What

The change in my practice that has and will have lasting impact is around engagement of learners, family/whanau and communities in co-shaping learning to address their needs, strengths, interests and aspirations.

Now what

 

Stage 1-Problem identification- Why is it important to implement the change?

As Bolstad (2012) states international thinking is examining “the role and purposes of education in a world with unprecedented degree of complexity, fluidity and uncertainty”. Learners of today will need a very different skill set to be happy and successful in the workforce. Education should be about learners, families and community’s being engaged in knowledge-generating activities in authentic contexts.  I want learning to be of the real world and co-shaped with teachers, children, whanau, community. This engagement is not always easy to achieve, this is the problem.

Stage 2- Observation and analysis-What insights have you gained about the problem that drives change?

From self-review around our deeper learning we noticed a need to establish greater equity in learning partnerships so that parents and children could be included in establishing and creating learning tasks and goals. We asked whanau for feedback on their engagement with learning and gathered data through surveys. To improve as the learning progressed, we conducted the survey 3 times to assess the impact of our actions. Analysis of this data showed that at the start of the inquiry into “stories” some parents felt they had limited input to children’s learning. This gave us direction for future change garnished from all stakeholders’ perspectives.

Stage 3- Abstract Reconceptualization-What other perspectives might be relevant to consider?

We re-examined how we as teachers viewed the role of the teacher in education and how learning could be further personalised. We questioned some of our beliefs (teachers as the knowledge holders), Bolstad (2012). This made us consider parent perspectives, so we invited community input to shaping learning. We prioritised effort and time into developing deeper partnerships and relationships between children, parents and teachers. These new roles and ways of working gave learners more agency and ownership of learning outcomes. We chose to leave some aspects of traditional practice behind (where parent involvement was limited) to value strengths based and inclusive approaches in deepening learning partnerships. This energised  our school community.

 

Stage 4- Active Experimentation- What have you learnt from the experience?

Broadening and engaging other perspectives is crucial in deepening learning, this is what I have learned. Using digital tools to leverage thinking from our learning community has been a new tool that we have employed with great success. It is important to keep an open mind to trying new strategies as the positives gained from them is valuable.

 

What next?

I am passionate about continuing to build my own capacity for creating environments where diversity can flourish. We are making progress with engaging our community, slowly but surely our parents are beginning to understand that their needs and views are important to the decisions we all make around the curriculum and teaching. We need to keep this ground swell up and continue incorporating their voice in shaping learning. Going forward the goal is to sustain and maintain our community involvement to support the development of authentic knowledge building activities for learners, and to generate something “new” that showcases what students have learned as well as being useful.  I am thankful to have a principal who is committed to driving this vision of education and who actively leads us to enacting this vision.

 

References

Bolstad, R., Gilbert, J., McDowall, S., Bull, A., Boyd, S., & Hipkins, R. (2012). Supporting future-oriented learning & teaching: A New Zealand perspective. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Osterman, K. F., & Kottkamp, R. B. (2015). Reflective practice for educators : professional development to improve student learning.(2nd ed.) New York: Skyhorse Publishing.
Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., Jasper, M. (2001) Critical reflection in nursing and the helping professions: a user’s guide. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

 

 

Week 31- Indigenous knowledge and cultural responsiveness in my practice.

I am going to analyse indigenous knowledge and cultural responsiveness in my practice using Rolfe’s (2001) model of reflection.

What

Culturally responsive pedagogy is defined by Gay (2001, p.106) as “using the cultural characteristics, experiences and perspectives as conduits for effective teaching”. There are five elements that reflect a culturally responsive pedagogy: knowledge about cultural diversity, the culturally integrated content in the curriculum, the development of the learning community, the ability to communicate with culturally diverse students and culturally responsive delivery of instruction (Gay, 2001).

Culturally responsive teaching places the students and their respective cultures at the centre of the school so that the classroom and school adapt and modify to the learner rather than the other way around. A culturally responsive learning environment values: teachers working collaboratively, educational achievement for all students, knowledge that is shared and created by both students and teachers, students who work collaboratively and cooperatively, Tukana/Teina approach to learning. One of the key elements to a culturally responsive classroom is a common philosophy or Kaupapa that rejects deficit thinking to explaining achievement outcomes for Maori students (Shields, Bishop, and Masawi, 2005, as cited in Bishop, R., & Berryman, M. 2009).

So what

(Milne 2017)

Human resources, I feel this is an area of strength for us as a school. We have made a conscious effort to improve communication with our school whanau, we have done this by conducting surveys at the start of inquiry topics so that we can co-construct learning with children and families. By surveying families, we have gathered data on what children and parents feel is important knowledge, skills and dispositions, from this we have co-constructed learning pathways. We have invited parents as experts to share knowledge and help us learn through a Tukana/Teina relationship. This has resulted in workshops run around the school with children of all year groups mixing and learning from the people in our community, thus engaging our local human resources. The feedback we have received along the learning journey has been one of excitement at creating new learning together and respect for inviting real opportunities of partnership as we construct deep learning. In this way we have as Milne challenges “empowered cultural identity”. Our deeper learning puts school in the driving seat for creating change in our society whilst sustaining the cultural practices of our community.

The area that I would like to improve on is my own understanding of Maori Tikanga and language. Reflecting on the action continuum for eliminating white spaces is challenging because I recognise that I have so much more that I need to learn. In thinking about the Mauri model, I recognise I am in the Mauri Oho state where my actions and expressions are proactive as I am looking for opportunities for students to live their culture in the classroom.

What now

The next step for me to grow further in being culturally responsive is by developing my knowledge of Te Ao Maori. I would like to take professional development to upskill my knowledge of Tikanga and Te Reo. We have parents in our school community who run evening courses, so I need to sign up. I will continue to celebrate the diversity of cultures in the classroom and work hard to move from the purple into the green section of the continuum. It would be interesting for us as a staff to identify where we think we sit and plan actions to collaboratively create momentum. I wonder where our community would place us?

Te kaha me te wairua. Energy flows where attention goes.

References

CORE Education.(2017, 17 October). Dr Ann Milne, Colouring in the white spaces: Reclaiming cultural identity in whitestream schools.. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cTvi5qxqp4&feature=em-subs_digest

Cowie, B., Otrel-Cass, K., Glynn, T., & Kara, H., et al.(2011).Culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment in primary science classrooms: Whakamana tamariki. Wellington: Teaching Learning Research Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.tlri.org.nz/sites/default/files/projects/9268_cowie-summaryreport.pdf

Bishop, R., & Berryman, M. (2009). The Te Kotahitanga effective teaching profile. Set: Research Information for Teachers, 2(2).

Edtalks.(2012, September 23). A culturally responsive pedagogy of relations. . Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/49992994

Milne, B.A. (2013). Colouring in the white spaces: Reclaiming cultural identity in whitestream schools. (Doctoral Thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10289/7868

Milne, A.(2017). Coloring in the white spaces: reclaiming cultural identity in whitestream schools. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.

 

Week 30: The broader professional context

I am going to analyse digital technology as a trend in NZ classrooms using Rolfe et al’s (2001) model of reflection.

What

The trend that is most relevant to my practice is the impact of digital learning in the classroom. I notice that it affects all of the communities of learning I am part of. It impacts on: me as the teacher, (as I design personalized and collaborative learning incorporating digital tools to create and share new knowledge), my students (learning to creatively solve problems), the families of my students (who have concerns about the increasing role of digital technology on their child’s learning and lives) and my colleagues (using digital learning in purposeful and meaningful ways that support the digital vision at our school). It has powerful immediate and extended influences on my students. I am most captivated by technology because of the way it shapes the future, “ technology will alter economic, social, political, and security dynamics” (National Intelligence Council. (2017), pg. 13).

So what

Using digital technology in the classroom is a given, there will always be some key challenges and opportunities afforded with this. Digital learning used thoughtfully (SAMR) develops crucial skills for students in a way that supports, self-paced learning in a  personalised manner. An example of this is the way Social media (Seesaw) provides a context for my learners to connect, collaborate and create content that is meaningful for them and their families. By using this technology, it also enables them to develop skills and follow processes in safe ways so that they can confidently interact with digital technology. However, the nature of digital technology also means that it can detract from face to face connections which are so important to developing learner relationships. Hattie’s meta-analysis lists teacher-student relationships as among the most effective influences on student achievement- even more so than professional development, teaching strategies, or socioeconomic status”. (as cited in Trends, G 2017) This highlights for me that digital tech needs a balanced approach and application as a learning tool.

 

What now-

Bill Daggert (2014) from the International Center for Leadership in Education posits that schools can respond to shaping this trend by:

1. Creating a culture that supports change
2. Creating a team within the school focused on the impact of the emerging trend
3. Networking with others to share best practices
4. Taking risks in prototyping and iterating practices to accept emerging trend
5. Pushing trend-aligned policy (Daggett, B., 2014)

NZ educators are already exploring the new Digital Curriculum, this is how we as a country are responding to the fast pace of digital tech application in schools. This curriculum will give students the skills to creatively find solutions to problems and this will help to transform digital tech use away from simple digital consumerism. The implementation of  a strategic and creative plan will best position NZ learners for future workforces. I will be able to apply my new learning around leadership theories in my context to see how the Diffusion theory applies to this. I hope to be an early adopter and instrumental in leading others on this new journey. Certainly, the MOE are providing resources to facilitate the success of the new digital initiative in the form of the online Digital Passport. As a school it would be interesting to canvas teaching staff on their confidence with digital tools to support learning with a google survey. This would help give future direction with further PD as identified by staff for staff as we know the impact of digital technology is only as successful as the teacher knowledge and school vision implementing it.

References

Bolsted, R. & Gilbert, J. (2012)   Supporting future orientated learning and teaching – a New Zealand perspective   MOE NZCER
Daggett, B. (2014). Addressing Current and Future Challenges in Education. Retrieved fromhttp://www.leadered.com/pdf/2014MSC_AddressingCurrentandFutureChallenges.pdf

 

Ministry of Education Digital Technologies and the National Curriculum, retrieved from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/Technology/Achievement-objectives

National Intelligence Council. (2017). Global trends: The Paradox of Progress. National Intelligence Council: US. Retrieved from https://www.dni.gov/files/images/globalTrends/documents/GT-Main-Report.pdf

Pearson. (2013). Global trends: The world is changing faster than at any time in human history..Retrieved fromhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdZiTQy3g1g

 

OECD. (2016) Trends Shaping Education 2016, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/trends_edu-2016-enDaggett, B. (2014). Addressing

 

Current and Future Challenges in Education. Retrieved from http://www.leadered.com/pdf/2014MSC_AddressingCurrentandFutureChallenges.pdf

 

Pearson. (2013). Global trends: The world is changing faster than at any time in human history..Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdZiTQy3g1g

 

http://core-ed.org/research-and-innovation/ten-trends/2018/

 

Week 29- Activity 5:Using online networks in professional development

I have been an avid user of some social media on a personal level for some time. Mind Lab has encouraged me to see the possibilities of social media from a lens of professional development with new communities of learning.

In this post I will critically discuss the use of social media in my professional development,  using Jay and Johnson’s (2002) reflective model.

Descriptive

The professional social media platforms that I use are: Pinterest, Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and VLN (Virtual Learning Network). The common element across these social media platforms is that they all provide ways of connecting with educational material. Our school based professional development is decided by school leadership in response to staff needs and is guided by budgets and priority foci. By taking the Mind Lab course I have been able to have increased control over how, when, and what I have chosen to study. It is interesting to compare and contrast the impacts of both these different styles of PD. Melhuish (2013) observes that  blended professional learning enables a flexible, personalised approach to learning for educators (Dwyer, Farooq, Fusco, Schank, & Schlager, 2009; Gunawardena et al., 2009; McLoughlin & Lee,2010; Rutherford, 2010). The ways that people utilise social media in their professional development varies. I am an active watcher, I read and think about much of the content that I engage with online, occasionally interacting within the online communities like Google+, Facebook and Twitter. I like learning form social media but there are definite aspects of face to face PD that I prefer to online learning. I am very selective about what I choose to share online and our reflections around Ethics confirm some of my reservations.

Comparative

Interestingly most people who I have had a discussion with around the impact of social media on professional development seem to really engage with the way that they can let their own passions drive their learning in ways that are ubiquitous. Rock and McCollum, 2009) as cited by Melhuish (2013) found that the justification for using social network sites for teacher PD was that their design can enable: democratic, distributed cognitive learning with the sharing of ideas amongst many communities at the same time as learners reflect on their own practice in their own context. Of course, the research finds both compelling opportunities as well as challenges with this approach. Certainly, I have found that my online social media professional learning opportunities have enabled me to take an agentic, metacognitive approach to my learning, as is supported by the research.

Critical reflection

I found it most interesting to read Melhuish’s (2013) assertion that ‘lurking’ (of which I do a fair bit) reading but not commenting was still legitimate as many members over time moved from the fringes to the centre of the network (Dwyer et al., 2009). By participating in online communities and utilising social media as a tool I have already gained new insights, perspectives and knowledge in relation to the findings of research. Over time my perspective on this has shifted I did not see professional development that was online as a forum that I saw myself a part of. The shift is that I now seek out online peer interactions and reciprocal investments  in order to professionally grow and develop. I have shifted my negative thoughts around why others would want to hear what I have to say. By and large I look forward to journeying towards the centre of the network as I grow more comfortable with social medias many affordances.

 

References

Jay, J.K. and Johnson, K.L. (2002) Capturing complexity: a typology of reflective practice for teacher
education.Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 73-85.

Dwyer, N., Farooq, U., Fusco, J., Schank, P., & Schlager, M. S. (2009).

Analyzing online teacher networks: Cyber networks require cyber

research tools. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 86. Retrieved

from Gale Group database.

Whitaker, T., Zoul, J., & Casas, J. (2015). What connected educators do differently. New York, NY: Routledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am going to analyse an ethical dilemma using Rolfe’s (2001) model of reflection (What? So what? Now what?) and Ehrich et al.’s (2011) model for conceptualising ethical dilemmas.

Figure 1 A model of ethical decision-making (Ehrich et al., 2011)

Step 1- The What

The critical incident involves improper use of digital technology. A teacher aide who works with a student 1-1 through the course of the day noticed that he was playing a space invader game that  had been downloaded onto the ipad. This game was not educational in any sense and had not been downloaded by staff. The immediate response to this was to take the ipad in and delete the game. This was worrying because we had assumed that the children would need a password to download any material on the ipads. We had not accounted for the fact that games could be downloaded on safari via internet access. This brought to light a loophole that children were able to download content that had not been checked by adults.

 

Step 2 – So What?

As a result of this discovery we recalled all the i-pads and checked the content on all devices in a central location by the teacher in charge of IT. The critical incident in step 1 prompted me to decide to either ignore or act. The first action was to inform the principal so that a plan of response could be devised. All actions were informal and taken internally. From this several steps were put in place to ensure that practices improved. A whole staff meeting reinforced  that children should not be using ipads in break out spaces where teachers were not able to monitor user activity on the ipads. It was decided that the scheduled monitoring of ipads needed increased regularity. The incident also highlighted the fact that our systems were not robust enough to ensure safe downloading practices on school owned devices. We considered ourselves lucky that the material was only a space invader game and we were able to learn from this without major consequences. This made me think it would be prudent to actively work with parents by holding an information session around safe use of digital technologies and as part of this raising the loophole we had become aware of so that parents were able to monitor children’s i-pad use at home.

 

Step 3 – Now What?

From this dilemma I have learned that it is crucial to check the content of each ipad regularly. Ultimately there was a successful outcome, but to improve the process we needed systematic review of material on the ipads. For future safety we need to take the ipads in a scheduled manner so that close monitoring can be maintained. In the future enforce digital technology use happening inside the classroom where the teacher can maintain close monitoring of material. Further problem solving, and practical advice  is needed around how to stop children downloading material but still have access to using the ipads as a research tool.

References

Connecticut’s Teacher Education and Mentoring Program. (2015). Ethical and Professional Dilemmas for Educators: Facilitator’s Guide: Understanding the Code of Professional Responsibility for Educators. Connecticut, US: Author. Retrieved from http://portal.ct.gov/-/media/SDE/TEAM/Module_5_Supplemental_Scenarios-Facilitator_Guide_January_2015.pdf?la=en

Cranston, N., Ehrich, L. C. & Kimber, M. P. (2004). Towards an understanding of Ethical Dilemmas Faced by School Leaders. Principia, Journal of the Queensland Secondary Principals’ Association, 1, pp. 1-3.Retrieved from:http://eprints.qut.edu.au/732/2/Ethical_Dilemmas.pdf

Ehrich, L. C. , Kimber M., Millwater, J. & Cranston, N. (2011). Ethical dilemmas: a model to understand teacher practice, Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 17:2, 173-185, DOI: 10.1080/13540602.2011.539794

Education Council. (2017). Our Code Our Standards.Retrieved from: https://educationcouncil.org.nz/sites/default/files/Our%20Code%20Our%20Standards%20web%20booklet%20FINAL.pdf

Legal, Ethical, and Social Issues in Educational Computing. (2013). Technology in Education, The Legal, Social, and Ethical Issues . Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/sappingtonkr/02-legal-ethical-and-social-issues-in-educational-computing.
Ministry of Education. (2015).DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY Safe and responsible use in schools. Wellington: New Zealand: Author. Retrieved from https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/School/Managing-and-supporting-students/DigitalTechnologySafeAndResponsibleUseInSchs.pdf

 

Descriptive: When reflecting on two possible inquiry topics I have decided to focus on computational thinking as I wonder “what do the achievement objectives of the new digital technology curriculum look like in a new entrant classroom? And “how can I lead a change innovation to deepen teacher’s explicit knowledge of teaching through a play context? The CoP most influenced by both inquiry topics would be the junior syndicate. This CoP has extended connections to local, national and international members (creating wider perspectives through membership sharing). The Community has three distinct elements as defined by Wenger (2000).  1) Joint enterprise: The group is focused on setting and achieving goals (digital and collaborative) to deepen student learning.  2) Mutual engagement: we have developed relationships where trust and respect are fundamental attributes.  3) Shared repertoire: together the syndicate gathers resources and problem solves on an ongoing basis to support each other in achieving the aims and goals of the group. The resources are modified or adapted as new experiences come to light.

Comparative: Through team meeting discussions I have observed that members are enthusiastic about the philosophy that underpins learning through play and incorporating digital tech into teaching practice. I hear Individual members voicing frustration at not knowing enough of the “nitty gritty” to feel they can apply this in an explicit way to deepen learning. I think exploring the strand of computational thinking in an unplugged sense will strengthen understanding for the team as well as enabling me to use the new curriculum in a meaningful way with 5 year olds. The digital technology curriculum states “The Students learn core programming concepts and how to take advantage of the capabilities of thinking like computers, so that they can become creators of digital technologies, not just users”.  My first topic of inquiry would raise awareness around computational thinking (creative not consumptive) and my second topic of inquiry will help me as a leader achieve our shared goals. Burns defined a transformational leader as “one who raises the followers’ level of consciousness about the importance and value of desired outcomes and the methods of reaching those outcomes” (Burns,1978, p 141).

 

Critical Reflection: I started this reflection not knowing what my preferred topic was but the reading I have done around computational thinking has raised some questions that I find myself feeling strongly about (inquiry topic sorted!) I realise I have learnt a lot already about using digital technology at a creational level rather than a consumptive tool primarily because of my new understandings about the SAMR and T Pack models. I believe an inquiry into computer science which is unplugged has the capability to provide rich learning for my 5-year olds. Deepening our collective syndicate understandings of what the technology curriculum achievement objectives look like will enable us together to make sense of something that as yet is a bit of a mystery. Thinking about my perceptions and my teams’ perceptions in light of research has created coherence of the topic which will promote challenge and change. Going forward my goal is to gain a better understanding of the digital curriculum achievement objectives in relation to five-year olds. To do this I will have a go at teaching computational thinking with the hope of collaboratively generating an adapted digital technology curriculum for our Hawea Flat School context. All going well the outcome would be resources for both the syndicate and school to use.

 

References

-TKI (n.d) Computational thinking: Progress outcomes, exemplars, and snapshots. Retrieved from http:technology.tki.org.nz/Technology-in-the-NZC/CT-Progress-outcomes-exemplars-and-snapshots/(tab)/PO2

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Wenger, E.(2000).Communities of practice and social learning systems.Organization,7(2), 225-246 (Link to the article in Unitec Library).

 

 

This week I am using Gibbs model to reflect on using the digital platform of Seesaw to share and engage stakeholders with learning.

Description: I wanted parents to increase engagement with the children’s learning around the skill of communication. So we unpacked the learning rubric of communication and the children drew their own learning map with an identified change goal for presenting their Mihi. Throughout this process we uploaded learning to Seesaw to engage parents with the children’s learning. I used the digital platform to provide support for parents around how to present a Mihi by uploading an example.

Feelings: I felt hopeful that parents would have increased levels of engagement in the children’s learning about communicating effectively. I felt satisfied when a large number of parents commented on how much they loved being part of their child’s learning and how helpful they found it was being able to listen to a model Mihi. I was disappointed that not all parents had made the effort to sign up to Seesaw and some made no comments around their child sharing learning although this was a minority. Afterwards I thought this change was positive and worth the effort of capturing and posting learning but it would be good to increase engagement of all parents and deepen the ways that parents can co-construct learning.

Evaluation: Both students and parents expressed that they liked the immediacy of sharing the learning. The parents were able to give the children timely feedback and the children really felt proud when they received such positive feedback from parents. The children loved receiving both written and verbal comments via the digital platform. Based on the high number of parents commenting via Seesaw and supporting children in learning (at home) I can see that using the digital platform increased whanau engagement thus strengthening home school relationships. Past experiences of sharing learning through paper portfolios, paper notices etc.,  often ended neglected in the bottom of children’s bags and only a few comments from the odd parent.  Overall the positive effects encouraged me to utilise the home school partnership further through Seesaw, particularly for the students whose parents do not come into the classroom very often.

Analysis: As a result of this change parents were more involved with their child’s learning and this improved the communication learning outcomes. Students were able to identify what their change goal was and parents helped them work towards achieving these goals. My observation is supported by a  review of research literature written by Hawley and Rosenholtz (1983), they identified “parent involvement as one of the four factors in effective schools that should improve student outcomes”.

Conclusion: By using the digital platform I have engaged more parents making connections and sharing learning quickly and easily.  In the future I would modify the way I used Seesaw to engage parents in co-constructing learning as well as sharing learning. This would involve parents even further and create true interdependence across the home and school partnership.

Action Plan: This change has improved the way that students share learning with family and engaged many more parents by using a digital platform. In the future I would make sure all parents had a Seesaw account by reducing the barriers to creating an account (some were not sure how to follow instructions because of language barriers and some were time poor so did not prioritise this action).

Reference

Bolstad, R., Gilbert, J., McDowall, S., Bull, A., Boyd, S., & Hipkins, R. (2012). Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching — a New Zealand perspective. Report prepared for the Ministry of Education. Retrieved from https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/schooling/109306

Cotton, K.,& Wikelund, K.R. (1989). Parent Involvement in education. School improvement research series, 6(3), 17-23

Finlay, L. (2009). Reflecting on reflective practice. PBPL. Retrieved from http://www.open. ac.uk/opencetl/sites/www.open.ac.uk.opencetl/files/files/ecms/web-content/Finlay-(2008)-Reflecting-on-reflective-practice-PBPL-paper-52.pdf

 

 

How easy it seems to tell the kids to be brave when participating to progress… the shoe is now firmly on the other foot! This is my first blog critically evaluating my reflective practice using Jay and Johnson’s (2002) reflective model.

Descriptive

I am used to writing an online journal to critically evaluate my practice, in our school we share our reflective journals via the Ariki project http://www.arikiproject.ac.nz/. I enjoy the opportunity to internally reflect by writing my thinking down in response to current theory and research. It is my understanding that critical reflection is about critiquing not criticizing. Fook, White and Gardner (cited in Finlay, 2008, pg.6) say reflective practice is “challenging existing assumptions that are informed by reliable resources”. When reviewing this it occurs to me that sometimes I can slip into self-criticizing rather than critiquing! I note that my reflections are often introspective (Finlay 2008). I feel comfortable sharing my thinking in our school setting because I know and trust critical friends who ask questions of my practice in a probing way.

Comparative

The survey created by Mind Lab gave me new insights to how my professional peers view their own reflective practice. It was interesting to analyse how my responses corresponded to other teachers views and reviewing this information in light of current research. A common trend noted in  “Evaluate your reflective practice-March 2018” was that:  reflection often occurred in greater depth during the ‘reflection in action’ phase.  Zeichner and Listens notice “that involves steps one to three mostly and less focus on retheorizing and reformulating”. This is the area that I would like to focus on further at a team level so that together we can critically examine our practice collaboratively (using different models of reflection as new tools (Finlay 2002). I rarely use a blog or twitter to reflect on my own practice, this was a trend noted by many others from the survey. A small percentage of Mind Lab teachers used Blogs and twitter to reflect on practice.  Yet Fook and Askeland argue that the focus on “critical reflection should be on connecting individual identity and social context”.  This prompts me to make a change to how I share my thinking!

 

Critical reflection

Reading Finaly’s article has given me a deeper understanding (whilst challenging some previously held assumptions) of the complexity of effectively reflecting on practice, I am most interested in the ideas around Dewey’s definition of reflective practice: identifying the two types of reflection (page3): reflection in action and reflection on action. Going forward my goal is to add more time and effort to reflection on action; in the context of learning through play. Also, I think there are rich opportunities for our learning team to explore models of reflective thinking in a collaborative sense. By writing this blog I have been able to review my thinking about reflective practice using new ideas from Finlay (retheorizing and reformulating) to renew my perspective. The act of writing a public blog will show that I am attempting to apply some new ideas. I will be stepping out of my comfort zone as I will be sharing my thinking with people outside of my school setting. I am hoping to experience the collaborative nature of leveraging digitally so that questions around my practice will prompt me to justify my thinking and consider reflection on action in more detail.

 

 

References

Finlay, L. (2009). Reflecting on reflective practice. Practice-based Professional Learning Centre, Open University. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/opencetl/sites/www.open.ac.uk.opencetl/files/files/ecms/web-content/Finlay-(2008)-Reflecting-on-reflective-practice-PBPL-paper-52.pdf

Jay, J.K. and Johnson, K.L. (2002). Capturing complexity: a typology of reflective practice for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 73-85.

Zeichner, K. M. and Liston, D. P. (1996). Reflective Teaching: An Introduction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton