OLJ Task 2: The influence of technology on society or OLJ Task 3: Reflections on the impact of change
To be or not to be (active on social media) is no longer the question
If we want ‘customer-driven, socially rich, and collaborative model of service and content delivery’ (module 2) then we must stop asking ‘why’ or ‘when’ and start asking ‘how.’
Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison & Weigel (2006, p.3) define a participatory culture as: “a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing one’s creations, and some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is passed along to novice. A participatory culture is also one in which members believe their contributions matter and feel some degree of social connection with one another (at least they care what other people thing about what they have created).”
According to Jenkins (et al., 2006), forms of participatory culture could include affiliations, expressions, collaborative problem-solving and circulations [“Affiliations – memberships, formal and informal, in online communities centred around various forms of media, such as Friendster, Facebook, message boards, meta-gaming , came clans or MySpace); Expressions – producing new creative forms, such as digital sampling, skinning and modding, fan video-making, fan fiction writing, zines, mash-ups); Collaborative Problem-solving – working together in teams, formal and informal, to complete tasks and develop new knowledge (such as through Wikipedia, alternative reality gamine, spoiling); or Circulations – shaping the flow of media (such as podcasting, blogging).”]
Artega (2012, p.72) writes, “social media extends the social milieu to the digital sphere where opportunities for global social participatory learning are plentiful.” Thus, to be viable in today’s globally connected society, particularly in western civilisation where a participatory culture has become the ‘norm,’ an educational facility’s social media presence is not only something that is necessary, but is something that must be done effectively.
“For library managers, questions are moving beyond how to initiate and launch social media to the more challenging problem of how to do social media well— how to better integrate social media into the life of the library, how to more fully engage the library’s staff and users in social media; how to make the library’s social media more effective in outreach and delivery of services, and how to measure the library’s presence and activities within social media in ways that truly matter. The next wave of trends in social media use are also always looming on the horizon— what will be the next big social site where users will be going next within the social media landscape, and should the library follow?” (Mon, 2014, p.51).
Some purposes for social media have been suggested by Mon (2014, p.24) as supported by the research of AlAwadhi (2019) to include: increased avenues for feedback from users, promotion and advocacy of the school &/or library, improved information access through outreach programs, deliverable educational or support hubs, improved collections and stronger or more frequent global collaborations. Notably, Kwon’s (2020) research places building trust ahead of information motivation as a reason for use of community social media platforms.
Roadblocks to consider
While reading Adner & Kapoor (2016) it occurred to me that, like all change processes, there will be roadblocks. This includes access to technology (either because of infrastructure, financial or intellectual constraints), as well as resistance to change from staff or families who are either change fatigued or stuck in the web1.0 mentalities. Perhaps there are issues around work-life balance, either for adults (addicted to screens and social media or overwhelmed by the need to take work home or have work cross over into the social sphere) or children (similarly addicted to screen time). These will all need to be considered in the 4 phases of creating a group digital presence or organisation’s digital learning environment (discussed at length in previous blog posts).
There is also the issue of needing to be innovative in the types of platforms that we promote as educators (as supported by the research of Manca (2020). Which brings up another roadblock to implementing social media for schools is the fact that there is an age limit for access – most students in K-6 Australian educational settings are below the age of 13 and cannot be encouraged by educators to look at nor participate in most social media applications. This means we have to tailor our content to an older demographic and seek out other (less public) social media platforms for younger students.
Some additional roadblocks or things to consider have been provided by Business.gov.au (2019) and they are to have a clear social media strategy, be mindful that additional staff or resources may be required for daily monitoring of all online platforms, be prepared for inappropriate behaviour (bullying, harassment, negative feedback, misleading or false claims, copyright infringement, information leaks or hacking) and have an action plan ready within your policy documents detailing specifically how to deal with these instances prior to launch date(s).
Hicks, Cavanagh & VanScoy (2020) recommend monitoring a library’s online presence via a ‘social network analysis (SNA).’ The SNA is a ‘theoretical framework and quantitatively oriented methodology’ for libraries to understand their ‘big data stories’ or connections with their community identifying relevant patterns and relationships among individuals, groups, or organisations over a specified period of time.
All of these issues need to be incorporated into the digital learning environment creation plan, a four phase process that I’ve detailed in a previous blog post from Digital Citizenship, but that can best be summarised in this infographic:
Digital citizenship implementation phases (Infographic) by Christy Roe
How to design a platform and design it well, improving engagement (web 2.0)
This leads to the next issue – how to have a website (web 1.0), that is interactive (web 2.0) and makes the step towards linking the online world to the offline world (web 3.0). We need to be thinking beyond web 1.0 in terms of having a simple ‘face’ website that offers little to no interaction and does not enable, encourage (nor monitor) engagement but a platform, website and social media presence that actively engages our users. The web 2.0 model of ‘likes’ is also becoming an outdated model and with web 3.0 we must begin to think of our digital presence as fully interactive, including building meaningful ongoing connections (Barnhart, 2020).
But each context must first ask “what does it mean to have ‘engaged users?” and “what platforms / website / social media should we use to engage them?”
(‘How marketers define engagement when measuring social success’ images hyperlinked; Barnhart, 2020).
After my practical work-placement in a local public library, where I completed two weeks of ‘virtual’ research on website design (offering several recommendations for website development for the library), I realise that there are almost infinite resources, research and opinions on how to design effective websites. I don’t believe that my understanding of moving from the web presence currently (as web 1.0) to web 2.0 (more interactivity) to even web 3.0 (content creation by the users) was fully developed, until I watched the video provided in module 2 of INF506 (Schwerdtfeger, 2013). I wish I had been able to communicate this idea previously.
Yet, one key article that I did find, in the interest of brevity, was Garett, Chiu, Zhang & Young’s (2016, p.1) literature review on website design in terms of user engagement. Their 4 notable findings were:
“Websites have become the most important connection to the public and using social media links on websites may increase user engagement;
Proper website design is critical for user engagement, because poorly designed websites result in a higher user ‘bounce’ rate (users do not proceed past the home page) whereas, well designed websites encourage user exploration and revisit rates;
The International Standardised Organisation (ISO) (in Garett, et al., 2016, p.1) defines website ‘usability’ as: “the extent to which users can achieve desired tasks (e.g., access desired information or place a purchase) with effectiveness (completeness and accuracy of the task), efficiency (time spent on the task), and satisfaction (user experience) within a system”;
Out of the 20 identified design elements that impact user engagement, 7 key design elements(in order of importance) are navigation, graphical representation, organisation, content utility, purpose, simplicity and readability.” Garett et al. expand these design element definitions, but the key words are:
Engaging graphical presentation: images, size and resolution, multimedia, font, font colour and size, logos, visual layout, colour schemes, and effective use of white space.
Optimal organisation: logical, understandable, and hierarchical / architectural structure, arrangement / categorisation, and meaningful labels/headings/titles/keywords.
Content utility: information is sufficient, of ongoing quality and relevant
Clear purpose: 1) establishes a unique and visible brand/identity, 2) addresses visitors’ intended purpose and expectations for visiting the site, and 3) provides information about the organisation and/or services.
Arteaga, S. (2012). Self-Directed and transforming outlier classroom teachers as global connectors in experiential learning. (Ph.D.), Walden University. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1267825419/BD063751849440E5PQ/1?accountid=10344
Garett, R., Chiu, J., Zhang, L., & Young, S. D. (2016). A literature review: website design and user engagement. Online journal of communication and media technologies, 6(3), 1.
Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture. https://www.macfound.org/media/article_pdfs/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF
Mon, L. (2014). Social Media and Library Services. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=2010483.
“Metadata specialists need to know their users, their collections and resources, and the information organisation systems they are working with (sic). They also need to develop an eye for detail, a very clear, succinct form of expression and a systematic and thorough approach. Faced with choices about what and how to describe, they need to apply principles as well as standards” (Hider, 2018, p.103).
Quality metadata: effective, functional, comprehensive, accurate and consistent
If metadata is of the highest quality, that is: effective, functional, comprehensive, accurate and consistent, then users, even with their complex information seeking needs (which they themselves may not even know) are commonly more satisfied (Hider, 2018, p.93-94). The best way to ensure the highest quality, including effectiveness, functionality, comprehension, accuracy, and consistency is through metadata standards and / or use of standards in terms of setting’s community of practice (Hider, 2018, p.123).
Functionality:
Knowing the user information needs (rather than assuming their needs, basing cataloguing on the cataloguer ideas or opinions of librarians) leads to better database quality (Hider, p. 94);
Standardised indexing aids in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) finding (Hider, 2018, p.94);
Standardised displays aid FRBR selecting (Hider, 2018, p. 94).
Comprehensiveness:
Comprehensive metadata requires a choice: more resources with less detailed metadata descriptions, or less resources with more metadata detail. Full descriptions cost more to create and thus, how comprehensive the data is must be weighed against the cost (Hider, 2018, p. 95);
Brief descriptions aid FRBR discovering (but not selecting) (Hider, 2018, p.95).
Accuracy:
Metadata must be accurate and consistently evaluated and corrected, because small errors can result in a failure for the user to find, identify, select, obtain or explore the information (Hider, 2018, p.95).
Clarity
Metadata descriptive words are chosen carefully to enable clarity. Without clarity, accuracy is moot – including language choice, jargon, abbreviations, codes, homonyms, or even changes in word popularity / common use (e.g. what is commonly called a title = ‘title proper’ to cataloguers; subtitle = ‘other title information’; or a title in a different language = ‘parallel title’) (Hider, 2018, p.96); Here is a screen shot of some common abbreviations used:
Rowe, 2019, Module 3.2 Screen shot of abbreviations
Quality metadata also has clarity, in that it is succinct – brief indexes may improve search results as the fewer the terms, the fewer irrelevant search results occur (Hider, 2018, p.97).
Consistency:
Being consistent, using the same elements and values aids FRBR retrieval across multiple systems (aka interoperability) (Hider, 2018, p.97);
Consistency (in descriptions, lengths, structures and terminologies used in indexes) aids in all FRBR functions (find, identify, select, obtain or explore) (Hider, 2018, p.97);
Consistency of understanding between the cataloguer/indexer and the user / searcher is also important and this is achieved by standardisation (Hider, 2018, p.98);
Vocabulary control, an aspect of consistency, is where the cataloguer/indexer use the same, standardised language, utilising cross referencing tools such as ‘see also’ (Hider, 2018, p.99-100);
Authority control, also an aspect of consistency, is where the names of people, nicknames/pseudonyms/varied bibliographic identities/people with the same name, organisations or corporate bodies, or titles and series are standardised in a list (such as this list by the Library of Congress or this list of standards by the National Libraries of Australia) or written to include birth years (Hider, 2018, p.101-102);
Evaluation systems such as quality control (QC) processes, audits, quality assurance (QA) processes including quality measures and benchmarks, checklists or scorecards ensure metadata consistency based on user needs (Hider, 2018, p.104).
A range of standards for a range of environments
“A range of standards have been developed for all aspects of metadata, including its values, elements, format and transmission” (Hider, 2018, p.123).
These metadata standards relate to ‘key information domains’, such as:
Book publishing – Copy editors refer to ‘style manuals’ such as: the Chicago Manual of Style, Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, MLA Handbook, and AMA Manual of Style; Electronic text publishers adhere to online standards such as the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) or the Online Information Exchange (ONIX) (Hider, 2018, p.163);
Research – data repositories such as: UK Data Archives, Australian National Data Service (ANDS), Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM), Australia and New Zealand Spatial Information Council (ANZLIC) Metadata Profile, Darwin Core (DwC), earth sciences Directory Interchange Format, space science Space Physics Archive Search and Extract (SPACE) Data Model, and the social science Data Documentation Initiative (DDI) (Hider, 2018, p.165-166).
Education – The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Learning Object Metadata standard (IEEE-LOM), the Gateway to Educational Materials schema (in USA), Education Network Australia (EdNA) schema, and, more recently, the Australia and New Zealand Learning Object Metadata standard (ANZ-LOM) by Education Services Australia (Hider, 2018, p. 167).
Web publishing – Hypertext Markup Language (HTML), Extensible Markup Language (XML) [with namespaces including Universal Resource Identifier (URI/URL)], and Resource Description Framework (RDF) as specified by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C); (Rowe, 2019, Module 3.3; Hider, 2018, p.124-127);
Digital Libraries – Dublin Core (DC), Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) and Metadata Authority Description Schema (MADS), Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS), Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) and OpenURL (providing access to journal content within subscribed databases); (Rowe, 2018, Module 3.3; Hider, 2018, p. 150, 153-154);
Archives – General International Standard Archival Description (ISAD(G) similar to ISBD below) and Encoded Archival Description (EAD); (Rowe, 2018, Module 3.3; Hider, 2018, p. 155-156, 158);
Museums – Standard Procedures for Collections Recording Used in Museums (SPECTRUM), International Committee for Documentation (CIDOC) International Guidelines for Museum Object Information: the CIDOC information categories (1995) and CRM; (Rowe, 2018, Module 3.3; Hider, 2018, p. 160-161);
Libraries – The Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (Published by the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) in 2009 updated in 2016), Anglo American Cataloguing Rules (AACR/AACR2), International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD), Machine Readable Cataloguing (MARC/MARC21) (a format for the automatic electronic sharing of library catalogue data – including the description, main entry/entries, subject heading(s) and Dewey Decimal ‘call number’ – that may be updated to the Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative (BIBFRAME) in the future); Z39.50 (client server information retrieval protocol for large searches); and finally, Resource Description Access (RDA) which is based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), (Rowe, 2019, Module 3.3; Hider, 2018, p.132-133, 136, 142-143, 147, 149; Furrie, 2009).
Registries of standards – To keep track of all of the standards as they grow and change over time and to select the appropriate standard or crosswalks between various standards for their tasks, metadata specialists use registries of standards such as: “the Open Metadata Registry, the Dublin Core Metadata Registry, the Basel Register of Thesauri, Ontologies and Classifications (BARTOC) and Schema.org, the last of which encourages individuals from across domains to join its community of schema developers” (Hider, 2018, p.168).
What is RDA and the RDA toolkit?
RDA (the main current standard for descriptive cataloguing) was built on the foundational basis of how effective catalogues operate, namely, FRBR & FRAD and is conceptualised by certain things which have inter-relationships to other things, thereby ensuring that users can search for and access information successfully (Hider, 2018, p.136; Oliver, 2010, p.14-15).
Find: “…(T)o bring together information about one or more resources of interest by searching on any relevant criteria” IFLA, 2017, p. 15 in Hider, 2018, p.29; Oliver, 2010, p.15) “The most precise attribute for this purpose is an identifier, which frequently takes the form of a number, uniquely assigned to a particular resource. Another attribute that often serves to identify a resource is its name. This can be more descriptive than an identifier, but may not be totally unique. Nevertheless, it often does the job and is more likely to be remembered than an ‘artificial’ identifier” (Hider, 2018, p.31). “A prime example of a systematic identifier at this level is the ISBN (ISSN, ISTC or ISAN)” (Hider, 2018, p.34);
Identify: “(To identify is) to clearly understand the nature of resources found and to distinguish between similar resources” (IFLA, 2017, p. 15 in Hider, 2018, p.29; Oliver, 2010, p.15); “A manifestation of a work, such as a particular printing of a book, is also unlikely to be named, except in very generic terms, such as ‘third printing’ or ‘2003 release’. This sort of metadata may be used in the identification or selection process, but it is seldom used to find the resource. A user may choose between a PC and a Mac version, or prefer an earlier printing if they are a literary scholar” (Hider, 2018, p.31); “To this end, users need sufficient and accurate description” (Hider, 2018, p.34); “Similarly, if a particular manifestation is required and there is no systematic identifier such as an ISBN to check, the user will typically start by identifying the work and then look at attributes pertaining to the carrier, especially publication and format. At the item level, users may consider attributes such as provenance, i.e. the item’s custodial history, to identify, for example, a piece of art or an archival file” (Hider, 2018, p.35).
Select: “(To select is) to determine the suitability of the resources found, and to be enabled to either accept or reject specific resources” (IFLA, 2017, p. 15 in Hider, 2018, p.29; Oliver, 2010, p.15); “…the selection process essentially occurs inside the user’s head” (Hider, 2018, p.39); “On reading the resource descriptions, the user may be influenced by other elements that they then realise are relevant to the selection process” (Hider, 2018, p.36); “In the field of information retrieval, the attributes used to select resources are referred to as relevance criteria” (Hider, 2018, p.36); “The kind of resource people want, when they do not have a specific resource in mind, often relates to the subject of its content” (Hider, 2018, p.36); “Other aspects of a resource’s content may also be of interest to selectors. For example, users may well be interested in its quality, in which case comments, reviews and ratings can be helpful. The currency of content may also be a factor to consider, so the user may look for a creation date or copyright year, for example. Likewise, the amount of content (e.g. the number of words) may have a bearing. The form of a work could also be relevant. It may be ‘about’ Japan, but it may be a map, website or film documentary. It turns out, then, that information content can be described in many different, and sometimes unanticipated, ways” (Hider, 2018, p.36).
Obtain: “To access the content of the resource” (IFLA, 2017, p. 15 in Hider, 2018, p.29); “To acquire or obtain access to the entity described (ie. to acquire an entity through purchase, loan, etc., or to access an entity electronically through an online connection to a remote computer” (Oliver, 2010, p.15). “In today’s online world, users often need very little by way of metadata in order to obtain, or gain access to, an information resource – just a label on a hyperlink…information about how to obtain it…is the resource’s location” (Hider, 2018, p.39).
Explore: “To discover resources using the relationships between them and thus place the resources in a context” (IFLA, 2017, p. 15 in Hider, 2018, p.29); “In today’s networked world, these linkages are underpinned by the hyperlink mechanism, whereby the linked record is only a mouse-click away. In the analogue world, one might have to look up a cross-reference” (Hider, 2018, p.39); “(T)his process allows the user…to get a feel for a network of resources through their surrogate records. … Relationships between resources, their commonalities and their differences are the heart of what organisation is about (sic)” (Hider, 2018, p.40).
FRBR vs FRAD (Rowe, 2019, Module 3.3) See also, Oliver, 2010, p. 16.
Creating bibliographic records for selected information resource using RDA
SCIS have excellent information resource standards for cataloguing and data entry, based on FRBR/FRAD/RDA. Rowe (2019, module 3.5) has shared an amazing video to help navigate the RDA toolkit, as well as a table to help create a bibliographic record using RDA, which I’ve uploaded to GoogleSheets, including notes from Rowe (2019, Module 3.5). Furthermore, Rowe (2019) writes:
“When using the RDA Toolkit you should note the following…Instructions within RDA move from the general to the specific. … The appendices of RDA contain supplementary information including, among other things, guidelines for capitalisation and abbreviations and symbols, and in Appendices I through to M you will find the controlled lists of relationship designators. There is a glossary which is particularly useful if you are unfamiliar with terminology. RDA also contains a Tools Tab where you will find mappings from RDA to MARC and MARC to RDA; workflows contributed by RDA users; an index to the RDA Toolkit; and examples of records encoded in MARC format. The Resources Tab includes the full text of AACR2; and policy statements from agencies including the National Library of Australia and the Library of Congress-Program for Cooperative Cataloging, as well as a link to the MARC Standards” (Rowe, 2019, Module 3.5).
Screen Shot of the RDA Toolkit taken by Christy Roe August 2020
Welsh, A., & Batley, S. (2012). Bibliographic elements. In Practical cataloguing: AACR, RDA and MARC 21 (pp.17-48). London: Facet. Available from eBook Library.
Digital Learning Environments (DLE) and digital citizenship implementation have a few issues and dilemmas that must be considered by teacher librarians, and all educational stakeholders:
Lack of growth mindset: Educators are often reluctant to change. We expect students to have an open mind to proactively embrace new things and attempt to connect to personal learning networks – and recognise that, generally, failure is a part of learning. We expect 21st century learners to be quick to learn and be resilient, yet we ourselves are sometimes close minded, reactive, afraid to fail, and stuck in ruts and ‘old’ methods or tools – as teacher librarians, we must lead in professional reflection, respond to needs and initiate change, particularly in terms of individualising learning plans and environments and recognising that the ways students access information is much different than what it once was (Cooke, 2012).
Communication via DLE is different: We must tailor the methods and means by which we communicate to ensure that we are understood and authentic. Communication in an DLE is different to face to face communication in terms of turn taking, online digital footprints or identities may not be authentic, the level of commitment or willingness to behave ethically vary understanding and clarity can be varied or blurred, and community expectations are different (Cooke, 2012).
Lack of thought into quality control: While there are several methods for measuring teacher quality in recent times, there is no official one way to measure the quality of DLE Digital citizenship lessons or teacher / teacher librarian quality (Cooke, 2012). (NOTE: In fact, 21st century learning skills are themselves very difficult to assess and measure in students. We need to find or design one agreed way of measuring quality teaching!)
Varied degrees of self-regulation, motivation, & overwhelmed, or distracted students: DLE education is often asynchronous or self directed (Cooke, 2012) relying on a student’s ability to self-regulate and motivate. This is sometimes problematic, not only because of individual student ability levels but also because the DLE can be overwhelming, or a place of distraction or ambiguity (see #14).
Lack of a fluid community of practice or PLNs: Wenger (p.2, 1998, in Cooke 2012) specifies 3 dimensions of a community of practice: 1. they are joint enterprises, created and maintained by their members, 2. they feature mutual engagement with all members joining to form a social entity, and 3. members have a shared store of resources and sensibilities that have been communally developed. However, Wenger (p.6, 1998, in Cooke 2012) does caution that communities of practice should take care not to become insular, rather they should attempt to remain ‘dynamic and fluid.’ (NOTE: I have discussed the concept of a community of practice at length in other blog posts: 1 or 2– see tags also).
Content at the cost of engagement and application: Stagnant, repetitive, standardised education, subjects and content are still taught in isolation from each other. Memorising facts and clerical tasks are still, despite being the 21st century, generally considered more important than engaging lessons that link to or apply to real life situations – students should be learning by doing rather than by being told (Wheeler, 2015). (NOTE: Would you rather be treated by a ‘doctor’ who learned medicine by reading about it or would you rather be treated by a doctor who has actual experience treating patients?)
Critical thought is not taught or supported: Inquiry learning and learning through questioning is still not the preferred method of teaching, ill-preparing students for their ‘why’ and ‘how to’ (rather than ‘what’) futures (Wheeler, 2015). “Critical thinking, flexibility, working collaboratively, and creative problem solving are all key components for success in changing environments. But ‘knowing that’ and ‘knowing how’ will not be enough. Students also need to know why” (Wheeler, 2015, Ch.6, p.9).
Educators have all the say: According to Wheeler (2015), instead of taking a ‘flipped classroom’ approach where learning is student led, the majority of educators are still deciding the curriculum and delivery of the content, delivering lessons with one way dialogue and lack of conversation. This means that students can become disengaged, disconnected and disempowered from their own learning (Wheeler, 2015). It is crucial that we design engaging lessons and topics and use varied learning approaches in order to promote the ability in students to generate their own ideas and voices (rather than copying the voices of others) (Williamson & McGregor 2011). (NOTE: How many of us consider ourselves facilitators of student learning? I myself have it in my teaching and learning philosophy…Time to put this into action!)
Lack of digital literacy: as per my previous blog post on Information Literacy and Inquiry Based Teaching: ‘According to the ALA, (2016) we must help our students become information literate individuals who can: “determine the extent of information needed; access the needed information effectively and efficiently; evaluate information and its sources critically; incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base; use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose; and understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally” (ALA 2016). This is expanded into Digital Literacyby Stripling (2010) who writes: “Digital literacy, itself, is not enough preparation, however, for our students to thrive in today’s global, information-driven world. Students must also acquire the skills of digital inquiry: connecting ideas to personal interests and a desire to know, asking questions that probe beyond simple fact gathering, investigating answers from multiple perspectives, constructing new understandings, expressing the new ideas through a variety of formats, and reflecting on both the process and product of learning” (p16).
Constantly evolving trans-literacy (multi-literate) expectations: educators must be able to prepare students to evaluate, access and effectively, ethically and legally utilise a variety of resources and tools across a variety of platforms (Preble, 2013; Wheeler, 2015, p.175).
The digital divide (as discussed in my previous blog post): the digital divide is closely related to Socio-Economic Status and is not just a lack of access to technological devices or internet, but it is also a lack of the ability to utilise technology, inability to produce content, and/or the lack of the ability to apply digital information and skills to real life applications (Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison & Weigel, 2006; & Schradie, 2013). (NOTE: this is something imperative for educators to be reflecting upon NOW during this COVID-19 crisis: the digital divide is real and it has an impact on our students whether they are in lockdown or not! Schools MUST CREATE A PLAN for access to and for digital literacy for all students).
Confusion, panic and lack of policy regarding intellectual property, copyright, fair use and Creative Commons: Educators must create a policy for intellectual property, copyright, fair use and Creative Commons. Thus, we must create guidelines at whole-school level that promote intellectual honesty and respect for the work of others as an ingrained community value (Williamson & McGregor 2011, p17). Educators must then model and teach deeper digital citizenship knowledge and understanding of what can be used, re-used, and shared in items produced electronically, based on an age appropriate teaching sequence (such as teaching students how to locate key words and write bulleted notes before paraphrasing quotes, as suggested by Williamson & McGregor, 2011).
Safety in the DLE: The DLE requires educators to help students be aware of safety issues such as cyberbullying, creating a work/life balance, age-inappropriate online communications (eg adult images, videos, ads or ‘chats’). (NOTE: The Australian Government have an e-safety page that is particularly relevant and offers resources to educators). However, we must also teach students how to use social media platforms responsibly (Elkin, 2013; Murray, 2013).
Lack of content curation, aka overwhelmed due to ‘filter failure’ or narrowed view due to ‘filter bubbles’: We must consider how we curate information within our personal learning networks (see #5), and model and teach students how to evaluate the methods for curation so that they aren’t either overwhelmed due to filter failure or creating a narrow world view due to over-stringent filters that act as ‘filter bubbles.’ (Crowdspoke. (2011, June 7).“good curation tools are those that allow you to: Aggregate and gather web pages specific to the topic; Filter content allows the curator to select the best material; Publish to your collection with ease; Share, syndicate and distribute to your audience and the wider community; Allow the curator to edit and add comments as well as providing a comment stream for the audience to nurture discussion around the article; Analytics so you can track the usage of the site; An export facility or a way to back up the curated work” (Adapted from De Rossi, L.C. and Good, R. 2010).
11 further ideas on what to think about from lecturer, Julie Lindsay (in ETL523):
Have we clearly identified our context (eg k-12 NSW Public School in x suburb…)?
Do we have a shared vision?
How can we create personalised learning spaces linked to learning needs?
Have we considered: Hardware / software / networking access?
Have we considered: Understanding / experience access?
Do we know our students’ and teachers’ individual digital profiles?
Are the tools in our ‘digital tool kit’ age appropriate?
What evidence are we using to determine best practice for online, topical, or connected learning?
Do all stakeholders have shared understandings, policies or guidelines?
Is there a PD program or plan to continually evaluate and support the changing environment (eg. do teachers model the digital citizenship behaviours they expect or teach)?
How will this be shared and networked within a global professional network(s) and local context(s)?
References:
ALA (2016). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher education. Retrieved from: https://alair.ala.org/handle/11213/7668
Cooke, N. A. (2012). Professional development 2.0 for librarians: developing an online personal learning network (PLN). Library Hi Tech News, 29(3), 1-9.
Crowdspoke. (2011, June 7). Understand collective curation in under 90 seconds. http://youtu.be/eW775HIlVMg.
Wheeler, S. (2015). Learning with ‘e’s: Educational theory and practice in the digital age. Crown House Pub Ltd. (Chapter 6: A 21st Century Curriculum). Retrieved from ProQuest
Williamson, K., & McGregor, J. (2011). Generating knowledge and avoiding plagiarism: Smart information use by high school students. School Library Media Research, 14.
21st Century learning and COVID-19 – catalysts for change:
With the COVID-19 lockdown, the Digital Learning Environment (DLE) issues are relevant like never before. Teachers who have been allowed to stick to their paper programs, regurgitating content from previous classes that they’ve taught or from purchased sources and shying away from digital tools and applications, must now think on their feet to create online programs to suit their classes and individual students.
The Digital Education Advisory Group, approximately 8 years ago, wrote: “What is now required is a catalyst intervention to bring into recognisable focus the change that the whole community will recognise and welcome as transformation that shapes our future” …”We need to harness the transformative potential of digital technology to support new approaches to innovative learning centred around the development of 21st Century Learning skills. These include creativity and innovation; critical thinking, problem solving, decision making; life-long learning; collaboration and communication; ICT literacy; consciousness of being a local and global citizen; and personal and social responsibility” (Digital Education Advisory Group – DEAG, no date).
“Assuming a world in which the welfare of the young people and the economic health of a society and the political health of a democracy are the true goals of education, I believe modern societies need to assess and evaluate what works and what doesn’t in terms of engaging students in learning. If we want to do this, if we want to discover how we can engage students as well as ourselves in the 21st century, we must move beyond skills and technologies. We must explore also the interconnected social media literacies of attention, participation, cooperation, network awareness, and critical consumption” (Rheingold, 2010 p.24; emphasis added).
“Schools need not only to prepare students to be responsible citizens, but also to prepare them with the technological and communicative skills necessary to engage civic responsibility in a digital age” (Richards, 2010, p.520).
Teacher ability:
It takes a village: I wholeheartedly subscribe to the notion presented by Hollandsworth, Dowdy, & Donovan, (2011) that educators have a duty of care for student safety and security, educational enhancement, ethical and legal behaviours and becoming an effective member of communities, in both the physical and digital environment through policy, leadership and practice.
It does, indeed, ‘take a village to raise a child’ to be a good global and digital citizen, and this process should include all stakeholders: parents, teachers, teacher librarians, administrators, academics, technology professionals and, none the least of which, students. This means that educators must be proactive in effective digital citizenship DLE (including risk awareness et al), as well as in fostering student peer mentor programs, effective student role models, and quality educational faculty/staff DLE ability.
PLC, PLN, PLE, DLE: Furthermore, we as educators need to foster professional learning communities (PLC) through culture of personal learning networks (PLN) and personal learning environments (PLE), including networks within the Digital Learning Environment (DLE) according to ‘Steve Wheeler on future learning environments: professional, powerful and personal’ (YouTube / 2:09 mins) | https://youtu.be/db9PXLqoduQ
Creation of content:
There are some great resources for creating content, as recommended by ETL523 Module 1, including:
Just as most schools have created a school ‘code of conduct’, so too should they proactively (rather than reactively) teach a DLE ‘code of conduct’ (Hollandsworth, et al, 2011). And just as we review and evaluate the quality of our lesson content and physical curriculum, so too should educators have a structured means in which to create, deliver and then evaluate their online DLE digital citizenship curriculum. (I like the ‘writing on the bathroom wall’ analogy, which links toilet graffiti to the banter and issues that sometimes arise in social media platforms or chats-we should have a plan for how to help students handle these situations in both environments as neither are able to be fully policed or ‘filtered’ by adults). A great source of raising awareness in students are the Pause and Think by Commonsense Education.
Furthermore, we need to reconsider the curriculum and how we have created and delivered content in the past: “For educators and the schools in which they teach, the challenges of this moment are significant. Our ability to learn whatever we want, whenever we want, from whomever we want is rendering the linear, age-grouped, teacher-guided curriculum less and less relevant.” (Richardson, 2008, Emphasis added).
Brown, Dehoney and Milichap (2015) surmise that the core dimensions of Next Generation Digital Learning Environment (NGDLE) are:
Interoperability and integration
Personalisation
Analytics, advising and learning assessment
Collaboration
Accessibility and universal design
Lindsay & Davis’ (2012) ‘enlightened digital citizenship model’ recommends we consider digital citizenship in terms of four areas of content:
Safety and privacy
Etiquette and respect
Learning habits – workflow
Literacy and fluency
Social media / Digital footprints (safety / privacy / brand):
We all have a digital footprint and we must model and teach an awareness of this to students. I agree with Richards (2010) who points out that we either teach students how to engage in social media responsibly, or risk them attempting it on their own, which is very much in line with research on sexual reproduction education. Wheeler equates learning about the internet to learning how to cross the road safely – what better place to teach these concepts than in school? (Wheeler, 2015, p.176).
I think it is imperative that this education begins prior to students having a substantial digital footprint, adhering to guidelines like ‘no facebook until you are 13’ – because teaching them to be mindful of what they display digitally after they have already begun displaying themselves, is like trying to teach someone who has just voted in a political election, how to vote. We must teach them early on how our digital footprint or identity is now our (online) personal ‘brand.’
We are identified at home in one way, at work or school in one way, and online or digitally in one way and our identities change through the passage of time. People can forget or not know anything about your identity in the real world, but in the digital environment, your identity is more permanent. Furthermore, the 21st century boundaries between these contexts are now blurred. We need to ask our students and them how to recognise ‘what is your identity?’across these three platforms and throughout time.
We must therefore consider that students (and teachers) need to be literate in (aka be able to have understanding access) social media, which requires: attention, participation (civil or otherwise), collaboration, network awareness and critical thought (or critical ‘consumption’) as according to Rheingold, H. (2010).
Something else to consider is that we have an expectation that students will be capable of digital citizenship, when their understanding of citizenship overall is still developing, particularly at the K-6 level. We must be aware of the way that we have learnt citizenship in the face to face world and how 21st Century learners have not had the same face to face opportunities and foundations that we’ve had. They must learn citizenship face to face and digitally simultaneously…like learning two different languages at the same time! Furthermore, social networks and social media have played a significant part in changing citizenship and previous boundaries and accepted expectations for social behaviour. Some face to face social constructs (such as body language) are not relevant in the digital social environment and as a result, effective use of emoticons or gifs or memes have been created to fill the void.
Delivery of content:
In order to deliver the content or curriculum, the devices and tools chosen must be convenient, consistent, and allow for frequent accessto digital devices (Mann, 1999; Kelley & Ringstaff, 2002; NCES, 1999; and Statham & Torrell, 1999, in Kemker, 2005).
Having access to physical technology (primarily due to SES) is not the only issue. As pointed out by Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robinson & Weigel (2006), teachers who wish to obtain full involvement of their students by creating a ‘participatory culture,’ must also make adjustments to their pedagogy based on:
Individual student ability to participate in the DLE given their varied accessto opportunities, experiences, skills and knowledge,
The varied degrees of understanding mediatransparency (or lack thereof) around how media shape world views, or how to apply filters for the large number of ‘hits’ or ‘tweets’ or emails that one receives so as to not become overwhelmed,
and the varied degrees of understanding, training or socialisation of digital citizenship or ethical expectations for global DLE success.
(Note to self: The issue of access to the internet, devices, applications and digital or social media tools in terms of Socio Economic Status and individual choice was covered in ETL401 and ETL503 and in my blog posts for those courses).
Furthermore, we must plan whether our delivery will be synchronous or asynchronous (or a mixture of the two): “Synchronous discussion is real-time or live communication that takes place on platforms such as instant messengers, audio chat, or video chat. Asynchronous discussion is non-live communication that takes place over time and includes platforms such as e-mail, discussion forums, blogs, and wikis” (Richards, 2010, p.516).
Richards, R. (2010). Table 1. Examples of Web 2.0 Communication Tools. p 517.
Evaluation & quality control:
Digital learning spaces need to be created in conjunction with digital citizenship awareness and incorporating essential attitudes and skills needed to be a productive (digital) learner . However, this means that digital citizenship is not just about recognising online copyright laws, or keeping students safe online. (See my previous post What is digital citizenship?).
Quality tools, lessons (either face to face or digitally) should enable students to be engaged in authentic tasks, connected to the real world, involving all partners of the learning community such as teachers, students, parents, business partners, and higher education experts (Kemeker, 2005). But, what can we use to measure student engagement and connectedness to ensure they are fully active, creative and ethical DLE participants?
Jenkins, et. al. (2006) have a comprehensive list of skills and competencies:
Jenkins, et al., (2006). p56 Core Social Skills and Cultural Competencies [Screen Shot]. Retrieved from https://www.macfound.org/media/article_pdfs/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDFSimilarly, schools can use standards created by the International Society for Technology (ITSE) for assessing student outcomes, assessing teacher quality and assessing leadership quality. In addition, we could use the resources created by BattelleforKids. However, I am not familiar with these and am hesitant to use them in my daily practice when other means are utilised by my employer.
Prior to the DLE, quality standards, each with a scale of 1-5, were created by Newmann and Wehlage (1993) to help teachers assess the “authenticity” of classroom tasks and experiences, Newmann and Wehlage (1993): 1. Higher order thinking, 2. Depth of knowledge, 3. Connectedness to the world beyond the classroom, 4. Substantive conversation, and 5. Social support for student achievement – which is closely linked to the more expanded and also individually scaled from 1-5 Quality Teaching Framework (Gore, 2018):
Dimensions and Elements of the Quality Teaching Model (Gore, 2018)Bitmoji Do It!
I think it is important to consider quality teaching and leadership standards within the context of the DLE, as well as the skills and competencies from Jenkins et al (2006) and possibly the 21st Century Learning skills identified from various sources (see previous blogs via tags).
Gore, J. (2018). Dimensions and Elements of the Quality Teaching Model. [Image]. Australian Council for Educational Research – Research Conference 2018. Retrieved from https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1336&context=research_conference
Kemker, K. (2005). The digital learning environment: What the research tells us. Apple White Paper. Retrieved from (see link).
Lindsay, J., & Davis, V. (2012). Flattening classrooms, engaging minds: Move to global collaboration one step at a time. Allyn and Bacon. Chapter 5: Citizenship. (available on CSU DOMS as a downloadable PDF)
Rheingold, H. (2010). Attention and other 21st century social media literacies. Educause Review 45(5). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/attention-and-other-21st-century-social-media-literacies
Nielsen, L. (2011, August 19).Discover what your digital footprint says about you. Retrieved from http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com/2011/08/discover-what-your-digital-footprint.html
Richards, R. (2010). Digital citizenship and Web 2.0 tools. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 516-522. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7740/fb40e7030935d7b00d5bd07a19ba83c496ff.pdf
Wheeler, S. (2015). Learning with ‘e’s: Educational theory and practice in the digital age. Crown House Pub Ltd. Chapter 12: Literacy in a connected world.
The funnel of professional learning transference (Cole, 2012 p.6). (Permission to use image granted by Education Services Australia as the legal entity for the Education Council).
I was just saying to my husband the other day about how different this degree is to the training we receive as teachers. Even things that we are interested in, often get attended, our enthusiasm is strong as we walk through the doors of our school and then, mysteriously, we never seem to implement what we’ve learnt with any real vigour, or if we do it soon peters out, lost in the quagmire or superseded by the next training course we attend.
My husband is a Positive Behaviour for Learning (PB4L) Assistant Principal External Coach and the PB4L team in NSW are focussing on this exact phenomenon and implementing strategies demonstrated by Cole (2012), who explains very clearly why this occurs in the image (above) ‘The funnel of professional learning transference’ – Used here with permission from AITSL).
Most of us never make it to reflecting and/or seeking feedback to improve mastery, much less adding the practice to our repertoire and very very rarely helping others to adopt the practice.
This is where PB4L and QTR are both so beneficial! Out of all of the lessons I’ve modified based on training I’ve received, only one has stood out as something that I would fight vehemently to keep in my practice and that is the L3 shared reading lesson that I did in QTR. Following the successful lesson (where I received helpful feedback from three peers who had not attended the L3 training), all three wanted to learn how to implement the lesson (or series of lessons as it were).
Bitmoji Do It!
I can see how this will help my assignment and help me create a community of practice in my library and at my future school(s)! I am totally capable of reflecting, helping others reflect, adding skills to my practice and helping others add them to theirs…Now to get it into my discussion paper somehow…
A blank page start & roses for Carolyn; Photo by Lumitar on Unsplash
In 2010, I was teaching part time job share on a stage 1 class at a South West Sydney primary school and had the honour of being led by my husband (acting assistant principal for stage 1) and Carolyn (Draper) Mozayani, Deputy Principal.
Working with my husband as my supervisor (something that had already been successfully attempted by another married couple at the school) was an interesting challenge of professionalism. He also supervised my job-share partner and it was very difficult not to come home and vent my frustrations to him. He helped me see how to better communicate with her via a communication journal and to make sure that the communication between my colleague and myself was being correctly encoded and decoded.
Working with Carolyn was an absolute dream. She was the most kind and patient and positive person with whom I have ever worked. She unfortunately passed away with cancer in 2015 after getting married and having a child (her biggest life goals). But the memories of her and the professional development she offered, remain. Her main mantra was for students to always witness calm, patience and kindness in words and actions. She also helped introduce several whole school initiatives, including a ‘building a community of practice’ how does it look, sound and feel (unpublished) document (image below):
Carolyn Draper Mozayani’s (2010) Building a Community of Practice
In this document, it is interesting to note that data collection is the first item on the list, yet I felt no stress or pressure regarding its implementation (unlike my stress during other whole school data collection initiatives at different schools in the last three years).
I want to honour her memory and leadership by trying to build a community of practice myself. But before we try to build one, what exactly does a ‘community of practice’ actually mean? More on this in Assessment 2!
In terms of networking and collaboration, being on the social club / committee is key for the TL! Why would people want to collaborate with you if you hide in the library and fail to socialise? “Get out there gorgeous!” as Carolyn would say.
I suppose I will have to keep reading the modules to develop more ideas on building a community of practice, like how to write a vision / mission statement and how to write a strategic plan…fingers crossed it all comes together!
“Change management is important but change leadership is essential” (Pennington, n.d.). Leadership versus Management:
Have a clear understanding about the difference between leadership and management, because if something turbulent happens that means an organisation or school is required to implement change and we are stuck in management tasks, we can’t lead (Kotter, 2013).
Therefore, leadership (leading) is: creating a strategy and vision for the future and creating an environment that motivates others to join the vision and strategy; whereas management (functional) is: planning, budgeting, organising, staffing controlling and problem solving (Kotter, 2013).
[I won’t write too much more about management versus leadership because I think I’ve written loads about this in my blog posts for ETL503 Resourcing the Curriculum]
Nick Skillcom’s (2019) definition of innovation (Permission to use image granted by Nick Skillcom)
Innovation versus change:
I think we also need to have a clear definition as to what is innovation versus change. The two seem to be being used interchangeably in this course, and in some ways that could be dangerous, particularly given the ‘change fatigue’ discussed in my previous post(s). Innovation is change that is adding value for both the company and the customer [as detailed by Nick Skillcom from Idea to Value (2019)], but change doesn’t necessarily do this and promoting a ‘change culture’ frightens me. We need to remember to match innovation (and subsequent change) to goals. Perhaps a ‘change culture’ is an innovative culture that is open to change, but not necessarily constantly changing?
Innovation by Nick Skillcom (2019) (Permission to use image granted by Nick Skillcom).
These are interesting, given the wording of the principal standards from the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL): “Identify the need for innovation and improvement; Develop a process and common language for change; Maintain their values whilst adapting flexibly and strategically to changes in the environment; Embed a culture of continuous improvement (AITSL, 2015).
Innovation: In order to recognise necessary innovations, I need to identify my passion. What’s my passion? Literacy. Quality literature. Education of children. Helping others find their passion. Encouraging colleagues to promote the social and emotional learning of students.
Professional Goals: 1. linking my practices to research; 2. linking my practices to the ASLA librarian standards.
Photo by Tim Marshall on Unsplash
Leading from the middle:
The whole premise behind this is to build capacity in others, which is what we do as teachers every day (Gottlieb, 2012). First we must lead by doing, and must get to know our team at a personal level. Gottlieb (2012) has many ideas about how to run a meeting or series of meetings to achieve this.
Morning meetings that build personal connections link to the teacher/students’ ‘morning meeting’ idea in the new wave of positive behaviour for learning and trauma informed practice pedagogy promoted by the Berry Street Educational Model (BSEM) or the Responsive Classroom.
Gottlieb (2012) also suggest we create a website page of our team ‘biographies’ to help team members get to know each other and reinforce such things as: What are your values or strengths? What excites you about our strategic plan or mission? Why are the things we do in our library important? What is your personal journey that has brought you here, or what is your personal teaching and learning philosophy?
Well hell’s bells, I thought of this ‘Spotlight’ idea too about two years ago and my supervisor at the time thought it was a great idea! Unfortunately, his son fell ill and he had to move away before the idea came to fruition (and his replacement did not renew my contract). Time to dust off the idea and utilise it in my future library!
Implementing an innovation culture (not a change culture!):
Bitmoji – Climate
Opinion based on my own experience: Changing the work culture in a school is a really big deal. Some might even say, insurmountable. When inundated with ‘top down’ policies, budget constraints, and a ‘to be run like a business’ mantra (influenced by a employment policy for administration staff that literally advocates for nepotism; ‘local schools local decisions;’ promotion on ‘merit’ being rorted – particularly for leadership positions; the bullying of bureaucrats and top-level executives resulting in the bullying of leaders; resulting in bullying of teachers, resulting in bullying of students, resulting in bullying on the playground; the oversupply of teachers (particularly new scheme teachers) in primary and the undersupply in secondary; the push to employ more (new scheme) temporary contract teachers (who struggle with building relationships with students – one of the main indicators of academic success) in primary over offering permanent positions – pitting the temps’ against each other in competition for the few permanent positions that arise; laying off temps in favour of ‘free trial’ teachers in from the city on incentive schemes, etc) trying to change a school culture from the bottom up, (or ‘the middle’ as per Gottlieb, 2012) at this stage is all but futile.
And while I agree that we need to develop as teachers, I am struck by Lortie’s (1975 in Oberg, 2011) terms “presentism, conservatism; and individualism” as being hinders to the change process. When I read this, I saw it as the bureaucratic level trends in society and global political trends rather than or in addition to the trends in teacher attitudes towards ‘change’ / innovation.
A Google dictionary search defines the terms as: “Presentism: uncritical adherence to present-day attitudes, especially the tendency to interpret past events in terms of modern values and concepts.”…”Conservatism: commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation; (or) the holding of political views that favour free enterprise, private ownership, and socially conservative ideas.”…”Individualism: the habit or principle of being independent and self-reliant; (or) a social theory favouring freedom of action for individuals over collective or state control.”
Wealth doesn’t ‘trickle down,’ but leadership attitudes seem to, as supported by Harvard Business Review (Zenger & Folkman, 2016).
The trick is to try to stop the ‘trickle down’ effect from reaching the students – and in that, the buck stops with me! I’m reminded of the social emotional lesson (learned from BSEM trauma informed practice teacher training) that I teach to students about things they can control. (I can’t control the bureaucrats or political arena, but I can control myself!)
Thus, to combat anti-innovative mindsets, I will aim to address my personal presentism, conservatism and individualism mindset(s) through: professional development, personal reflection, collaboration, questioning the validity of top-down changes (such as data collection, standardised testing, and mandatory curriculum), as well as battling the conservative practices of social inequity and lack of cohesion that trickle down to school inequities–further disadvantaging marginalised students (Oberg, 2011).
Regarding ‘top down’ changes and conservative practices: I will confidently ask my team(s) the question: ‘How can this innovation (such as a behaviour peg chart or stoplight ‘welfare’ policy), which is intended to improve teaching and learning, contribute to making a difference for all stakeholders and all students, or will it make a difference only for those already advantaged (such as those who are meeting outcomes, have social capital, or who come from economically stable, privileged backgrounds)?’ (Oberg, 2011 p.2).
I will get to know the teaching and learning philosophies influencing teaching practices, the school’s attitudes towards innovation (or if it is simply ‘change’), how the teachers interact (in isolation or collaboratively), the executive team roles and goals, and the methods for determining success – both professionally and academically (Pratt, 2017; Oberg, 2011, p.2; Green 2011).
I will proactively start in ‘my’ library by being patient with the innovation process (Pratt, 2017; Oberg, 2011), working flexibly and collaboratively with all stakeholders, setting SMART goals that are based on both the school mission/strategic plan/library mission/strategic plan of improving teaching and learning as well as based on evidence/research based innovations of 21st century teaching practices such as differentiation (Oberg, 2011; Green 2011).
Things I currently lack but need in a future teacher librarian role (according to Green (2011, p.23)): “established authoritative position, credibility amongst peers, a vision that is based on best practice and, importantly, a mandate to implement or produce change (innovation).”
I need to utilise my skills in linking practice to researched evidence, marketing, ICT and QTR (as well as from training and experience received from BSEM, L3, AL and TEN, etc) in my library and collaborate with teachers, offering professional development in these areas, in order to help them utilise evidence-based practices, helpful computer technologies, effective lesson structures or to professionally and collaboratively evaluate their lessons or units of work (Green 2011).
References
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2015). Interactive leadership profiles. In AITSL.Retrieved from https://legacy.aitsl.edu.au/leadership-profiles/interactive-profiles/leading-improvement-innovation-and-change
Pennington, R. (n.d.). How to make change work. In Educational leaders: Leading and managing change. Retrieved from http://www.educationalleaders.govt.nz/Leading-change/Leading-and-managing-change
Pratt, A. (2017). The challenge of implementing change. SCIS Connections, 103. Retrieved from https://www.scisdata.com/connections/issue-103/the-challenge-of-implementing-change
Skillcom, N. (2019). What is innovation? 15 experts share their innovation definition. Retrieved from https://www.ideatovalue.com/inno/nickskillicorn/2016/03/innovation-15-experts-share-innovation-definition/
Zenger, J. & Folkman, J. (2016). The trickle down effect of good and bad leadership. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/01/the-trickle-down-effect-of-good-and-bad-leadership
Leading change, solving problems, building teams, effective communication & conflict resolution
Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash
Kotter’s 8 steps for leading change (in Madsen, 2016):
Create urgency – a compelling case for change
Form a powerful coalition – a team formed with key people as change champions
Create a vision for change – short, clear, understandable, emotional, relevant and creative
Communicate the vision – showcase it and demonstrate it
Remove obstacles – physical or emotional, fears, concerns; use feedback to overcome obstacles
Create short term wins – phases or steps where each step offers reward
Build on the change – repeat the steps 1-6 so that it becomes routine
Anchor the change – embed it into every day practice
“When facing a problematic situation, people can consciously choose to draw on powerful ways of thinking and acting—such as striving for accuracy and drawing on past knowledge. And as a person becomes more disposed to use a particular facet of practical intelligence, that disposition can grow and become more sophisticated” (Claxton, et al., 2016 p. 4).
Soft Skills / Dispositions / & 7 Ways to Problem Solve:
Soft skills or the preferred term: ‘dispositions’ are necessary for today’s workforce: effective communication, collaboration, ability solve problems and fitting in within the school vision. Claxton (et al., 2016)
Removing obstacles & Problem solving is probably the most challenging aspect of soft skills/dispositions (that and fitting in to the school vision – or what is perceived as the school vision). Complex problems cannot be solved easily and have to have a different approach as listed below (BNET Video, 2011; McNamara, 2017; & Belbin, 2010):
Define the problem / Identifying needs in a statement or group of statements from stakeholders: What, where, how, with whom, when and why is a problem happening and what is the most urgent aspect? (Role titles: shapers and coordinators);
Collect data about the problem (the what) and its causes (Role titles: Team members);
Analyse the data for the cause (the why) (Monitors, Evaluators and Specialists);
Plan a solution or action plan and implement it (the how); Consider what end result we want, plan the steps for success (use SMART steps), identify resources required including time and participants; and determine the roles of each stakeholder for the process; (Role titles: Plants and Resource investigators);
Evaluate the success or failure based on more data; How will we know we have achieved our goal and solved the problem?; (Role titles: Monitors, Evaluators and Specialists)
Standardise a solution – make it work in other areas; (Role titles: Implementors and Coordinators); and
Learn something from this process as a team- what did we do well / poorly / where to next? (Role titles: Motivators; Team workers; Resource investigators; Completer finishers & Implementors).
This problem solving process is also applicable to our teaching practice as pointed out by Claxton (et. al., 2016, p.4), in that we can encourage soft skills / dispositions in our students by having them solve problems by asking themselves questions like:
“How can I draw on my past successes with such problems? What do I already know about the problem, and what resources do I have or might I generate? How might I approach this problem flexibly, looking at the situation in a fresh way? How can I draw upon my repertoire of problem-solving strategies? To make this challenge clearer, can I break this problem into its component parts and develop a strategy for understanding and accomplishing each step? Are there data I can draw on? How do my beliefs, values, and goals interact with this problem? Are any attitudes or emotions blocking—or enhancing—my progress?”
Photo by Providence Doucet on Unsplash
What is a team?
While reading Belbin (2010) I am struck by the realisation of what was motivating my previous employer to choose me as the teacher who needed to be the one to not have their contract renewed: he didn’t believe I conformed or ‘fit’ into his vision of the school or the culture he and his executive team were building…and maybe there were times that I was taking a counter-productive role…?
It is interesting to me that Belbin (2010) suggests that the word ‘team’ is often maligned as to mean a ‘group’, ‘flock,’ ‘squad,’ or ‘audience’ rather than what it should be: reciprocated and dynamic engagement between unique and varied individuals.
Effective companies create a balanced or hybrid culture &/or a hybrid team, capable of protecting the company from problems that arise and the destructive work culture cycle [As a ‘team’ arises (however it may come about), a ‘visionary’ work culture is created and the need to be connected to the culture results in conformity. Conformity then results in an inability to speak up and solve problems, which, in turn, results in a leaders becoming ‘hard nosed’ towards members of the team in order to motivate and engage them. A group of leaders become ‘the shapers’ and a group of followers become ‘the team’ (Belbin, 2010)].
Creating a balanced team in 8 steps:
Creating a balanced team begins with the vision of employment based on a need for a diverse range of team members, rather than someone who ‘fits’ with those already employed – a focus on skills rather than personality or conformity (Belbin, 2010);
Goals of the company need to be clear as this will effect the creation of individual job roles (Belbin, 2010);
Roles need to be well communicated so that all stakeholders are knowledgable about the abilities within the team (Belbin, 2010);
Roles need to be flexible, so that as the team grows or changes, so too can the roles and voids can be filled or accommodated (Belbin, 2010);
There are many kinds of roles that people can have, but according to Porteus, (n.d).; and Roberts, (2012), they all have one of three themes: Roles for tasks: Initiator- contributor: suggests new ideas; Information seeker: clarifies details; Opinion seeker or consensus tester: looks for opinions or values of others; Elaborator or clarifier: provides examples; and Orienter: summarises and keeps everyone focused. Maintenance roles (working smoothly): Encourager: Offers acceptance or praise; Harmoniser: mediator in conflicts; Expresser: senses group feelings and seeks clarification; Gatekeeper: keeps communication flowing; Compromiser: one who attempts conflict resolution; and Standard setter: testing overall group satisfaction with the process. Counterproductive roles: Aggressor: putting others down; Blocker / Un-cooperator: negative, stubborn and difficult; Withdrawer: removed from interactions either physically or mentally; Side-conversationalist: whispering, giggling, or having private conversations that distract or exclude others; Degrader: puts people down either directly or through jokes; or Dominator: is controlling or monopolises the group;
Start with a talented person in the required area and find a manager who can relate well to that person, defending, guiding, supporting or mentoring them (Belbin, 2010);
Keep team numbers small wherever possible (Belbin, 2010);
The team must form an agreement on their operational style (Belbin, 2010).
Photo of Christy Roe’s training notes from a Skillpath seminar (2002)
14 Rules for Effective Communication:
I worked in a call centre in the finance sector for many years in my 20’s just after I immigrated to Australia. Luckily, my employer was a large, publicly listed company who invested heavily in employee training and as a result, I have an in-depth understanding of communication — I just need to remember it all! Much of what was said in the videos in Module 3.2 (2019) Leading Change was a refresher for me.
We need to recognise and follow the school’s hierarchy (seeking clarification and improving policies in times of doubt);
We need to keep communication open even in challenging situations, utilising a variety of communication formats and refrain from being distracted;
We need to remember to begin and end with positives and emphasise areas in which we agree (particularly, in Australian settings, performing an Acknowledgement of Country and brief welcome to individuals at the start of every meeting);
We must consider the communication device carefully, taking into account ease of communication, our (direct) words (30% of communication) as well as the other (indirect) 70% of communication: body language, tone and volume (or lack thereof in digital formats);
We need to consider our own encoding barriers and the barriers of our receiver: environment preferences, knowledge, age, personality, habits, background, social customs, emotional and mental diversity;
Because of the barriers listed in #6, we also need to make a real effort to be careful and thoughtful of what we say and how we say it, e.g. adjusting language to suit the situation; using jargon, technical terms versus informal language; and trying to use ‘I’ statements wherever possible as opposed to ‘you’ statements;
We need to be respectful, (rather than the most recently maligned ‘political correctness’) in both formal and informal situations;
We need to be clear, concise and consistent when communicating across all platforms, regardless of whether your communication is about positive or negative information;
We need to keep and open mind and be willing to compromise – and not just expect compromise from the receiver;
The receiver decodes the message amongst ‘noise’ in the background, physical, mental or emotional issues that must also be considered; We need to monitor the receiver for active listening;
Request or expect regular and ongoing feedback from the receiver (eg. ‘what I heard you say was…’) which we should not be jumping to conclusions, getting distracted nor thinking of our own response but instead, we must actively listen to the receiver’s message and remember what they have said; and
We should respect the receiver’s confidentiality and avoid gossip [‘triangles.]
We need to follow up and action anything that comes up in our conversations and survey our team to see if we are being productive leaders, such as a 360 Degree Feedback Survey (or similar).
Photo by Chris Sabor on Unsplash
Conflict Resolution:
Conflict (or ‘dissensus’) can be a great avenue for ‘win/wins’ and authentic change in an organisation (Plocharczyk, 2013, p.308). Our job as leaders in times of conflict is: timely, transparent and open communication, listening (actively), responding with new points of view and perspectives, and resolution by encouraging creative innovations – never avoidance (Plocharczyk, 2013, p.311). We need to focus on the process/’the how’ the work is being done, rather than the people/’the who’ doing the work (Johnson in Plocharczyk, 2013 p.316). We need to have proactive, clear guidelines and policies for behaviour defined and communicated simultaneously, so that everyone understands the policy and the restorative practices that will occur in the event of inappropriate behaviours.
Types of conflict (more than one can occur at a time): Intra-personal (conflict within yourself); Solution: releasing anxiety through talking to others; Interpersonal (individual conflict with another person); Solution: adjustments or mediation; Intra-group (individual conflict within members of a team); Solution: embracing the conflict as necessary part of problem-solving (see this article by Jacob Stringer on New Compass about consensus versus dissensus) and goal achievement or mediation; Intergroup (a group conflict with another group in the organisation); Solution: clarification of goals, interests, competition, resources, or group identity (Evans, 2013); and Task /Organisational (individual conflict with others based on the constructs or policies of an organisation such as tight budgets, shared resources, unequal workloads, unclear future employment, boredom or undefined values, goals, objectives or role descriptions); Solution: ‘integrative conflict management’, collaboration, analytical thinking, problem solving, mediation from a third party, or clarification/revision of company policies (Plocharczyk, 2013, p.311).
So what kind of conflict manager will I be? I took the survey suggested in the module but I didn’t really get much out of it. The questions seemed repetitive and out of context. I often get emotional at conflict situations, depending on who they are with. (I have anxiety, undiagnosed, in all social situations but particularly those that are new or unfamiliar). I recognise that and try to listen more than I speak.
I like the idea of having a policy on behaviour (like the NSW DET Code of Conduct) and utilising the Positive Behaviour for Learning / Restorative practice techniques that we use with students also in my work team. I realise there are those who disagree that behaviour is communication but I do believe that it is. And it is my job to listen to that behaviour and act appropriately. I will try to use Judy Ringer’s checklist in times of conflict, and a 360 Degree Feedback Survey (or similar) to make sure I am communicating and responding appropriately… Hope I will be up to the challenge!
Belbin, R. M. (2010). The art of building a team. Chapter 9, pp. 97-106. Team roles at work(2nd ed.). Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central.
Bender, Y. (2005). Building effective communication, Part 1, p.3-18. The tactful teacher: Effective communication with parents, colleagues and administrators. Chicago, IL: Nomad Press. Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central.
BNET Video. (2011, June 8). 7 step problem solving. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZXDGQSuF9I [4.38 mins]
Claxton, G., Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2016). Hard thinking about soft skills. Educational leadership. 73-6 p.60-64. Retrieved from https://www.learningpersonalized.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Hard-Thinking-about-Soft-Skills.pdf
Davies, L. (n.d.). Effective Communication. In Kelly Bear. Retrieved from http://www.kellybear.com/TeacherArticles/TeacherTip15.html
McNamara, C. (2017). Problem solving and decision-making. In Free Management Library, Retrieved from http://managementhelp.org/personalproductivity/problem-solving.htm#guide
Plocharczyk, L. (2013). Managing conflict and incivility in academic libraries (part 12). In K.Blessinger& P.Hrycaj(Eds.),Workplace culture in academic libraries. Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central. [Elsevier Science version]
Porteus, A. (n.d.). Roles people play in groups. StanfordUniversity. Retrieved March 5, 2017 from https://web.stanford.edu/group/resed/resed/staffresources/RM/training/grouproles.html
Based on my readings of Module 4 and 5, I’ve added a GoogleDocs Survey to help create or evaluate a strategic plan, mission, vision and values to the left menu bar of this blog.
Here are also some practical websites offering tips and steps for creating and evaluating the process of a shared vision, strategic plan, objectives and goals:
ETL504 Module 3.1-Change in Organisations (2019): Improving the impact of change conflict with a shared vision and strategies for improving the work culture or climate
Photo by Ross Findon on Unsplash
Change can be put into effect by various ‘change agents’(managers, team members or consultants) and can be planned or unplanned and is either required based on internal or or external demands. Change from external demands is from sources such as: the marketplace / SES of the LGA; governing bodies / laws / regulations such as those required by ACARA or NESA; technological advances; the labour market such as the availability or oversupply of teachers; and economics / funding / the economy / budgets (Module 3.1, 2019).
Change required based on internal demands is from things such as: the school structure / eg. the school’s strategic plan, the library’s strategic plan, the school vision, the library vision, the school mission statement or the library mission statement; the workforce–from the principal to the GA; equipment, eg. buildings / pencils and; attitudes–the various backgrounds, experiences, religions, ethnicities and cultural groups of the stakeholders of the school (Module 3.1, 2019).
Some blockers to change might be caused by uncertainty, personal loss for ‘the way we’ve always done it,’ or genuine concern that change isn’t in the schools best interest (Module 3.1, 2019).
Change Management Strategies: “Planned, incremental change is always best” because work, workflow, attitudes & behaviours are all impacted by change (Module 3.1, 2019).
Change is initially confusing and challenging, but leaders can reduce change conflict or change-induced fatigue or stress by: linking the benefits of the change to the school vision or long term goals, anticipating where conflicts might arise and having a plan ready for how to ease them, education, communication, participation at all levels of the organisation and leadership facilitation, support & negotiation (rather than manipulation or coercion) (Module 3, 2019).
Bitmoji – Climate Work climate or culture:
In schools it is key that we create a ‘learning organisation’ within 7 dimensions classified by Kools and Stoll (2016): “1) developing and sharing a vision centred on the learning of all students; 2) creating and supporting continuous learning opportunities for all staff; 3) promoting team learning and collaboration among staff; 4) establishing a culture of inquiry, innovation and exploration; 5) establishing embedded systems for collecting and exchanging knowledge and learning; 6) learning with and from the external environment and larger learning system; and 7) modelling and growing learning leadership” (Kools & Stoll, 2016, p.3). This can also be understood by points listed in this infographic by elearning infographics.com (2013):
eLearning Infographics. (2013). (Image provided for uploading and embedding into blogs for free by eLearning Infographics).
Teams should also meet regularly for ‘wellness checks,’ including all stakeholders (leaders, staff, students and families) and change agents must remember that people learn best through: interdependence, change and the social constructs of reflective practise, conversing, inquiring and acting (Fleet, et al., 2016).
Fleet, et al., (2016) point out that positive change initiatives require: effective leadership, a positive school culture or climate, effective employment procedures, support, participation at all levels of the school (promoting a sense of respect for leaders who are able to perform the tasks that they expect others to be able to perform, individual ownership, consensual involvement & team-wide willingness to participate in changes or innovation) and creating a shared vision and mission statement.
Bitmoji: Vision Quest Shared vision:
‘Transformational’ or ‘distributional’ leaders need to develop a shared school vision in order to develop trusting relationships, solve complex problems, have a clear focus on teaching and learning, and a willingness to engage with the community (Fleet, et al., 2016; & Holmes et al., 2013). When creating a shared vision, Holmes, et al. (2013) reminds us that it takes a lot of time (sometimes frustratingly), as well as effective communication skills and patience in order to ensure inclusivity. Furthermore, sharing and communicating the school’s journey of change initiatives with the community promotes a shared understanding (Fleet, et al., 2016).
If every change or proposal (organisational, financial, teaching & learning) links to the school vision and strategic management plan then the changes are ‘well justified’ can receive whole school and organisational support and funding and this, in turn, further contributes to a positive school learning culture or climate and creates a ‘bottom up’ (rather than ‘top down’) influence (Fleet, et al., 2016; & Holmes, et al., 2013).
Bitmoji: ‘Bottom Up!’ influence Top down influence:
‘Top down’ influences often sidetrack school innovations, change or reforms and super-cede relationship building because trust takes more time than what is allowed by governing bodies (Holmes, et al., 2013). ‘Top down’ mandated changes have very little uptake by teachers, because they react with a range of negative emotions, believe they aren’t given neither time nor education to understand changes nor support prior to or at implementation, and that changes from the top are transitory and will soon be obsolete (Clement, 2014, p. 42).
A whole school approach to change is more likely to have teachers driving the change based on the school goals and agendas and within their own time parameters, leading to more understanding and less stress or conflict (Clement, 2014, p. 43). ‘Change fatigue’ or ‘innovation fatigue’ or ‘reform fatigue’ can result in teachers as we are in a constant cycle of mandated education reform (such as continual curriculum change) which presents as dissatisfaction, exhaustion and perceptions of increased workload, lack of support, training and resources and unrealistic mandated implementation timelines (Dilkes, et al., 2014).
“Cynical, realistic and even enthusiastic teachers suffer change fatigue after years of rapid and continual curriculum change” (Dilkes, et al., 2014 p.45).
Bitmoji: Following the leader Leadership:
“Principalsmust be managers as well as leaders, dealing with the pragmatics of managing a complex system, being the human face of relationships amongst school personnel, learners & the community, as well as offering constructive visionary leadership to carry the school through the mundane, through the complexities of diversity, politics & bureaucratic infrastructures to the desired future” (Fleet, et al., 2016, p. 73). Humour, patience, flexibility, accountability, commitment and thoughtfulness are the skills of “visionary” leaders, as well as the ability to understand that knowledge and genuine learning communities and pedagogies are socially constructed (Fleet, et al., 2016 p 74).
Teachers can often express that they feel stress, physically, mentally and behaviourally (Module 3, 2019) and some ideas to help alleviate stress are: develop a whole school approach to growth mindset, flow and/or mindfulness; encourage a work-life balance (eg. stick to a work timetable then stop working at that agreed time-including emails, and think about something other than work every day, etc); do a ‘what I can control versus what I can’t control’ mind-map in order to identify stress triggers; ‘don’t sweat the small stuff’ by prioritising or focusing on what really matters to you or what is a top goal; do a ‘stress’ survey and discuss the stresses identified openly as a team; find someone to talk to or to collaborate with; set S.M.A.R.T. goals; accept and give recognition to and from colleagues; seek and offer appropriate training and supports; and say ‘no’ and encourage others to say ‘no’ sometimes (Bailey, 2013; Cross, 2015).
Reflection on change conflict, fatigue and stress:
Is change conflict, fatigue and stress in my school representative of: individual and whole school stress management or coping mechanisms not being in place; a lack of a true growth mindset in teachers or leadership, a lack of a ‘invested interest’ from all stakeholders because of ‘top down’ mandated change, a lack of understanding of the benefits of the particular change and how it relates to the school vision and student outcomes, poor communication about the change(s), a lack of understanding about how to implement a change, insufficient time given to implement the change, a history of consistent change creating a ‘why bother’ mentality, backlash from the community who’ve been left out of the decision making process or who haven’t had adequate communication about the change, or a reaction to the change itself due to consistent change creating ‘change fatigue?’
Reflection on downsizing:
Bitmoji – You’re Fired
I have worked for a clothing company who when into administration and closed down.
I was also retrenched once from a marketing position.
Later, as a temporary teacher, I did not have my contract renewed at one school and
I did not have my contract renewed at another school the following year.
In the first and second and third instances, I felt that my employer looked after me to some degree, two found me work elsewhere (to some degree), one gave me access to external counselling and an external c.v. creation training service at no cost, but one (the last and most recent) did hardly anything to ensure my mental and financial health was in any way looked after as recommended by Wolfe (2019). I put this down to inexperience and arrogance of the leader(s) who thought downsizing by not renewing my contract was in the best interest of their school…although, it would have been better to have asked the staff for alternatives to laying off a teacher (Wolfe, 2019).
Similarly, as suggested by Wolfe (2019), my extreme level of poor mental health was not assisted by the lack of communication as to why I was selected to be ‘downsized’ but the other 8 temporary teachers were not, many of whom were not communicated with regarding my situation, creating a terribly insecure work culture (without any communication from the top, most asked me what happened, resulting in further distress).
References
Bailey, A. (2013, November 6). 10 ideas to help teachers beat stress. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2013/nov/06/teachers-beat-stress-10-ideas
Change in Organisations: 3.1 [Study notes]. (2019). In ETL504: Teacher librarian as leader. Retrieved from Charles Sturt University Faculty of Education and the Art’s Interact 2 website: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_42385_1&content_id=_2928579_1
Cross, D. (2015). Teacher well being and its impact on student learning [Slide presentation]. Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.research.uwa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/2633590/teacher-wellbeing-and-student.pdf
elearning infographics.com. (2013). How is a learning organisation differentiated. Retrieved from https://elearninginfographics.com/how-is-a-learning-organisation-differentiated-infographic/
Kools, M. & Stoll, L. (2016). What Makes a School a Learning Organisation?, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 137, OECD Publishing, Paris, Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/5jlwm62b3bvh-en.
Holmes K., Clement, J. & Albright, J. (2013).The complex task of leading educational change in schools,School Leadership & Management, 33:3, 270283, DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2013.800477
[Reflection of ETL401 & ETL503 (The TL Role in Collaboration)] (*addendum 16 September 2019 for ETL504)
I think I’ve been pretty clear in my stance on the impact of temporary and casual work environments to the collaborative climate. If not, then I suppose I should mention here how much it wears away at collaboration to have individuals fighting for the renewals of their contracts: completely and utterly.
The casualisation of the teaching workforce, particularly in my personal working context, is not something I am able to change as an individual. Helping create a collaborative climate (despite the political climate) however, I can try to change.
Before we jump head first into collaborating with classroom teachers on an inquiry unit of work, let’s take a step back. I mean, yes we want to design and implement inquiry learning and literature programs and we certainly want to help embed digital formats. But we need to confront the elephant in the room in stead of simply shrugging our shoulders and saying ‘some teachers just don’t want to collaborate.’
I would argue that some teachers haven’t had positive collaborative experiences in the past (experiencing – much like a lot of students must experience – forced compliancerather than collaboration) or some teachers expect judgement in disguise rather than collaboration.
We ran into this in a school where we were trying to roll out Quality Teaching Rounds (QTR). We surveyed the staff to identify their concerns and these were the results:
Q. Why do we have to? (Comfort Zones: Not comfortable being watched / observed / critiqued; Doubt ‘teamwork’ capabilities; Criteria for involvement unclear; Feel pressured to do it).
A. (summarised) Be the change you wish to see in the world. Also, the NSW DET require a colleague observe you once a year so it might as well have a clear structure and limits and offer real improvement to your teaching.
Q. What’s the benefit? (Is there follow up; What do ‘we’ get out of it; Evidence of benefits; How does it improve the school; How valuable is it versus mentoring which we do already).
A. (shown QTR training slides proving benefits based on research)
Q. How could we possibly do it? (Logistics / Resources: What types of lessons have to be observed, eg 1:1, whole class, small group; Time off class; Casuals; Time required for prep work outside school hours).
A. (Thankfully, the principal had budgeted for the resources and did not have a set idea of what sort of lessons were required for observation).
The QTR team did our best with the resources and research provided by the QT Framework training to answer these concerns in a specially allocated staff meeting. We then surveyed the staff to determine their level of interest, which was about 70% in favour, and a few other teachers joined the second ‘Quality Teaching Round.’
Furthermore, in this process and in the readings for ETL401 Module 4, it occurred to me that an aspect of (primary) teaching that impacts collaboration is an ingrained and embedded culture of isolation. A teacher, predominantly alone in a room of students (or a Teacher Librarian on their own in the library) cannot effectively collaborate with other teachers as well as someone working in an office filled with cubicles or a group of engineers on a building site.
Another aspect of collaboration are the social norms of either Australian culture, or the culture of a town or city, or the culture of a school context. An immigrant and possible ASD person myself, I struggle with social norms on a daily basis.
I am also struck by the massive gap in the expectations of our TL role as collaborators, where we are expected to just jump in there and collaborate with teaching and learning programs with people who don’t know anything about us and of whom we also know very little…it is a bit ‘chicken before the egg’!
The OECD-UNICEF (2016) Education Working paper’s ‘dimensions of learning’ for organisation transformation touches on this (developing and sharing a student centred vision, having a culture of support for staff learning opportunities, promoting team collaborative professional development and embedding systems that support it, establishing daily expectations or ‘culture’ of inquiry, innovation and exploration–including staff in leadership roles, and learning with and from larger learning systems outside of the school context or direct governing body).
Logistically though, what does this look like? I love the idea of the ATSI community’s ‘yarning circle’. But how do I help create a ‘yarning circle’ or gathering spot where we can get to know each other and our contexts and socialise professionally? How do I help draw people out of their shells and into the safe environment of a collaborative climate?
Creating a Collaborative Climate (The triple C’s):
I can’t do it alone. There are things the executive must do to help improve the collaborative climate and things that they will need from me as well. However, once I’ve developed a rapport with the principal by helping them achieve their ideas, I will liaise with the principal to allow for time and budget amounts to be determined and allocated to enable some or all of the following of MY (8) ideas for creating a collaborative environment each year as follows:
In an allocated staff meeting or staff development day, we sit in a ‘yarning circle’ and discuss ourselves, our school and any concerns openly and freely, using the ideas from this link as a guide: ATSI community’s ‘yarning circle’.
Everyone completes the School Context Survey (draft version also in links on the right side of this blog) either collaboratively or on their own in time provided.
Everyone takes the VIA Character Survey and shares their top 5 / 10 character traits for the year (they can change slightly each year).
A photo of the teacher is either created or supplied with their permission (see #7 below for format ideas) using the Photo Permission Form Template created by the American Library Association (or similar).
The results of the school context, VIA, and philosophy surveys can then be sent electronically to the TL to be added to a electronic photo of the teacher(s) (with their permission), &/or collated and presented on an intranet or school website (which, unfortunately I do not have at present as I am not attached to a particular school).
I even have ideas (I have a marketing background, don’t forget!) on what the end result would look like and have pinned these ideas onto my Teacher Spotlight Pinterest board. (This board could also, theoretically, be made available for all of the school staff to edit).
And finally, (and this is where it gets a bit heavy), introduce Quality Teaching Rounds (in which I am an advocate and trained to deliver) to the school at least once a year if not twice, depending on budget and time allowances.
From here, collaborating on programming and teaching collaborative inquiry units are a walk in the park.
*16 September 2019 ETL504 addendum: See the template link on the left of the blog for initiating a collaborative inquiry unit with a classroom teacher Created by Christy Roe, based on suggestions from Carr, J. (Ed.), (2008) p.13-14; 28; 39; and Bishop, (2011) p.7.
WHEW! Its a big task. I hope I’m up to the challenge!
Carr, J. (Ed.). (2008). Leadership for excellence: Insights of the national school library media program of the year award winners. Retrieved from iG Library.
OECD-UNICEF. (2016). What makes a school a learning organisation? A guide for policy makers, school leaders and teachers. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/school/school-learning-organisation.pdf
If we want ‘customer-driven, socially rich, and collaborative model of service and content delivery’ (module 2) then we must stop asking ‘why’ or ‘when’ and start asking ‘how.’
While reading Adner & Kapoor (2016) it occurred to me that, like all change processes, there will be roadblocks. This includes access to technology (either because of infrastructure, financial or intellectual constraints), as well as resistance to change from staff or families who are either change fatigued or stuck in the web1.0 mentalities. Perhaps there are issues around work-life balance, either for adults (addicted to screens and social media or overwhelmed by the need to take work home or have work cross over into the social sphere) or children (similarly addicted to screen time). These will all need to be considered in the 4 phases of creating a group digital presence or organisation’s digital learning environment (discussed at length in previous blog posts).
With the COVID-19 lockdown, the Digital Learning Environment (DLE) issues are relevant like never before. Teachers who have been allowed to stick to their paper programs, regurgitating content from previous classes that they’ve taught or from purchased sources and shying away from digital tools and applications, must now think on their feet to create online programs to suit their classes and individual students.
Reflection on change conflict, fatigue and stress: 
I think I’ve been pretty clear in my stance on the impact of temporary and casual work environments to the collaborative climate. If not, then I suppose I should mention here how much it wears away at collaboration to have individuals fighting for the renewals of their contracts: completely and utterly.