Tag: collaborative planning

Press Start, Pause or Stop? 3 Ways We Can Approach Launching a Unit of Inquiry

Press Start, Pause or Stop? 3 Ways We Can Approach Launching a Unit of Inquiry

Bewildered by my outburst, my sleeping dog popped up her head and twitched her ears when I giggled out a “hmmm”.  But I couldn’t help it. I was so immersed in a recording of the Town Hall discussion with fellow Google Trainers. They asked a question about concept testing that made me make a connection with a recent topic that we had been discussing during our grade level meetings, the cycle of learning and teaching.

What was the question they use during their iterative process of concept design?

What would you expect to happen ...?”

Their research shows that this puts algorithmic thinking into motion, generating potential scenarios that could be incredibly powerful in articulating the effect of our decisions.

What if we applied this same question as we approach a launching a unit of inquiry? I think this could be and effective way to start a familiar unit of inquiry, creating the impetus we may need in order to contemplate and debate alternative approaches with greatest impact for our learning and teaching.

Entry points in The Cycle of Learning and Teaching.

Where do you begin with learning? Do you launch a unit with TEACHING, picking up your PYP planner from last year and “copy and paste” what you did last time? Do your reflect on your past PYP planner and adjust the learning expectations or reinvent the unit with PLANNING provocations and activities to launch new concepts? Or do you pick up your PYP planner and think about how you might ASSESS the learners to figure out what direction you might need to go to support strong concept development and bringing out the best in the Learner Profile and Atls?

I would argue that there is no “right answer” to this because every unit of inquiry is unique and we have to look holistically at the grade level Programme of Inquiry (POI) and the whole school Programme of Inquiry (POI). It might also depend on if the UOI is a single subject or if it is transdisciplinary. That said, I do think that teachers need to sit down and re-read the planner from last year to reflect on what is relevant and meaningful to their current learners. They need to unpack the central idea and lines of inquiry before determining where they are going to jump into this cycle of learning and teaching.

Decisions, Decisions!

Press Start: Teach 

There are some very valid reasons why we might just start teaching. Time may play a significant factor, especially when we know this unit will introduce never explored content in the school-wider programme of inquiry. Also, if there is a project that the students will work on during the unit and the goals of the unit are more about the process of learning so we have to focus on teaching into the Atls such as the self-management or social skills that will be developed throughout the unit. For example, collaboration or time-management may need to be developed right from the word Go so that groups can effectively do research together. A great example of that is during the PYP Exhibition. Teachers might need to start teaching into stress management or technology skills in order to ensure that students can work independently and effectively.

Teachers who are also single-subject specialists may also jump into the cycle of learning and teaching here, particularly if they have younger students who they feel can safely assume that they have no prior knowledge of the concepts. For example, a music teacher who wants to teach the concept of melody to their kindergarten students or a language acquisition teacher who works with newcomers to a language.

However, we really want to think critically about this approach because research suggests that we need to value our learners more than teaching our content, so we need to carefully consider our students when planning and assessing.

Press Pause: Plan

It is good practice to review previous planners for a familiar unit. As you re-read the planner, it’s important to read the reflections first before digging into the resources, learning activities and assessments that you created in the past. I know that this part of the planner often gets neglected, but it really can be critical to understanding how and why you might make changes to a unit, especially if there are new members of a team who may not be as familiar with a unit. It is especially for this reason why you would want to start with planning. Not everyone interprets units the same way, especially when a central idea is broad. So team members need to “unpack” the unit’s concepts and think about how it could be approached differently, particularly when considering the students you have in your class. I’ve written about the importance of this before in this blog post.I think this is the most common way that teams approach the learning and teaching cycle–Teachers getting together and discussing what might be possible during this unit.

However, you can share the central idea with students and unpack it with them in order to co-construct the unit. The questions and ideas that emerged during those discussions with students then become the fodder to re-write aspects of unit in order to develop more student interest and agency. Sometimes that means we go back are re-write lines of inquiry, change learner profiles or switch our Atls. And sometimes it means that the content shifts. It really depends on what happens during the “unpacking” with students.

For example, consider this unit:

Central Idea: 

Circumstances impact opportunity and the ability to achieve.

Lines of Inquiry:

  1. The attributes of empathy(form)
  2. How opportunity is enabled (causation)
  3. The measurement of achievement (perspective)

A team of 4th grade teachers were going to approach this as a “copy and paste” type of unit, in which the focus has typically been on the role of social class in creating barriers or opportunities to success in life. However, when they unpacked it with students, it became clear that they were fascinated with disabilities and inclusion. It required the team to get back to the drawing board and re-design the unit with student interests in mind. Although the key concepts might stay the same, the related concepts shift from Poverty, Social Class, and Opportunity to Diversity, Innovation and Inclusion because students were keen to learn about how disabilities and neurodivergence lead to developing new technology to help people feel capable and involved in their lives.

When teachers respond to students like this, learning is more dynamic and student action can organically evolve from their enthusiasm. I’m sure you can see how responding like this can change the trajectory of a unit.

Press Stop: Assess

Before putting the car into drive, some teachers choose to stop and assess before beginning a unit. Pre-assessment is always a good idea, but since the pandemic, this approach seems like the most sensible for many units. We just aren’t sure where the conceptual and skill gaps may be, so we may need to do some formal assessments to see where students knowledge base lies. Once we have an idea of what students know, understand and can do, teachers can sit down with the data and then examine what concepts and skills make sense before launching a unit. Again, they may need to adjust content, change Atls and/or learning expectations.

What would you expect to happen ...?”

I think predicting and reflection are 2 key superpowers that a PYP teacher needs when we consider how we can build strong units. As I continue to mull over this question, I think this question can be an important tool to help shake up unit planning and instigate critical thinking in our approaches. Whether it is asked 2 weeks before a unit of inquiry begins or as a strategy to provoke reflective thinking, this question can help us explore new ways that we could approach the unit.

What do you think? Are there other questions that we need to consider when determining the why and how we jump into the cycle of learning and teaching?

Designing for Humans: Thinking Beyond a Checklist for the Enhanced #PYP Planner

Designing for Humans: Thinking Beyond a Checklist for the Enhanced #PYP Planner

This past year we trialed a new PYP planner, and the intentions were good with letting the students’ responses to our provocations direct and lead the unit, but we ended up having a planner that was so complex that it became cumbersome to actually fully complete. It was christened “The Big Book”, which should have clued us in that this was an exercise in paperwork. Clearly, it’s back to the drawing board.

So what are “The Basics” that have to be on the planner? As I see it, there need to be 12 components that are fundamental to the planning document:

  1. Transdisciplinary Theme
  2. Central Idea
  3. Lines of Inquiry
  4. Key Concepts
  5. Learner Profile
  6. Approaches to Learning (ATL)
  7. Questions
  8. Provocations/Engagement Activities
  9. Resources
  10. Assessment
  11. Action
  12. Reflection

As I began to wonder what is the “special sauce” that would move a planning document beyond “the basics” and make this planner “enhanced”, I decided that I needed to go back and listen to the webinar that addressed this aspect of the enhancement.

My big takeaways from the webinar were:

  • The document takes us through a PROCESS of CO-CONSTRUCTING learning.
  • It encourages COLLABORATION with staff.
  • It fosters REFLECTION.
  • It not only documents STUDENT AGENCY but reminds us that this is central to the learning. Teachers need to consider the WHO just as much, perhaps more so than the WHAT.
  • It influences the ROLE OF THE TEACHER and how they inspire ACTION in students to support SELF-MANAGEMENT skills.

While I considered the ideas shared, I was thinking “What would be the purpose of even re-designing the PYP planner?” I mean, they have given us a “refreshed” and updated example that we may use and other schools have already created other templates that could be integrated into our school. Truly, there is no immediate demand that schools HAVE to create their own planner.  But now schools have the liberty to design their own, yet it isn’t a mandate. So, if schools were to embark on creating their own, it would only be for the sole purpose of improving their collaborative planning at their school in an effort to increase student agency.

Agency is about listening.

Sonya terBorg

As I contemplate the benefit of redesigning the PYP planner, I wouldn’t dare create a copy and paste version of the templates shared. Not because they aren’t wonderful, but because they aren’t unique to the needs of my school.–which would be the purpose of even embarking on this journey. 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 (7)In my past school’s pilot of the re-designed planner, it was a hard copy only. This worked well for our initial planning session, but on-going additions to the planner weren’t possible unless you were to have the hard-copy in your possession. And because it was a “big book” it took up a lot of space on one’s desk area, which became problematic since we had 6 Units of Inquiry plus 6 stand-alone Math planners. You might imagine the frustration of all those paperwork piles in one’s workspace, which created a disdain for planning since it meant that one teacher had this A3 sized booklet taking up a lot of real estate on their desk. This was an unintended consequence of going “retro” with our planning. I wouldn’t recommend this. So, with this in mind, if the planner isn’t digital, with equal-access available to all teachers, then it’s set up to fail. That’s like putting square wheels on a bike–it is taking us nowhere with collaboration.

With this in mind, I would utilize Design Thinking, focusing on human-centered design principles of really understanding what would be the needs of the users of this planning document. Also, since human-centered design considers the interaction along with the actual “product”, the experience is of vital importance. Here is the overview of the process:

designhc
Designed by Dalberg

Framing the Context: Understanding our Users and Their Problems

Human-Focused Design optimizes for human motivation in a system as opposed to optimizing for pure functional efficiency within the system. -Yu-Kai Chou-

What is the challenge: Let’s be honest, the main reason why teachers don’t appreciate using the PYP planner is that it seems like a time-consuming document that doesn’t seem to support their day-to-day planning of the unit of inquiry.

So how might we design a planner that is collaborative, compelling and ultimately results in better learning outcomes and increased student agency?

Hmm…..

In the first phase of design, Planning, we have to consider the audience for this document. Teachers, right? So, when we consider feasibility, we should ask ourselves what might be the biggest barrier that we will need to overcome in order for this document to work?

I’m rather practical so as a teacher, I would say TIME poses the biggest challenge to collaboration.

Thus, when we create this document we need to think about the amount of time it might take to fill out this document, especially since we might imagine that the initial planning will involve multiple teachers who represent a variety of subject areas. Trying to get all those educators in a room can seem like putting the planets in alignment. So, if we UNDERSTAND these teachers, then we must take into consideration that this document will most likely require at least 40 minutes of time to begin the planning process, with opportunities to plug into the document to give feedback and feedforward into the learning (at least another 30 minutes of individual or grade level teacher time). Lastly, there will need a final block of at least 40 minutes for teachers to get together to reflect on how students responded to this unit of inquiry. So, with that in mind, the document, from start to finish, needs to be completed in 3 planning periods; 2 of which will include multiple voices and perspectives in the room, and at least 1 planning period in which teachers or a grade level team get together to discuss how the unit is progressing and what direction it might need to take. So let’s just say, this collaborative document takes at least 2 1/2 hours to complete, give or take 1/2 hour.

Then, as we peel the layers of the onion, we know that the 2nd biggest challenge will be ensuring that this document is truly collaborative, with the opportunity for multiple voices to be present, particularly our subject area specialists, who often feel marginalized during planning.

Furthermore, this document must create a holistic process of learning about our students, so we can create learning opportunities for our students, in that we can examine what learning came from our students. It has to fuel conversation and inspiration among teachers to develop student-directed inquiries and motivate student-led action. Moreover, it should get teachers discussing how they can access the larger community, whether local or global, to tap into resources that expand the learning outside the 4 walls of the classroom.

Lastly, when teachers engage with this document, I would want them to feel excited and anticipating the best that could happen during this unit of inquiry. I wouldn’t want this to feel like “ticking a box” but instead designing learning that changes lives. (Because, truly, that is what we are doing, every day. How cool is our job, right?!)

Learning Phase: Perspective and Use by Teachers

I know that this planner has to contain the “Basics” but I’d think about the teachers first and not the “boxes” that it needs to tick. Already I’ve made some assumptions, such as identifying some barriers and challenges to using the planner. However, those are inferences and my own biased opinions. I have yet to tap into the perspectives of the teachers directly at my school, which might produce different ideas. I must put on my researcher hat and use some of the methods of Human-Centered Design to get an accurate picture of the challenge and its possible solutions.

empathymapdesignFrom a design point of view, I might start from one of the PYP planner templates shared, observing teachers “in the wild”, using the document during the collaborative planning process.  I would record reactions with the Empathy Map to evaluate their experience with the planner. Since I’m not just considering the physical experience with the document, I need to collate the responses of the emotional experience of the teachers when deciding how to help craft a new one. Remember, I’m not trying to devise a fancy planner, I want the planner to actually get teachers to have rich discussions that connect and extend the learning of students so that students can ultimately become self-motivated and feel a great urgency to take action. I’d need to be a fly on the wall, leaning in to listen and notice how planning is being “enhanced”.

Brainstorming Ideas

First of all, this is not me, alone, on my laptop or with a pad of paper and pen in hand, ready to sketch out ideas. It takes a team to cleave through the data and create mock-ups that will ultimately result in a prototype document. Every one of those template planners on shared on IB’s PYP resource page took a team of dedicated individuals to shape and mold the prototypes that we see today. And I use the word “prototype” very intentionally because no doubt these planners will evolve as those teams reflect on what works and what doesn’t work with its use. Just as our teachers have spent time reflecting and evaluating the “big book” planner that was created at my past school, all schools need to stand back and be critical of their work so that it can be refined and improved upon.

So when brainstorming ideas, it will require a group of diverse and interested educators who will not only ensure it contains “The Basics” of PYP principles but develops our teachers understanding of our student learning and improve collaboration among teachers. That’s a big ask. Needless to say, where we go from here is To Be Continued…….

If any brave and like-minded individuals want to share how their school is approaching this project, I’d be keen to hear more. Please post in the comments below so everyone can benefit from your learning and experimentation. 

The PYP Planner: A Shift in Our Approach to Planning Inquiry (#enhancedPYP )

The PYP Planner: A Shift in Our Approach to Planning Inquiry (#enhancedPYP )

Quick Quiz: What is the first “box” in the PYP planner? Did these things come to mind?:

What is our purpose?   To inquire into the following:

  • Transdisciplinary theme:    
  • Central idea :  

summative assessment task(s):

What are the possible ways of assessing students’ understanding of the central idea? What evidence, including student-initiated actions, will we look for?

Now with the enhancements in the Primary Years Programme (PYP), we can redesign our planner which has to lead to an overhaul of our collaborative planning. If you notice in the Box #1, aside from clarifying our theme and central idea, we would start planning our summative. However, we haven’t done any assessment of student’s prior knowledge, and I often found that determining the summative assessment before we have even launched a unit of inquiry (UOI) has always led to more teacher direction in our units, as if we are nudging and, sometimes pushing the students toward our end goal–The Summative Task. Think about it, when we plan in this way, we are already dictating the terms of what we want the students to Know, Understand, and Do (aka: KUD) before we have even gotten them to SHOW US what they already know, understand and do. A bit presumptive of us, really, eh?

Needless to say, since the reigns are off, and schools get to design PYP planners in the Enhanced PYP, there’s been a shift in how we approach planning. And the new “Box 1” (figuratively) is about planning our provocation FIRST so we can let the students reveal to us what they know and lead the direction of the UOI, rather then us marching them towards the summative. It may seem trivial, but when you consider how AGENCY is the new core of our curriculum, we need to be approaching our units in different ways.

Let me provide a context, looking at our Math Stand Alone:

Patterns and sequences occur in everyday situations.
-Patterns can be found in numbers.
-Types of number patterns
-Patterns can be created and extended.

Key concepts: Connection, Form, Reflection

Related concepts: pattern, sequences, collections/groups

As a team, including our Math Leader of Learning (Olwen Millgate), we sat down and discussed the many different ways that we could plan a provocation around this central idea. At the end of the day, we determined that the most open-ended, the better, so that students could exercise as much creativity and skills as possible. We would just be the “researchers” in the classroom, observing and noting what the students came up with when given the challenge–Create as many patterns using one or more of the materials provided. 

As teacher researchers, we divided up the students so that we could take notes, making sure that all students were given the time and attention to “show what they know” about patterns. Here is the simple observational sheet that was created for this provocation: (Free to use)

We gave the students a variety of math tools to work with:

  1. counters
  2. ten frames
  3. unifix cubes
  4. Cuisenaire Rods
  5. beads
  6. pattern blocks
  7. peg boards
  8. tanagrams
  9. popsickle sticks
  10. white board and markers
  11. stampers and paper
  12. dominos
  13. magnetic letters and boards

As you can see, they had a plethora of options, and the students engaged freely, making their own choices and creations. Some students preferred to work by themselves while other collaborated–another aspect that we noted along with capturing their conversations. Here are just a few of those creations:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

There was a very loud and animated group at the Unifix cube station–which surprised us all by how excited they got about building “tall patterns”, with a lot of debate about whether they were just snapping cubes together or generating a true pattern. Although to outsiders, it may have felt chaotic, there were fantastic conjectures going on, which we saved a few examples to use for future provocations. (The Guiding Question: Is this a pattern? Why or Why Not?)

Later, our team met to discuss what we observed and we were able to sift through our documentation. We unpacked the provocation, and shared our photos and notes, describing some of the interactions that we had with them. Then we went to our curriculum and examined the phase the students might be achieving at in their conceptual understandings. Our central idea comes from the PYP Maths Scope and Sequence in Phase 1, so we needed to challenge it —is this the phase they are actually in or are we seeing evidence of Phase 2 understanding? We decided to stick with our central idea and lines of inquiry because we felt like we saw and heard evidence that most of our learners were on the tail end of this phase, applying their understanding of pattern.

After this conversation, we went on to determine what our next steps could be. Most of the patterns were ABABAB–do we encourage them to make ABCABCABC or other more sophisticated patterns? At the end of our deliberations, we decided that rushing them might create conceptual gaps so we wanted to stick with their ABABAB, but create a series of opportunities to look at how we could manipulate only 2 variables to generate a variety of patterns. What can we do with only 2 attributes?–This became the guiding question for our upcoming provocations.

So here we are, in Week 2 of this unit and we still haven’t nailed down our summative task. Gasp, right? But, on Friday, after this week’s follow up provocations, we can safely appreciate our learners, where they are and where we can take them during the remaining weeks of the unit. I find that thrilling. We will create our conceptual math rubric, using this generic one as our guide:

math standalone 2

Hopefully, you can see that we are thinking about planning not as boxes but phases in our inquiry. We are using this “tuning in” period to dictate the terms of our how we will ultimately assess students. And we are spending more time researching and planning our provocations so that they can make the children’s thinking visible and expose their understanding of the math concepts. I believe that as this approach to planning evolves, our attitudes toward our students also evolve when we are observing how they are competent and creative when expressing their ideas.

I’m wondering how other schools have begun to consider the impact of planning on agency and how it will look in the Enhanced PYP. The planner has always been a tool for us to shape our collaboration and thinking about how best to meet our students’ needs in the inquiry. I think it will be fun to see how schools begin to shift as they reflect deeply on the importance of it–it’s more than just an exercise in paperwork, it is an artifact of learning.

So what’s your “Box #1”?

Verified by MonsterInsights
Verified by MonsterInsights