The beauty of unfinished work

There is a danger in seeking finished perfection in all that we do. There is a risk that our students will focus solely on the attributes that define a finished piece and overlook the importance of the process that leads to it. With a shift in our mindset we might be able to celebrate this process and encourage our students to value the learning that occurs along the way.

Guernica by Pablo Picasso  - http://www.all-art.org/art_20th_century/picasso11.html

Guernica by Pablo Picasso  - http://www.all-art.org/art_20th_century/picasso11.html

Carol Dweck’s writing on Mindsets has had a significant effect within education. Her research informs us that an individual’s beliefs about their potential to expand their cognitive and creative abilities and their success in doing so is closely linked. Believe you can improve and you have taken the first step towards achieving your goal. For teachers the lesson is that we can play a powerful role in developing the Growth Mindset of our learners through the things we value, the feedback we provide and the culture in which we situate their learning. If we value the processes of learning, creating, thinking and collaborating more than we value the finished product we send a message to our students that we see learning as a continuous act with mistakes, failures and refinement as essential components. 

Failure is a concept with an unhappy history. At times it has been deeply admonished and hidden from view. Individuals who failed were to be shunned or punished. At other times failure was to be avoided by setting the bar for success so low that failure was impossible. The result of this movement was that success became meaningless, achievable by all without risk and through little effort. More recently failure is seen as a part of the learning process, an inevitable consequence of trying something new. Einstein said ‘Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new’. Elon Musk, founder of Tesla Motors and Space X is quoted as saying 'Failure is an option here. If things are not failing, you are not innovating enough.' A culture that accepts failure as a part of the learning process will need to take time to celebrate the steps taken towards learning as much as it celebrates the finished product.

When things go wrong for Space X the results are costly and spectacular but part of the process.

When things go wrong for Space X the results are costly and spectacular but part of the process.

There is an unhealthy obsession in schools with displaying a public face made up of pristine student works that hide and devalue the reality of learning as a messy process full of mistakes and revisions. Maybe this traces back to a time when Gutenberg’s press was literally the final word in publishing. The costs involved in printing required a determined effort to avoid errors. In schools publishing persists as a part of the creative process of writing and sharing with similar expectations for quality in the published works as that set for those printed on a press. This fascination with publishing as the path to perfect finished works persists in the digital age only when the very nature of digital works as open to constant refinement and reworking is ignored. Digital allows levels of accuracy and precision not achievable in other ways but also presents the possibility for a published work to be revisited time and time again by its originator and by yet unknown, future collaborators. A digital work of art, of music of writing is never truly finished, it grows and transforms over time. 

Taking time to celebrate the unfinished product within the learning process is one idea Guy Claxton encouraged during his presentations at the International Conference on Thinking (ICOT). Claxton encourages teachers to ban erasers from their classrooms so that student mistakes are there to see. The message to the students is that mistakes are something that you learn from, a marker of the learning that has occurred and not something to be banished from view. Claxton believes that in a classroom that allows erasers students are taught that smart students don’t make mistakes, a message he insists we must avoid sending. In his classes mistakes are a sign that the learning is not pitched at a level below the needs of the students; if the students are not making mistakes when they engage with new learning the expectation has been set too low.

In seeking an opportunity to celebrate unfinished works Claxton described a school art show titled ‘We never finish anyth” that displayed student artworks in their unfinished glory. Unfinished art in particular has a certain appeal and energy that may allow students to see the creative process and their ability to participate in it differently. Dr Karren Serres discussed the potential of unfinished artwork when interviewed by the BBC about a display at the Courtauld Gallery.  "At a more aesthetic level unfinished works have a quality and appeal all of their own. We can imagine the possibilities of what they would look like if they were finished, but at the same time they have a ghostly quality that is also very beautiful.’  Picasso had a definite view on finishing his artworks 'Woe to you the day it is said that you are finished! To finish a work? To finish a picture? What nonsense! To finish it means to be through with it, to kill it, to rid it of its soul – to give it its final blow; the most unfortunate one for the painter as well as for the picture.’ He also identified with the role of accidents not as mistakes but as an inevitable part of the process and the path to discovering humanity in art 'Accidents, try to change them - it's impossible. The accidental reveals man.’ Claxton encourages schools to explore the use of unfinished artworks as stimulus material for students as part of a culture that values process over finished perfection.

Study for "Guernica" - 1937 Revealing the process behind the masterpiecehttp://www.all-art.org/art_20th_century/picasso11.html

Study for "Guernica" - 1937 Revealing the process behind the masterpiece
http://www.all-art.org/art_20th_century/picasso11.html

Schools that have embraced a Design Thinking approach have the foundation required for a culture that values process over product. Embracing mistakes and failure as part of the learning process needs to be accompanied by a clear message that we are to learn from these situations. What must be avoided is a belief that mistakes are to be accepted without an equal emphasis on identifying and understanding their causes. This model neither admonishes nor ignores mistakes but sees them as fodder for the next lesson, the next attempt in learning, the many stepping-stones to success. Within a rapid prototyping/design thinking approach this attitude towards mistakes is baked into the process, each turning of the design cycle will reveal new lessons from the mistakes of the previous iteration. With opportunities for reflective practice and metacognition real learning can become part of a process that the students are eager to engage in free from fears that their failures are a measure of their fixed and predetermined ability.
 
 By Nigel Coutts
 
 
 

Encouraging Metacognition for Learning

A critical component of learning is the ability to reflect on one’s learning and the processes that occur while we are engaged in learning. If we are to develop independent, empowered learners then we need to build the skills required for metacognition both directly through the provision of suitable strategies and indirectly via the modelling of effective learning that we provide.

Simply defined metacognition is ‘thinking about our thinking’, it is the process of actively engaging with reflective practices that assist us to understand both what we think, why we think it and how we came to think that which we do. As a process within a learning cycle it can be a powerful tool but its truest power comes when it becomes incorporated as a practice of the independent learner who seeks to understand how they learn. The metacognitive learner is able to leverage the strengths of their learning style, apply prior learning, identify barriers to new learning and develop a deeper understanding through their reflective practices. Beyond metacognition we may think of meta-learning as a process through which the self organised learner brings their intellectual powers to bear on the learning task at hand. The individual who understands how they learn and who can manipulate their environment to best suit their learning needs has a better chance of doing so than an individual who must rely on others. 

Neil Anderson who identifies five components of metacognition offers a nice approach to metacognition. Awareness of these components allows the learner to begin to understand their thinking and assist them to focus their thinking at key stages. The five components are identified as '(1) preparing and planning for learning, (2) selecting and using learning strategies, (3) monitoring strategy use, (4) orchestrating various strategies, and (5) evaluating strategy use and learning’ (Anderson 2002). Applied to the example of a student engaging with a learning task we can see how awareness of the five components provides a structure to their approach to learning. The student begins by becoming open to new learning; they focus on the task at hand, consider expectations for the learning, create goals and possibly reflect on how they have been able to achieve similar learning goals in the past. As the learning begins the students select strategies to assist their learning and enhance their understanding; some will need to take notes, others sketch or manipulate items. Using thinking routines at this stage can provide a set of flexible strategies to engage the mind and promote cognition. As the learning continues the metacognitive learner will monitor the strategies they are using and make modifications and adjustments as needed. Questions will be asked and new methods trialed with prior experience of dealing with difficult learning scenarios as a guide. The metacognitive learner will have a range of strategies to utilise and will be able to make decisions about which is most likely to assist them. When the official learning period finishes and the problem is solved the metacognitive learner reflects on their learning and further enhances their skill set ready for the next experience. Raising awareness of these components will encourage metacognitive practice and coupled with presenting strategies for metacognition will aid learning. 

Those familiar with Habits of Mind will instantly identify with Metacognition as it is one of the sixteen habits. It has a special part to play, as it will allow the learner to consider how the other fifteen habits can be applied to their learning.  The sixteen habits of mind provide a powerful set of actions, dispositions and mindsets that combine to enable effective learning across domains. While each of the sixteen habits are important Metacognition is required as an underlying practice if individuals are to engage habits that are not naturally a part of their approach to learning or recognize which is most suitable in a given circumstance. Metacognition allows for the right habit to be identified and applied to the right situation and for the individuals application of the habits to be evaluated and enhanced over time. More information about Metacognition as a Habit of Mind along with strategies for applying it and Thinking Routines to support it can be found at - http://www.rediquest.com/metacognition/

Metacognitive skills can be developed through collaboration and skills developed thusly are transferable to individuals who can then apply these skills to individual problem solving (Sandi-Urena, Cooper & Stevens. 2011).  Sandi-Urena et al. provided students with a problem and allowed time for reflection and collaboration, enabled by prompts, that enacted meaningful social interaction that they found enhanced metacognition. Being able to share ideas about a problem and then reflect on how the problem solving process had evolved allowed richer, more effective metacognition. Three mechanisms to describe why collaboration is effective in enhancing understanding and task performance are identified by Hausmann, Chi & Roy (2004 p547): ‘other-directed explaining occurs when one peer instructs or explains to another partner how to solve a problem, co-construction is defined as the joint construction of knowledge and self-directed explaining is learning from listening to someone self-explain’. This process was applied by a group of Year Six students as they prepared for a ‘Genius Hour’ project. 

Part of the planning process involved students gathering feedback on their plans from a group of peers during structured collaborative discussions. The aim was to enhance student understanding of their design brief through other-directed explaining, co-construction of a refined plan and self-directed explaining as the students sought to analyse and act on the feedback offered by their peers. To this end students reviewed their plans and prepared a short presentation of this for a group of four to five peers. At the conclusion of the presentation students asked their peers a series of questions that focused on aspects of the plan they had identified for improvement. Students used “The Ladder of Feedback’ (See Below) to gather written feedback from their peers. Students had time to respond to and discuss questions and peers offered additional feedback on the plan as presented. After this collaborative discussion students had time to reflect on the feedback and record brief notes as a record of their self-explaining of the feedback before refining their plan. For the students this was their first experience of preparing and sharing a design plan and the first time they had planned a set of questions to ask their peers about their own ideas.

Late in Term Two the collaborative discussions were held with students self-selecting groups for the purpose. Each student took turns at presenting their ideas and then asking questions to gather feedback on specific elements. For some of the students the process of preparing their questions was a challenge and having access to the ‘Ladder of Feedback’ was a nice support for these students. The experience of the interviews was very rewarding for all the students and they each reported that it had enhanced their understanding of their plans and helped them to identify areas that could be improved. In line with the research of Hausmann et al. students reported that the benefits of the interviews came from preparing for the collaborative discussions the process of presenting the design brief, asking the questions and from reflecting on the feedback offered. The students had engaged in other-directed explaining as they prepared and presented their briefs, co-construction of understanding through collaboration during the discussions and finally self-directed instruction as they made sense of the feedback offered. Students who made up the discussion panels reported that the process of providing feedback allowed them to better understand their own plans and to identify potential problems. 

Throughout this project it was important that the students were in charge of the process. They had already invested much time and energy into developing their plans and this process was designed to encourage their reflection on how they may develop the best possible projects. By allowing the students an opportunity to involve their peers in the planning process while retaining ownership of that process was a powerful tool that encouraged metacognition. In this instance the process of thinking about thinking was both collaborative and individual and while the result of a process instigated by the teaching programme, modelled a process that the students can apply to their future learning. Deliberately incorporating metacognitive practices into the learning process can have real benefits for the learners both immediately as seen here in the improved plans that resulted and long term as students are able to independently apply the strategies they have experienced. 


Anderson, N. (2002) The Role of Metacognition in Second Language Teaching and Learning. ERIC Digest - http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED463659

Hausmann, R. G. M., Chi, M. T. H., & Roy, M. (2004, August). Learning from collaborative prob- lem solving: An analysis of three hypothesized mechanism. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 26th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, IL, pp. 547–552.

Sandi‐Urena, S., Cooper, M., & Stevens, R. (2011). Enhancement of metacognition use and awareness by means of a collaborative intervention. International Journal Of Science Education, 33(3), 323-340. 

Adapted by Mary McFarland, 2006; © President and Fellows of Harvard College (and of Project Zero) 

An Introduction to Design Thinking (Part Two)

In the constructivist-learning model, engagement and experience combine with immersive environments and self-organisation of knowledge to establish a context in which learning occurs naturally. Constructivism has since the time of Dewey become closely affiliated with Project Based Learning and yet despite years of efforts to refine the process the result does not always match the promise (Scheer, Noweski and Meinel. 2012). Scheer et al. argue that ‘Design Thinking’ is capable of providing the structure required for successful constructivist learning and the development of skills required for 21st century citizenship. ‘We want to fill that gap by proposing ‘Design Thinking’ as a meta-disciplinary methodology which offers teachers the needed support through a formalised process. Teachers, as facilitators of learning need to be equipped with up-to-date skills and tools to actually practice on the needed key competence learning.’ So where should a school start and what does it mean to implement ‘Design Thinking’?

For schools in Australia, ‘Design Thinking’ needs to be on your radar thanks to the ongoing implementation of the National Curriculum. The ‘Design and Technologies’ curriculum incorporates ‘Design Thinking’ principles from Foundation to Year Ten with statements such as 'As design skills and design thinking develop, students should have greater input into the development of design briefs for specific identified needs or opportunities.’ and 'In Design and Technologies, in the early years, students are actively involved in projects.’ The curriculum requires students consider the ethics and sustainability of their solutions in their marketing; 'Students become more enterprising in developing and promoting designed solutions. Marketing increasingly draws on social and sustainability considerations, recognising wider societal acknowledgement of ethics and futures thinking.’ and will require collaboration on a scale that will be new to many schools 'They coordinate teams and collaborate with others locally and globally.’ This syllabus is available for use by States and Territories and its influence can be seen in document such as the NSW Science K-10 syllabus that incorporates Science and Technology.

An alternate approach for any school seeking support in implementing a ‘Design Thinking’ approach would be to match the description and requirements of critical and creative thinking provided with the Australian Curriculum against the benefits of design thinking. One statement seems most appropriate for this purpose ‘Critical and creative thinking are fostered through opportunities to use dispositions such as broad and adventurous thinking, reflecting on possibilities, and metacognition (Perkins 1995), and can result from intellectual flexibility, open-mindedness, adaptability and a readiness to experiment with and clarify new questions and phenomena (Gardner 2009).’(Australian Curriculum) It would not be unreasonable to restate this with ‘Design Thinking’ in place of 'critical and creative’ as it is these opportunities that occur within such a framework.

For a school wishing to implement ‘Design Thinking’ the first step needs to be understanding that it is a process which should become entrenched into the broad approach of the school. If the desire is to add pieces of a ‘Design Thinking’ approach then it is unlikely that the full benefits will be achieved. Situated within a culture that allows learning from failure, encourages a growth mindset, values creative and critical thinking and places a high value on learners finding questions that matter ‘Design Thinking’ can be the process that consolidates the schools learning platform.

One starting point for a school wishing to build a culture that supports ‘Design Thinking’ should be the writing of Carol Dweck and the conceptual framework that is embodied in ‘Growth Mindsets’. Beginning with a ‘Growth Mindset’ will allow learners to see mistakes and failure as an opportunity to learn. New research by Melles, Anderson, Barrett & Thompson-Whiteside (2015) found that attitudes to risk-taking played an important role in the success of ‘Design Thinking’ endeavours and that Australians were particularly risk averse. ‘In order to support design thinking in Australian schools and higher education, we need to consider what constitutes a nurturing and supportive environment for creative and innovative thinking. (Melles et al 2015 p200)

When extended to a ‘Design Thinking’ approach a growth mindset will allow each iteration in the design process to be seen as one step closer to a workable solution. Learners with a growth mindset will fear neither feedback nor sharing their ideas in a process of collaboration. The process of giving and receiving feedback is a key piece of ‘Design Thinking’ and one that is well supported by a growth mindset. To learn more about ‘Growth Mindsets’ visit Carol Dwecks website - or read her book - 'Mindset: The New Psychology of Success’. Resources for promoting a Growth Mindset are abundant on the web and a quick search will reveal a wealth of ideas. On Twitter try #growthmindset It is easy to take the approach of placing posters on walls and doing little else but this will only introduce the idea. To genuinely develop a ‘Growth Mindset’ takes time and a concerted effort in shifting the way individuals and groups think and talk about learning. Subtle changes to the way feedback is provided, the nature of conversations around success and the attribution of achievement to characteristics within the individuals control all play an essential role in shifting mindsets.

Promoting a Growth Mindset

Good to Great Advice for Growth Mindsets

Having established a ‘Growth Mindset’ the next step for a school might be to develop the question asking capacity of its learners. ‘In design thinking significant time and energy are dedicated to the problem finding phase’  ‘where as in problem-based learning, students follow accepted theories and principles to solve a clearly defined problem given by the teacher.’ (Melles et al. 2015 p193 & 190) Just as with a ‘Growth Mindset’ establishing a culture that values asking and seeking questions that are worth answering will establish the environment necessary for ‘Design Thinking’. It is quite likely that this will be the first tension point as ‘Design Thinking’ is implemented as there needs to be ample opportunities for learners to seek questions and this is counter to the ‘command and control’ model of teaching and leadership that continues to permeate many institutions. The key is to see the importance of the skill set required to ask quality questions. Fortunately just as with ‘Growth Mindsets’ there are numerous resources to draw on. One of the best is the writing of Warren Berger in his book ‘A More Beautiful Question’. The reader of ‘A More Beautiful Question’ will discover how innovation leaders utilise their ability to ask questions as the starting point of a process for discovery and change. The way a question is posed, the value it is given and the openness in which alternative questions are pursued can have a significant effect on an organisation and a learner’s ability to innovate.

One-way of identifying the type of question most appropriate for ‘Design Thinking’ is embodied by the term ‘Wicked problem’. Richard Buchanan who borrowed the idea from Horst Rittel expanded on the idea of ‘wicked problems’. A ‘wicked problem’ is one with ill-defined terms, confusing information and many conflicting demands that conspire against simple solutions. If there is a single reason for the broad adoption of ‘Design Thinking’ it is the ‘wicked problem’ as it is this class of problem that most confounds traditional problem solving pathways. ‘Design Thinking’ with its focus on solutions suits the demands of ‘wicked problems’ by allowing the learner to concentrate on finding satisfactory solutions rather than needing to find optimum solutions. (Cassim. 2013) In an increasingly complex world the ability to solve problems that do not have one single correct answer is an increasingly valuable skill.

In previous posts I have explored the questions we ask and the utility of allowing students to pursue questions of their own.

 The Questions that Matter most

What Questions shall we ask?

 Questions that encourage deeper thinking

Having established a culture that will allow ‘Design Thinking’ to thrive the next phase is selecting the process or framework that will facilitate the desired results. A ‘Design Thinking’ frame should allow individuals and groups to function in a productive manner that promotes collaboration and engages users in a process where ideation, sharing, iteration, reflection and evaluation combine. From simple models to highly evolved multi-phase processes there is likely to be a framework that works for your particular goals. For the ‘Design Thinker’ the framework provides a scaffold for their thinking and allows them to engage with collaborators in a more productive manner. For the teacher this structure can remove some of the fear that comes from throwing the class open to the students. While chaos at times can produce results it can also consume large quantities of time. A well selected or developed design process should allow time for creative chaos but include time for evaluation of the results and provide steps along the way for the consideration of alternatives.

When getting started you will probably want to use a ‘Design Thinking’ process that has been tried and tested. There are numerous options and most are supported with easy to follow graphics. The importance of a cyclical, iterative process should be clear in any model selected with opportunities for the learner to enter and exit the cycle at the appropriate point. This cyclical process sets ‘Design Thinking’ apart from linear design patterns where the designer moves from one phase to the next and onto a clear conclusion. While a linear design process may be appropriate for traditional graphic or product design where one solution is prepared for consideration by a client, it does not serve the multitude of purposes that ‘Design Thinking’ may be adapted to serve. The one danger with this cyclical process is that some learners may never feel they are ready to exit the cycle of evaluation and refinement. An understanding that needs to be built into the ‘Design Thinking’ culture is that ideas need to be shared and in the end a result should be achieved; endless refinement without sharing is counter productive.

Regardless of the model you choose you will most likely have four to five main phases in your Design Cycle. Fatima Cassim distilled one model of the ‘Design Cycle’ from academic writings on the topic. Cassim identifies the key phases as: Formulating, Representing, Moving, Evaluating Reflecting

Adapted from Fatima Cassim (2013)

Adapted from Fatima Cassim (2013)

For added detail at each phase of the cycle you may find the Design Cycle developed for the International Baccalaureate useful. It has four main phases with up to three distinct steps within each.

Image courtesy of IB World School - http://www.ibo.org/

Image courtesy of IB World School - http://www.ibo.org/

 Other options for a Design Cycle include the excellent model developed by Dr Charles Burnette available online at idesignthinking.com or the detailed process developed by the Nueva School. An extensive set of resources and professional development is offered through NoTosh.com including tools for planning and strategies such as ‘Hexagonal Thinking’ that will encourage learners to make connections between ideas. For schools wishing to apply ‘Design Thinking’ as a strategy for solving problems and not just as a teaching tool the experts at IDEO have produced a toolkit for educators called ‘‘Design Thinking’ for Educators’. This resource provides a set of tools that can be adapted to solve many of the problems schools are likely to face from reimagining spaces to developing new learning programmes. Stanford’s dSchool is a highly respected leader in the field of ‘Design Thinking’ and share many valuable resources through the web. For any school looking to implement ‘Design Thinking’ their Bootcamp Bootleg is a valuable set of resources that can be tailored to individual needs. While some of these resources are aimed at users beyond the classroom, the ideas can be modified to suit a classroom setting with a little creative thinking. To this end dSchool has a site dedicated to the K-12 environment and provides a wealth of tailored resources based upon the programmes developed for University students.

Hexagonal Thinking courtesy of NoTosh - http://notosh.com/

Hexagonal Thinking courtesy of NoTosh - http://notosh.com/

As you delve deeper into ‘Design Thinking’ you may wish to build a model of the ‘Design Cycle’ that suits your needs as a school and body of learners. Taking this step can be a learning experience and the result is a device that is understood more deeply than if you borrow a process from elsewhere. This is the thinking behind the ‘Creative Process Planner’. It was developed with ideas borrowed from many other ‘Design Cycles’ and is aimed at serving the needs of students as they approach their ‘Genius Hour’ projects. It includes a range of sub-steps and gives just enough advice to help students move ahead with their projects. It was developed initially in ‘Inspiration’ the well-known mind mapping software and gradually adapted to be used on the web. It is presented here with an open licence for schools to adapt to their needs.

Once you have the foundations of a ‘Design Thinking’ culture in place, you may like to explore providing a space for it to occur within. ‘Even more so, they need space to try out different mental models and methods to connect abstract knowledge with concrete applications and thereby, being able to convert and apply abstract and general principles (acquired through instruction) in meaningful and responsible acting in life (acquired through construction). (Scheer, Noweski and Meinel 2012 p10) ‘Design Thinking’ is a philosophy that fits nicely alongside the ideals of the Maker Movement and providing a space for ‘Design Thinking’ that is flexible and encourages collaboration can do much to legitimise the endeavour.

 by Nigel Coutts

Read Introduction to Design thinking (Part One)

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in ‘Design Thinking’. Design Issues, 8(2), 5-21

Cassim, F. (2013). Hands On, Hearts On, Minds On: ‘Design Thinking’ within an Education Context. International Journal Of Art & Design Education, 32(2), 190-202.

Gardner, H. 2009, 5 Minds for the Future, McGraw-Hill, North Ryde, Sydney.

Melles, G. Anderson, N. Barrett, T.  & Thompson-Whiteside, S. 2014 Problem finding through design thinking in education Chapter in Innovations in Higher EducationTeaching and Learning - http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/S2055-364120150000003027

Perkins, D. 1995, The Intelligent Eye: learning to think by looking at art, Getty Centre for the Arts, California.

Scheer, Andrea, Noweski, Christine, & Meinel, Christoph. (2012). Transforming Constructivist Learning into Action: ‘Design Thinking’ in Education. Design and Technology Education, 17(3), 8-19.

 

An Introduction to Design Thinking (Part 1)

‘Design Thinking’ might just be the next ‘new’ old thing in education. In her recent address to the National Press Club, Catherine Livingstone of The Business Council of Australia included ‘Design Thinking’ amongst the critical STEM skills required for Australia’s future. But what do we mean by ‘Design Thinking’ and why should educators be interested?

Stanford University has been a pioneer of ‘Design Thinking’ since founding its dSchool in 2005. Founder David Kelley explains that ‘the central tenet of Design Thinking, isn't one of aesthetic or utility, but of empathy and human observation’. It is a process for finding new ways of solving problems and for identifying problems worth solving. It is much more than a process of design and it provides a structure in which critical thinking, reflection and evaluation is the key. Seen in this way it is what 21st century teaching and learning is all about.

"We moved from thinking of ourselves as designers to thinking of ourselves as design thinkers. We have a methodology that enables us to come up with a solution that nobody has before." — David Kelley

In a traditional problem solving model the solution is derived to solve the problem that has been presented. ‘Design Thinking’ begins a step before this with the identification of the problem a subtle but important difference. The problem identification process is critical as it at this point that we begin to evaluate why problems need a solution. According to Kelley the measure is empathy or ‘needfinding’ a process in which ‘ it was just important to worry about figuring out the kind of human needs that were worth working on and then doing the problem-solving’. ‘Design Thinking’ is not something that happens separate to humanity it is a core response to the needs of people and it begins with asking questions about making the world a better place.

The methodology of ‘Design Thinking’ is the key to its value. It provides a structure and language for collaborative problem solving that allows teams to be more powerful than they would without it. Ewen McIntosh of ‘NoTosh' describes it as the box that gives you a place to work within. 'You want to think creatively, you NEED the box to think inside of. You need a common process to go into new places.' Rather than throwing out the box, ‘Design Thinking’ turns the box into a worthwhile process that facilitates problem solving and ideation. In this model the box is not a constraint but a structure that enhances creativity.

‘Design Thinking’ engages learners in a highly iterative process grounded in evaluation and critical reflection, both highly valued processes. Research by Looijenga, Klapwijk and de Vries titled 'The effect of iteration on the design performance of primary school children’ explored the benefits of a highly iterative design process for young students. They found that 'Effective knowledge expansion comes by thinking about already acquired knowledge and also by searching for definitions and explanations of not yet understood knowledge. Both activities are practiced during design activities.’ This study used simple design tasks with young learners, not the more involved and student driven tasks typical of a ‘Design Thinking’ process and yet the results showed that the iterative process of design tasks required high order thinking skills that could be transferred to other learning contexts. 'Design concepts emerge and become complete through iteration of analysis, synthesis and evaluation’. For schools using Bloom’s taxonomy the evidence here is clear that ‘Design Thinking’ will not only target the high level thinking skills which are so desirable but will require them to be used over and over again by the students as they evolve their ideas.

For advocates of a ‘Genius Hour’ approach ‘Design Thinking’ is unlikely to be a knew idea. The research by Looijenga et al. adds validity to such an approach ‘Our case study shows that iteration, freedom of choice, collaboration and presentation improve the effectiveness of design and technology activities.’ The beauty of ‘Design Thinking’ is that is a highly collaborative process that leads to the presentation of ideas that are evolved through iteration. That the process begins with the identification of the problems and needs that will become central to the project adds further values as learners are allowed to develop ideas with both personal and broad meaning.

Central to the iterative process is ongoing evaluation of ideas. Allowing students to experience an environment where learning occurs from self-identification of what works and what does not has great value. In ‘Design Thinking’ failure is part of the process that leads to learning. Each time an idea is found to be lacking the learner moves one step closer to a plan that has a chance of working. In the world of start-ups and tech companies this mentality is given voice in catch cries such as ‘fail fast’ or ‘move fast and break things’. Students learn to evaluate their ideas and learn from each iteration. If our goal is to develop a ‘Growth Mindset’ where failure is viewed as a positive learning experience ‘Design Thinking’ provides an ideal process and opportunities to develop an attitude that can be readily transferred beyond the design project.

A “‘Design Thinking’’ approach will also ensure students are engaging in a process of critical reflection and metacognition. 'Effective reflection for learning through experience requires a capacity for understanding one’s thinking and learning processes, critical self-awareness of values, beliefs and assumptions, and an openness to alternative, challenging perspectives.’ according to Debra Coulson and Marina Harvey of Macquarie University. Their research focused on the role of reflection at three critical points in the learning cycle and which occur repeatedly within a ‘Design Thinking’ process. ‘Reflection for Action’ can occur for students as they consider the nature of ‘Design Thinking’ and use scaffolds for their collaboration which will support reflective practice. ‘Reflection in Action’ is part of the culture of ‘Design Thinking’ in which learners are constantly engaging in a process of questioning, evaluating, testing and refining their ideas based on their observations and analysis. Including a formal reflective process into this mix can add structure and refine the process while recording the thinking that is taking place for later analysis and review. ‘Reflection on Action’ occurs at end points in the ‘Design Process’ but as in many respects the end point is the start of a new cycle the reflective process has greater meaning than it may otherwise. In a “‘Design Thinking’’ model this ‘reflection on action’ is what spurs the learner onto more action and continued learning. 'Reflection and learning may continue long after the experience and the academic requirements are complete, particularly if scaffolding has been effective in supporting the development of reflective ability and agency.'

Observe a group of students engaged in ‘Design Thinking’ and you will see similarities to the way students play. Unsurprisingly Looijenga et al. noted this in their study. 'Playing includes experimenting with the same thing, with small variations, over and over again. Every repetition of the experiment gives improvement in performance.’ This sort of constructive play according to John Dewey, amongst other skills and dispositions encourages students to take responsibility for their own learning. What you are also likely to see is learners engaging in a process of self-explaining in which they describe their thinking to themselves or share their ideas with collaborator or teacher. ‘Eliciting self-explanations clearly enhances learning and understanding’ states Chi, De Leeuw, Chiu and LaVancher in their study on the effect of self-explaining. Chi et al. found that self-explaining is a constructive activity and it occurs frequently within the ‘Design Thinking’ process. Further they found it encourages integration of new learning with old and as it is a continuous process where partial explanations are evaluated and added to ‘self-explaining' can manage conflicts and misunderstandings between new and old knowledge. ‘Design Thinking’ encourages this sort of iterative self-explaining and constructive play.

In Part Two of ‘An Introduction to Design Thinking’ explore how ‘Design Thinking’ can be implemented by schools and discover a range of resources from experts in the field that can maximise its benefits for learners while making the process easy for teachers to embed.

 

Coulson, D., & Harvey, M. (2013). Scaffolding student reflection for experience-based learning: a framework. Teaching In Higher Education, 18(4), 401-413. doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.752726

Chi, M., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting Self-Explanations Improves Understanding. Cognitive Science, 18(3), 439-477. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1803_3

Dewey, J. (1899/1976). Play and imagination in relation to early education. In The middle works 1 (pp. 339–343). Carbondale & Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

Looijenga, A., Klapwijk, R., & de Vries, M. (2014). The effect of iteration on the design performance of primary school children. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 25(1), 1-23. doi:10.1007/s10798-014-9271-2

 

 

 

 

Is STEM the Key? (Part Three)

The message from PwC is clear, Australia needs to take action now if we are not to slip behind the rest of the world. 'Australia is waking up to the fact that the good times can’t go on forever. In the face of economic challenges and a digital revolution that’s reshaping business and the workforce, we need to act.’ (PwC - A Smart Move). What Australia needs is an increased focus on STEM to enable us to compete in a global economy driven by ‘data, digital technologies and innovation. According to PwC seventy-five percent of the fastest growing occupations require STEM related skills but it is in this area that Australia is lacking.

The Me2 is an Australian designed and built 3D Printer that is largely aimed at the Education market - http://me3d.com.au/

The Me2 is an Australian designed and built 3D Printer that is largely aimed at the Education market - http://me3d.com.au/

PwC analysis found that increasing our STEM workforce by 1% would add $57.4 billion to our GDP in coming years. 'Inextricably woven into the fabric of our economic future is the impact of digital disruption, arguably the most significant mega-trend of the 21st century. Digital technologies are radically changing the way we live, consume and work.’  Be it in the form of machine learning, 3D printing social media or crowdsourcing the impact of digital is seen to be everywhere and everywhere it is having a disruptive influence, changing the make-up of our workforce and creating new pressures in the job market as demand for STEM qualifications out paces supply and old occupations are replaced. Among the jobs that will give way to automation in the next 20 years according to PwC are accounting clerks and bookkeepers (97.5%), checkout operators (96.9%) general office support (96.1%), personal assistants (92.4%) and farm and forestry workers (92.5%).

'Modelling shows that the jobs most likely to endure over the next couple of decades are ones that require high levels of social intelligence, technical ability and creative intelligence. This includes doctors and nurses, teachers, engineers, and information communication and technology (ICT) professionals, and managers.'

While the report predicts some of our present occupations are likely to linger it also suggests that the future will include many jobs that do not yet exist. These yet unknown occupations will be a result of innovation and the report card for Australia is not good with our competency and capacity to innovate being rated by OECD as ‘average’.  

'In order to realise our potential, Australia needs a workforce that is technologically savvy and able to innovate. And one of the best ways to do this is by improving capabilities in STEM.'

The answer for business beyond increasing its capacity for innovation is to partner with education to build a STEM capable workforce for the future. Through open discussion with educators and by building partnerships, offering internships, and breaking down stereotypes business can play a part in delivering change through education reports PwC. The key is the concept of ‘educating to innovate’.

So far this discussion has been somewhat clear cut, the future workforce will require STEM related skills and the way to develop this is through partnerships between educators, business and governments to bring about the changes in the education system required to produce suitably qualified STEM graduates. But is it possible that STEM is just another fad that will come and go and does the call for STEM distract us from identifying the true skills our students need?

Not all writers support STEM as the answer to the needs of the future workforce. Author of ‘In defines of a Liberal Education’ Fareed Zakaria calls for caution as we rush towards a STEM focused educational system. 'This dismissal of broad-based learning, however, comes from a fundamental misreading of the facts — and puts America on a dangerously narrow path for the future.’ While Zakaria agrees that innovation is important he argues that it is not restricted to STEM subjects and that in limiting student choices or encouraging a STEM pathway the benefits of a well-rounded education are lost. What is needed is a broadly applicable ability for innovation, critical thinking, imagination, passion and social intelligence. 'Innovation in business has always involved insights beyond technology.’ writes Zakaria.

Unsurprisingly there are those who feel Zakaria got it wrong. 'All obsessions can be dangerous’ points out Dr. Jalees Rehman in response to Zakaria. According to Rehman STEM is all about teaching students to be critical and creative thinkers and is not about the transfer of technical skills as Zakaria alleges. Rehman is clear in his response that STEM is part of but not the whole answer and he calls for a balanced approach with a strong emphasis on the teaching of creativity and critical thinking which are described as the essential constructs of STEM but also of the arts and humanities. Rehman calls for greater inclusion of the arts and humanities in STEM education and for this to be a two-way relationship.

There is the potential here for a great error to be made and it is revealed in some of the underlying assumptions that Zakaria bases his assessment on. Teaching in the STEM field can be all about creativity and critical thinking and it often is but there are also the countless classes that have a focus on teaching knowledge for later recall with bland skills taught in isolation and ‘follow the instruction’ experiments where the results are know and the method is carved in stone. The design and make task where every student produces the same dust pan, the mathematics lesson where there is one method to solve the problem are all too familiar and do nothing to promote creativity, critical thinking or innovation. Not that the humanities are excused from such mundane teaching practices. How many students are taught the correct analysis of poetry, the fill in the blanks model of writing or the colour by numbers approach to art lessons where every student produces a near identical piece of art.

The call to arms has been made and it is clear that the future will need a workforce capable of innovation on a new scale with the skills of creativity, critical thinking and imagination at the cornerstone of the new workers skill set. As writer and futurist Alvin Toffler puts it the 'the illiterate of the twenty-first century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.’ With the role that technology has to play in this future a grounding in STEM is undoubtedly essential but so too is balance and within this balance an emphasis on the 'long life' skills that will allow individuals and groups to put their knowledge, capacities and passions to good use in creating the innovative future we desire.

 

By Nigel Coutts

 

Read Part One

Read Part Two

The cultivation of empathy

The cultivation of empathy and understanding for our students and their needs is central to the tenets of individualisation, differentiation and personal growth. We know that an essential requirement for effective learning is a safe and accepting environment in which every learner has access to the respect and dignity they deserve. However, even equipped with this awareness and a desire to achieve this goal establishing a culture of empathy and understanding that embraces all students presented unique challenges. 

A simple definition of empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. In most instances this is not such a challenging task that requires little else but an ability and willingness to see things from another’s perspective. Where empathy becomes challenging is in those situations where the perspective of the ‘other’ is outside of the realm of our experience, where our understanding of things is challenged. Unfortunately this is most likely to occur for teachers when we encounter students who require empathy and understanding most.

In many cases teachers caring for a disabled person are able to provide the empathetic environment they require to thrive. A student with a physical disability, short or long term can expect a host of accommodations to ensure their learning is maximised. To a slightly lesser extent the same is true for students with a variety of sensory challenges. Empathy for those with certain types of intellectual or behavioural conditions seems to present a greater challenge and I present the following as examples.

Recently I taught a student who is High Functioning Autistic. It was a pleasure to teach him and while we could recall moments throughout the year that we would prefer to forget we also had many moments of true learning together. His autism presents genuine barriers to his ability to perceive the world in a fashion similar to his peers. Rigidity of thinking and action dominate his approach and confound many situations for him. Those who know him well understand this and are able to make suitable accommodations. The difficulty comes not from his autism but from people’s perceptions of his actions. To some he is seen as deliberately disobedient and in need of strong discipline. They see a boy who chooses to act the way he does and in this perception they fail to empathise. The rigidity of thought that he experiences and is also aware of is a barrier that only true empathy can see past and ensures only empathetic teachers are likely to establish the conditions he needs for personal growth.

Many years ago I had the privilege of teaching at a special needs school. It was the most rewarding teaching experience I have had. I recall on a number of times having members of the school’s surrounding community volunteer to spend time helping the students. These caring members of the community would offer their time in the belief that they could do some good for the ‘unfortunate’ students they saw entering the school each day. Very few came back, many left part way through the day suddenly remembering an appointment. These caring people were confronted by what they saw and were not able to cope with the realities of it. They felt so sorry for the students that they failed to empathise with them at all. Empathy was the key to meeting the needs of these students for it was empathy that allowed you to understand a little of the world they lived in. My strongest memory of my time with these students was how happy they were. I learned from them what made them happy, what routines and rituals they had that they made them smile. They engaged with the world from a different reference point and the challenges and ‘disabilities’ they experienced did not limit their ability to experience joy. Singing 'Bob the Builder' with a five year old dancing in circles with you as their may-pole or watching a young girl's face light up with absolute joy as you make her favourite colour appear from mixing paint in a sink reveal the special roles we can have as teachers. Once it was understood that the children were happy and once it was understood how this could be achieved the daily experience of working and learning became an uplifting experience as is the case for all teaching.

Truly cultivating empathy for our students is in reality a complex task, at least as complex as our students but it will always be an essential ingredient in a culture of learning. 

by Nigel Coutts

Thanks to #asiaED and @asiaEDchat for asking the question - How do we cultivate empathy and understanding for our students and their needs in school?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is STEM the key? (Part Two)

The call for improved STEM programmes has gained momentum in the past two weeks with an address to the National Press Club by Catherine Livingstone AO of the Business Council of Australia and an occasional paper released by the Office of the Chief Scientist. The message is increasingly unavoidable, Australia must develop its STEM capabilities or be left behind by a global market driven by innovative technology and science. The role of education is understood to be essential in this process but what is to be done to meet the demand remains less clear.

With the Federal Budget came support from both sides of parliament for enhanced STEM programmes with the Government restating its commitment and the opposition offering an alternative plan. Prof. Ian Chubb supports the moves by each party and in his response to the budget announcements called for a bipartisan approach to Science 'Properly supported science must last longer than any parliament and any changes of government. I hope that a bipartisan spirit will be extended to science; after all, it sustains us all.'

The latest round of articles, speeches and papers calling for a new approach to STEM began with the release of the an Occasional Paper by the Office of the Chief Scientists (OCS) published on 29th April. Titled 'Stem skills in the workforce: What do employers want?’ written by Dr. Roslyn Prinsley & Dr. Krisztian Baranyai the paper reports on a survey of employer attitudes to STEM skills and STEM skilled workers. The results agree with previous reports that businesses are seeking and value employees with STEM skills. Eighty-two percent of employers responded that STEM qualifications are valuable even in fields where such qualifications are not a requisite, seventy one percent indicated STEM employees were amongst their most innovative and over fifty percent report an increasing need for STEM qualified staff (either professionals or technicians and trades). Looked at from a ‘skills to needs’ match forty percent reported difficulties finding the right technician or trades workers and thirty one percent had difficulty recruiting STEM graduates while around one in three reported a mismatch between the skills required and those of applicants.

At a finer level the survey reveals the types of skills wanted and valued by employers. Topping the list is a call for more ‘Active Learning’ where learning occurs on the job, this was considered very important by more than 60% of respondents and at least important by over 90%. The top five skills and attributes desired for the workforce where critical thinking, complex problem-solving, creative problem-solving and interpersonal skills. More than fifty percent of respondents ranked occupation-specific STEM skills, lifelong learning and design thinking as at least important while programming was considered at least important by less than 50%. The paper concludes 'This report highlights a mismatch between the skills required by employers and those of job applicants. Clearly, an effort has to be made to minimise this discrepancy. The information presented here should help to identify what needs to be done.' (Prinsley & Baranyai 2015 p4)

Also on 29th April, President of the Business Council of Australia, Catherine Livingstone AO addressed the National Press Club and presented her views on the importance of STEM. Catherine describes an ‘extraordinary disruption that is now upon us’ as a result of mass connectivity, an internet of things and from this rapid innovation fuelled by hyper connectivity. It is the degree of connectivity available to us that will allow for a tie of increased innovation 'Because innovation happens most powerfully at the interface. The more interfaces, the greater the potential for innovation; and the more connectivity the more interfaces.’ Livingstone states 'given the disruption of a hyper-connected world, many of our policy settings are simply not fit for purpose.'

In a similar fashion to the OCS paper, Livingstone identifies a need for a shift in the skills young people leave school with citing the current 400,000 young people out of work and not in full time study as evidence that 'This would suggest that it's not a participation problem, but a jobs and skills match problem we have on our hands.’ Focussing on the educational recommendations of the address Livingstone suggests 'We must move away from the notion that work is something we begin after a long period of study, to one where work is integrated with learning.’ Livingstone adds her voice to an increase in the development of STEM skills including computer coding, computational thinking, problem solving and design thinking. According to Livingstone 'Given that an estimated 75 per cent of the fastest growing occupations, including those in the creative industries and humanities, will require STEM related skills and knowledge, the imperative for introducing these foundational skills into the primary and pre-primary curricula should be unassailable.’ Livingstone calls for a ten-year plan to close the gap between Australia’s digital literacy and that of our competitor nations. She concludes her discussion of educational changes by saying 'In order to achieve these philosophical shifts, we need to move our national preoccupation with class sizes needs to be replaced with a national obsession with teacher quality, teaching standards, learning methods and curriculum.’

Responding to a question by Gareth Hutchens of The Sydney Morning Herald based on teacher quality and wage based strategies for attracting teachers to the profession, Livingstone identified the lack of sufficient numbers of suitably qualified teachers within the STEM disciplines as the key issue. Her solution is to identify and promote technologies that will maximise the impact and collaborative potential of those with the required skills. This would extend the reach of those most skilled in the delivery of STEM learning beyond their classroom or school such that a far larger number of students benefit. This solution has merit but would require a shift in the way school systems operate and an increased openness towards sharing the expertise of highly valued teachers. The profession is generally open to this sort of collaboration but competition between schools may act as a barrier to this occurring on increasingly formalised levels and ongoing emphasis on ‘high-stakes’ testing can only enhance this scenario. Looking beyond Australian schools one sees models such as Korean ‘Hagwons’ where the most valued teachers use technology to reach a mass market and earn considerable salaries in doing so. An alternative model may be a teacher driven market sector that supplies high-quality learning environments, programmes and expertise as a consultancy model similar to that provided by ‘NoTosh’ and ‘IDEO’ where industry knowledge and quality teaching practice merge. It is a shame perhaps that the excellent ‘Scientists and Mathematicians in Schools’ programme of the CSIRO does not gain greater support from industry and government as it has the potential to connect teachers with the level of expertise they require while building opportunities for the sort of situated learning industry is calling for.

A discussion thread on an Association of Independent Schools IT Integrators group touched on the possibility of mass collaboration as a method of circumventing the text book industry and developing a set of resources with genuine value to teachers and students. Such a collaboration is easily possible with the resources available to teachers today. Both YouTube and TED Ed provide tools for sharing lessons in a video format with added features to enhance learning such as questions, discussions, links to information and student tracking. Building on their motto of ‘Ideas worth sharing’ TED Ed embraces the motto ‘lessons worth sharing’. The site provides an open space for teachers to share lessons built on videos from YouTube or TED. The site allows teachers to create, share, explore and build on lessons at a global scale and in doing so create a rich resource for educators to draw upon. Apple is building a similar resource in the form of its iTunes U service that allows educators to create and share entire courses for access on Computer or iPad/iPhone. iTunes U enables teachers and students to share interactive text books they create with iBooks Author in addition to Video or Audio files and as with other services allows uploading of files in PDF along with the proprietary formats used by Apple’ productivity applications (Pages, Numbers, Keynote). What services like this offer that in-house Learning Management Systems do not provide is access to a global community of educators both as a source and destination for collaboratively constructed resources.

In Part Three I will look at the perspective on Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC) report ‘A Smart Move: Future-proofing Australia’s workforce by growing skills in science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) and those who call for a cautious approach to a STEM focused education such as Fareed Zakaria of the Washington Post.

By Nigel Coutts

 Read Part One

 

 

Is STEM the key?

Note: With a flood of papers, speeches and articles relevant to the topic, this post is now Part One of a Three Part series on STEM. Part Two will be published Sunday 17th May and Part Three Sunday 24th May.

In June 2014, the Prime Minister of Australia, the Hon. Tony Abbott MP acknowledged the significant role that STEM is to play in the nations future. 'There will be significant emphasis in boosting our focus on science, technology, engineering and maths because science is at the heart of a country’s competitiveness and it is important that we do not neglect science as we look at the general educational and training schemes.’ The question now is how will education respond and why is STEM so important to our futures.

Australia’s Chief Scientist, Prof. Ian Chubb, has thrown his voice behind action to enhance STEM education both in public speeches and through the release of a substantial report titled ’Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Australia’s Future’. According to Prof. Chubb 'Science is infrastructure and it is critical to our future. We must align our scientific effort to the national interest; focus on areas of particular importance or need; and do it on a scale that will make a difference to Australia and a changing world, We are the only OECD country without a science or technology strategy. Other countries have realised that such an approach is essential to remaining competitive in a world reliant on science and science-trained people,'

The role that STEM plays in future economic growth is well supported. Roughly half of America’s economic growth is attributed to STEM related advances. In Australia a similar picture is painted in that 65% of our growth per capita can be linked to improvements in our use of capital, labour and technological innovation made possible by STEM. (OCS 2014) Similarly a report by USA’s National Science Board (US NSB) found that:

'The “STEM workforce” is extensive and critical to innovation and competitiveness.'
'STEM knowledge and skills enable multiple, dynamic pathways to STEM and non-STEM occupations alike.'
'Assessing, enabling, and strengthening workforce pathways is essential to the mutually reinforcing goals of individual and national prosperity and competitiveness.'

Forbes reports that the US Department of Commerce found 'STEM creates a nation of innovation and global competitiveness because it drives the generation of ideas and propels the creation of new industries. Moreover, growth in STEM jobs is three times faster than in other jobs; STEM occupations are projected to grow by more than 17 percent.’

According to Prof. Chubb, ‘STEM skills are critical to the management and success of R&D projects as well as the day-to-day operations of competitive firms' and 'There is the lesson for us: top-performing STEM economies are united not by their size or geography but by their capacity to organise then grasp their opportunities.’ If Australia is to maximise its position in the emerging technology and innovation driven economy we must create a climate that supports STEM at all levels. We need to create partnerships between industry, research and education that empower innovation. Globally this cultural climate is taking shape supported by clear directives from government as seen in directives from US President Barack Obama (training of 100,000 excellent STEM teachers over the next decade) and in the UK from the 'Technology Strategy Board’.

Among the four focus areas of 'STEM: Australia’s Future’ is an emphasis on ‘supporting high quality education’. Seen as a means to an end 'Australian education- formal and informal - will prepare a skilled and dynamic STEM workforce and lay the foundations for lifelong STEM literacy in the community.’ The US NSB agree ‘A well-rounded pre-college education that includes significant engagement with STEM unlocks pathways into the technical STEM workforce and pursuit of additional STEM studies at the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral levels.’ In the US ’16.5 million college-educated individuals, including many working in sales, marketing and management, reported that their job required at least a bachelor’s degree level of Science & Engineering training. Many of these people are not employed in fields typically identified as STEM disciplines but they recognise a need for this style of knowledge and thinking in their daily operations.

What the evidence shows is that STEM is both a discrete set of disciplines and career pathways along with a set of broadly relevant capabilities which are increasingly required for career success. STEM encompasses knowledge in areas such as mathematics, chemistry, physics, engineering, skills such as complex reasoning, problem solving, design and programming and broad abilities such as inductive and deductive reasoning, mathematical reasoning and non-cognitive dispositions such as preferences for investigative approaches and independence. (Anthony Carnevale) The US NSB report identifies that 'In addition to having a well-rounded education that includes both STEM and non-STEM subjects, employers indicate that today’s STEM workers must possess a variety of characteristics important for the workplace. These include the ability to work independently and in teams, a willingness to persist in solving hard problems, and an understanding of workplace expectations.’

To meet the needs for a STEM capable workforce Prof. Chubb identifies a need to increase recognition of STEM education, lift the number of STEM teachers, develop ‘Science Literacy’ in schools, build a workforce with industry aligned skills and increase the uptake of STEM across the workforce. For schools the standout points of the 'STEM: Australia’s Future’ report is its call for ‘Inspirational Teaching and ‘Inspired Learning’. To achieve the first of these two goals ‘Inspirational Teaching’ Australia must 'Provide all pre-service and in-service STEM teachers with training and professional development opportunities to deliver contemporary science using contemporary pedagogy, with a focus on creativity and inquiry-based learning- more like science is practised.’ This goal will be in part achieved by increasing incentives to follow a STEM education pathway and that training for pre-service teachers reflects the demand for STEM teachers. The second goal of Inspired Learning’ requires we 'Use curricula and assessment criteria, from primary to tertiary levels, to promote the development of long-lasting skills- including quantitative skills, critical thinking, creativity, and behavioural and social skills- in parallel with disciplinary knowledge.’

The goal of ‘Inspired Learning’ within STEM is worth particular consideration. According to 'STEM: Australia’s Future’ we will 'Develop science literacy in schools by helping schools to teach STEM as it is practised, in ways that engage students, encourage curiosity and reflection, and link classroom topics to the ‘real-world.’ Such a goal is in common with much of the pedagogy described on this site and across those that emphasise an inquiry approach to learning that is driven by student ownership of the problem solving process from the point of imagining questions to be explored through to the testing of solutions. It is this approach to STEM education that will enable our students to experience a process of innovation, which they may call on when they enter a workforce where a ‘start-up’ mentality will be increasingly common.

Robot container loaders at Port Brisbane set productivity record for a straddle terminal

Robot container loaders at Port Brisbane set productivity record for a straddle terminal

Speaking at an Australian Association of Independent Schools STEM conference Dr. Fabio Ramos of Sydney University illustrated the importance of a 'start-up' mentality. In areas such as mining, healthcare and agriculture innovative technologies and processes have brought new products to market out of the research and development of students. These students have been able to utilise their STEM capabilities to rapidly develop new fields and then capitalise on the economic potential of their ideas. Having experiences with this approach to innovative, design thinking from an early age is critical in building a STEM capable workforce. It is in this way that a STEM approach to ‘Inspired Learning’ distinguishes itself from traditional teaching and learning in Science. In STEM the blending of science, technology, engineering and mathematics allows a greater emphasis on real-world applicability of skills. In this model the focus is on the thinking dispositions, an iterative design process with a research foundation that leads to new ways of working and living.

According to ‘Natural Start Alliance’ (a coalition of educators, parents, organisations and others who want to help young children connect with nature) student engagement in STEM learning in a unified, integrated manner is critical as it helps students integrate knowledge across disciplines. Starting this process early is essential according to 'Natural Start’ as 'The secret is to tap into their natural and innate curiosity about the living world. By simply allowing them to investigate, by encouraging them to ask questions about the real world, you are engaging children in STEM.’ and 'The traditional approach of teaching topics in isolation does not support the ways that children learn best.’ 

Undoubtedly then STEM has a place in the educational futures of our students, but will their teachers be ready for this challenge. Australia has an ageing teacher population and education is a field of endeavour with a long tradition of changing slowly. Without adequate training, high levels of support, incentives for teachers to train and re-train into STEM success will be hampered. Unless we build connections with industry and research institutions we risk missing opportunities to maximise learning. Without government incentives and support for the funding of the development of ‘Inspirational Teaching’ STEM learning in Australia is likely to slip further behind and with the speed at which developing nations are moving into this space we could find ourselves trailing a new world order. 

by Nigel Coutts

Read Part Two

What are your students doing?

Recently I read Amanda Ripley’s thought provoking book 'The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way’ in which through a comparative study of foreign exchange students she reports from the inside on the modern powerhouses of education. Amanda set out to explain why some countries are able to outperform others on PISA scores. From the pressure cooker environment of Korea, where students sleep in their regular classes so they can stay awake until 10pm studying in ‘hagwons', to Finland where education and educators are highly valued but change came as a result of a long process not the overnight success sometimes reported, Ripley found that the answer is complex and fails to reveal one right way to educate our children.

In the concluding pages Ripley offers advice to parents looking to find the right school for their child, she advises they ask the students two simple questions: ‘What are you doing right now?’ and ‘Why?’

Across all of the systems Ripley visited and in every classroom the consistent measure of success was that the students were paying attention and were engaged. ‘In the best schools, though, boredom was the exception rather than the norm’. In a classroom where the students are engaged and interested in what they are doing asking ‘What are you doing right now, and Why? should illicit a detailed response, the students should know the answer and understand the relevance of what they are doing. What they are doing should be important to them, not just their teacher and certainly not just to some future test scenario.

Digging deeper into how students answer this question will reveal further details. Consider the verbs used in the responses.  If the students are consistently using verbs such as locate, identify, define, or label they are not being asked to apply high order thinking skills. Students who are using high-order thinking skills are likely to respond with answers that include verbs such as devise, design, compose, propose and invent. Looking for evidence of where students are operating on Bloom’s taxonomy is a better use of this hierarchy of thought than displaying it on a classroom wall.

In the best classrooms students should be able to answer the question ‘What are you doing right now?’ with confidence because they played a part in developing their exploration. In these classrooms students have ownership of their learning. According to Chan et al. (2014) 'Classroom transformation will only occur when teachers begin to shift from teacher-focused to student-focused classroom environments.’ to do this students need to be given ownership of the learning process.

'Teachers may fear giving up some of the control of goal setting, progress tracking, and assessment. However, granting students an active role in their learning can increase school completion; teach students valuable skills, like setting and attaining goals; and help students develop independence' (Uphold & Hudson, 2012)

Black and Wiliam (1998) in their analysis of assessment and the role of self-assessment showed the importance of students being able to and required to reflect on their learning and progress. They report that the problem with self-assessment comes not from a lack of reliability but because many pupils do not have ‘a sufficiently clear picture of the target that their learning is meant to attain’. These students would not be able to adequately answer the question ‘What are you doing right now?’

Chi et al. (1994) provide another perspective on this in their study of self-explaining. Self-explaining is the metacognitive process or strategy of generating explanations to oneself such that the integration of new knowledge is facilitated. They report that 'new instruction of either declarative or procedural knowledge cannot always be either instantiated or directly encoded; often it requires the integration of new information with existing knowledge. This integration process can be facilitated by asking students to actively construct what they are learning.’ Students who are learning therefore should be able to answer the question ‘What are you doing right now? and should be used to asking this question of themselves.  

The importance of engagement with and self-motivation towards the learning process is central to quality learning. In self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci 2000) the role of autonomy in this process is placed in equal importance to competence and feelings of safety and positive relations to educators. If our goal is intrinsic motivation for our students autonomy and ownership of the process are essential ingredients. Without ownership the best we can hope for is ‘integrated regulation’ in which students agree with the externally set goals. 

So ‘What are your students doing? and Why?’ Do they know? Is their answer the same as yours?

by Nigel Coutts

References

Chan, P., Graham-Day, K., Ressa, V., Peters, M., & Konrad, M. (2014). Beyond Involvement: Promoting Student Ownership of Learning in Classrooms. Intervention In School And Clinic, 50(2), 105-113. doi:10.1177/1053451214536039

Chi, M., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting Self-Explanations Improves Understanding. Cognitive Science, 18(3), 439-477. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1803_3

Ripley, A. (2013) The smartest kids in the world. New York, Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. 

Uphold, N., & Hudson, M. (2012). Student-focused planning. In D. W. Test, Evidence-based instructional strategies for transition (pp. 55–78). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. 

 

Term One Reflections 2015

With one term down now is the perfect time to look back and identify what has worked and suggest some areas for growth ahead of Term Two. It has undoubtedly been a busy time but in the midst of that have emerged ideas that have really worked and our new programmes have had the desired impact in getting the students started. So in no particular order here are my reflections for term one 2015.

1. Stand Up Meetings - Early in term we decided to implement a daily stand-up meeting with the goal of providing a time each day to share ideas and discuss the day ahead. With a new team member, new programmes for Science, History and Mathematics on top of English programmes that had been updated significantly to integrate with the other new programmes it was set to be a busy time with a lot to stay on top of. These meetings have been a definite success and have allowed us to come together as a supportive team. One of the strengths has been the sharing of what is working well within a programme and the ability for others to adopt strategies that helped a team member deliver a successful lesson. The side benefit of these meetings is that each team member has embraced the opportunity to run a ‘morning lines’ with the students and this has resulted in sessions with more meaning than was present when ownership of this time was shared across five teachers. 'Morning lines' is a short assembly used for distributing messages, it still does this but now it includes reflections on the topics we cover, discussion of pastoral care matters and strategies for effective learning delivered with a personal flair unique to each of us. 

2. Real Science - One of the biggest changes has occurred with the introduction of the New Science Curriculum. Our goal for Term One was to have the students engage in true scientific inquiry linked to an exploration of rapid changes at the earths surface due to events such as earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, bush fires and droughts. After an initial period of exploration and research students were given the challenge of creating experiments that would explore their chosen event in greater detail. At this stage we had little idea of what the students might come up with and while we had back-up plans we knew at this stage we would need to remove ourselves from the process. We did not want this to become ‘science by numbers’ where the students simply follow a recipe. The results have been pleasing and the students have risen to the challenge with some quality scientific thinking. Not everything went to plan and some groups in the end had to report that their experiments produced somewhat inconclusive data but in each case they have shown high order thinking fuelled by reflection on what each phase of experimentation revealed. By approaching the task in a cyclical manner with planning, followed by experimenting, followed by reflection then more planning before further experimentation students saw how scientists build and refine their understanding over time.

(1901). Poster "Don't be in such a hurry gentlemen!". To do with Enabling Acts 1896 leading to 1897 Convention. Deakin Collection. 1901 - http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/22431900

(1901). Poster "Don't be in such a hurry gentlemen!". To do with Enabling Acts 1896 leading to 1897 Convention. Deakin Collection. 1901 - http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/22431900

3. History - We decided to embrace the new History syllabus this term as the changes to Science dictated a rethink of our Units of Inquiry. The result has been a programme that begins with an in-depth look at the reasons for Australia’s  Federation and moves onto exploring the structures of Australian democracy and Government. We are half way through this programme now and will continue next term with visits to Canberra as part of our camp. Students are enjoying the study thus far and their ability to understand historic concepts is pleasing. As a concluding performance of understanding linked to Federation students engaged in a debate of the issues as perceived by each colony. The result revealed a deep understanding of the issues confronted by the colonies as they debated Federation leading up to 1901 and the passion the students applied to their colony’s perspective was impressive.

4. Mathematics - A shift towards an inquiry approach to mathematics has lifted students’ engagement with the subject and allowed us to build a deeper understanding of the concepts. With less time spent on repetitions students are spending more time applying their knowledge and using skills from one strand in another as they solve and create problems with genuine relevance. From re-designing the playground to using real world data in explorations of directed number, distance and speed students have seen the immediate applicability and interconnectedness of their learning. Having students take on the task of creating challenging mathematical questions for their peers to solve has added a new dimension and another opportunity to demonstrate understanding. 

Artwork by Year Six student completed as part of Optional Homework

Artwork by Year Six student completed as part of Optional Homework

5. Optional Homework - Late in term I asked my students to share what they were most enjoying about their time in Year Six, almost all said homework. This term we decided to offer students an option to design part of their homework. The goal was to give them a choice and a say in how they spent their time. We hoped that this would allow students to pursue a personal interest and to take ownership in their learning. We felt that dictating what homework was done and enforcing its completion with detentions or the like was counterproductive and denied the students an opportunity to develop responsibility. The results have been in most cases fantastic. Students have taken on a rich variety of projects each on a scale that can be completed in a week. We have had artworks, poetry, comedy, animations, coding, cooking, journals, websites, short films and documentaries. Feedback from parents has been positive with many stating that homework is no longer a chore as their children take on responsibility for managing it themselves. Part of the success of the overall programme has been a result of keeping some set items and always providing the option of a teacher set task. This option has been used by students when they either can’t think of a better option or don’t have the time that a self selected task requires. The next phase of this will be to add a more deliberate process of reflection to allow students to identify what they have learned from a particular task.

6. Genius Hour and Parent Partnerships - For 2015 we are shifting from a Personal Passion Project (PPP) that was completed during Term Four to a Genius Hour project that will run throughout the year. Based on the lessons learned with the PPP we have revised our processes for introducing the Genius Hour project and created new planning guides for students to use. This process has been an excellent opportunity for us to reflect on what has worked for us in the past and to combine that with ideas from ‘Design Thinking’ and project management. As a team we engaged with the process of designing the new programme as phase one of our Action Research project. Our ideas have been shared through Google Docs and we were able to engage colleagues from the senior school in this process incorporating their expertise in design thinking. So far we have introduced students to the concepts of project management and design by calling on parent experts. We have been fortunate to have three parents give an hour of their time to share their expertise with the students and called on a large number of parents to assist with a visit to the Powerhouse Museum so the students could see great designs. Next term we move on to the serious phase of the programme as students plan their projects guided by a modified version of “The Design Thinking of Educators’ guide produced by IDEO. By the middle of next term students should have moved from big ideas powered by ‘How might we questions’ through to a workable plan with timelines, resource lists and a clear concept of what success will look like and require. Along the way students will take on the task of gathering peer feedback on their ideas, pitching their ideas to their teachers and refining their plans. It should be an exciting process and one that we hope produces spectacular results.

7. Growth Mindsets – I have introduced the concept of ‘Growth Mindsets’ and the writings of Carol Dweck to students and parents and while it is early days the results are positive. It is a concept that resonates with learners as they struggle with how to measure their success and learn from the times when it does not go as planned. We have started with the idea that fail should be read as F.A.I.L. or first attempt in learning. Over the term I have spoken the students about these ideas on a number of occasions and it is nice to see some using this sort of language in their reflections. As a school we were able to give a Monday Meeting over to the discussion of Carol’s writing and talk of developing growth mindsets is spreading. It has been interesting to discuss this with parents and many have encountered the concept through their professional lives and are keen to share their perspective.

8. The Learner’s Way - This blog you are reading now has become a tool for reflection and engagement with educational ideas. One of my personal goals has been to post to this site on a weekly basis regardless of how busy the week may be. It has allowed me to share my ideas and those developed from the books and other blogs I read with an audience. Some of the more popular postings include one on Finland’s approach to handwriting, reflections on the idea that knowing is obsolete and the future of schools. A post made late last year documenting our eight years of experience with Personal Passion Projects was well received along with an article on Carol Dweck’s concept of growth mindsets. For me blogging has become a powerful tool for reflection and thinking about my teaching and teaching in general and is a strategy I recommend highly. 

9. An Excellent Team – I am blessed to work with a team of teachers willing to try new methods, to adopt new technologies and share their ideas and passions while critically reflecting on their practice. Teaching is easy when you are surrounded by people who genuinely care about the quality of learning that occurs in their classrooms and are eager to operate as part of a team. 

By Nigel Coutts

The future of Schools

Ask the average adult to describe a school and you are likely to get similar responses. There will be a focus on the places and spaces in which their education occurred, the teachers who taught, the rows of desks, the daily schedule of classes and breaks. They may reflect on the subjects they enjoyed and those they didn’t. If you asked the same question of your typical octogenarian the response would be similar and if you could travel back in time you would receive a similar response from those whose experience of school would not include electric light. It makes you wonder what makes a school and what might a school be like?

Karl Weick the organisational theorist wrote in 1976 an article titled ‘Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems’ in which he asks the questions ‘Why do all educational organisations look the way they do, and why do they all look the same?’ He suggests that the common structural and organisational elements in schools are not a result of the true task of education but a consequence of the certification and registration process. The implication being that if schools were designed to best serve their fundamental task they would look different and there would be differences between schools as a result of their intentions and purposes.

The unflattering description of the physical layout of most schools reveals much in common with factories. Raw product enters at one end, is acted upon through set processes and at the opposite end of the factory processed products exit ready for the workforce. Along the way the child learns how to fit into society, how to complete core tasks required for dutiful citizenship and is presented with the knowledge of content expected of an educated person. Pink Floyd’s gruesome portrayal of a school as a production line for humans resonated with its audience not only for its gore but also its metaphorical accuracy. Thankfully schools have a greater calling and are moving away from this archaic model.

The modern classroom is a space full of light and colour, with flexible furnishings and a degree of comfort not present in the classrooms many adults recall. Students are encouraged to take charge of the space and arrange its physicality to meet their needs. Design decisions are based around engagement, creativity, expression, imagination and an understanding of education as an active process that the student chooses to engage with. So important is the physical space that authors and architects for education OWP/P published a book titled ‘The Third Teacher’ as a tome for anyone wishing to enhance the effectiveness of their learning spaces. 

In this classroom you will likely find the teacher located somewhere amongst the students. The role of the teacher is transforming from the deliverer of content and enforcer of behavioural norms to one of facilitator of learning. Learning as an educational term is under re-evaluation as the profession and society considers what it means to learn. Once defined through connections to the recall of facts and the application of formulas and methods, learning is now seen through a wider lens. Learning is a process that you must learn to do, a process that involves imagination, problem finding, questioning, design thinning, collaboration, reflection and knowledge creation. The modern teacher is skilled in enabling dispositions, attitudes, habits of mind and thinking skills within their diverse learners. A successful lesson will be one that generates a new list of questions, not a set of answers. 

The students in this classroom are adept at asking questions but they do not expect easy answers and they do not rely on their teachers to be the source of their learning. They approach their learning with a sense of possibility and openness that the students in the Pink Floyd clip have had beaten out of them. They should experience a learning system that encourages creativity and prepares them for a world that will value them for their ability to find problems and solve them in unique ways.

What might the school day be like? The ever creative Finns are exploring a model of learning that does away with traditional subjects. Students instead of discretely studying mathematics or language will explore themes with opportunities to develop a wide mix of dispositions and skills around the exploration of central ideas. This model of themed learning is described as having more in common with how individuals learn outside of a school-based setting where they operate within a group to explore a set of closely linked ideas and find solutions to the problems they encounter along the way. Such a change will bring with it fundamental adjustments to the timetabling of the school day, the structure of schools around faculties and the compartmentalisation of knowledge that comes with this. The skill set of the art teacher, the mathematician, the scientist and the language specialist will be combined around a central theme with the students benefiting from the sharing of knowledge that this model creates as their teachers collaborate. 

If the process of modernising schools identifies a clear intent for schools with an equally clear model for how this is best achieved will schools still all look the same? Will a shift from schools as factories for the fodder of the industrial age workforce to a focus on the production of creative problem finders and solvers produce a greater variety of schools? Will Weick see a diversity of organisational structures? As we shift from the one-model fits all system of the past to a new model that celebrates flexibility and individuality will this be reflected by a diversity of school systems that follow? Will there be a common experience of school in the future or will the loosely connected structures, tasks, intents and people of a yet to be invented educational model centred on the networked individual even form an organisation that we can meaningfully refer to as a school?

By Nigel Coutts