In search of excellence...

Still on that journey, huh? Anyway, I didn't (don't?) want this blog to be anything other than a look at evidence gathering in the "new" curriculum. However there are issues impacting on us as teachers which, I think, will directly affect how the curriculum is delivered.

If one of the key notions of ACfE is the integration of different curricular areas in order to enliven and enrich the experience for learners (it is a key notion, right?) then it strikes me as fairly obvious that the approach teachers take to both introducing and teaching subjects - and/or teaching across the curriculum - will be central to the way in which that information (or that "experience") is interpreted and subsequently utilised by the pupils.

Phew. Long winded way of saying something I said before. Ho hum.

Back to the point: basically I agree with and endorse - not that he needs it - the ideas of Richard Bailey with regards to the notion of learning as problem solving. It strikes me now, having been both teacher and, in a previous life, sports coach that if you have no need for the learning experience then you're going to take very little from it. In other words, if there is no "problem" to be solved then why are you learning decontextualised solutions?

Professor Bailey put this into context with the simple analogy of a traditional basketball drill: the chest pass. Two rows of participants, firing off passes to a partner with the possible reward of a game at the end. Loads of perfect chest passes result. Along comes the game. The ball rarely makes its target. "Stop, stop, stop!" exhorts the bewildered coach. "Why aren't you passing like I showed you?" "Oh," say the players, "So that's why we were doing it..."

I've heard him speak before and one of his books is the core text on the PE course but it doesn't stop the cringe inducing feeling of "whoops - think I've done that in class" every time he makes this sort of analogy. The key question, though, as a reflective practitioner must be "how can I use this notion in class?" I've found the answer lies in keeping things simple. I ask myself a question when planning an activity, a lesson or a topic: what use will doing this activity/practice/scenario be to the children. If an answer's not immediately forthcoming which doesn't involve contrivance on a massive scale then I think of another activity/practice or scenario which will be.

Reading that back I realise I've made that sound like a lot of work for myself - and anyone else adopting such an approach. But it isn't really, and its value can't be overstated. Time is so precious, I think it pays to ask oneself, "Am I wasting mine and that of my pupils by doing this?"

Interesting "what's this learning malarkey all about?" type link.

"Call for major education shake up..."

What, another one?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7135889.stm

This really is depressing stuff...surely ACfE is attempting to address some of these issues or perhaps I've completely misinterpreted it? It's late and I'm tired - lots of panto practice at school at the moment! - so I'll not spend long on this for the moment, suffice to say that whilst I appreciate (notice I didn't say "think it's right") that people will always look for results and some level of accountability as a measure of teaching and learning, I'd have to question the need for yet more "shake ups" and "initiatives."

When does one get the chance to interact and learn with one's class if one is spending time 'firefighting' paperwork? Just a thought...

Ah, but is it really schoolwork?

That seems to be one of the main questions asked about the new Curriculum for Excellence when parents and the like find out about some of the "non-traditional" things their children are doing in - and out of - class.


Without waffling on about the Four Capacities of ACfE, I think it's fair to say that it presents some challenges for teachers in terms of how we can assess the learning that's taking place. Indeed, it's also fair to say that it presents challenges - and opportunities - in terms of thinking about what we need to assess.


The idea of assessing what we value and valuing what we assess must surely be one of the guiding principles in designing so-called "experiences" for learners in school.

The new curriculum challenges many preconceived ideas about what is taught and how it is taught. Debates rage around "style over content" and questions will be heard in many a staffroom about whether or not any of this is actually teaching the children anything.


I would argue that this is surely the very point of the exercise - are we really trying to teach them "things" (facts, processess, procedures, etc) or are we trying to empower them to think for themselves and take control of their own learning?


This could easily be dismissed by saying "of course it's about empowerment...give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day but show him how to fish..." etc, etc. However, there will always be those who will - rightly - contend that the basics (whatever they may be deemed to be depending on the school/local authority/political climate) must be in place before you can do anything else.


Quite. But who says that once the foundations are in you have to build all the houses in the same way? To stretch a building analogy, I think that ACfE should have Grand Designs for all learners; I hope to look in this blog at some of the ways in which I try to challenge the children in my class, to empower them, to value each and every individual contribution on its own merits and to give my take on some of the ways I think we can gather evidence of what's useful or not.