One of my senior managers gave me this when he was clearing out some files. Thought the blogosphere might like it too:
The Perfect Principal
A Principal must be a democrat, an autocrat, a diplomat, a doormat and a coolcat.
They must be able to entertain Director-Generals of Education, assistant secretaries, Deputy-Directors of Education, superintendents of Education, Councillors, teachers, parents and members of the Constabulary.
They have to settle arguments and fights. They must be a qualified solicitor, psychologist, clergyman, architect, supervisor, doctor, nurse, gardener, cleaner and on some occasions have some expertise in the role of sanitary contractor both in the literal and metaphorical sense.
They must always look immaculate when imbibing at end of term celebrations. They must allow their staff to reach maximum capacity but never reach the same happy state themselves.
They must be on the student’s side, the parent’s side, the teacher’s side, the Superintendent’s side, the Teacher’s Union side, the Progressive teacher’s side and the Ministry of Education’s side but never on their backside.
To be successful they must be able to handle irate parents, insane parents, hysterical overworked teachers (and support staff), the Ministry of Education, fellow principals and ERO officers.
To sum up they must be inside, outside, offside, glorified, sanctified, crucified, stupefied, cross-eyed and if they are the strong silent type, they can be deified.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
Motorvatin' over the hill
I recently read some interesting comments on student motivation to succeed at their NCEA studies. It came from the New Zealand Ministry of Education (I hope you were sitting down) in a summary report titled, snazzily, "Motivation and Achievement at Secondary School". It may have past you by.
This bit on external influences on achievement grabbed my attention -
This bit on external influences on achievement grabbed my attention -
Students who do small amounts of part-time work, sport or other extracurricular activities show higher motivation and achievement patterns than students who do not participate in these activities or who do so more than 10 hours weekly.Okay it's not earth shattering but when it's added to the following little nugget it provides some encouragement:
Whereas achievement in Year 11 (in 2005) was a significant predictor of achievement in Year 3 (in 2007), positive motivation orientations added significantly to the accuracy of prediction of future achievement. Motivation orientations were better predictors of total credits achieved two years later than predictions made solely on credits attained in previous years.So, students can significantly build on their success at level 1 (and improve their success at level 2 and 3) by improving their motivation. This can be done by:
- Working towards a merit or excellent endorsement,
- Improving their relationships with teachers,
- Being involved in sport or other extra-curricular activities and,
- Getting some part-time work.
This is a good message I think. It encourages students to aim higher and be more involved in wider than study activities. Seems that old saying 'all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy' has some life to it yet.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Of (brick) walls and bridges
The academic brick wall that all students have in their school diary becomes a critical aid to success at this time of the year. It's a grid that allows our students to see at a glance how many credits they have towards an NCEA qualification and just as importantly - how many they have to go to reach their target. Each brick in the wall is worth one credit. Students shade in the bricks as they gain credits towards Level 1 or 2 or 3.
If you're a parent of our students reading this - please ask to see the academic brick wall. Then discuss how many potential credits there are to be gained in external examinations or in the remaining few weeks of the academic year.
Next week, during our Options Day, students in years 10 to 12 will be selecting their probable courses for next year (students in years 9 and 13 will not have timetabled classes on this day). The focus on this day is to plan for 2010 and to remind students that they need to gain success in 2009 to create the bridge to the courses they want to do next year. You were probably wondering how I was going to fit 'bridges' in weren't you?
I am keen that students think backwards from their chosen career/job or further education. For instance if you are in Year 11 and you want to become a nurse you will need to think about subjects you need in level 3 NCEA, then level 2 NCEA and finally in level 1 NCEA.
With this in mind Options Day also doubles as a careers intensive day for our Year 11 students. A number of visitors, as well as our guidance network, will be guiding students during the day.
If you're a parent of our students reading this - please ask to see the academic brick wall. Then discuss how many potential credits there are to be gained in external examinations or in the remaining few weeks of the academic year.
Next week, during our Options Day, students in years 10 to 12 will be selecting their probable courses for next year (students in years 9 and 13 will not have timetabled classes on this day). The focus on this day is to plan for 2010 and to remind students that they need to gain success in 2009 to create the bridge to the courses they want to do next year. You were probably wondering how I was going to fit 'bridges' in weren't you?
I am keen that students think backwards from their chosen career/job or further education. For instance if you are in Year 11 and you want to become a nurse you will need to think about subjects you need in level 3 NCEA, then level 2 NCEA and finally in level 1 NCEA.
With this in mind Options Day also doubles as a careers intensive day for our Year 11 students. A number of visitors, as well as our guidance network, will be guiding students during the day.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Reasons to be cheerful part 4
In my previous post I explained how the status quo industrialised version of education needs revolution. I mentioned Ivan Illich's book 'Deschooling Society'. Here is another excerpt:
The current search for new educational funnels must be reversed into the search for their institutional inverse: educational webs which heighten the opportunity for each one to transform each moment of his/her living into one of learning,sharing, and caring.
So what of these 'educational webs'? Clearly we (and by 'we' I mean
educational institutions in general) have made a tentative start - the interweb
has potential with elearning (electronic learning). So does video-conferencing.
So does distance learning. So does mlearning (mobile learning). But so far it's
been piecemeal and on a very small scale and really limited and, for various
reasons, hasn't challenged our industrial status quo at all. For instance there
is a tension in my school between appropriate use and inappropriate use of
technologies. There is also a tension between advising students on distance
learning/video-conferencing and allowing them the freedom of choice.
Anyway this doesn't feel revolutionary. And what about the good bits of
what we offer? The subject specialists, the facilities and resources? Do we junk
all of that? Well no, we don't. Illich again:
A good educational system should have three purposes: it should provide all who want to learn with access to available resources at any time in their lives;
empower all who want to share what they know to find those who want to learn it from them; and, finally, furnish all who want to present an issue to the public
with the opportunity to make their challenge known.
So... we need a smarter way of freeing up our tight control of timetables and classes and the other aspects of the industrial model that I wrote about last time, while providing access to available resources, empowerment to teachers and learners, and an opportunity of expression (imagination is more important than information - so said Einstein!).
Yep fine (apart from it being a really long sentence). But what?
Last year I heard an address by Patrick Duigan. He talked about the concept of “learning spaces” which is heavily influenced by technology and gave an example of a development by a company in Sydney called LandLease who are developing 10 x 30,000 home communities in Western Sydney where schools are being reconfigured into “learning communities”. The entire community is to be networked and businesses who want to be involved have to sign on to be part of that “learning community”.
Blended learning seems an exciting prospect to me. Here's a brief description of it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_learning
This aligns with some aspects of experimental Canadian schools that I heard about at a SPANZ conference in 2008. Students, in these schools, arrive in the morning and select their day's programme from a menu of courses placed around the school. They then attend tutorials that incorporate 'face-to-face' sessions with access to other technologies. Teachers are called 'facilitators'.
This is the inquiry model at work. No industrialised classes in rows. What it does do is place the responsibility for learning squarely on the learner. Hallelujah!!
Monday, August 17, 2009
The assembly line
I recently wrote about my hope that education can break away from our 19th/20th century industrial model via a revolution of ideas.
Okay - I'd like to expand on this during this post. But first - a revolution requires knowing which way we want to go.
This exchange between Alice and the Cheshire Cat sums up our situation in 2009:
I know which way I wish to go - away from the old industrial model which has so far lasted in New Zealand schools until the present day, and towards the complete delivery of an inquiry model (that actually is the basis of our new New Zealand Curriculum document).
Basically I want to get away from this picture presented in a 1947 training film but which could have been filmed today. Take a look, even if it's just for a few minutes.
What we have currently is this industrial model: desks in production rows, the teacher as oracle at the front dispensing information, conformity and obedience, a rigid timetable structure of discreet subjects, age determined class cohorts, uniform criteria for success, standardised curricula, and therefore students without focus. Look familiar?
The industrial model, which emerged in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, aimed to improve efficiency and to prepare young people for factory jobs requiring repetitive tasks. As a consequence, intended or not, the industrial model tended to preserve the status quo. The industrial model was further characterized by strict rules and regimented behavior, identical curricula and expectations for all students, and an emphasis on basic skills of literacy and numeracy.
Clearly we no longer need to prepare young people for factory jobs exclusively, just as we no longer need to prepare them to become university professors exclusively. Why then do we preserve the status quo model of education?
Standing in contrast is the inquiry model of education, in which learning is active, social, contextual, continuous, and holistic. It requires pedagogies of engagement, learning designs that connect students to knowledge-making activities and to one another, critical thinking, adaptability, creativity, multi-age classes, authentic/diverse assessment practices, teacher as facilitator and co-learner.
Basically, I think we need to revisit a text I had to read at university in 1977 Ivan Illich's Deschooling Society. Some of his messages have stayed with me. This for instance:
I don't understand what he meant by "being 'with it' ", but I certainly agree with him about the need for a "meaningful setting".
I'll try an explore what these meaningful settings may be over some upcoming posts.
Sources: Christine H. Leland and Wendy C. Kasten, “Literacy Education for the 21st Century: It's Time to Close the Factory,” Reading and Writing Quarterly, vol. 18 (2002), p. 13.
Okay - I'd like to expand on this during this post. But first - a revolution requires knowing which way we want to go.
This exchange between Alice and the Cheshire Cat sums up our situation in 2009:
Alice - Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here
Cat - That depends a good deal on where you want to get to
Alice - I don't much care where
Cat - Then it doesn't matter which way you go
I know which way I wish to go - away from the old industrial model which has so far lasted in New Zealand schools until the present day, and towards the complete delivery of an inquiry model (that actually is the basis of our new New Zealand Curriculum document).
Basically I want to get away from this picture presented in a 1947 training film but which could have been filmed today. Take a look, even if it's just for a few minutes.
What we have currently is this industrial model: desks in production rows, the teacher as oracle at the front dispensing information, conformity and obedience, a rigid timetable structure of discreet subjects, age determined class cohorts, uniform criteria for success, standardised curricula, and therefore students without focus. Look familiar?
The industrial model, which emerged in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, aimed to improve efficiency and to prepare young people for factory jobs requiring repetitive tasks. As a consequence, intended or not, the industrial model tended to preserve the status quo. The industrial model was further characterized by strict rules and regimented behavior, identical curricula and expectations for all students, and an emphasis on basic skills of literacy and numeracy.
Clearly we no longer need to prepare young people for factory jobs exclusively, just as we no longer need to prepare them to become university professors exclusively. Why then do we preserve the status quo model of education?
Standing in contrast is the inquiry model of education, in which learning is active, social, contextual, continuous, and holistic. It requires pedagogies of engagement, learning designs that connect students to knowledge-making activities and to one another, critical thinking, adaptability, creativity, multi-age classes, authentic/diverse assessment practices, teacher as facilitator and co-learner.
Basically, I think we need to revisit a text I had to read at university in 1977 Ivan Illich's Deschooling Society. Some of his messages have stayed with me. This for instance:
Most learning is not the result of instruction. It is rather the result of
unhampered participation in a meaningful setting. Most people learn best by
being 'with it', yet school makes them identify their personal, cognitive growth
with elaborate planning and manipulation.
I don't understand what he meant by "being 'with it' ", but I certainly agree with him about the need for a "meaningful setting".
I'll try an explore what these meaningful settings may be over some upcoming posts.
Sources: Christine H. Leland and Wendy C. Kasten, “Literacy Education for the 21st Century: It's Time to Close the Factory,” Reading and Writing Quarterly, vol. 18 (2002), p. 13.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
To a worm in horse radish the world is horse radish.
Lately, I've been watching a lot of the 'TED talks' presentations instead of watching TV (sharp intake of breath). There is some excellent stuff on http://www.ted.com/ and I've only touched the surface.
There was nothing on after Coronation Street last night so I read an article in the Guardian Weekly about Malcolm Gladwell. He's the author of one of my favourite books "The Tipping Point'. I was interested to learn that he's a hit on the speaking circuit in the UK. His presentation on spaghetti sauce was mentioned in the article, so I googled that and low and behold it was on TED. At its conclusion a list of other talks came up and my attention was drawn to Sir Ken Robinson's presentation on how education destroys creativity. It was brilliant! And got me thinking, again, about the world's wholly inappropriate industrialised style of education.
I mentioned the talk to my English class and they debated this idea for a bit. Actually they didn't debate it at all, because they were unanimous in their belief that their creativity was not acknowledged and as students they were being processed through the school system in an inappropriate way (not exactly their words, but certainly their feeling). They asked to see the talk and loved it when I showed it to them.
I think we're long overdue a change of delivery. I can sense some subtle shifts with the expanding employment of technology but we need something revolutionary. Sadly, I don't see it on the horizon.
There was nothing on after Coronation Street last night so I read an article in the Guardian Weekly about Malcolm Gladwell. He's the author of one of my favourite books "The Tipping Point'. I was interested to learn that he's a hit on the speaking circuit in the UK. His presentation on spaghetti sauce was mentioned in the article, so I googled that and low and behold it was on TED. At its conclusion a list of other talks came up and my attention was drawn to Sir Ken Robinson's presentation on how education destroys creativity. It was brilliant! And got me thinking, again, about the world's wholly inappropriate industrialised style of education.
I mentioned the talk to my English class and they debated this idea for a bit. Actually they didn't debate it at all, because they were unanimous in their belief that their creativity was not acknowledged and as students they were being processed through the school system in an inappropriate way (not exactly their words, but certainly their feeling). They asked to see the talk and loved it when I showed it to them.
I think we're long overdue a change of delivery. I can sense some subtle shifts with the expanding employment of technology but we need something revolutionary. Sadly, I don't see it on the horizon.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Alumni, Stephen Hawking AND Noam Chomsky
Alumni
Last week I spent a very pleasant evening attending a meeting of our 'old pupils' association'. Mr Gary Vincent is the chair of this association of former Stratford High School students (they were called pupils in the old days). The meeting was at his house and we were there planning the next reunion of former students. Every five years a committee from the association plans a reunion. It's a great idea and is very popular.
The evening made me think about a number of things:
Last week I spent a very pleasant evening attending a meeting of our 'old pupils' association'. Mr Gary Vincent is the chair of this association of former Stratford High School students (they were called pupils in the old days). The meeting was at his house and we were there planning the next reunion of former students. Every five years a committee from the association plans a reunion. It's a great idea and is very popular.
The evening made me think about a number of things:
- All of the students who have passed through SHS in the last 100 plus years and where they've gone;
- How our school is such a focal point in people's lives in the Stratford district;
- How one's school years generally are so much a fabric of our individual lives - even after 30, 40 or 50 years;
- Reunions that I've attended in the past at Mount Albert Grammar School (I was a student during the 50th in 1972 and a staff member for the 75th).
- The old friends network that I belong to;
- The communication spread that is possible these days;
- and what a nice cup of tea Gary made - really nice fragrance to it...
If you haven't seen the old friends site - here are the details: http://www.oldfriends.co.nz/ . There are over 1 million members now in New Zealand and more are added every day. That's impressive.
Stephen Hawking AND Noam Chomsky
I recently had a look at a couple of interesting websites and was shocked to realise that at a click of a button I could email Stephen Hawking AND Noam Chomsky. Yipes!! My finger quivered at the thought. I'm not sure why I haven't considered this possibility before, but imagine emailing either of these giants of the academic world. What on earth would you say?? While you consider that thought here are those sites: http://www.academia.edu/#/Universities/Cambridge_University/Departments/Applied_Mathematics_and_Theoretical_Physics for Stephen Hawking (The warning on his website - please bear in mind that it may take a while for you to receive a response and that due to the severe limitations that Stephen works under and the huge amount of mail he receives, he may not have time to respond - S.W.Hawking@damtp.cam.ac.uk ) and if you feel brave enough here is Mr Chomsky's contact chomsky@mit.edu
I don't know about you but...WOW. This is amazing! All thanks to the http://www.academia.edu/ website. Please let me know how you got on if you do make contact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)