Tag: Learner Agency

Is Agency the same as Personalized Learning?

Is Agency the same as Personalized Learning?

By | | Comments 0 Comment

There are two words that are trending in education right now: Agency and Personalized Learning. It’s rather funny that these ideas have been around since the 1960’s and are now emerging as shaping forces in our educational paradigms. However, I hear them used as if they are synonymous, but are they the same thing?

Is Agency the same as Personalized Learning?

This is a question that has been tumbling in my mind for a while. Ever since the PYP introduced the new branding symbol, I kept staring at the center of it and wondering how schools were really going to be “enhanced” by the updates? enhanced pypI also have been seeing a trend in which schools are starting to shift from a guided inquiry into an open inquiry approach, giving primary students, particularly ones in the upper grades, more say in the content of their learning. Although I have not directly visited those schools, I am given the impression that the children get to write their own units and learning is on their terms, in this way, the learning is quite personal and self-directed. I think these schools must be highly motivated to be innovative and deeply committed to this ambitious approach; from leadership to every member of staff, they focus their energy on creating a student self-directed learning approach. So is THIS personal learning? Personalized learning, by its definition, is to customize learning for each student’s strengths, needs, skills, and interests. So what can be more agentic than this?-As a student, I ultimately choose what I learn and when I learn it and teachers just coach me into my next steps.

So should we, as PYP schools be creating more personalized learning for students in order to enhance our student agency? Hmmm…..

A learning community that supports agency offers opportunities for students to develop important skills and dispositions, such as critical and creative thinking, perseverance, independence and confidence. These are vital to the learning process and the development of self-efficacy. The learning community further offers students multiple opportunities to experience the impact of their choices and opinions, which support their evolving perceptions of their identity. In return, students with a stronger sense of self-efficacy bring a stronger sense of agency to the learning community.

From The Learner – PYP, developed by the International Bacchaleurate

After reflecting on that, it seems to me that the answer is NO. Personalized Learning and Agency are not the same thing. Moreover, schools do not have to create “Studios” or “Learning Labs” in which teachers are supporting 20 different personal units of inquiry that the students have created in order for students to have agency. Of course, this is fabulous to have these structures and resources but to assume that this is the gold standard that all of our PYP schools should be doing would be missing the point of the enhancements. It’s about student empowerment, not individual inquiries or personalized learning tracks. So we don’t need a lot of tech and teachers in order to do this. How this looks may differ according to the context and budget considerations of that school. But to think that we need to recreate the wheel in order for us to cultivate student agency would build more barriers to getting started now in our classrooms. We need to think about learner agency as self-efficacy and not individualization. When you look at that excerpt, its the culture of the Learning Community is what creates learner agency, and this is more about developing competency and confidence and less about designing specialized learning spaces.

Agency is Self-directed Learning

The book, Empower: What Happens When Students Own Their Learning by John Spencer and AJ Juliani,  to me is one of the best books out there that really empowerarticulates how student agency can happen in our classroom. When students have the motivation and skills to explore content, they can take action that goes above and beyond our expectations for them. They can develop self-direction. THIS is the GOLD STANDARD  that we should be aspiring to.

Moreover, this book helps educators to cultivate the mindset necessary to relinquish control of classroom learning so that learners can become self-directed. It contained an important question in there that I think teachers should tape to their computers (or planning books) when they are sitting down to lesson plan:

What decisions am I making for students that they could make for themselves?

I know I found myself going to my class and asking the students “How might we….”

  • show what we know about this concept
  • explore this idea
  • experience our learning differently

No bells or whistles were required. It was about bringing them into the planning of their learning and supporting their decisions. Sometimes students wanted to go off and do their own thing, but more often than not, it meant collaborating with peers. I think this is why we shouldn’t confuse personalized learning with agency, especially since we, as PYP educators, are social-constructivists. We shouldn’t create “learning islands” in our classrooms, rather learning hubs, in which we can connect with different people and resources because, in the real world, this is often what we do to solve problems. This is true ownership of learning. This is the essence of a true Learning Community. We need to work at getting REALLY GOOD at collaboration, so students know who and what can support them in their personal growth.

PYP Coordinator Footnote

As a leader of learning at my school,  I can’t begin to express how much misunderstanding there is out there about student agency. I know I have to be careful to tread lightly on pushing student agency without being more informed about how I can support my teachers in supporting their learners. We get into vigorous conversations about this term and often teachers feel that this means that we should “kill” teacher-directed lessons or if we help students manage their decision making, we are squashing their agency. It seems that many teachers equate agency with kids having a free-for-all in classroom learning. Or, on the other hand, we should be differentiating every lesson all the time. Yikes! These are extremes.

So, I think we need to be careful about how we approach this at our schools.

I’m wondering what other terms like “personalized learning” are getting confused with Agency at your schools. Please share so we discuss and debate, arriving at greater clarity and purpose when implementing the PYP enhancements at our schools.

 

 

 

 

The Only Thing You Need To Do To Develop Student Agency

The Only Thing You Need To Do To Develop Student Agency

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Every school is trying to define and articulate how they are developing “Agency” in their curriculum, but I’m going to tell you the only thing you need to know. I’ve come to realize that it’s not that complicated. First of all, if the term confuses you, change it to “Independence”, because that is what it really means. Don’t overthink this jargon. Now, simplifying this term should help you to realize that you don’t need to create huge innovative initiatives at your school. In fact, I believe it doesn’t begin with our heads, it starts in our hearts. So what is the ONLY thing you need to develop student agency (i.e. independence)?–It’s TRUST. So ask yourself right now, Do I trust my students?

That’s a really important question so sit with it for a minute because our level of trust gets communicated with our words and actions (or inaction) toward our students every day in our classrooms. Have a think about this quote from Peter Johnson, author of Choice Words.

When you figure something out for yourself, there is a certain thrill in the figuring. After a few successful experiences, you might start to think that figuring things out is something that you actually can do. Maybe you are even a figuring out kind of person, encouraging an agentic dimension to identity. When you are told what to do, particularly without asking, it feels different. Being told explicitly what to do and how to do it–over and over again–provides the foundation for a different set of feelings about what you can do and can’t do, and who you are. The interpretation might be that you are the kind of person who cannot figure things out for yourself.

A few weeks ago we had a parent meeting, and there was a lovely debate about what was “better” about teaching through inquiry vs. traditional methods. Parents questioned why education was moving in this direction that felt “slow” to them. “What has changed since we grew up?” was the essence of that sentiment. Perhaps you could say that technology has taught us teachers that we are not the beacons of knowledge anymore–but I replied “brain research”. In my opinion that is really the heart of why we are shifting because inquiry-based approaches have been around since the time of Socrates–maybe even longer. This approach isn’t new either, it’s really an ancient technology that is making a comeback, if you will, in education. However, now we have evidence that our brains get wired differently when we have passive vs. active learning experiences. Since these ideas are still under research, not many schools develop metacognition through the use of using neurological terms like synaptogenesis and neural plasticity, but I do think that the term Growth Mindset has become more commonplace which reflects this phenomenon. Having a Growth Mindset is the key to cultivating the confidence that encourages this “agentic dimension to identity”, as Peter Johnson calls it.

So what does trust look like? We’ve filtered it down to 3 things: giving students more choice, voice, and ownership in their learning. And because we are educators, we feel the need to unpack this, create criteria and continuum that demonstrate the growth of these things in our classrooms.  If you are not sure what I am talking about, here’s an example:continuum-voice-web

It’s a great reflection tool for us when we examine the culture of learning in our classrooms and schools, but this is not in and of itself the means by which agency is developed–we are not trying to force kids into action (not that these teachers are suggesting this with this infographic but I know there are some school leaders who may take it that way) just so we can say that we are ticking the box when it comes to “Voice” with student agency. Truthfully, our kids come with lots of “voice” when they first arrive at school–we can just “shush it” out of them. I know, I am an Early Years educator, and there are lots of gentle and not so gentle ways of doing this; it’s a burden to consider how much our classroom culture shapes their identity and confidence level in these formative years.  But their voice is the expression of their thoughts, and when we suppress that, we limit their motivation to think and contribute to problem-solving situations. Furthermore, if we never offer them choices, then there is no practice in making good decisions, which means “ownership” is void. How can you “own” something you never have the privilege of thinking carefully about and solve problems around? I’m sure you can relate to this through your own experience.Future (5).png

In my mind, this quote from Ron Ritchart really summarizes the work we do to not only create “cultures of thinking” but foster agency. When we promote students making connections and the mindset of “I can do this”, it is no longer a question of IF they will take action, it’s just a matter of WHEN. And we have to TRUST that too–that time is on their side.

Recently we had a student-led Performing Arts assembly that was outstanding. It was extraordinary because every element of that assembly was created by students. Our performing arts teacher, Graham Baines (aka PYP Chef), provided the props and structure, but otherwise, it was purely the students. They’ve been working on a personal “dream goal” for months, spending break time, lunchtime and after-school time to practice and perfect the performance that they designed independently or in collaborative groups. Here is one of the fun student performances–an audience favorite:

It was such a stark contrast from previous assemblies which felt awkward, tense (at moments) and contrived, from the teacher written MC scripts to the songs performed to the order of the acts. This one was energizing, fun and inspiring. There is no doubt that other students will be eager to put in the effort and time to improve their “dream goal” and perform for a large crowd just like this. Also, imagine how those students feel with having such wonderful success, which they get to completely own. However, Graham had to completely trust the students and relinquish control of “the show”, even if it meant that his reputation might be diminished as a teacher in our parent and teacher community.  I have high regard and appreciation for that level of vulnerability and visible courage, as he broke the mold when it came to providing this opportunity to students.

So, with that in mind, how can we not only let go of trying to control everything and trusting students but how can we get more of their thinking expressed in general? Because when we give them space, I truly believe that they will exceed our expectations and their own.

In for the Long Haul: The #PYP Year-Long Who We Are Unit of Inquiry

In for the Long Haul: The #PYP Year-Long Who We Are Unit of Inquiry

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Today we are making Unicorn Cupcakes. I wonder if my friend Amelia is as excited and nervous as I am about it. She’s going to be leading the activity and already has 5 friends who she is going to work on the project.  Last time our friend, Martin, researched “potions” and after reading several science experiment books, decided on recreating a volcanic eruption. He created a sign-up sheet and enlisted several friends to help him with the project.

You see, on Friday afternoons, students have time carved out to work on personal learning projects in our Grade 1 class, which we generically call our “personal inquiry time” others may call it “genius hour” or “golden time”. In the beginning, it was a generic exploration, and we just let the children play, but now we want to refocus this time a bit more so that we move from an interest into a passion, developing true skills and knowledge.

Despite this unit of inquiry being sprinkled over the course of our calendar year, as a team, we have decided to devote time consistently to this Who We Are Unit, whose central idea is: Our choices and actions as individuals determine who we become as a community. In particular, we are exploring the line of inquiry, ourselves as learners (reflection) during this allocated time.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

We believe that not only will we develop a culture of curiosity and wonder, but also really get to know the hearts and minds of our students.  I am also interested in documenting how we are creating a “powerful learning environment” that I think is beautifully captured in the following quote:

When I think of a powerful learning environment, it has a number of different aspects to it. One is that, when you walk into it, there is a sense of engagement and excitement and purposeful learning. I think that there is attention given to, not only the content, but what is often referred to as the four Cs–communication, collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking. 

Mary Beth Banios, quoted from Launching Innovation in Schools course.

Undoubtedly I will use this blog to demonstrate progress and innovation in this area. I feel that we are on the path already. Of course, I also feel that this is our first step developing agency, the new buzzword that is now central to the “Enhanced PYP”.

So what do we know about “Agency”? Although I love reading blog posts that demonstrate innovative approaches to it, I always proceed with caution because I know that meaningful and personalized learning requires structure and organization. In our context, we are dabbling with students pursuing interests; it is not anarchy nor is it obedience. It’s the power to act with initiative, and we are looking for ways to support them in their efforts.

In Personalized Learning in a PLC at Work: Student Agency Through the Four Critical Questions by Timothy Stuart and Sascha Heckmann, the myth is debunked that not all progressive personalized learning initiatives result in student learning.  “Learning progressive schools” need to combine effective structures with a clear direction of the essential student learning outcomes. As a teacher who is promoting open-ended inquiry during our precious class time, I wholeheartedly agree with their recipe to build in an organized approach to our learning.

Structures of Inquiry 

Timothy Stuart and Sacha Heckman advocate for using 4 questions in a PLC to drive a more personalized approach to inquiry.

The 4 Questions: (Worded in the perspective of a student)

  1. What do I want to know, understand and be able to do? (What is my learning goal?)
  2. How will I demonstrate that I have learned it?
  3. What will I do when I am stuck? (How will I get out the learning pit?)
  4. What will I do when I have already learned? (What will be my next learning challenge?)

We are beginning to introduce this structure, however, right now we are considering how we can not only help students plan their learning but how we can effectively document and assess it–and whose job is it to do so?

The Learning Outcomes

Perhaps since I’ve spent the bulk of my career in the Early Years, “proving” that kids are learning isn’t a hard pill to swallow. Since we are a bit off the map, we are using suggestions to release control gradually when students can confidently and competently articulate their learning. Stuart and Heckmann propose a teacher-led learning approach in which teachers determine what disciplinary skills that will need to be mastered, answering the first 3 critical questions of a PLC, and leave the 4th question to the students to answer.  In a nutshell, this is the advice:

When targeting essential disciplanary outcomes, the collaborative teacher team is responsible for the path and pace of learning.

Because we are dabbling with this, determining specifics with “what do we want all students to know and be able to do?” becomes a bit of a challenge since it’s not anchored in developing content knowledge. Plus, since this is a Who We Are unit, it’s hard to peg content-specific goals to it anyhow.

That said, I believe deeply about the need to have “skin in the game”, and intend to co-create success criteria along with students, assessing the development of Approaches To Learning (ATLs). Our school has slightly revised the popular Approaches to Learning document which will be helpful in describing how students are developing these sub-skills within the year-long Who We Are. There are some of these areas in which our students will have no experience or understanding of–they are in first grade after all!  But I believe that if we create a focus on some key areas and develop goals around them, this can be quite potent.

So, we’re in for the long haul now, excited by the possibilities and power of a year-long unit of inquiry. Perhaps if other schools are considering doing an extended unit of inquiry, this post might have inspired and given you some food for thought. I sure hope so because, in my mind, this can be foundational for developing a life-long approach to learning.

 

#PYP “Pre-packing” vs. “Unpacking” the Central Idea: Design Thinking Based Approach to Writing Units of Inquiry.

#PYP “Pre-packing” vs. “Unpacking” the Central Idea: Design Thinking Based Approach to Writing Units of Inquiry.

By | | Comments 2 comments

Anyone who teaches the Primary Years Program knows preciously what I mean by the word unpack. But just for clarity sake, let me explain:

Unpack (verb): to explain and define the key conceptual understandings and “big words” used in a central idea and lines of inquiry, usually as a part of “tuning into” a new unit of inquiry.

Depending on the unit of inquiry, teachers can choose to go a more traditional path to explain the big words or they can create provocations that awaken the meanings. I suppose it depends on how much weight you want to give to these keywords or how long you want to dwell on them. Each unit is sort of unique in that way.

In an earlier post (#PYP The Sound and Light of Using Design Thinking To Write a Unit of Inquiry), I explained the experiment and struggle of using design thinking to construct a unit of inquiry. This past week, we presented two different “prototypes” of a central idea for a How The World Works unit that we are creating for our Grade 1 students. Here are the prototypes:

Version 1.1: Understanding energy can lead to discoveries and help us predict its behavior.

Version 1.2 Exploring light and sound can lead to discoveries and open up new possibilities.

When we presented these central ideas, we discussed them one by one and asked them what words they connected to and what did it make them think about. This was a very revealing exercise! The first reaction to the central ideas:

“Wow, that is long and hard sounding”

Second of all, only a handful of our 34 kids had much to say about the scientific concepts in either central idea, showing a deep need to develop real content knowledge.  Third of all, our English language learners preferred “light and sound” over “energy”, which was something that we needed to put a high emphasis on since we have a large group of them. Last insight was that they made the connection with the words exploring and discoveries to “finding out”, which then evolved into the idea of a “science experiment lab”–these words got an uproar of excitement in the group. They began seeing themselves as scientists, creating all sorts of investigations.

At that point, we voted on whether we would explore “energy” in general or if they wanted to just focus on “light and sound”.  The latter was the most popular with both our ELLs and our girls (which made me go, “hmmm….”) in high numbers for the vote.

So then I tried to capture the ideas that the students resonated with, while still honoring the nature of this transdisciplinary theme, and wordsmithed some new ones. Our grade level team discussed and debated them, which is an important aspect of using design thinking.

Central Idea, Version 1.3: Experimenting with light and sound can lead to discoveries and innovation.  

Team comment summary:

” I think it’s 1 dimensional, with the word experiment in it because there are many ways to explore light and sound that isn’t through experiments. “; 

“This sounds like an upper-grade unit because they can do more research into the innovation part”;

“Yeah, we’d have to unpack the word innovation and they don’t have much context for that concept yet”. 

Central Idea, Version 1.4: How living things hear sounds and see light impacts their experience of their world.

Team comments summary:

“Kids this age love animals, so I think they would really enjoy the learning.”; 

“Yeah, this is very Grade 1 friendly and we need to develop the concept of living vs. non-living”;

“Oh, and we could discuss sonar with underwater animals and how bats use echolocation. They’d love that!”;

“Would this have any scientific thinking and process skills though? They really wanted to do experiments and I think we’d lose the ‘science lab’ aspect if we made this the central idea. I mean, we could do experiments showing how living things experience light and sound differently but then it would just be proving scientific facts vs. exploring with our own original ones. In our original UOI, it was all about scientific thinking so maybe it covers a different TD indicator and this one definitely feels like an inquiry into the natural laws. But maybe we could write this into a line of inquiry”.

Central Idea, Version 1.4: Human understanding of sound and light can transform their experience.

Team comments summary: 

” This invites more inquiry-how many ways do humans experience light and sight?” 

“Yeah, when I think about this, I think about how humans first harnessed fire and this sort of discovery led to so many more advancements, as people tried to turn night into day.”

“Oh, totally– this has more of a transdisciplinary approach because we not only have the science bit with natural vs. artificial light but then you have social impact of candlelight to electricity.” 

“But if we only focus on humans, then this unit might not be as interesting as the one with animals. The concepts within electrical energy would be better for older kids. Our 1st graders would appreciate more the context of how animals and plants have senses that detect light and sound in different ways.”

” Good point-How about we just drop the word ‘human’ so we can keep it open for other living things and see where this unit takes us?”

Nods in agreement……..

So here is the new prototype that we are going with for our UOI:

Central Idea (v. 1.5): Understanding sound and light can transform experience.   

Lines of inquiry        

  • How living things hear sound and see light (perspective)      
  • Transformation of energy (change)
  • Ways we use the scientific process (reflection)

       Related Concepts:  Energy, Impact, and Transformation

Attitude: Enthusiasm, Creativity, Curiosity                              LP: Reflective, Thinker, Inquirer

Although this process may have taken longer than we would have liked, it was important to reflect on the needs of our students as well as appreciating what fascinates them and promotes curiosity. When I think about how the PYP has been reviewed, I think this exercise in Design Thinking honors the new emphasis on Learner Agency. In the new IB documentation, it states:

Your understanding of the learner is the foundation of all learning and teaching and will influence how you support student agency, and how the learning community considers children’s rights, responsibilities and identities.

Agency is present when students partner with teachers and members of the learning community to take charge of what, where, why, with whom and when they learn. This provides opportunities to demonstrate and reflect on knowledge, approaches to learning and attributes of the learner profile.

–The Learner in the Enhanced PYP–

Even though I think this is our first iteration at developing learner agency through “pre-packing” the Central Idea with student thoughts and viewpoints, I still believe that we have honored the core of the PYP programme and moreover have really carefully considered our learners over pulling units of inquiry out of the archives to see which one might “fit”. For our team, we have a higher level of excitement going into this unit (and maybe a little trepidation), knowing that we can’t wait to surprise and inspire them with the provocations and challenges that this Central Idea will bring.

How does your team approach honoring student voice and choice? Have you ever “pre-packed” a unit of inquiry (other than Exhibition or PYPX)?

Like Minded? Let's Stay Connected!

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,300 other subscribers

Verified by MonsterInsights
Verified by MonsterInsights