Challenges for a Christian School Community

I write this post as a reflection on my recent work in a Christian school community. Being involved in such a close knit environment, and comparing it with my many years of teaching in the public sector, led me to consider what it was that made a Christian school community so different. And what were the implications of that difference on the lives and relationships within the community. I begin my reflection with the story of Guy Doud, US Teacher of the Year, but move from there to explore what we mean by stakeholders, community and very briefly some of the challenges that Christian school communities face and will need to find answers to in these next few years, if they are to survive being different and not bowing to the pressures to conform to the ever growing ‘business’ mentality.

Introduction

Guy Doud, at one time US Teacher of the Year, is a Christian educator in the public school system in the US. In the recording of his speech for Focus on the Family, he mentions as part of his story, an Asian professor who taught him at university. Doud recalls that the professor’s simple motivational activity at the start of the year was to say to the students, “Sometimes, me flunk [fail] whole class!”

When I first read this comment, I found it amusing, but yet also objectionable and unpalatable. For despite the amusing and perhaps effective motivating characteristic of Doud’s university lecturer, his technique was far removed from a biblically authentic model of student-teacher relationships, which is one of the most important relationships that develop in the Christian school community. Doud’s humorously states he has borrowed that technique, but what becomes clear from Doud’s story is that he has adopted a Christian education paradigm reflected in a unique blend of sharing truth in a context of a warm, trusting, accountable, mentoring relationship between teacher and student.

Doud’s story is based on just one of many bilateral relationships that exist in the school community, that of teacher–student (there are many others, parent-teacher, teacher-senior management, and so on). Although schools as such receive little mention in the Bible, the subject of relationships in general, and teacher–student relationships in particular, receive strategic attention. Jesus (in Luke 6:39-41) reminds us that teachers, when they have done their very best will have shaped their students in their own image. Furthermore, if the teachers are ignorant or blind in a certain area or perspective, then their students will be blind in that area also, a sobering thought! Doud in the second half of his story quotes Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:2, “Your very lives are a letter that anyone can read by just looking at you” (The Message). Paul’s identification of good teaching (in 1 Thessalonians 2:1-12) with characteristics of mothers and fathers is a reminder that good teachers are not just conveying information. They carry out their task by being involved in the lives of their students in a caring, self-giving manner.

It is sobering to reflect on what that means in the context of the relationships which exist in the Christian School Community. What is the impact of these verses for the relationships we share with those with whom we come into daily contact? Our students, other teachers, the admin staff, and any others we connect with on a daily basis, within the school community, those now often called our ‘stakeholder’.

Perhaps a good place to start to unpack what these relationships mean, in fact, what we mean by school community is with an exploration of the question, who are the “stakeholders” in Christian education? I want to investigate this concept taken from the business literature, yet all to often used, and see how it relates to the concept of community in Christian education. What does it mean to be a teacher in a Christian school and how does the term stakeholder ‘fit’ with a developing view of community. Maybe it doesn’t, and Christians need to come up with a term that better reflects what we do!

I also want to look briefly at some of the challenges to community – an important idea to explore as part of this topic, recognizing some of these challenges may help us identify ways of overcoming them.

Stakeholders

I will begin by developing an understanding of what the term stakeholder means. It is a term that is loosely thrown around in education, but may mean different things to different people. The term is drawn from business, in particular stakeholder theory as first defined by Edward Freeman (1984) and referred to those who in the corporate world “really counted”, the shareholders who had invested funds in to the business.

However, as is always the case, the theory has moved on from this first attempt at defining, and with regards to the business world has broadened considerably. Donaldson and Preston (1995) argue that stakeholders should include those to who the corporation has a moral obligation, whilst Mitchell, Agle, and Wood (1997) define stakeholders in terms of those who wield power over the corporation, those who have the ability to impose its will on the corporation. In the corporate world the primary stakeholders are the shareholders, but this has broadened over time, through usage and by law, to include employees, customers, suppliers, and other stakeholders such as the economy of a com­munity and any societal interests (Gillespie & Lucas, 2012).

The language of business infiltrates many areas of our schools (Gross & Godwin, 2005). But stakeholder theory is a theory of the corporation and many would argue that the Christian school is not a corporation! Yet we see the influence of the business language everywhere, the parent/student becomes the ‘customer’ or ‘client’, and schools report annually to the Board and the ‘shareholders’, the members of the association, to whom they are financially accountable. Many Australian Christian schools are in fact run financially as not-for-profits, and there are legal and reporting requirements attached to such a designation.

However, that is not the point of blog post!^[1] What is interesting is that as a result of these changes in our approach and language, we are also changing the way we approach our ‘stakeholders’, our relationship with them is changing as a result. We see parents dropping children off, no longer involved in the school community. We see barriers to entry at the administration desk, so that parents can no longer freely enter the premises. And there are good and real reasons for doing these things. However, taking all this into account, let’s ask the question, should we be considering these members of our school community as our ‘stakeholders, and what are the implications of that on the relationship we share with them. But before we can continue with that question, I want to continue by coming up with a way of looking at the word community.

Definitions and Features of Community

“Community isn't a property, nor is it a territory to be separated and defended against those who do not belong to it. Rather, it is a void, a debt, a gift to the other that also reminds us of our constitutive alterity with respect to ourselves.” (Esposito, 2009)

I love this quote from Esposito, on what community is or is not, because it reflects the word back onto us with regards to the other. The word community is frequently used in contemporary western culture. From the business office to the football team, people are urged to recognise that they live and work in community, and yet we are more individualistic in the 21st century than in most centuries before us. Teachers are encouraged to consider schools as learning communities where collegiality is important (Blake, 2007). But our governments set us up as competitors against each other. And we encourage students to consider themselves as part of the broader school community to increase their sense of belonging (Fennema, 2006), but we encourage them to compete against each other for results. So what do we actually mean when we use this term? And how can we in the Christian school bring it back to this meaning.

The term community has a contested meaning with a changing definition over time (Esposito, 2009). Ancient bible texts do not include the term directly^[2], as the Greek word koinonia, often translated as community in modern versions of the bible, and which contributes to our understanding of the modern word ‘community’, is not the same (see Esposito, 2009, for a thorough explanation of the term). Koinonia literally means ‘joint participation’ and was traditionally translated as fellowship (Philippians 1:5), partnership (Luke 5:10) or even communion (1 Corinthians 10:16) (Pope, 2004). Sichling (2008), and indeed many dictionaries, rightly trace the meaning back to the Latin word commūnitās, meaning ‘common’.

Sichling (2008) traces the definition of the common usage of the word community back to the 14^th Century, where community was based on the organised society and was not at all about the relational; in fact the meaning drew on the notion of the common people, the lowest rank of society. This has important implications for our thinking about community in the Christian school, when we draw on our modern understanding of this word. In fact, the relational aspects of community do not become embedded into the definition and application of the term till sometime between the 17^th and 19^th Centuries. It is the contemporary meaning, according to Sichling, that includes relational qualities, such as connectedness or having a shared common interest or concern, whilst being rooted in a place. This term provides for group identification and the ability for collective action whilst being self regulating and exhibiting social control over its members.

Smith (2013) brings out some further nuances to this contemporary definition, let’s look at these a little closer as they have a significance for our thinking about what it means to have community. He begins with the idea of value, which “bring[s] together a number of elements, for example, solidarity, commitment, mutuality and trust” (p. 2 of printout), entwined with 3 sets of variables, place, interest and communion. I love that he brings this back to communion, the communion of the Christian with Christ. This represents an echo of the biblical meaning of koinonia – as demonstrated in John’s gospel, particularly in chapters 14-15. In these chapters Jesus fully describes the relationship of the Trinity, and His intent in them “is to reproduce among His people on earth a fellowship or communion that is like the oneness with the Trinity” (Greene, 2003, p. 262). Consider for a moment what this would mean for the relationships teachers share with their students, with their fellow teachers, with the administration? Those who come together within the notion of ‘place’, that is the school. This construct of value has tremendous implications for the relationship between the teacher and the student, particularly in a Christian school.

I also want to briefly reflect on the notion of attachment and belonging, which he highlights at the intersection of place and interest, fostered within community. What does this mean for those who attend our schools who have been alienated from the community or those who are a stranger to it? We know what the bible teaches us about the stranger (e.g. Exodus 22:21 and Leviticus 19:10) – but what does that mean in the context of the Christian school community? Smith picks up on this idea of connection in the second of his 3 sections which follow, ‘community as network’. An important aspect as studying the networks, or how people connect into the community, can show us those who are outside of the community, wether deliberately or because of oversight. Or perhaps because they occur at the end of a community, beyond its boundaries?

Smith (2013) asks this important question, where does one community end and another begin? A criticism often made of Christian schools is that they trespass on the church’s domain (Dickens, 2006). At other times, it is argued that the Christian school is an ‘extension’ of the family – what does this mean? And what are the implications? These are difficult questions, and I do not have time to delve into them here, but they are worth reflecting on.

Smith then goes on to explore community as value, our norms and habits, because “to judge the quality of life within a particular community we need to explore what shared expectations there are about the way people should behave – and whether different individuals take these on” (p. 5 of printout). I leave you to read the qualities he lists as important in making up community value – and make connections between these and those in your notion of community.

Finally, Smith explores why fostering community is important in education and finishes with a list of some further readings – these are somewhat dated, but none the less interesting.

We come then to an understanding that community is about place and a common purpose for the group, but also about value, lived out in the trust that we share in each other. It is about ourselves in relationship with the other, we cannot be a community by ourselves, it must be with others with who we have connections over a shared and common interest. And it is about belonging.

Challenges in Community

What will have become evident from the readings quoted in this blog post and listed at the end is that there are a number of challenges in establishing and continuing with community. Just briefly, these include individualisation – the focus on the individual rather than the group as people seek the fulfilment of their own self interest (Isaiah 53:6); a business mindset – the market forces of competition and choice can work against notions of community; and exclusionary behaviours – by encouraging oppressive and narrowing norms that may define the strict boundaries of the community, working against the values identified by Smith (2013) of tolerance, reciprocity and trust.

Conclusion

I have come to the end of this quite lengthy peroration; however, I have covered some important concepts that bear thinking about within a Christian School context. In my reflection I have tried to briefly get you thinking about who are the stakeholders in your community and whether or not we should we be using that term! I have looked at aspects that go to make up the contemporary community, such as the relational qualities of connectedness, having a shared common interest or concern, whilst being rooted in a place, yet having boundaries that both include but also exclude. And I have also, very briefly, begun to grapple with some of the challenges associated with community.

If you have read to the end of this reflection, I challenge you to consider your school community, whether you are a parent, teacher, student, or administrator. I would love to hear your comments, thoughts, or even suggestions for another term than stakeholder?

References:

Blake, C. (2007). Teaching in a Christian school: New teacher induction unit (3rd ed.). Agnes Banks, NSW: National Institute for Christian Education.

Gross, K., & Godwin, P. (2005). Education's Many Stakeholders. University Business September. Retrieved from http://www.universitybusiness.com/article/educations-many-stakeholders.
Dickens, K. (2006). Church and the Christian school. In R. Edlin & J. Ireland (Eds.), Engaging the culture: Christians at work in education. Blacktown, NSW: National Institute for Christian Education.

Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications, Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 65–91.

Doud, G. (2011), Focus on the Family: Teacher of the Year (Part 1), Recorded 29/08/2011; http://www.focusonthefamily.com/popups/media_player.aspx?MediaId={7603E9EA-C5E5-42B3-BD01-7DD81018BBB1}; accessed 25 June, 2013
Esposito, R. (2009). Communitas. The Origin and Destiny of Community. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Fennema, J. (2006). Transforming education: Students. In R. Edlin & J. Ireland (Eds.), Engaging the culture: Christians at work in education. Blacktown, NSW: National Institute for Christian Education.

Greene, A. E. (2003). Community in the Christian school. In Reclaiming the future: A transforming vision (pp. 261–267). Colorado Springs, CO: Purposeful Design.
Gillespie, T., & Lucas, T. (2012). Blurring the Boundaries: Emerging Legal Forms for Hybrid Organizations—Implications for Christian Social Entrepreneurs. The Journal of Biblical Integration in Business, 15(1), 11-28.

 Mitchell, R., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts, Academy of Management Review, 22(4): 853–886.

Pope, K. (2004). 'Fellowship in the Gospel': A Study of the Greek Word Koinonia. Biblical Insights, 4(7), 4-5.

Sichling, F. (2008). Community. Social Work & Society, 6(1), 108-111.

Smith, M. K. (2013). Community. Encyclopedia of Informal Education. Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/community/

---

[1] This is a growing area of study, for those interested in reading more on this issue I suggest delving into the pages of the The Journal of Biblical Integration in Business as a starting place.

[2] For example you will not find the word in the KJV, though the NIV uses the word 84 times.

©Karin Oerlemans 2014

Visible Thinking in the classroom

This has to be one of the most powerful and fun websites for teachers. The routines are innovative and work in classrooms from K to Masters! The ideals are important ways of thinking that as teachers we wish to see established in our students. The documentation processes helps us as teachers to be accountable. Win, win, and win!

I discovered the Visible Thinking website back in 2009 whilst still working at UTAS. And subsequently used it extensively with my university education students, introducing them to this wonderful resource and the skills it contains to help making thinking visible in their classrooms. Over the next few posts I am going to share this and some of my other teaching activities – activities that have worked well for me in the classroom, whether at university or at school.

Why make thinking visible? What is that all about? Let me quote directly from the website:

“Thinking is pretty much invisible. To be sure, sometimes people explain the thoughts behind a particular conclusion, but often they do not. Mostly, thinking happens under the hood, within the marvellous engine of our mind-brain. As the name suggests, the basic strategy is to make thinking visible in the context of learning.” The Visible Thinking website is a past project from the Project Zero team out of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, so you know it has an excellent pedigree.

The website includes a number of great routines for getting students thinking, and becoming aware of their thinking – meta-cognitive processes that help them to engage with the content in new ways, helps them to really start to think about what it is they are learning. And it takes account of the many types of learners.

Let me give an example from practice. This was an activity I conducted in my Year 9 Social Studies class. My unit was based on the Japanese Tsunami. And I used the Think Puzzle Explore routine from the website.

I love this routine, it is a great way to open up a topic. We began by asking the question “Where is Japan?” And as a sub-question – “How do you move an island?” I love the Backward by Design work of by Wiggins and McTighe – and a leading question can be a great hook. I used post it notes – in different colours, colours are great engagers, and students came up with some widely varied ‘this is what I think’ comments about the topic. Then went onto puzzling about the disaster and as this was not the first time I had used this activity, they knew already to think wider – beyond the obvious. And so, many questions were raised as they thought deeply about the crisis, questions such as how does it happen? How do tsunami’s happen, what other countries were affected, did Japan move back (remember it moved 8 ft), how did the world respond, what other disasters have happened, can you stop a tsunami? There were more puzzling questions than our class could possible answer!

We then went on to do some reading about the topic, watched some videos on the interactive whiteboard. Then we went back to the questions and refined them into an Explore board. We asked the question, What did we as a class wish to explore? Eventually, I collected all  the information, took it home, sorted it and came up with 8 group topics based on their post-it-notes. There are times when I will let groups choose themselves and other times when I mix it up a little. This time I assigned the groups. How they worked on those projects! The projects were followed by a personal response assessment, group work followed by individual work, and at the end a group work self-reflection, asking them to rate themselves, how they went on their project, their time management, their work as a team member – I am all about making students take responsibility for their own learning!

Go on have a go and explore this wonderful website – you will be surprised at how well it works in the classroom!

Technology Inertia

I sit and watch my son do his school work and wonder how he ever gets anything done. There he is with his phone texting his friend, his ear buds in listening to music, Facebook chat up, and theoretically doing an assignment. It’s a warm day so he’s gone outside to do get some air on the deck. Is this your picture of learning? No, neither is the view for many teachers or parents. I am convinced he is loitering, playing or at best just chatting. But then he comes a while later to show me the PowerPoint presentation he and his mates have created on World War 1 engineering advances and I find myself once again adjusting my thoughts and expectations.

My oldest son delivers pizzas for a living. At work he uses an online ordering system that tracks the flow of pizzas and lets them know when to make new dough. The enterprise resource planning (ERP) system lets them know when to order new stock, the administrative database produces their timesheets on the computer in the office, and are immediately signed off by the boss, and when he delivers a pizza the delivery address is entered into the car’s GPS, though he tells me he is getting to know the streets of Hobart so well that he can almost beat the GPS at finding his way!

Computers, servers, online, wireless access, G3 capability, notebooks, iPads, iPhones, GPS, ERPs, the NBN, how are you fitting into the brave new world of information and communication technology or ICT? If you are under 20 you have just about now turned off and are going onto the comics. But if you are over 20 or have had little to do with computers you are no doubt grimacing. Yet as a home educator your job is going to be to ensure that your children are prepared for this brave new world. The Australian Curriculum to be slowly implemented in schools, will require teachers to work towards the integration of these skills and tools in the learning programmes of children. And this is a scary requirement, because the focus moves the educator beyond the teaching of mere skills, to using these as tools – and not just word processing, internet and email. But spreadsheets, presentation software, databases, and so on.

If that scares you as a teacher – you are not alone. This is a massive cultural shift for many educators. In a survey conducted by the education Department of Western Australia, published recently, it was found that eighty two percent of teachers are not regularly using ICT in the classroom, suffering from I have called ‘technology inertia’. Of those teachers who are using ICT regularly (18%), most are doing so to improve computer skills and to find out about ideas and information. The basic suite of ICT applications ever used by more than 95% of teachers is comprised of word processing, Internet, email and file navigation. Only 9% of teachers have a high level of ICT competence and integrate it into their classrooms, most of those being younger male high school teachers. The reason many educators fail to use ICT to move beyond the basics, and seldom in the teaching of learning of the children in their care, is because they are not comfortable using it themselves, are afraid that the students already know more than them, and worry about all the things that can go wrong. There is an answer to these problems and that is to get comfortable, yes some of your students will know more, and things do go wrong.  So now that I have affirmed your worst fears, what can we do to move beyond it?

Getting comfortable

Let me begin by saying that the biggest problem is the cultural shifts, the way we do the things that have always done in just that way. As an educator you have probably fallen into a rhythm in how you teach your students. The use of technology requires you to change. In schools this change makes many teachers doubt who they are, what they have done and how they have always done it. Some leave, some refuse to change, some make adaptations, but not always good ones, and muddle along. The ones who embrace it become great teachers. Although they were probably already great teachers! But when changes, such as compulsory ICT integration, notebook programs or computer based admin systems, are implemented teachers often talk of not sleeping at night, and being scared to come in the morning. Dread was an overwhelming feeling. This was new to them, and that scared them. Change scares people. But with good tips, some techniques, a little know-how, and most importantly working together this can be addressed.

Things do go wrong

And yes things go horribly wrong! I love the comment by David Gefen, who said that ICT has always suffered from what NASA called as early as 1968 the “software crisis”: spending more than the allocated budget, missing the delivery dates for implementation of software packages, and having too many glitches. In my work in education systems, I work as a coach, facilitator and change agent, implementing technology systems, learning management systems, administration protocols and online learning. I love the work I do but I know that many people really struggle with it, and change is so relentless, especially technology changes. 

Your students will know more

Well, maybe some. Most know how to Facebook certainly, use a mobile phone, or maybe put together a word document. But many don’t know much more than you do – so you are about to embark on a wonderful journey of discovery together. And here I would encourage you to let go of control and work together to learn. This generation, the digital natives are not afraid of pushing buttons – you probably are, but as I always say the most powerful button is the off switch! If it goes pear shaped, start again! Most of all though, enjoy your time together as you explore the brave world of ICT and overcome your technology inertia.

(This post is an adaptation of a longer paper written for the HBLN, May, 2012)

A Question

"I have a group of bright students in my class, how do I set work for them that engages them, but doesn't have the feeling of being 'extra'?"

This was a question posed just recently - and my answer was of course, you differentiate the learning experiences in the classroom. My mind jumped immediately to lots of different 'activities' this teacher could do in their class. But actually, it has to go beyond the 'business' of class, it has to be how you structure the class, so that this group is engaged not just this once but all the time, and so that the rest are not left behind, or feel that they are missing out!

I seldom identify the 'gifted' children in my class - though I might occasionally identify those that have extra needs,depending on the need. I work on the premise that all children in my class can learn and will learn if I structure the work in such a  way that I give all of them opportunities to show what they can do, and give all of them little successes on the way. I do this by identifying learning styles, as I have explained in a previously blog. I think this first step is vital. It means I set work that meets learning outcomes in a variety of ways. It has been my experience that those that are 'gifted' in humanities have high vocabulary and literacy skills, whilst those that often are identified as having a variety of 'learning difficulties' are visual, kinaesthetic or interpersonal learners.

And I give my students choice, choices about what they do in the class, how much they do and often how they work. I think this is vital in teaching students to become independent learners.

Okay you want to know how I do this. Take the mundane activity of essay writing as an example. Often we just set an essay - give them a word limit and say go for it. Sometimes, if we know we have students at different levels of competence in our classes we might give them different word lengths. I do that too - I think that is a great idea. But first of all I give them choice. I let them know the target lengths required to reach a particular curricular requirement,  I am very specific here I bring the curriculum into the classroom, and then they chose - this essay might be shorter for one student, because they want to get it right, and then the next essay they might want to make it longer. It is of course in the detail of the essay that the difference really needs to exist.

When I do essay writing with my class I give them - right up to Year 10, and sometimes beyond, a graphic organiser. If you wish to write at the top level, my expectations are that you will include 3 paragraphs, and each will include 3 examples, which you have explained in detail. If on the other hand you wish to write a shorter essay, you will include 2 paragraphs and maybe only 2 examples in each. The graphic organisers set the levels and the expectations. I have included an example I have used on the right. This one is for preparing to write a persuasion essay.  We workshop the graphic organiser. we workshop the writing of the first example, sometimes in groups, sometimes as a whole class, other times in pairs. This way every child has success. At the end of an extended period of writing we share what we have.

For this I love the interactive whiteboard, as it gives us all the opportunity to put up our ideas and share them in a legible way with each other. Our school also uses a learning management system, so there are times, especially when we are at the beginning of an exercise that I will post the examples we have built as a class on that. It means students have access to this at home. At at the end, every child has an essay. And an understanding of how the process works, and an opportunity later in the year to maybe work at a higher level if they have found this process not too onerous and had success here. And the result is that each student in my class is supported, and each student in my class is challenged.

And my next task is not written. It may be spoken, drawn, acted, filmed, audio recorded, argued through debate - always multiple ways to show me that you have learned the specified outcomes.

Oh and don't sweat the graphic organisers, there are hundreds of thousands on the web for all sorts of writing - persuasion, cause and effect, y-chart, KWL's. Just Google it!

From My Journal

"My class is doing a project, they are all working. Imagine a light and airy room, one wall light lime green (not a good description) maybe a sort of light lime/avocado, anyway the other walls are white. Edged in Tasmanian oak. Tables spread about the room. Groups of four students. Laptops, poster paper, scissors, glue sticks some drawing, some writing, others researching. No one group doing the same, some outside the room in the main library area reading. Outside it is raining, raining, raining! Inside a quiet hum of busyness, activity, students engaged discussing latest world news as they look at the floods in Queensland, the bush fires in Perth, Japan. Someone is asking how much money they collected for the flood, someone else is trying to find the final death toll in NZ. I am enjoying their company. Especially when it is like this. 

Actually, I was a little late to class, when I walked in they were already working - a teacher's dream! Better than the nightmare I had a few nights ago - literally, of this same class, out of control. I woke up and laughed, hadn't had that one for years!"

How do you go from the beginning of the year to this space with your students. And this business did not mask a lack of engagement, but interest. The hum of activity did not mask dis-interest or of-task behaviours, but learning. I come back to my earlier question, how do you 'do differentiation'. 

One step at a time. In my previous post I left you with an understanding of the needs of the class, and this can get very overwhelming, especially to a beginning teacher who may consider they have to do it all - at once! But in fact you don't and shouldn't try, as you will be setting yourself up for failure. 

Begin by identifying the areas where you are comfortable making changes. Begin with small changes. Have you ever watched a road being built? Road builders often begin with the places where it is easy to build the road, so they can show progress. You can do this too in your classroom, photocopying bigger type, preparing worksheets in a bigger font, creating an assessment task at two levels, these all are small changes to make and help build success in your classroom, for the students but also for you!

Meanwhile road builders will also have a crew beginning on the harder places, the ones where they have to build the bridge. Those areas of the road take longer to build and often need extensive preparation. You must think of this in your classroom. Some changes, accommodations, modifications or adaptations will be easy to do, but others will require extensive planning, support and (horror) may even require you to do some research. Hmmm that leads me to a different thought ...

The Complexities of Differentiation

When you read Carol Tomlinson's work she makes it all sound so easy, that it becomes almost overwhelming. I arrived at my class and a quick glance around told me I had a number of characters who were going to test my skills as a teacher. I had received in the mail the latest Tomlinson and Imbeau offering and keen to try this new approach, began, as suggested, with exploring with my students - who they were as students. This would help me to learn more about them, but also maybe help them to understand who they are as learners. Invite them to participate in the vision of running a differentiated classroom.

We began with a discussion of who we were as people, they created bio poems (from the Teacher toolkit in Tomlinson and Imbeau) - utilising a nearby computing lab, and completed an identikit of themselves. Graphing me (again from the book) gave me a sense of their own view of their strengths and weaknesses in the classroom. Then I asked them to complete a learning styles test (based on the work of Howard Gardner) - introducing this with a short activity on background, what we did in the summer, that had them moving around the classroom, who was born here, who was born not in this town, not in this state and so on. The link, even as we have different backgrounds and things we like to do, so we learn differently. Then we looked at the results - and that was when I began to get very worried. The extensive learning styles test showed that more than 50% of my students tested themselves as being bodily-kinaesthetic and interpersonal learners. And only two were linguistic! Oh help.

We talked about the results and what it meant for them. And then using all that information they now had about themselves we looked at what they wanted to achieve for the year. And I asked them to write this in a letter addressed to myself. 

Armed with all this information it was time for me to sit down and re-plan my year.

And this is the problem, this is where it can get very difficult. You see when you know your students, who can do what, what they like; when they have shared themselves with you, then they can hold you accountable. No longer are you able to hide behind a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. Especially as I now knew that I had 30 different 'sizes' in that classroom. And I hadn't even got to those who were ESL, a highly able student, the student with learning difficulties, the behavioural issues. How do you support the learning of 30 very individual learners in a classroom, get through the curriculum, help them to progress, knowing that many of them don't like sitting still for too long!

You see student differences do matter, and a class will be a better one for them and the teacher if that teacher teaches them with those differences in mind.  That is the essence of differentiation. But it involves a significant layer of complexity. And the ability to reflect on your practice.

Creating the Opportunity to Learn

So I have a new book, by the above title, just in from the ASCD. And it has given me pause to reflect once again. Their emphasis in the title is on 'the' and the authors, A. Wade Boykin and Pedro Noguera, explore the possibility of closing the achievement gap and doing so by addressing the contexts in which the learning take place.

It was with the intention of addressing the learning context of my middle school class that I read with interest earlier this year Carol Ann Tomlinson and Marcia B. Imbeau's book Leading and Managing a Differentiated Classroom. I have tried to recall what we called differentiation when I was going through my initial teacher training. I remember a unit, which failed to engage most of us, called Diagnostic Teaching. The idea being that we would use our teaching to diagnose where students were at and so be able to direct their learning better, creating programs that would meet their learning needs. And all that within the context of the curriculum. So we learned to accommodate and make adaptations to enable our students to be part of the classroom. The focus was not on inclusion per se, more on ensuring their educational progress. Teacher aides were vital for the success of this approach, they would implement what we would write, the worksheets we created for our 'disabled' students, and often mark and assess the students on our behalf. But the reality was that on the whole, we ignored students with differences, those at the top end were often given an extra worksheet to do, those at the bottom were removed for remedial classes. And if we were lucky to be working in a bigger school, then classes were streamed. Either way as teachers we taught a 'homogenised' group in the middle.

Differentiation  has changed our focus. I suspect in response to the inclusive education movement that has permeated the educational landscape in the last 20 years. Differentiation focuses our attention back onto all our students - helping us to understand that differences in our students do matter and that quality teaching makes room for these differences. The one-size-fits-all approach fails significantly for many of the students in our very diverse classrooms. So how is differentiation different?

Tomlinson and Imbeau describe differentiation as a philosophy, a way of thinking about teaching and  learning, a set of principles if you will. And it requires rethinking your classroom practice through an ongoing process of trial, reflection and adjustment. Actually reminds a little bit of action research. The approach brings together Lorna Earl's Assessment as learning approach, the creation of a positive learning environment, a well thought out curriculum (perhaps using McTighe and Wiggins Understanding by Design approach) and of course flexible classroom delivery.

Sounds complex? That is because it is - and one more reason why new teachers truly need a good mentor and extra time to embed good practices in their classroom. Let me explain ...