposes of education. At present our 'new' curriculum has given us an opportunity to be creative but talk of national standards are on the horizon - idea proposed by simplistic politicians and appealing populist minds.

A recent Guardian article gives us early warning! Thanks to those of you who sent it to me.


A Cambridge Review of Education has just been published after three years research. It presents a damming view of the UK primary curriculum which it suggests has failed generations of children. The review suggests a blueprint for a radical new kind of schooling.

The review blueprint looks remarkably like our 'new' New Zealand Curriculum. Our 'new' curriculum, thankfully, replaced one which bears a remarkable similarity to the UK one which was developed prior to our own 'old' one.

What is wrong with their curriculum?

There is an over emphasis on the skills of reading, writing and maths at the expense of other subjects.This, the review says, limits children's enjoyment of school and risks severely compromising their natural curiosity, imagination and love of learning.

The testing they have introduced, complete with 'league tables', has encouraged schools to focus on short term learning ( school survival?) at the expense of children's long term development. The most conspicuous causalities are arts and the humanities. Learning that requires time for talking, problem solving and exploring ideas is sacrificed, for what review calls, a 'memorization recall' style of learning.

Is this where our new Government is to take us?

The belief behind this narrow approach to schooling ( not learning) is that it is not possible for schools to focus on basic skills as well as covering full range of subjects. The review's lead author, Robin Alexander, of Cambridge University, believes this is faulty thinking and cites evidence that schools that blend literacy and numeracy into the wider teaching often get the best results. They are achieving this not withstanding the 'obstacle' of the current curriculum ( the one that looks like our 'old' one).


Our 'new' curriculum now gives such creative teachers 'permission' to be 'risk takers' but so far not may have left the security of past 'best practices'.


This longstanding belief in the primacy of the so called 'basics' has been made worse by national literacy and numeracy strategies and the publishing of results.

Even though in New Zealand, so far, we have avoided the failed concept of national testing literacy and numeracy have come to dominate nearly 50% of the classroom time that is occurring in the UK. UK national testing did at first improve achievement levels but are now trending down and, at the same time, students enjoyment and attitudes towards reading and maths are also falling.

It seems obvious that the politicisation of basic skills is simply the new governments scare agenda to improve so called standards. If implemented their agencies will 'micromanage' schools and this suggestion, ironically, by a party that believes in freedom and dislikes bureaucrats and regulations.

If we get national testing then the creative potential of the New Zealand Curriculum will not be realized.

The Cambridge Review is suggesting the introduction of a curriculum that aligns well with our 'new' curriculum. It want twelve aims for each pupil.They are: 'well being, engagement, empowerment, autonomy, encouraging respect and reciprocity, promoting interdependence, citizenship, celebrating culture, exploring, fostering skills, exciting imagination and enacting dialogue' and continues, 'their learning should should cover eight domains, including art and creativity, language, oracy and literacy, and science and technology to replace the current narrower subject areas'. Their current subject statements were what we had in New Zealand up until 2007. All the above aligns well with New Zealand's Curriculum's vision of 'confident life long learners', able to 'seek, use and create their own knowledge' and, in the process, develop the 'key competences' required for continual learning.

Currently, it seems, we are leading the world - but for how long?

The Review's suggestion is for their national curriculum to cover only 70% of lessons and for the other 30% left to schools to decide.Our 'new' curriculum has gone well past this suggestion by encouraging school to develop curriculum to suit the needs of their students opening the way for personalised learning.

The Review wants to shift the responsibility for designing how children learn back from their government and its agencies back to schools. If were to introduce national in New Zealand testing it would stifle such responsibility and flexibility.

The review states that, as an antidote to the current 'utilitarian and philistine' and self centred age, there is a need to make an economic case for creativity in eduction but even more importantly it concludes that it is fundamental to children's happiness and well being, as well as raising job prospects in the future.

Certainly in New Zealand our best chance of survival is in realizing the gifts and talents of all students in school and in creating an environment where such gifts can be turned to individual and communal success.

The Review is timely for us in New Zealand for if we aren't careful we could lose the opportunity for creativity before we even had the chance to give it a go.

'Colonise' the Curriculum says Kelvin Smythe

Few people give curriculums the 'once over' like Kelvin Smythe. Kelvin has a had a long career in education and has aways been a champion of innovative 'holistic' New Zealand teachers. Kelvin has long suggested that teachers ought to 'colonise' Curriculum documents to fit their own philosophies and I agree. If you want to read Kelvin in full go to his site. In the meantime I am going to 'colonise' Kelvin's writing!

Kelvin is determined that education ought to attend to the heart as well as to the mind. Recent curriculums have ignored the affective , or feeling aspects, of learning and, as a result, a lot has been lost. Kelvin believes that powerful learning experiences 'transform' how students think/feel about issues. This of course is too hard for the technocrats to measure!

It is this affective aspect of learning that Kelvin wants to protect from hierarchical pressure and academic experts.

The answer, Kelvin advises, is for teachers to 'colonise' the official curriculum and to take in messages they feel comfortable with and to treat the rest with benign neglect.

All in all, Kelvin believes, the 'new' curriculum is a rather 'genial ' one. A document that allows teachers the flexibility to shape it to suit the needs and interests of their students. Even its brevity is an advantage.

Kelvin makes the point that the emphasis on the key competencies does not mean that the curriculum is any less concerned with knowledge. Kelvin recommends that the Learning Areas statements should be given a prominent place. Without real content learning is at risk - the 'key competences' are both and end and a means.

The 'new' curriculum encourages integration of learning areas which, although a good thing, can if done badly, undermine curriculum validity.

Kevin is excited by a statement that , in regard to coverage, that 'the teacher may decide to cover less but cover in greater depth'. And that 'each schools curriculum should allow teachers the scope to make interpretations in response to particular needs, interests, and talents of individuals and groups of students in their classes'. Another statement Kelvin liked was the one that says the new curriculum is a 'framework rather than a detailed plan...schools have considerable flexibility when determining the detail'. And also that teachers should select achievement objectives to 'fit the learning needs of their students'.

The matter of school evaluation is a concern to Kelvin which is in contrast the documents 'genial setting'. Along with the elegant statements about assessment for learning comes the following that has the potential to damage good primary teaching.

Teaching and learning 'expectations', the curriculum says about achievement objectives , 'should be stated in ways that help teachers, students and parent recognise, measure, discuss, and chart progress'. In this one statement, Kelvin writes, 'is encapsulated the withering of imagination, creativity, intuition, the divergent, the aesthetic, the immanent, and the affective'.

This one statement, Kelvin writes is , 'the enemy of our holistic education tradition'. It represents the 'triumph of the technicists, the atomists, the bureaucrats, the contemporary Gradgrinds, the measurers, the controllers' This is about organising learning so it can be measured.

Kevin asks is this the kind of education we want for our grandchildren.

It is as if two different Ministry teams developed two irreconcilable stances. In technicist times measurement always trumps the affective, Kelvin writes.

Teachers should feature the curriculum's elegant statements that 'the primary purpose of assessment is to improve student's learning and teachers teaching.' And that 'analysis and and interpretation often takes place in the mind of the teacher, who then uses the insights gained to shape their actions as they continue to work with their students'.

In the the contradiction lies between the two approaches lies the curriculum's fundamental flaw.

A look at some of the learning objectives as that are developed up the 'levels' will show mindless word games in an attempt to show progressions.

Kelvin seems happy with most of the Learning Area statements particularly the Arts and Science. They are well worth reading.

A concern of Kevin's is that the competencies could become 'areas of bureaucratic contestation'. His suggestion is to 'integrate the competencies into the everyday functioning of the school and classroom...without losing sight of the key elements of the competencies'. The review Office will no doubt want to see evidence of their implementation!

His overall suggestion for the competencies is that unit plans for curriculum units include criteria derived from the competencies, and when a child does something significant a note be made.Another suggestion is to to develop a key statement to represent each competency.

Kelvin's real issue is about the pressures being placed on schools that result in less time being given to ' the aesthetic, affective, the imaginative, the creative, the intuitive, the feelings for, and so on.' This sort of imaginative teaching needs time and space to alow children to be divergent.

The creative 'holistic' approach is an alternative ,Kelvin writes, to the WALTS now in vogue. He suggests broadening the WALTS to encourage students divergent and imaginative responses.Currently an overuse of WALTS is developing a standardized mechanistic approach to learning.

Kelvin has some concerns about inquiry learning which I do not fully understand. Maybe it is that all too often inquiry learning neglects in depth understanding; the valuing of process, or competencies, over content.If so then I am in agreement. A study without real understanding is a study at risk.

The learning structure Kelvin recommends is: 'Introduction; Developing Understanding; Expressing Understanding; and Conclusion. The key stage though is Developing Understanding - this is the stage which teachers and children should stay until a strong affective response is evident. This is about engaging students emotions, their curiosity, and to allowing their divergent imaginative thinking to emerge.

'Teaching', Kelvin writes,'is about providing an environment that increases the likelihood of children being involved in powerful transformative experiences; by definition that means that the affective must be a central part of the process.' This he continues, is not about 'airy fairy' teaching but based on real detail, information and reality.

Kelvins aim, in his presentation, was to encourage teachers to be confident in the ways they approach the new curriculum; to see it as a mixture of pluses and minuses, and to continue to 'colonise' it.

He wants teachers to see the curriculum as a 'genial one that in many respects actively encourages you to shape it to your purposes'. He wants teachers to recognise the many holistic and liberal ideas in the document that will encourage enlightened practice.

He also wants to warn teachers about the destructive ideas being set up for measurement, and that the affective and imaginative are being squeezed out of classrooms by pressures resulting from the crowded curriculum. It is important, he believes, that the competencies need to be integrated into everyday classroom functioning.

How the Review Office reacts will be a vital factor in the development of the liberal possibilities of the curriculum.

Most of all Kelvin wants to remind teachers that they are inheritors of an a holistic approach to teaching and learning - one where the cognitive and the affective interact; the mind and the heart. An approach that values the power of transformational experiences.

This is the knowledge that primary teachers need to contemplate and value rather than that of the technocrats, bureaucrats and academic experts.

And I agree.

Developing a co-constructivist unit of study

A foyer display - Hokowhitu School. Hokowhitu is a school that values in all learners their sense of wonder. A school that values their students thoughts and is keen to develop their school as an inquiry community.

Below is a plan for a school to develop a unit of work which values students' ideas and thoughts and then challenges them to 'change their minds' though interactive activities.

Before starting the unit the staff need to clarify their idea of 'constructivist' and inquiry learning.

1 Select a unit of work either individually or as a team. If a team each team member will develop their own interpretation of the unit.


2 Plan to complete the unit in 4 to 5 weeks.Junior classes may need less time.

3 Plan to achieve 3 or four major outcomes for the unit. The thought is to do 'fewer things well'. Possibly research findings based on 'key' questions ( research writing), a piece of creative writing,and a piece of art etc.


4 Conclude the unit with a parent open time ( from 2 to 2.50) to share student's work. A good idea is to have 'class walk around' by teachers before the parent open time.

5 The unit is to based on a 'co-constructivist' or 'interactive' approach where teachers gather students' questions, their prior ideas, and then undertake research and experiments etc to challenge students' views; and then to present/ display what they have learnt.

6 The interactive model is in essence an inquiry learning model

7 Consider using four group rotational model ( similar to the one used in the literacy block). Each session to start with few minutes to outline expectations and to finish with a reflective 'wrap up ' session. If such a model is used one group each day to be used to undertake an experiment, or in-depth discussion with the teacher, while others complete work they can do independently, or have drafted out in literacy time.

8 For the above group rotation to work the literacy (and possibly numeracy) times need to be 're-framed' so as to develop skills to be applied in the inquiry time. The literacy block needs to teach information and design literacy, and include experiments and activities to develop science writing etc. All the 'seeking, using, and creating' competencies need to be in place to ensure all students have the 'self managing' skills to stay on task during inquiry group work.

Negotiated group task need to be defined on the blackboard/whiteboard so all students are aware of daily expectations. The group programme will 'break down' as students complete tasks. Students then have the task to finish any work - or do extra tasks.

9 Such a process, as outlined above, will become more effective as both teachers and students gain confidence and skill.

10 The unit concludes with a display, or exhibition ,of the ideas the students have developed. Display will have a heading ( written as a provocation) 'key' question, 'prior ideas', processes used, finished work, any art or language and also including students assessment.

The key to successful inquiry learning depends on the information skills taught in the literacy ( and numeracy) block. Skills will need to be developed as needed if they are to be relevant or transferred. A quick read of students finished work will indicate success or otherwise.

It also not only important to teach a range of information literacy skills but it is also important, during this time, to steep students in facts, literature, and visuals about topic to provide material for students to wonder about. Once it is in students memories ( however interpreted) it becomes available for spontaneous recall later. Or, stated differently, the more students see, read, hear, or experience about a topic the more likely they will be able to ask better questions and to use that information independently. This of course is assisted by teaching information literacy skills.

Valuing students' 'voice'.

Entering this classroom a visitor cannot but be impressed by the celebration of students 'voice' or ideas. The young teacher, in a low decile school, has created an environment based on aesthetics and creativity. Her shadow study, a small thing in itself, has been made the most of.

'Children and scientists have much in common. Both are interested in a wide range of things and both are interested in, and attempt to, to make sense of, how and why things behave as they do'.

'Unless we know what children think and why they think the way they do we have little chance of making any impact with our teaching' write the authors of 'Learning In Science' ( Osborne and Freyberg).

Student centred classroom ought to reflect students questions, theories, 'prior ideas', points of views, and ideas they have modified as a result of learning more.

All too often this is not the case. Worse still teachers' intentions and language gets in the way. As well there is simply too much time spend on literacy and numeracy that also gets in the way of tapping into students' curiosity. Even the, hardly 'new', emphasis on key competencies may divert teachers away from the valuing of student's ideas.

Teaching ought to be about reflecting students diverse idea and helping them clarify and extend their thoughts. It ought to be about providing students feelings of satisfaction and power which comes from being able to do something.

Students are perfectly capable of making meanings for themselves. the teachers role is to value their 'prior ideas' and then to help them clarify and deepen their understandings. Disconcertingly students view are sometimes hard to change - this is the dilemma of the traditional teacher.

Students have idea to express ( and to be challenged) about an infinite range of experiences.

How do plants grow? What are seeds? What are Flowers for? What are fruits or vegetables?

How are animals, like cats, dogs or goldfish, suited to live their lives? What things are alive? What is an animal? Are we animals?

Why do we need food? Where some food good or bad for you? Why do things taste differently?

Why do some things dissolve, melt, freeze and why?

What is air? How does smell get from a air freshener to our noses? What is wind? Where does it come from? Why do kites , or birds fly?

Why is water important? Where does it all come from, or go to? Why does it freeze or melt? What does soap do? How are bubbles made? Why do some things sink or float? Why do boats float? Where do waves come from -what makes the waves?

What is electricity? What is a battery? How does it get into our homes?

Where does all out toilet water go to? Where does all the storm water go to? What is rain? Where does it comes from, or go to? Why do puddles dry up in the sun?

How do we keep warm? How do we keep things warm? What is a thermometer

What is light? Can it go around corners? How are shadows made? Why do they change during the day?

How do musical instruments make sounds?What is vibration? How do we hear?

Why do things fall down and not up? Is the world round or flat? How do you know? Why do season change? What is the sun, the moon, or the stars.

What is wood, rocks, soil , dirt?

Why do we get sick? Why do medicines work? What is inside our bodies? Why do we have blood, veins, bones , hearts? Why do we get old and die?

A great idea would be to ask students, of any age, what are the question and concerns they have? From such an activity an 'authentic' curriculum would emerge' that teachers and students could explore ( co-create new knowledge) together.

Looking at the above list it is hard to know if they are science, language, literacy, numeracy, philosophy, technology, social sciences, or art. To solve them would involve all disciplines.

We need to consider how to integrate literacy and numeracy into such an 'emerging' and creative curriculum.

Students could be asked to think of ways to explore their ideas and ways to express them. In this process 'learning how to learn' ('key competencies') would naturally be involved.

This is true learning - all about 'changing ones mind'.

It is what ought to happen in our schools. It is how we learn in life - or at least the very young or those who get through our system to become scientists.

Imagine a school based on exploring students curiosity.

Imagine the exciting role of the teacher!

Schools have a lot to learn about learning

Interactive teaching- the Learning in Science Project (LISP)

If we really believe students 'construct' their own 'meanings' from any experience then teachers need to value the 'prior ideas' , questions and theories their students have. Only then can they set about to challenge and help students clarify what they know and can do. Some of the best research in this process was completed in NZ in the 80s by researchers at Waikato University but has been, more or less, ignored by those in authority since.

In the 80s, as a science adviser, I was involved in the development of the Learning in Science Project (LISP). It had evolved when a university physics professor became worried that the knowledge he thought his students ought to have been taught seemed to be missing in his classes. He found that it had been 'taught' , but that the students had been taught in way that their 'prior ideas' had not been changed in the process, or that they did not have the confidence to use what they 'knew' in practical situations. Some call this 'fragile' learning and it exists throughout the curriculum.

The basic findings were that children bring to any science lesson ( or any lesson in any subject) meaning that interfere with their acceptance of 'scientists' or teachers views.

Out of the research an inquiry model for teaching was developed; a model that can be applied across all learning.

It is a concern that, as teachers are being encouraged to focus on developing learning how to learn 'key competencies', that the importance of deep understanding of content is being ignored. A focus on competences only is resulting in 'thin learning'. I have seen evidence of such poor teaching where students, after completing a bush, study learnt little about the bush - the teachers more concerned with the 'key competencies' being gained.

The same concern is seen where teachers seem keener to show that they are using a range of thinking skills without any real gains in actually developing deep thinking, or understanding, about content.

This problem is not helped by an over emphasis on literacy and numeracy ( divorced from the afternoon inquiry programme) leaving little time for exploring the other learning areas.

Unless teachers know what their students think and why they think that way, teachers have little chance of making any impact with their teaching.

An 'interactive' approach allows teachers to work alongside their students to help them co- construct better learning. Such an approach gives time for teachers to develop their own understanding of content and not be seen as the font of all knowledge. Both teachers and learners are involved in the inquiry process resulting in 'constructing', or creating deeper understanding.

Our 'new' curriculum states that learners should 'seek ,use and create their own knowledge'. An interactive approach enables this to be achieved and, in the process, naturally develops the life long 'key competencies'.

Briefly the interactive inquiry model asks teachers;

1 Place students in an interesting situation ( in any learning area) that stimulates them to ask questions.

2 Record students question and gain insight into the students prior ideas.

3 Help students select suitable questions for them to research. With experience students could work in groups researching different questions. This will require clearly defined group tasks.

4 Students undertake their research. To do this requires a number of skills to be in place: how to do an experiment and write it up; how to 'seek, use and create' information; skills of information technology; and design and presentation of their ideas. All these need to be part of well thought out literacy( and numeracy) programme. Teachers, during this research, need to interact with students, provide resources, to challenge their ideas, and to help them stay focused on their tasks.

6 Students report, demonstrate, exhibit, or display their findings and reflect on how their understanding, knowledge and skills ( including 'key competencies') have changed. Hopefully such conclusions will result in further questions to explore illustrating the tentativeness of all learning.

To be honest there is little evidence that such an approach is common in our schools. 'Cut and paste' is still the common fare of student 'researchers'.

An interactive approach will remedy such poor learning.

Notes for developing a creative school

As we escape from the conformity of the previous curriculum teachers, and schools, have the opportunity to develop some new thinking and to create school more suited to the demands of a new creative era? Or will they?

I have the task next week to outline some ideas to a school staff about how to develop a creative school where all the gifts and talents of all students are valued. A school where all students leave 'confident, connected, life long learner - all able to 'seek, use and create their own knowledge'.

I thought I would share my 'emerging' thoughts; a work in progress.

The last big change in education happened in the period between the 1950s and 1970s. During this time straight rows, with the teacher all powerful at the front, was replaced by the discovery of the individual and group teaching. Little has really changed since then. In secondary schools the 'transmission model' still continues even though it is obviously failing. So far modern technology has not yet dramatically changed the teaching patterns established in the 60s.

Is developing really creative school possible?

What would it mean for teachers and students? consider the changes that happened in the 1960s.

What would have to change?

If we accepted that learning, the disposition to inquire and make meaning, and to be creative were inborn how would this change our roles? If these capabilities are inborn how come so many students seem to have lost this natural love of learning? Are schools part of the problem?

There are schools that already believe their role is to provide experiences to amplify ( or 'recover') this natural desire. The Emlio Reggio schools of Milan and the writings of James Beane come to mind. And of course the writing of progressive educators over the ages led by John Dewey.

The research of Piaget and Vygotsky led to the changes in the 50s and the concept of developmental or learner centred education. In NZ pioneer teachers, like Elwyn Richardson, actually developed such creative learning environment. Elwyn's book 'In the Early World' is still available from the NZCER.

New knowledge about how students learn now points to new transformational developments in schooling but so far little has changed.

Imagine a school led by students' questions and concerns; a school seen as a 'community of inquiry' ensuring every student leaves with a positive learning identity.

A school that made full use of their immediate natural and man made environment as a source for 'rich' integrated studies along with pertinent studies of other culture in time and space.

Schools that use student curiosity to develop 'learning power' ( 'key competencies') so that they have the capacity to 'know what to do when they do not know what to do', to quote Piaget.

Such a school would focus on 'doing fewer things well' so learning results in 'deep' understanding and positive attitudes.

Such a school would value the education in students of sensory awareness and value observational skills so as to develop language, students questions and to lead into imaginative expression of their ideas.

Such a school would provide students with a range of 'frameworks' to interpret any experience( covering the Learning Areas or 'multiple intelligences').

Whatever was learnt, or expressed, would be 'done well' with the thought that achieving personal excellence develops positive attitudes and feeling towards learning. All the expressive arts would be given full value and individual interpretations encouraged.

In such an environment modern technology would be integrated, as required, to research, express and share ideas gained.

Such a school would require 'artistry' from teachers to assist learners gain the skills required to achieve personal excellence. 'Teaching', to quote Jerome Bruner, would be 'the canny art of intellectual temptation'.

An inquiry approach would be integrated into all learning - essentially 'enlightened trial and error'; trying things out and keeping what works.

Teachers, with their focus on developing the gifts and talents of all learners would be aware of the 'multiple intelligences' research of Howard Gardner and would appreciate the individual learning style of each learner - 'personalised learning'.

Teachers would make use of a co-constructivist approach , one that values students questions and 'prior' ideas. An approach that challenged student's views and provided learning assistance as and when required. An approach that respected the learning style of each learner.

One big change would have to be made.

Literacy and numeracy blocks would have to be 're framed' so as to place the emphasis on developing the skills and depth of content to be used in the inquiry topic that would now be the centre stage of all learning.

While there would need to be processes in place to assure basic achievement in maths and reading the emphasis is on applying the skills in the service of inquiry learning. this would make both reading and maths more relevant for learners.

As for assessment the 'evidence' would be what the students can do and how they act. The whole school , the grounds, the room environments, student learning journals, the school website, would speak louder than any so called 'learning targets'. There would be visual 'messages' shouting out creativity wherever you looked.

Parents would cue to enrol their children and teachers would line up to involved.

I am sure that many teachers would want to do this? Few enjoy the 'surveillance culture' they are currently exposed to which is killing the joy of teaching let alone learning.

If we want all students to develop all their gifts and talents, to develop positive identities as 'confident life long learners', able to 'seek, use and create their own knowledge', we have little choice.

It is beyond the current system still locked in the 1970s.

The intent of the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum provides with an opportunity to develop such creative schools but only if we have the wit and imagination to take up the challenge.

We will have to wait and see.

Teaching for thinking

Students exploring electricity. To make fullest use of such a 'rich' learning situation teachers need to find out what students 'prior ideas' might be, what questions they have, teach how to record what they are doing, how to discuss what is happening and why, how to write up their findings, provide opportunities to use their 'new' knowledge, and, finally, to reflect how much they have changed their minds. If this is not done learning will be lost. This is learning in depth - or doing 'fewer things well'.

There is a lot of talk about teaching thinking in schools and all sorts of thinking processes are often seen on classroom walls. The trouble is that more than talk and processes are required - there ought to be some real evidence of students thinking to be seen. All too often was is seen is 'higher order thinking for thin learning!'.

Gwen Gawith writes about this lack of translation into action, this lack of critical thinking, in the Term 3 08 Good Teacher Magazine, Quoting Ned Nodding she writes ' I consider thinking as the sort of mental activity that uses facts to plan order, and work towards an end, seeks meaning; is self reflective; and uses reason to question claims and make judgements'.

The key is doing. Nodding makes is that thinkers need something to think about. Plan what? Order what? Work toward what end? Just using De Bono thinking hats is not good enough!

All Learning Areas provide contexts for this thinking to be used - maths experiences, examining research in reading, but most of the current inquiry topic. Trouble is there isn't much time for such topics with all the focus on literacy and numeracy. One way to solve this is to 're-frame' the literacy and numeracy blocks so as to contribute to developing thinking related to the current study 'killing two birds with one stone'.

The inquiry topic should be the driving force for much of the school day.

A lot of school have developed inquiry models but such models often neglect to show the value of recognising the messiness and confusion that is a part of any inquiry or creative learning.

The first task is to define the challenge. Students need some experience to attract their curiosity, to provide questions and to surface 'prior ideas'.During this exploratory stage it is valuable to recognise feeling of uncertainty and confusion.

Out of the above will emerge 'key' , 'hook' , or 'fertile' questions to explore. With greater definition of the challenge, and narrowing down things to do, feeling of optimism and clarity emerge ( even if they are often easily lost).

Then the 'thinking begins'. Students need to be 'helped' to involve themselves in explorations, experiments,and research. To be able to record their thoughts students will need help and this is where the literacy time can be integrated. Information literacy is all too often taught and never used - now is the opportunity. As activities, usually done collaboratively ( and this requires new skills ) are completed and recorded confusion leads to a sense of direction and anticipation of realising answers.

Finally as idea are presented, displayed, demonstrated feelings of satisfaction and pride will be felt. During a reflective time students will realized that they have only scratched the surface and that there is always more to learn. Ideas might have 'emerged' for a new class study or for individual, or group, research. This contributes to them becoming 'life long learners'.

To achieve such learning requires that teachers need to 'teach' the various aspects involved. They need to work with their students, 'thinking out loud', modelling the kind of thought they want their students to be able to use. This includes using graphic organisers, how to take notes and how to record sources of information. Most of all learning to appreciate of the 'messiness' involved in inquiry learning; the 'enlightened process of trial and error'. It is vital, Gwen Gawith, writes for students to learn 'reason with facts' and observations, to be able to ask deep questions, how to break up ideas, how to combine ideas, and how to 'see ' connections with previous learning.

This all gets back, says Gwen, that 'children need to know stuff to think with'; or as Nodding says, 'we are talking about thinking in a learning context'.

Providing 'rich , real ,and relevant' contexts, and digging into them rigorously, is what it is all about, or ought to be. The truth is such deep thinking, based on inquiry, thinking that is intellectually challenging is not often seen. Students need to ground their claims on verifiable evidence and also to go beyond the information given.

More often what is seen is an unquestioning regurgitating of information as children 'cut and paste', with no interpretation, of what they gather from doubtful sources. No 'I think..', or I am still wondering about...' , or 'it might be....' or any other 'markers' of real thinking.

Howard Gardner , Gwen writes, believes that students need more than an information base... they need to master disciplinary thinking'. This, Gwen says, is what John Dewey 'used to bang on about, getting them to think mathematically, historically, geographically.'

Inquiry, or creative teaching, is about disciplining the mind so as to think creativity and critically; to grow children's minds by building on their inborn disposition to 'make meaning' of their world.

Maybe we have to rethink all the fragmented learning areas ( particularly the role of literacy and numeracy) to focus them all on developing this disposition to inquire with growing depth and confidence.

I wait to see such classrooms.

I can remember such classrooms before the days of the imposed curriculums.

Our 'new' curriculum provides an opportunity to develop our classes as centres of inquiry.

But only if we change our own minds (and our fragmented school timetables) first.

Creative teaching

I saw this wonderfully creative piece of art while visiting Hillcrest School. All students had used the same media ( cutting out coloured paper) but every piece was so different but Amy's (age 7) work stood out. The aesthetic feeling gained from achieving such a piece is the best 'evidence' of learning. And of course it is a representation of an important idea to the young artist. A real change from the 'formulaic' art I so often see.

Great art

A piece of art from Hillcrest Normal School illustrating the right amount of teacher guidance and plenty of individual creativity.

Beyond rationality into creativity?

Schools need to escape from the bounded rationality of a failing era and move into more flexible style of learning for a new creative age.

Have we gone too far?

Discovery Time

Discovery Time is a most valuable book written by two New Zealand educators Brenda Martin and Gay Hay. To acquire this book visit their website. Discovery Time, an activity based programme held once a week, provides an exciting environment in which to strengthen the key competencies and bring fun into children's learning.

Highly recommended.


I have visited a number of schools that have introduced 'Discovery Time' but until now have not taken the time to discover what it was all about. All I knew was that the teachers in the schools involved were highly enthusiastic.

Last week, by chance, I became more informed about Discovery time and now have no hesitation in providing my wholehearted support. I was presenting creative teaching and learning ideas at a school in Lower Hutt where one of the authors, Brenda, a Resource Teacher Learning and Behaviour ( RTLB), was attached. The principal assured me that we would have much in common.

At the conclusion of my session the 'author' and I had a discussion during which I was given copy of their book.

Discovery Time was introduced to create a balance between the skills and knowledge demands of curriculum and the activity-based , student-directed focus that many teachers believe in.

One one hand, the authors write, there is large body of research that indicates young children learn best through developmentally appropriate, experience-based student-directed learning, whilst on the other hand there is a demand for measurable, outcome focused, highly structured and teacher directed programmes.

The authors believe that we have tipped too far towards the outcome focused assessment model at the expense of a more holistic experiential learning; that we have become so focused on academic learning that we have neglected important social and emotional needs.

As a result play ( 'the natural way children go about the business of learning') is being neglected and as 'children don't get a chance to test ideas, explore and experiment because they are always meeting imposed adult expectations. As a result young children are not as resilient as they no longer have the time nor the opportunity to try things out, make mistakes, fall flat on their faces and then pick themselves up.

World wide, the authors report, that the emphasis on improving test scores has neglected creativity and innovation.In order to foster creativity children need to be actively involved in wide-ranging experiential learning and able to participate in learning of their own choosing.

In order to redress some of these concerns new curriculum have introduced 'key competencies', 'the things all people need to know and be able to do in order to live meaningfully in, and contribute in , and contribute to, a well functioning society'.

Discovery Time was written in response to this need and is a programme that provides an activity-based student directed environment where students have the to opportunity to explore and develop 'key competencies'.

The authors write that, while their programme is loosely based on 'Developmental' or 'Choosing Time' a strong features of New Zealand junior school classrooms of the 70s and 80s, it provides a greater facilitative role for teachers; a greater emphasis on quality feedback and teacher interaction.

I particularly liked the structure the authors provide for the ninety minute discovery time. The teacher begins by introducing the focus for the day which may target a specific aspect of the key competencies as well as the content involved.

The children then select and participate in the activities during which teachers provide feedback, ask questions and generally encourage students to take learning risks and to expand their thinking.

At the end of the session the class comes together in a 'wrap up' session to share and reflect on what they have learnt.

The implications of each key competencies are clearly explained which I am sure teachers will find valuable.

Teachers are also provided with a planning format which covers the three steps outlined above to assist them make the best use of discovery time. Teachers will also find the assessment suggestions useful along with the extensive lists of possibilities to include in discovery time. Detailed examples of planned units are provided to give even greater guidance.

The theme of the book is that the possibilities are endless.

The philosophy behind discovery time could easily be extended to cover most of the school day and certainly can be used to introduce, or contribute to, more extensive class integrated explorations.

Discovery Time is a good idea, one developed by classroom teachers for classroom teachers. It is an approach that builds on the beliefs of creative New Zealand teachers and I am sure it will spread as teachers tire of the current imposed 'best practice' outcome based measurable programmes.

It is a programme that values the creativity of teachers and that is its real strength.

The book comes with a most valuable CDROM.

Advice from David Perkins to make learning Whole

David Perkin's book 'Make Learning Whole' concludes each chapter with very practical advice to create positive integrated learning environments.




Advice from David Perkins 'Making learning Whole'

One: 'Play the whole game' not fragmented bits.

The problem Perkins says is there is too much problem solving ( teachers problems ) and not enough problem finding - or figuring out often 'messy' open ended investigations. 'Playing the whole game' is the solution resulting in some sort of inquiry or performance. It is not just about content but getting better at things, it requires thinking with what you know to go further, it is about finding explanations and justifications.It involves curiosity, discovery, creativity, and camaraderie. It is not just discovery learning - it needs strong guidance gradually faded back.

To get students involved in any learning game teachers need to present 'threshold experiences' suited to the students developmental level. And students need to see the point of the game in any content area.

The best 'threshold experiences are playing 'junior versions' that provides students opportunities to see the 'big picture' of the activity . All 'games' have 'hard bits' to practice. 'Whole language' is a good example but with the inclusion of necessary skill development so to 'play the game' of reading well. 'Junior' versions can be played in subject areas such as mathematics or cross curricular investigation that integrate the total curriculum. 'Junior versions' need to involve learners at different skill levels, and need to challenge students to get better at the game, and, to 'stick', students need plenty of practice.

Ideally the language and numeracy blocks ought to contribute to students being able to involve themselves skillfully in such bigger open ended investigations.

The critical thing is that students can 'perform the the game' ( reading, maths, an inquiry investigation) with flexibility and understanding.

Teachers need to:

1 Try to introduce all learning as a kind of inquiry or performance involving problem finding and solving learning that students see the point of it.

2 Such learning should produce something worthwhile - a solution, greater understanding or research that students value.

3 The best way is to find a 'junior version' of the activity, a 'threshold activity', that is attractive to the learners. A ' junior version' that stimulates curiosity, discovery, imagination camaraderie and creativity.

4 Such 'threshold' activities need to provide opportunities for meaningful practice

Two: 'Make the game worth playing'.

Worthwhile games have intrinsic motivation. Students often start school highly enthusiastic but become increasingly less so over the years as schools focus on measureable achievement rather than developing a love of the game of learning. Most students simply forget most of what they are taught - it does not 'connect' or 'stick'.

Worthwhile learning resonates with learners' interests and concerns, and provides opportunities for greater success, insight and understanding. Teachers need to introduce 'generative' topics to develop powerful learning. Good topics provide, writes Perkins, 'enlightenment, empowerment, and responsibility'. Topics, or 'junior versions' of any game, must provide reason for students to want to learn more. Sometimes students don't know what they want until they have had a significant amount of experience through playing 'junior versions'. A good topic provides the opportunity for students to develop their understanding and provides opportunities for guided choices and teacher feedback to develop meaningful skills. Teachers need to provide a 'culture of opportunity' to 'make games worth playing', to communicate high expectations for all learners and toencourage the value of practice and effort.

The first step is choosing a game worth playing.

Teachers need to:

1 Search for 'generative' topics that illuminate fundamental questions of human learning.

2 Organize learning, through 'Junior versions', that develop personal goals, worthwhile performances and ongoing assessment.

3 Provide a climate of high expectation for all students to develop proactive mindsets and provide step by step assistance so students can improve their learning capacity.

4 Provide opportunities for students choice,creativity and imagination as their confidence and skill develops

Three: 'Work on the hard bits'

Students need to appreciate that to get better they need to work on and practice the 'hard bits'. If the desire to get better at playing the game is present such practice is understood as necessary. 'Hard bits' need to be valued as a means to improve and requires ongoing assessment by both the teacher and the students. Feedback need to focus on strengths and shortfalls and should clarify intentions, provide appreciation and indicate concerns and suggestions for 'next time'.

Feedback fails to 'stick' unless it is infused back into the setting of the whole game. After any separate 'hard bit' lesson students need an opportunity to make meaningful use of it for it to be integrated. Deliberate practice is needed, with experience teachers will gain insight into the areas of 'troublesome knowledge' to assist students. 'Junior versions' themselves are a way to practice missing skills. 'Learning conversation' with students having difficulty - with students describing their actions- are another way of finding problem areas.

Teachers need to:

1 Help students work on the 'hard bits that feedback into the 'whole game'.

2 Figure out ways to give students frequent rich feedback from themselves or other students.

3 Embrace 'hard bits' and provide actionable feedback and immediate opportunities to apply.

4 Try to anticipate 'hard bits' and organise teaching to assist.

5 Make use of students specific difficulties to help teach smarter.

6 Find some 'whole game' exercises that focus on practicing the targeted 'hard bits'

Four: 'Play out of town' - the issues of transfer.

People often do not transfer learning in one context to another ( 'they can't play out of town). If the task is similar ( reading another book) then 'near transfer' applies. It it involves reading in an inquiry situation it might not ( 'far transfer'). To develop transfer students need to build up 'rich extensible action repertoires' .

Transfer does not happen by itself. It can only be achieved if the pattern of learning favours it. Teachers need to pay attention to developing transfer ensuring that students develop awareness to make use of skills learnt in other situations.

The more students are encouraged to transfer learning by being involved in situations that require them to use such skills the more learning is transferred. Transfer involves both content and process. Teachers can point out where transfer is required by doing activities close to the original application ( called 'hugging') or in a new situation ( Perkin's calls this 'playing out of town') and by reminding students of the need to use previous learning ( called 'bridging' ).

Teachers need to make the most of transfer opportunities.

1 Ask how can I help students make connections?

2 Focus on areas where transfer might be a problem -applying reading or maths skills to inquiry topics.

3 Design learning activities that involve transfer - teaching research skills in literacy block to integrate into the current class inquiry study.

4 Remind students of their prior knowledge of content and process ( 'key competencies').

Five: 'Uncover the hidden game'.

Almost everything people learn in school has its hidden aspects. Getting good at things means getting below the surface. What is often missing is self management- ways of analyzing, questioning, clarifying problems and then organising approaches. To do this students need to be able to explain things to themselves - to be aware of strategies, for example, in reading new texts. Thinking about thinking , to be successful, need to undertaken and made explicit in real contexts ( or 'whole games'). Each learning area, or discipline, has its own 'hidden games' to appreciate and once again these are best learnt by being involved in 'Junior games' - by being mathematicians so as to 'surface' how mathematicians work.

What teachers can do to make 'visible' 'hidden' learning - 'key competencies'

1 Reveal 'hidden' strategies to students through examples and discussion, or help students discover them for themselves with your help.

2 Keep things simple at first with very 'junior versions' .

3 Encourage self management and 'good moves'.

4 Help student appreciate the learning process - how the 'game is played' in any learning area - to think like scientists.

Six; 'Learn from the team' - to learn from and with others.

Too much of schooling, Perkin writes, 'is a solo activity' - reading and listening rather than interacting. In life we generally learn ( or 'play whole games') together; learning is a collective enterprise. To achieve this teachers need to set up 'participation structures' to ensure all students are involved. Focused group work is required. 'Newcomers' can be ' scaffolded' and helped just above their developmental level and by 'participating as apprentices' graduallay become more involved. Ideas thrive in an environment of discussion and collaboration while undertaking real tasks ( or 'whole games') that result in group performances or presentations. Peer, or small group problem solving, (with each group working on different elements of problem), active listening, thinking aloud, cross age tutoring, and reciprocal reading are ways of working on the 'hard parts' and are examples of learning from each other. Demonstrations and sharing ideas and critiques of each others work are other means of learning from others. Teachers can also share ideas by circulating around groups 'nudging, prodding and cajoling to help students in advance' with the 'hard bits'; focused teaching.

All the above builds up a 'community of practice' where students actively share and talk about what is on their mind and what they have learnt, or need to learn. This is an ideal situation to to integrate newcomers to the room - this applies to new school staff as well as class members. The school as a inquiry or learning community.
Such collegial sharing 'makes the game worthwhile'.

What teachers can do to ensure 'learning from the team'.

1 Use various well defined group partciation activies.

2 Think of different ways for students to share and help each other.

3 Plan ways to involve newcomers ( beginners) to any activity: pair problem solving, 'jig saw' tasks, cross age tutoring, debates, project based learning.

4 Make use of a 'demonstration - lecture- students at work, and critique' ( reflection) approach that 'allows students to watch and learn from one another'. The same applies for teacher professional development.

Seven : 'learn the game of learning'.

Students need to 'drivers' of their own learning and not 'passengers' - much of this sense of agency will come from playing 'whole games. To be 'drivers' students need to make their own choices. Too easily learning can be micromanaged and, if so, students will not develop a 'take charge mindset. We need to teach them to feel what it is like to 'drive their own learning' - and there is no other way without letting them drive. This about student agency -about developing classrooms that work happily even without the teachers presence. Teachers in charge of their own learning. Such 'driver-seat school cultures are very good for building the skills and dispositions of learning to learn ' - the 'key competencies' required for unknown times. Students in such classes do not easily give up as they have learnt to value effort and responsibility for their own learning. How teachers relate to students, the messages they give about learning, are vital to develop 'confident, creative and connected' learners able to 'seek , use and create their own knowledge'. 'Such students have been drawn into deep and self regulated engagement in learning'. Creating opportunistic learning situations, high expectations for all students, realistic learning contexts,modeling, coaching, scaffolding, and focused feedback to make learning 'visible' or explicit are key teacher ingredients. Any separate stand alone lessons, if necessary to practice 'hard bits', need to be put to use as soon as possible. Such teaching, Perkin's writes, ' does not call fr absolute freedom, but rather a measured latitude that supports as much as it frees, guides as much as it permits, shapes as much as it allows'.

All the previous six points contribute to developing to students learning the lifelong 'game of learning'. All learning is preparation for the as yet unknown that lies ahead.

What teachers need to do to help all students learn the most important game of all - 'the game of learning.'

1 Do everything to capitalize on the 'driver not the passenger effect' in learning so learner develop skill in the 'game' of independent learning.

2 Develop a 'driver seat culture by developing patterns of interaction that allow learners significant autonomy and choice promoting self reflection and self- management ( the 'key competencies')

3 Develop a 'deep' rather than a 'shallow' approach to learning, one that values effort rather than a 'either you get it, or you don't, mindset'

4 Teach specific skills of self management and learning strategies to develop student independence and responsibility.

5 Bear in mind that good learning benefits from explicit attention not just by osmosis.

Natural learning is immediately meaningfull and worthwhile; new knowledge is woven in as needed as well as revealed by the unfolding experience; conflicting knowledge is negotiated through thought and experiments; and considerable learning happens automatically extended by reflection and targeted rehearsal and practice of 'hard bits'. Each learning experience represents the larger 'game of learning'.

'We are teaching today for tomorrow' Perkin's concludes. The essential ingredient is the first principle - 'play the whole game' - or a 'junior version'. 'Teach today what students will need tomorrow'...'how to map it, how to cope with it and how to master the large understandings that can help make sense of it'.

Education is about playing the whole game .

David Perkins is professor of Education at Harvard University Graduate School of Education. A highly respected authority in his field he is well known for his research and insight into the deep understanding of teaching and learning. His latest highly creative and easy to read book ( published 2009) summarizes years of observations, reflections and research. He 'makes visible' what creative and insightful teachers do. He also provides a framework of seven practical principles for all teachers to transform their teaching. A must read for 2009.

'Making Learning Whole', written by David Perkins, is hot off the press - published in 2009. All schools ought to acquire a copy because it will certainty help them focus their teaching and ensure all their students are equipped with the dispositions to thrive in an unknown future.

It is certainly aligned with the intent of the 'new' New Zealand Curriculum and provides practical ideas to implement it.

Perkins believes that there are too many research ideas that merit attention that make selection difficult. His book, developed around a metaphor of playing a game aims to provides a simple metaphor/framework to base teaching on. He outlines seven principles that make sense of the 'game of learning'- each providing very practical guidelines.

He succeeds.

His point is that formal learning rarely gives students a chance to learn to 'play a whole game'. All too often learning by teaching isolated 'elements' first or students are required to 'learn about' things because of distant future need. In both cases ( one resulting in a 'piecemeal' curriculum the other lacking personal relevance) students struggle to see the point of learning. Perkins contrasts this 'mindlessness' to learning a new game.

Education , Perkins writes, 'aims to help people learn what they cannot pick as they go along' unlike, he say, learning ones first language.

Perkins seven general principles, if applied, would make the 'learning game' more like playing a 'real' game. His principles, he believes ( and I fully agree), are able to be applied to any learning.

To gain all the practical suggestion ( nicely summarised at the end of each principle) requires the full reading of the book but creative teachers will recognise the principle in their current teaching and be reassured. I certainly was if I am allowed to put myself in their company.

The seven principles are:

1 'Play the whole game'.

When young people first learn a new games they play it at what Perkins calls a 'junior level'. Such a game is fun and makes immediate sense to them; with success, experience and skill they begin to appreciate greater complexity. Some might even become professionals but all learn to understand the basic game.

Schooling is short on what he calls 'threshold experiences' that are able to challenge student current thinking. All too often for students school feels like a jig saw puzzle without even a picture to focus their thinking.

The key to involving students to make the learning 'whole' by playing, at first, a 'junior version' of the game. An experience that students can see the point of doing. In the sports world this done well to first attract and then involve students.

2 'Make the game worth playing'.

Now and then, Perkins writes, pushy students ask , 'why are we doing this?' To make the game worth playing play a whole game not just 'bits and pieces' that make no sense to the learner. The secret is to find a 'junior games' ( or learning challenges) to suit the developmental level of the students.

3 'Work on the hard parts'.

Just playing a 'game' will not mean you will get any better . Perkin's introduces the important idea of the need to work on the 'hard parts'. Real improvement requires singling out the 'hard parts' for special attention, practicing them on the side, developing strategies and then reintegrating them into the whole game. This immediate reintroduction is vital. Practicing the 'hard parts' is what all good learners do. Practice and effort are more vital than innate talent in many cases.

4 'Play out of town'.

By this Perkins is talking about the problem of applying or transferring learning. Applying learning to new situations is a mark of deep understanding. New settings ( away from the home crowd or school) challenges student's to stretch and adapt their skills and insights. Perkins provides ideas to achieve this transfer. The whole point of learning is to prepare students for other times and places and not just to get better in the classroom.

5'Uncover the hidden game'.

Any activity always has hidden dimensions -underlying principles or strategies that beginners are not aware of. Often things are not as simple as they seem. Take for example the game of chess.

6 'Learn from the team.. and other teams'.

At school, all too often, students are encouraged to do their own work but in contrast hardly anything in real life is done solo. In life people are required to work in teams or to co-ordinate with other people in complex ways. Learning from others involves learning from teachers, peers, and all other information sources. Students will need explicit skills to be able to do this but any such skill need to be re-integrated back into a whole task. How often do teachers develop information seeking and expressive skills in their literacy programmes that integrate such learning directly to the current study ( the main 'learning game' of any class)? Reading many 'shallow' student project reports not too often - or if done, they ate are not applied. This disjoint is the point of Perkin's book.

7 'Learn the game of learning'.

It is only when you learn a second language that you learn important ideas about language learning. All too often students are so busy 'learning' content that they are unaware of 'how' they learn. A self managing learner makes a point of becoming aware of and practicing the hard parts. They are able to connect, or transfer, what they have learnt to other situations.

Perkin's writes that there is nothing more worth learning than acquiring the disposition ( 'key competencies') of learning how to learn. In this he would be joined by such people as John Hattie, Art Costa, Guy Claxton, Benjamin Bloom and Howard Gardner. It also resonates with the intent of the NZ Curriculum with its vision of 'connected, confident, life long learners, students able to 'seek use and create' their own knowledge.

Not only has Perkin's developed a powerful integrating metaphor for learning he has also provided , for each principle, a summary page of excellent practical ideas of how to develop each principle.

As for order of the principles play the 'whole game' first ( a suitable 'junior version'). Learning the 'game of learning' comes only when all is in place. Following Perkin's advice would solve the problem of 'shallow' or fragmented learning and would result in in depth understanding, an awareness of the inquiry process and the development of the dispositions ( 'competencies') required for life long learning.

'Learning by wholes' incorporates various learning theories.

It is an integrative approach but can be a unifying cross curriculum study or be used within a subject disciple. It shares with behaviourism the idea that things get better when feedback is immediate and informative but it also encourages that students develop their own creativity and style. It is very constructivist embracing the idea that learners construct in some sense their own meanings from experience. Discovery and inquiry learning can be understood as particular spins on constructivism.

However, 'learning by wholes' Perkin's explains, 'does not say all learning should be aggressively discovery orientated'. 'There are many times when the best way to get started is to explain and demonstrate, to ask learners to try and try it again, and to coach them through a process of improvement'. Well designed 'learning by wholes also accommodates different levels of readiness within the same group. Perkin's makes it clear that attention the 'hard parts, are most necessary to ensure growth but that such practice must be immediately applied to the 'game' in hand.

Perkins model sits comfortably with the approach of many creative New Zealand teachers as well as contemporary ideas about learning.

Forgetting the whole game metaphor, Perkins writes, it all might sound something like the below:

1 Engage in some version of holistic activity.
2 Make the activity worth learning.
3 Work on the 'hard parts'.
4 Explore different versions and settings for the activity.

Although achieving excellence is an ideal aim Perkins explains that many people will remain 'mediocre' at whatever 'game' they are playing. This is not a problem, he writes, because by playing the 'game' certain values and understandings are gained and a general sense of participation with whatever they are experiencing. An ecological study, for example, might develop in some students a life long interest while other gain an a sense of ecology responsibility. Both aspects, he writes, do 'substantial good'.

All in all an excellent read - made more enjoyable by Perkin's easy style of writing.

As I began - a must read for 2009.

For a negative take on the 'game of learning' read Robert Fried