Category: co-teaching

“I Used to Think, But Now I Know” -8 Ideas about Translanguaging and Language Development

“I Used to Think, But Now I Know” -8 Ideas about Translanguaging and Language Development

I’ve heard this word translanguaging tossed around a lot on Twitter and among educators, but, honestly, not only does its spelling baffle me but also what it looks like in education. Recently a colleague of mine presented a workshop on it which got me curious about what this elusive term could mean in classroom practice. So, I decided to include a book on it during My Summer Professional Reading for 2019 and by the time I was halfway through Translanguaging for Emergent Bilinguals: Inclusive Teaching in the Linguistically Diverse Classroom by Danling Fu and Xenia Hadjioannou, I knew I had to read more books on this topic.

Why? Because as I read the case studies, I realized that I knew so very little about the language development of bilingual and multilingual children. I also realized that I had a very limited perspective of their issues. You see, I, as a Caucasian American, grew up believing that English was a preferred language and was encultured to develop a bias of elitism which made any subsequent efforts to learn other languages half-hearted. This introspection was an illuminating and humbling experience, so I began picking up more books to fill in some gaps and help me understand what it means to truly be “culturally responsive“. There was one book, Teaching in 2 Languages: A Guide for K-12 Bilingual Educators, that contained a quote which really impacted my thinking around the connection between language and identity:

Technology can make report cards more personal, not less. (1).png

As a person who grew up in an all-English-speaking home, attending a monolingual American school, I’ve never had to grapple with how my home language and culture was viewed by others. But now I can easily see how other’s view of our language can impact our self-esteem. For example, I remember when English-Only became a legislative act in the state of Arizona (a state that borders Mexico). At the time, I hadn’t seen the harm in it, but now I know that banning the use of other languages in school was like rejecting the immigrants and multi-lingual persons which populated that state, who were mostly Mexican. As a teacher, it had huge consequences in our classrooms, and bilingualism became a dirty word.

Of course, the opposite of this is also true: if you really want to show me that you care, love my language. As an international educator, I have had a unique opportunity to live and learn a variety of languages and been exposed to a myriad of cultures. When I read the poet’s words above, it hit me deeply, remembering back to moments when a simple hello in a child’s home language made them light up with a smile of recognition. Now I know that smile said, “You see me. You love me.”, which was true, but I had undervalued this gesture, thinking that it was rather superficial. Now I know it communicated a message of acceptance and care.

Technology can make report cards more personal, not less. (2)It makes sense that language is so deeply connected to self-worth because it not only reflects the values and perspectives shared with and among those language groups, but the self-expression of that child. Language communicates thinking through culture; and when we accept the use of a variety of languages being used in our classrooms, we accept that our students are woven together by a complex tapestry of experiences that can be expressed in a multitude of ways; denying them the use of their complete language repertoire is like rejecting their ideas and perspectives.

These books really stirred my heart and got me thinking about how important language is to our school’s culture and in the development of the self-esteem and personal identity of children. It’s not a small topic, but a big deal.

These are my 8 takeaways from my reading and the ideas that widened my understanding of translanguaging and the language development of children.

  1. Different languages are not contained in different parts of the brain. Multi-lingual children have access to all components of language facility during learning. So when we think of terms of “Spanglish” or “Chinglish”, we shouldn’t associate it with a lack of English competency, but instead demonstrating how holistic the nature of language is in our brain.
  2. Translanguaging is not the same as translation. Translanguaging is about empowering students to access language in order to grow their whole intellectual and social facilities and develop cognitively. Translation helps to serve this purpose but is not the end goal. We want students to integrate the understanding that exists in both languages, not preferring one language over the other.
  3. Language confusion is a misnomer. Multilingualism is an enhanced way of viewing and interacting with the world. What we think of as “language confusion” is actually us observing children in the process of integrating and experimenting with language; students are building bridges of networks in their brains, rather than tangling up their neurons. In fact, code-switching (the practice of moving back and forth between two languages) serves different purposes based upon the learner. So, code-switching is a deeply personal experience, and, as educators, we should consider what is being communicated vs. how it is being communicated in order to that we understand how best to support the learning needs of our students.
  4. Certain content areas require more skillful use of a child’s language repertoire and cultural background. I think most of us can appreciate that inquiry-based approaches utilize the scope of a child’s cognitive ability, particularly when language doesn’t create barriers during an active learning experience in which they are constructing conceptual understanding. However, social studies can be the most challenging of the content areas because it requires not only language skills to understand the abstract nature of vocabulary and concepts, but also highly influenced by the background knowledge and experience of the student. According to Sharon Adelman Reyes and Tatyana Kleyn, models such as Sheltered Immersion are more useful for students who have intermediate language capabilities; for emergent students, we need to provide learning resources in their home language in order to gain a full understanding and to bridge together their cultural dispositions with their prior knowledge and the learning within the classroom.
  5. Content objectives are not the same as language objectives. Although learning content may also call for learning the vocabulary associated with it, there is also an opportunity for a multi-lingual to use their language repertoire which included previous experience and terminology from their home language. For example, when learning content, students can use any of their languages to access information and gain a deeper understanding. So, if it makes sense to give them a book in Korean (or whatever is their mother tongue) about lifecycles because you want them to understand how living things change over time, that is perfectly fine to do so. Learning in their home language is adding not subtracting from their intellectual reservoir. However, if the lesson is specific to language, then outcomes need to be centered around the skills associated with developing fluency in it.
  6. Translanguaging involves the 5 Cs  (communication, culture, connections with other disciplines, comparisons with students’ home language and culture, and the use of the foreign language in communities outside the classroom) for a holistic learning approach. Translanguaging encompasses more than just instructional practices, but also engaging the heart with the head of a child, in order to create an inclusive school culture and bridging the curriculum to the child’s experience.
  7. Graphic organizers aren’t the same as worksheets. Worksheets can often have a negative connotation. However, the purpose of graphic organizers isn’t to keep them busy but to help students clarify their thinking and can be necessary for multi-lingual students to access the full range of their language repertoire. We really need to integrate semantic maps (mind-mapping and conceptual maps) within lessons to combine visual and written information to accommodate the language needs of our students.
  8. There is a distinction between teaching a language and “special education”. Although language development could be dumped into the same category as “additional learning needs”, they are NOT the same. Moreover, an educator who is qualified in EAL (English as an Additional Language) or other second-language learning teachers, is not an expert with assessing and working with students with exceptionalities. Both are highly specialized fields and need to be treated as such.

These 8 ideas are really the beginning of getting a foothold into appreciating the complexity of language development. We need to stop this “English-only” approach in our schools because it does more harm than good when helping students to make academic progress and mature emotionally. Incorporating these ideas involves a comprehensive analysis of a school’s culture which can involve aspects such as language policies, parent education, teacher professional development and buying educational resources to create an optimal learning environment for our students. I know that I am just beginning to appreciate how connected culture and language is to our students’ identity, and plan to continue to study how it can be used at my school.

Perhaps you might consider areas in which your school can “grow the whole child” through languages other than English. Where would you start? Examining school and classroom libraries? Doing read-alouds in other languages? Auditing how and where multilingualism exists in your school? Encouraging more multilingualism, such as school and classroom displays that include other languages?

Once you start to brainstorm ideas, I’m sure you can find numerous ways in which you can employ language in the service of learning and building an inclusive culture within your school community. I hope this blog post whets your appetite and you dig deeper into the research and resources to create translanguaging in your school.

If you feel that I have forgotten some other essential aspects of translanguaging or have any resources that you wish to share, please post below. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful contribution.

 

 

 

 

 

Co-Teaching Wisdom: 4 Things That Are Worth Your Jelly Beans

Co-Teaching Wisdom: 4 Things That Are Worth Your Jelly Beans

Do you believe in coincidence? Sometimes I feel like the universe is conspiring on my behalf as if some unseen force can hear my silent thoughts rattling around in my head, and finding ways to provide me with answers or at least some nudges towards a better version of Me. This epiphany is compliments of one of my teaching teammates, my Grade 1 partner in crime, Pam Daly. It’s the Jellybean Philosophy. If you haven’t heard of it, please watch:

Why this resonates so much for me is that, as someone who has worked in highly collaborative schools, in which co-teaching is the norm, asking: “Is this “worth my jelly bean?” is so vital to developing and sustaining relationships, as well as keeping teams on track. When teams distill what is essential to their learning culture, then so much of the shaft can be removed from the wheat.

With that in mind, I feel that there are 4 critical areas that create a sound foundation for teamwork and collaboration. Spending time on these things are absolutely worth your “jelly beans” when developing strong teacher teams.

  1. Commit to the “We”
  2. Share a common language
  3. Generate unified goals
  4. Listen for the Voice of the Students

Commit to Being a “We”

There’s a great book that I highly recommend pedagogical leaders to read: The Power of Teacher Teams by Vivian Troen and Katherine Boles. It discusses the stages and strategies for building effective teaching teams. I think when teams are made explicitly aware that they’re in a very intimate relationship with one another, and the impact they make won’t be judged by one individual alone but by their combined efforts, I think this is an important perspective that should be made front and center. In the beginning, relationships are tenuous, but the sooner teams commit to getting along and growing strong together, the easier it will be to bring out the best and loving each other, warts and all.phil jackson And I know this sounds odd, but the sooner teams experience conflict or adversity, the better off they will be at developing clear communication and trust.

Although we’d like to be at our best 365 days a year, 7 days a week, the truth is we have difficult moments. We get distressing news, or a bad night of sleep or a toothache–some emotional or physical stress which makes it hard to teach at our highest levels. And when our patience is strained, our ingenuity is diminished, this is when we need to lean on each other; supporting one another through the ups and downs is really the tell-tale sign of a true team. As a team member, you can create an oath or vow to demonstrate a commitment to becoming “WE”. Here’s my really corny one:

I do solemnly swear to not be a jerk on purpose. And if I offend you in some way, please let me know so I can work to improve my communication and develop a caring relationship with you. Likewise, if you do or say something that upsets me, it is my responsiblity to communicate this feeling in a respectful manner so that I do not habor resentment towards you. Our relationship matters to me and most important, to our students.

I think if teams are grounded in a commitment to get along and be strong, assuming positive intention becomes a staple, and then people can approach each other with curiosity vs. judgment.

Share a Common Language

Feeling that there is equity in a relationship is huge, and one thing that can divide or bring a team together is our language. Now I’m not talking about how polite or eloquent we may speak, although that might be helpful, it is having a clear idea of what different pedagogical terms mean to one another. As someone who has worked in a myriad of educational contexts, I NEVER assume that my colleagues and I define terms in the same way because we come from different cultural perspectives and pedagogical backgrounds–even if we all share the same country on our passports! Here are some just a few terms that often need to be checked for shared understanding (no right or wrong here, by the way):

  • best practice
  • play
  • good writing
  • critical thinking
  • rubric
  • running records
  • formative assessment
  • inquiry-based learning
  • transdisciplinary
  • math terminology
  • learning outcomes/learning intentions/learning objectives
  • developmentally appropriate
  • parent communication
  • home learning

I often found that unpacking these commonly used terms helps to develop an appreciation and understanding of our influences and philosophies, helping teams to come into agreement and alignment, paving the way for fruitful collaboration and respectful interactions.

Generate Unified Goals

A couple years ago I read Phil Jackson’s book, Eleven Rings. I’m not a basketball fan, but I was immensely interested in how a coach develops teams with all those egos in one room. And if there is one thing that I took away from the book is that the desire to win can be overwhelming. Although we may not be amazing at layups and scoring 3-pointers, teachers are driven to make a difference and genuinely want to make a positive impact on student outcomes. We want to “win” too. That, in a nutshell, is the goal, right?–it’s what should unite us? So just like Phil Jackson worked to make his players masters at the “triangle offense”, I’d like to quote Todd Henry, teams need to master focus, function, and fire. Here are some suggested goals:

Focus: What needs our collective attention?

Our energy is a finite resource, so asking this question can generate consensus and ensure that we are driving in the same direction. Data always helps to facilitate these conversations.

Function: How can we use our planning time efficiently?

Setting goals for a co-planning session create a sense of purpose and make a big difference to the productivity levels of teams. Having an agenda and defining whose role it is to follow-up or follow-through on something is a highly effective tool to help teams become more collaborative and synergistic.

Fire: Why are we here?

Most of us care very deeply about the impact we make in schools. The “5 Whys” suggested by Simon Sinek can help inspire teams to determine their beliefs and purpose. When we are rooted in our purpose, it’s easy to be more authentic on our teams because our shared connections and values will be revealed. And this context helps us to see beyond our different cultures or training, recognizing that the heart of what we do is ultimately similar.

It also makes it easier to develop our professional growth goals as a team and support one another in becoming our best selves.  As long as we walk in the direction of that goal or goals, we are growing together and our collaboration will naturally deepen.

Listen for the Voice of the Students

Four ears are better than two. And how about six ears or eight ears?-Wow we are bound to hear the ideas and conversations that abound from our students! When we keep our senses on alert, we are bound to capture the understandings that are evolving which can guide decision-making.

collaboration.jpegAfter I spent the weekend with Margaret Maclean, I  have come to a greater appreciation for the need to have a perspective into our classrooms. Using protocols to capture what is happening in the classroom can be highly enlightening and lowers our threat of exposing personal vulnerabilities. There are several websites that offer protocols that can reveal ways that we can engage in deeper analysis of student learning. Using tools like protocols are helpful because it documents and funnels the evidence of student learning into productive discussions. Focusing on student learning is the most worthwhile “jelly bean” there is.

 

Our time is precious. Our time with our students even more so. We have to develop strategies and use tools to help us become effective and productive teaching team–not to mention happy ones. I hope these 4 ideas will help you to sort your “jellybeans” into meaningful moments and develop greater clarity of purpose with your teaching team. Please share below any other ideas that you feel are necessary to have strong teacher collaboration–I would love to hear it!

 

#EdLeadership: 3 “Bright Lines” That Help Support Co-teaching and Team Collaboration

#EdLeadership: 3 “Bright Lines” That Help Support Co-teaching and Team Collaboration

The days of the silos in education are phasing out. Inclusivity and collaboration are in, and co-teaching is becoming more of a common feature in our 21st-century classrooms. So how can educational leaders encourage creativity and cooperation? — by making it easy for groups of teachers and teams to come together to plan, create and collaborate. And how can we mitigate the friction and build a culture of openness where everyone feels empowered, engaged and inspired? I think the answer is bright lines. 

Bright lines?-I know what you are thinking–What the heck is she talking about?  Well, most of us take for granted the white or yellow lines that are painted on our roads. However, years ago, when cars began to become popular vehicles, that innovation made a tremendous impact on road safety – And whether you drive in Omaha, Nebraska or Jakarta, Indonesia, it helps drivers to maintain lane discipline, and avoid oncoming traffic and other potential hazards.I remember thinking that students should learn the way I taught- they should adjust to me. I could not have been more wrong. A great teacher adjust to the learner, not the other way around (1) But those line markings or “bright lines” can only serve their purpose if they can easily be seen by all road users, in all conditions. Okay, so hold onto that concept while I digress a moment …..

I think we can all agree and appreciate that ideas become amplified when groups of self-motivated people with a collective vision join together and dig into challenges. But Simon Sinek really expresses the conundrum that we face in teams:

There’s a paradox with being a human being. At all times, at every moment on every day, we are both individuals and members of groups. We are both responsible for ourselves and own happiness and our own joy, but, at the same time, we are members of multiple groups at every moment. And this produces some complications, we have to make decisions. So do we put ourselves first or do we put the group first? And there’s a debate: some people say you have to take care of yourself before you can take care of the group; and some say, “No, no, no!”, you take care of the group and that’s what helps take care of you.  And the answer is YES–it’s not one of the other. The answer is both, simultaneously.

Simon Sinek, #followthereader with Jay Shetty

Can you relate to the tug and pull on our emotions when we are involved in teams? I totally do! I think-How do I do ME and yet help become a better WE?

Well, the more I consider it, the more I feel that “bright lines” can create the boundaries you just can’t cross in a team so that the “I” and “We” can co-exist in harmony. These are non-negotiables that your team articulates that put you on the road to success (pun intended).  And perhaps the best way is for teams to identify the “bright lines” around their purpose, roles and goals.

Bright Line #1: Common Purpose

How often do you jump in your car (or any form of transportation) and just start driving? I bet most of the time you have a reason why you got into your car and a have a destination in mind.

Hmmm….. But how in our “Teacher back to school” week, do we just “jump in” and start “driving”, without cultivating connection, intention, direction, with WHY we come together, to begin with. We start planning our Week 1 without really getting to know each other. Sure, some teams may be given some team norms or encouraged to make some common agreements, but then we either race through that stuff or get caught up with surface level chit chat (ie: Do you have children? Oh you have a dog? That’s nice, I like dogs!), without developing understanding and trust with each other. In my mind, that is HUGE and makes a really big impact on the effectiveness of the team. We take each other’s philosophy and passions for granted, failing to find our common ground and connect the dots between our personal values and guiding principles that impact our practice. I’m not suggesting that knowing the basic information isn’t important and necessary, but I think that’s more of a whole staff icebreaker rather than a goal of our first team meeting.

Last year we had discussed bringing our team together to co-construct a team mission statement, but because it hadn’t been encouraged in the beginning and we didn’t have a framework, it slipped way to the bottom of our team “to do list”.  However, when team members became really ill and had extended periods of absence, I could definitely feel the loss of that opportunity because it would have helped all team members to know what direction we should take, as well as helping the absent members transition back onto the team. I will definitely make it a point next year, and I think these questions can really help out sculpt our shared mission/team statement together.

Individuals reflect on these questions, write them down, then share them with the group:

Intention: What am I committed to? Why does that matter to me?

Direction:  What do I think is the best of the “best practice”? Why do I feel that way? What is the impact I hope to make?

Connection: What is something that is important for me to feel safe and valued? What is something that really hurts my feelings or annoys me? What is something that I want to improve upon that I’d like support and encouragement with?

I think the questions about intention and direction can guide the collective team statement, while the last “connection” questions help to organically shape common team agreements.

To create change that lasts, we need to know what we stand for. -Simon Sinek-

Translating those answers into creating a common purpose really draws those bright lines around your collaborative efforts while developing your “standard operating procedures” for the team. And those questions are just one way to approach developing your team’s identity and purpose. But having that in place, in my mind, is foundational. Teams can’t be successful without having high-quality professional conversations.

Bright Line #2: Roles- Driving In Your Own Lane

I’ve heard it said that when you’re driving in your own lane, there’s no traffic and no speed limit.  I’m sure from the previous conversations that the “lane” in which a team member is going to drive in is becoming more obvious, but these questions can further tease out our concerns and passions.

Individuals ask these questions:

  1. What am I good at?
  2. What do I love?
  3. What does our group of learners need?
  4. What does our school need?
  5. How can I serve the needs of these learners?
  6. Is there something that I can do to serve the needs of the larger community?

Under poor leaders we feel like we work for the company.  With good leaders we feel like we work for each other. -Simon Sinek-

Focusing in on ourselves and then widening the lens helps everyone in the group to appreciate what a team member finds joy and excitement for; also we can take notice of each other’s unique perspective and start to develop synergy around commonalities in areas in which we can intersect and elevate each other. It also is a moment in which we can be authentically vulnerable and a natural trust and closeness for one another can develop. Sharing begets caring.

A footnote here: If we really want to amplify the vulnerability then we can have team members express what they would like to work on and/or what they would like to improve upon. This opens a door to peer-coaching. But, in this instance, when we are trying to understand our roles on a team, it’s best to avoid personal/professional goal setting–that’s for another meeting time when we are not painting bright lines.

Bright Line #3: Goals- What’s The Destination?

Once you have “painted” the bright lights around passion and purpose, goals naturally develop. Now, as I see it, there are at least 2 layers to this–there are interpersonal goals with team members and then there are student learning expectations that come about as a result of our cumulative efforts. With regards to team goals, I feel that having a positive projection is critical, as well as developing optimism and motivation for team members. So questions that could support this might be…

What do I think is the “best case scenario” for our team and what am I willing to do and/or contribute to the team to make this a reality? What guideposts or milestones might I see that would indicate that we have arrived or achieved our goal? 

At our school, we often refer to our rubric/continuum for collaboration that could direct these conversations. Here is what it looks like:levels of collaboration

goals spectrumBut I really love this concept of a success spectrum from Faster than 20, and I would like to advocate for this applying this tool to our schools because I think it develops greater teacher agency. Also, because it is so broad, not only could be used for team collaboration goals but for student learning impact goals as well. Plus, teachers could use this template for their personal professional goals; so in my mind, this is a very versatile and handy dandy tool.

As for student learning outcome goals, so often we rely on standardized test scores or using our learning outcomes to define our destination. But this data, when you think about it, is really 1-Dimensional. It doesn’t really address the needs of the WHOLE child, and it doesn’t examine the powerful dynamics that happen in the learning community. Yes, it’s important to review data on math and literacy from the previous year, but I would caution that as being the only data explored. However, it is a place to start to look at the overall composition of the cohort and consider how you might elevate their progress in your own grade level.

That being said, what are the kiddos that might need additional support and whose responsibility is it to ensure they grow? (Admittedly, all of us, right?–but sometimes it’s nice to have “eyes assigned” to specific students if you have a lot of students with additional learning needs so no one falls through the cracks.) Also, bright lines need to be developed how the team is going to track their growth. What tools and methods are you going to use to examine progress?  If progress isn’t made, then what steps will members make to help those students? If progress IS made, then how are we going to celebrate it?

In summary, here are the questions that teams need to ask to define student outcome goals?

  1. What do we know about this cohort?
  2. Who might need more support?
  3. What do we know about these students beyond the test scores?
  4. What data are we going to use to track growth?
  5. Who is going to be responsible for anecdotal evidence of growth?
  6. How often are we going to evaluate the needs of students?
  7. What might we do if growth is stagnating and who is responsible to assess this?
  8. What other goals can we set for our students, outside of academic progress? For  PYP schools, I think our focus should be on ATLs and the  Learner Profile.

Personally, I think none of these questions should be skipped or overlooked, even if the answers seem obvious. The point of this is to make explicit the what, who, how and when of goals so that there is nothing implied and hidden on the team with clear and effective communication.


Bringing together eclectic groups of educators and developing synergy between them is a real challenge. What we want to avoid is a team member suffering from feeling that their ideas are being marginalized or watered down,  feeling snubbed and personalizing the rejection, rather than understanding that it is the idea that is being challenged. This can lead to members experiencing loneliness and apathy, disengaging from collaboration rather than leaning into it. However, I think developing bright lines creates understanding and empathy for one another on a team which can circumvent some of these future personality issues and conflicts.

I know these ideas around bright lines are really a “first thinking” around how teams can reflect and reveal the perspectives, purpose, and passion of its members. The questions are meant to drill down and reflect on the needs of an individual and the needs of the group so that “I” and “we” can work harmoniously and simultaneously to meet the needs of the learners. What is important and vital is having structures that express the goals, roles, and responsibilities of each member so that respect and collaboration organically develop.  That is what effective leadership does on Day 1.

As I begin to think about the start of school, I look forward to deepening my understanding of how our team can connect and communicate more openly so that our team’s combined efforts can create amplified learning.

 

A Journey into Design Thinking to Tackle Classroom Challenges

A Journey into Design Thinking to Tackle Classroom Challenges

Design thinking isn’t a subject, topic or class. It’s more of a way of solving problems that encourage positive risk-taking and creativity.

-From LAUNCH by John Spencer and A.J. Juliani-

I am not proud to say this but I am really struggling with our school’s initiative to tear down classroom walls and combine classes to increase collaboration. I’m usually keen to try out new ideas but it’s made me question so many things about what is trending in education and has really made me “sharpen my stone” when it comes to classroom management.  But here’s the thing, I don’t want to ‘manage’ the students, I want to empower them. So I wonder what I am missing –how can I use this structure and type of learning to fulfill the needs of our 21st-century learners? How will this better prepare them for their future?  George Curous says “Change is an opportunity to do something amazing“. So I’ve taken on my innovator’s mindset and have begun to apply design-thinking to build a better functioning learning environment.

In Design Thinking, initially, you seek to understand your “audience” or the “user” and define the problems that they may have.  Currently, we have two perspectives to consider: our students and our team of teachers. Collectively we are a community of learners, but it’s important to put the needs of the children first–they are the reason why we are here anyway, right?!  But as teachers, we are the facilitators of this change, so I think our focus will ultimately be on the big WE, and cannot carve ourselves out of the equation when developing a flourishing community of learning.

user experience.jpg
The journey begins! What does our community of learners need? Why? How does it make them feel?!

Because this is the research and discovery phase, I am really digging into books and articles to find ways to make this work–not that we survive but to thrive in such an environment, and turn this challenge into an opportunity.

So I’ve begun to approach our situation through the lens of curiosity and ask questions about the challenges that are most immediate and pressing. As teachers, we have three main areas of concern: time for learning, the organization of the learning space, and conducting effective and engaging classroom discussion (in the large group and in small groups with our noisy space). Here is a list of just some of the questions I have begun to formulate about our collaborating Grade 1 classes:

  1. How can we structure our timetable to ensure that we have enough stand-alone literacy, maths and then transdisciplinary unit time?
  2. Of those transdisciplinary subject areas, how best do we need to develop the knowledge and skills in that areas?-in the “large group” (both classes combined) or in “split groups” (separated grade 1 classes) or through a carousel of activities.
  3. How do individual voices get heard in all the “noise”? What tools and strategies do we need to employ to make sure that there is a diversity of ideas being shared, especially our English Language Learners?
  4. How can we use our space to design areas, not just for literacy and maths, but for genuine collaboration, creativity, and quiet?
  5. What gets the kids not just “doing stuff” but actually thinking and reflecting?
  6. And how do we develop strong relationships with our students, knowing about who they are and how they learn best? What feedback systems can we create to help them go from learning passively to actively engaging and ultimately being empowered?

Although I know that we have already begun a rough “prototype” with how we tackle these challenge areas, I recognize that we need more time to understand our learners, our constraints and what the research says about developing more collaborative learning environments, which some have dubbed as Modern Learning Environments (MLE). 

desing evolved
From the wonderful website: http://corbercreative.com/the-ux-process/

So as I layer the designer mindset to frame our challenges, I recognize that we will need to actually get more data. If I am to rewind and start again, then our discovery phase requires a deeper analysis into the complexities of our learners and the needs of our community. Other than our co-planning meetings and daily reflections, I have 2 other ideas for mining some data:

  1. Student survey: we need to find other ways to include their student ideas so they are co-designers of our learning community. In the book, The Space: A Guide for Educators  , the authors encourage including student voice to create a purpose for the learning spaces and cultivate behaviors that support their emotional and mental growth. I am thinking of using the formative assessment app Plickers for a general climate survey and then work on interviewing students either individually or in small groups to get their feedback and input on how we can improve the learning.
  2. Fly on the Wall-I would like to ask some staff members, including administrators, to just pop in and make objective observations. I am thinking about making a questionnaire as a framework for their drop-ins, but I’m also really curious about them just capturing some conversations that they hear–what is the “talk” in the classroom?

As I begin to dive into our data, I will be sure to share some of the results. Truthfully, I’ve always thought about design thinking as something that you introduce when doing project-based learning and never thought to use it in this context, so I’m exploring new territory.  I am really keen to hear other people’s stories and ideas about how I can go deeper. What am I missing? What suggestions do you have?

When “Me” Changes to “We”: 6 Things to Consider With Teacher Collaboration

When “Me” Changes to “We”: 6 Things to Consider With Teacher Collaboration

When I arrived at Vientiane International School, the primary school classroom walls were taken down either altogether or partially during the summer. This left no choice for teachers to figure out how they might manage this open concept idea. Would teachers coexist, cooperate or collaborate? How would they approach this new initiative by admin and how would they manage this new relationship to sharing their “teacher territory” with their peers? These were looming questions that began our teacher prep week at VIS and the context for the ideas I share.

Let’s be clear, there is a big difference between “coexisting”, “cooperating” and “collaboration”,  so I’d like to dissect these terms.

collaborateCoexisting in a space means that you both “live” there and tolerate each other and are friendly, but you are doing your own thing. Cooperating means that you are developing a relationship with another person because it is mutually beneficial to do so;  on occasion, you plan something together or share resources on a needs-based basis. Collaborating means that you co-labor together, working together toward a common goal, which could be done in parallel with each other, in supporting roles or as a tag team. It is a very powerful model for learning but it’s not an easy one to pull off and takes some time to develop a strong working relationship with the team of teachers.

According to the work of Ochan and Bill Powell,  there are 6 things that need to be considered and agreed upon before teachers begin to embark upon this professional journey:

  1. Roles and responsibilities: Figure out who is going to take the lead in what learning area. What systems and routines do you want to use in the classroom?
  2. Attitudes:  Assess what philosophies and practices you share in common. What can you agree upon?  How can you share joint-ownership for the students and the learning space?
  3. Planning: What are you going to plan together? What are you going to plan on your own? How will you share your planning with each other?
  4. Delivery of Instruction: How is the learning going to look? Will it be done in large or small groups? What will the groupings be based upon and what model of collaboration will you employ?
  5. Assessment of Student Learning: What tools and procedures will be in place to evaluate student progress? Who is assessing what students and how frequently will this be done? Where will these assessments be kept and how can team members access them?
  6. Evaluation and Reflection on the Learning:  How can teachers provide feedback on the effectiveness of the learning? How frequently will this be done and in what format? What norms must be established so that feedback is seen as a positive habit of reflection?

Looking at these 6 areas for collaboration, you can imagine the level of candidness and trust that is involved with teachers. You have to think collaboratively so you must find ways in which your ideas intersect with one another in order for mutual respect to be developed. You may not agree with everything but if you can articulate what is non-negotiable and develop shared values, then your team can rally around that.  You have to find the opportunities to connect and identify with each other so that a positive working relationship can start to form, as you begin to see the classroom as “ours” and not “my”.

As I start to begin this process with an unfamiliar group of teachers, it does seem a bit daunting to “nail this” straightaway. Our PYP Coordinator, Chad Walsh,  has really challenged us to examine our willingness towards collaboration. Just today my Grade 1 partner reminded me to not call one side of our space as “my” and “your” room and instead refer to it as “literacy” area and “maths” area.  I appreciated this gesture but it made me very aware that my thinking and language will definitely need to refine as we undergo this transformation. But the willingness and eagerness to try something new are shared by all the members, which makes this effort so much easier. As long as we work on these 6 areas, I know that we will reach the highest levels of collaboration.

What do you think is the most important area to focus on first as you develop collaboration between staff?

Verified by MonsterInsights
Verified by MonsterInsights