Getting Engaged

I've been doing a lot of work (and writing) lately on engagement. Student Engagement is seen by most educators as the holy grail to improving student achievement - learning can't really happen without it.

Whilst the past decade has seen an overall improvement in standards, more recently the upwards performance trend has stalled. And it's widely felt that the tough accountability framework, which has been at the centre of all UK policy initiatives, has largely served to exacerbate disengagement. Whilst the current 'template' approach to teaching and learning (3-stage lesson plans et al) works well for some students, for others it has made lessons predictable and boring. Increasing numbers are voting with their feet, becoming truants and NEETs (not in Employment, Education or Training). Today's student is also acutely aware of the contrast between the learning environment of the classroom (where copying from the board is still the most regularly reported task, according to students¹) and their media-rich, socially-networked learning lives outside school.

I'm currently writing a pamphlet on Engagement for the Learning Futures programme - it should be out early in the New Year. You can get hold of it by going to the Learning Futures website and signing up for the newsletter.

1Ipsos MORI Survey of Secondary School Pupils, 2007

Posted via email from etc : education, technology and culture

We Are The People.....

Here's a good reason for buying the Guardian this Saturday 28th November  (as if you needed one). Given away free with the paper will be a DVD of probably the first serious  feature-length movie about education in decades. It's the product of a collaboration between Lord David Puttnam (ex-film producer and now one of the most knowledgeable men in education since his change of career) and Sir Michael Barber.
I haven't personally seen it yet, of course, but the trailer promises a serious 'inconvenient truth' applied to education. And David Puttnam is integrity personified. The PR company promoting the film  state:  Lord Puttnam) :  ' "We need to provide all of our young people with an education that motivates them to learn, and enables them to discover what they are good at. ‘We Are The People We’ve Been Waiting For’ is intended to act as nothing less than a wake-up call.”

By exploring some of the more innovative approaches to education around the world, the film offers a glimpse of the future. It shows how much more flexible, exciting and engaging learning could be for young people - and how our education system could support them in identifying and making the most of their individual talents.'

So, expect a no-punches-pulled, but highly informed, and passionate advocacy of radical reform in education. And if you're not living in the UK, you can see the movie, from next week, at its website.



--

'We Seek Engagement': Larry Rosenstock on What Makes Great Learning

'Why does parental anxiety about Maths peak around 8th or 9th grade?' 'Do you really need to know how to subtract polynomials?' 'Who's responsible for  2,000 kids in a High School? Somewhere between everybody and nobody'

How many great ideas about schooling can you fit into 10 minutes?

Click the video and find out for yourself.

Larry Rosnestock, CEO of the High Tech High Charter Schools in San Diego County, was special guest at the 2nd National Event for Learning Futures schools and their Headteachers. He talks, at great speed (it really is worth playing this a couple of times), about his own background, the founding philosophies and some of the challenges facing the  education system in trying to remain relevant in the 21st century. This is a 10 minute edit of a 90 minute session - more clips will be posted up on the Learning Futures website in due course.

Posted via email from etc : education, technology and culture

Never Trust A Futurologist....

The Huffington Post recently linked to Karl Fisch's though-provoking 'Did You Know?' presentation. I first saw this a couple of years ago, but it's now been updated to try to keep up with exponentiality (Is that a contradiction in terms? Is it even a word?

Whatever, once you've seen it, the inevitable (if somewhat cynical) conclusion could be: if someone tells you how it's going to look in the future, they don't know what they're talking about.....

Posted via email from etc : education, technology and culture

Has The Time Come For Experimental Models of Schooling?

There was a typically thoughtful/outspoken feature by Matthew Taylor in the Times Education Supplement last week. The piece was trailing the launch of 'Whole Education' the new (and somewhat obtuse) name for the Education Alliance formed by some UK charitable trusts and foundations. The piece claims that 'new battle lines are being drawn in anticipation of the election of a Conservative government, with a campaign planned to defend “progressive” education in the face of a predicted “back to basics” onslaught'. It feels as though Matthew has been mounting a one-man campaign warning of the dangers of an in-coming Conservative schools strategy for some time now. I've referred earlier to some of the more 'traditional' pronouncements by  Tory Shadow Education leader, Michael Gove, so it seems as though there is a clear 'battle' to be fought.

But what's this? It doesn't look to be as clear-cut as progressives v traditionalists: An unnamed Tory spokesperson repllying, said:  “We’ve said for three years that people like Matthew Taylor who want to set up new schools with experimental curricula should be campaigning for a Conservative victory because, unlike Ed Balls, we would not just let him do it but fund him to do it under our ‘Swedish schools’ policy.” (There's a thought - why not borrow someone else's education policies?) Is there a shift taking place in Conservative thinking which might present their direction as innovative rather than primitive?

It's becoming terribly confusing - education was one of the few areas where there seemed to be some clear blue water between to the two major parties. All of a sudden, experimental schooling models and innovation are de rigeur (it's not that long ago that they were outlawed on the 'guinea pig' principle).

Elsewhere in the TES, it's rumoured that Ed Balls is inching his way towards scrapping high-stakes national testing at the end of primary schooling. So, could it be that both sides are acknowledging that the 'progressives' could soon be pushing at an open door? And if so, could we learn from what seems to be working elsewhere, and find a way of bringing parents into the conversation?

Posted via email from etc : education, technology and culture

What Does It Profit A Man?

It was written all over his face at the final whistle. Thierry Henry knew that he'd done a bad thing. For me, it was a bit like finding out there was no Father Christmas. I've always been a great admirer of Henry. For my money, he's been the most talented player in the world for much of the past 10 years. And he's always struck me as a man of integrity. But I suspect that, not only will fans all around Europe  turn against him, but even his own countrymen might find it hard to revere him in quite the same way. The French people have always had a strong sense of fair play, and they can't be happy this morning.

Henry, according to this morning's L'Equipe  is passing the responsibility to the officials, admitting that the ball hit his hand (it looked more like he was juggling with it from where I was sitting...) but that he's not the referee. Well, perhaps.

But we not only remember the great acts of sportsmanship (think Paulo di Canio, Jack Nicklaus), we measure a man by the company he keeps. Thierry Henry - should he do a quick Google this morning - will see that he's in bed with  Maradona. Not a pleasant thought.
Give me the moral victory of the Irish any day.

Posted via email from etc : education, technology and culture

Tunis Symposium on Advocacy in Music Education

This photograph was taken shortly before the fight broke out at the World Music Forum, held in Tunis recently. And for once I was the peacemaker. Academics are not known for getting fiery, but this was a particularly lively session, kicked off by a provocation by Wayne Bowman challenging the blurring between education advocacy and education philosophy. It sounds a bit esoteric, but I think it's not. Here's an extract from the presentation Wayne made - I believe you could substitute almost any 'subject' in place of music:

"The advocate generally assumes and argues that things like music and music education are unconditionally good. But philosophical inquiry shows pretty unequivocally that musical engagements are not unconditionally good: they may harm as well as heal, subvert as well as advance the goals of education. Involvement in music does not automatically lead to desirable educational outcomes, and indeed, I would argue that the need for advocacy often arises precisely because of failure to deliver the discernible, functional benefits for which the music education profession exists. It becomes necessary to advocate when people cannot discern the tangible benefits of music making and music study; when they cannot see clearly how education makes students’ current and future lives clearly better; when they do not experience music as a vital cultural force. Both the validity and the persuasiveness of advocacy arguments depend upon particular musical and instructional practices—and ultimately upon the actions of specific individuals working in very diverse situations. I believe, therefore, that advocacy for music education should be undertaken judiciously, and locally, by the people responsible for delivering the goods. Far too often, advocacy claims are remote from what educators are actually attempting to do, “on the ground.” And all too often advocacy claims sound like last gasp efforts to defend instructional practices that have simply failed to keep pace with social and musical change."

There's a great deal of advocacy that takes place in arts education in North America - largely because they're always the first things to go when the curriculum or budgets get squeezed. But rarely do people advocate for changing the education on offer. As Wayne says some pedagogic practices are just not valued by kids - but there's an inherent conservatism comes over those who are seen as the flagbearers: teachers and parents. This gets writ large when an entire school is threatened with closure. Parents - who detested their own experience at the threatened school - will mobilise en masse to 'save our school'. Not change it, just save it.

But I'd argue that advocacy that's about arguing for change can be the most effective of all - that's what I think we were able to do with Musical Futures. We still defended kid's rights to access music education, but it had to be a better, and more relevant experience.

Posted via email from etc : education, technology and culture