Pedagogy & Expectations

While the teachers were not directly asked about their pedagogical approaches, their understanding of pedagogy before the unit commencement was obvious through their discussions of curriculum integration and the curriculum, as well as the impact of these on their planning, teaching and assessment. The comments from each teacher are outlined in the table below.

Table 4.4 - Teacher Pedagogy & Expectations: Teacher Understanding Prior to the Unit

Reflecting on Rich Learning... Reflecting on New Basics... Links to personal pedagogical practise

Teacher Expectations Mike ...thinking about the context

that we’re using… following the coverage of the curriculum so it’s a lot of planning and looking for ideas to make it fun and interesting.

...looking at deeper questioning; teaching children to be questioners, and problem-solvers... asking the questions, finding the answers to those questions, redefining those questions and going deeper.

... shared language amongst all teachers…

John ... having a learning context that is influenced by all areas of the curriculum… they’re purposefully linked so that learning is authentic.

Children learn in context. Learning needs to be authentic, and children should drive learning; assessment of learning should be throughout - may culminate in something at the end.

...let the kids drive it, along the way there’s decision making times; start with whole class and move that into small group or individual, and by the end it’s more individual- oriented.

[Rich Learning] makes them better long term learners, over time, better problem-solvers because they learn in context so they better at applying things across real life situations.

Jane I think curriculum integration is when you try and find meaningful experiences that are taught through all areas of the curriculum…

...sometimes [rich learning], it’s a little bit deep sometimes and I’ve got to look and make sure that I’m targeting their needs...

Mike showed a good understanding of the need for depth in learning and the use of a shared language, consistency, problem-solving and questioning in learning. Mike also showed concern over ensuring curriculum coverage through curriculum integration and noted his struggle to integrate effectively, suggesting that while Mike had a good

Similarly, John discussed using curriculum integration and Key Competencies to meet individual needs and the value of contextual and authentic learning. Also, John seemed to have a strong theoretical basis for using curriculum integration.

Jane noted the importance of meaningful learning that is targeted, but showed lack of effective pedagogical understanding through her suggestion that the Key Competencies

were something that were “added-on” as something extra to teach, rather than something to embed in all learning. Jane’s concern also that Rich Learning had previously been “too deep” at times for her children, perhaps reflected a lack of understanding of how to effectively get depth in learning while still targeting it to their level.

Teacher understanding prior to the unit was varied in all areas. Curriculum integration seemed to have the least teacher understanding with two out of the three teachers describing a multidisciplinary approach (see chapter 2). All teachers recognised the importance of the Key Competencies but none were implementing these regularly in their programmes, and Jane particularly struggled with understanding these. Teacher

pedagogy was reasonable but use of effective pedagogical tools seemed to be lacking.

2.2

During the Unit

Thirty minute observations in the classrooms were carried out at two points during the study: in the second week of the unit and the sixth week of the unit. An observational matrix tool, developed by lead teachers within the EHSAS GraduateCluster, was used to guide the observations (refer to section 4.3.2 in chapter 3). The individual teacher

development for Mike, John and Jane were noted for each observation on the tool so that changing understandings could be monitored (see appendix 8).

During the unit teachers were involved in several professional development sessions that led to changes in their understandings after the unit. These sessions and their impact are now briefly outlined before changed teacher understanding is shared in the next section.

Planning for the unit investigated in this study took place three weeks prior to its commencement. However, within two weeks, it was noted that a professional development session on the new model and curriculum integration was needed. A teacher call-back day was held that reviewed the model and its components: specifically on defining the Deeper Understandings and the Deeper Knowledge and how to use the productive pedagogies to unpack the learning effectively. It was also decided that we would create our own curriculum. A set of Deeper Understandings, encompassing both the Key Competencies and all curricula areas, was developed by myself as leader of the project and then reviewed, refined and set by the staff.

Further professional development took place through the EHSAS GraduateCluster. An educational consultant, Hanan Harrison, who had worked with the cluster previously, visited our school reviewing our current progress, documentation and model for Rich Learning and also observed all classrooms, then sharing feedback and insight with all staff. This also led to the creation of the school’s learning dispositions. These were initially drafted by me and then, through professional development sessions on learning dispositions and extensive staff discussion, were developed so that they completely encompassed the Key Competencies and provided further validity to the Rich Learning

model.

Such development impacted on teacher understanding significantly: both positively and negatively. Greater clarity on curriculum integration and our model was achieved; especially in relation to the Deeper Understandings and the school’s own curriculum and its relationship to the revised New Zealand curriculum. However, the speed with which the Deeper Understandings and learning dispositions were created led to confusion as there was not sufficient time to consolidate understanding of these.

2.3

After the Unit

2.3.1 Curriculum Integration

All teachers showed greater understanding of curriculum integration after working through the Rich Learning unit. The table below shows their responses when asked how their understanding of curriculum integration had changed since the start of the study.

Table 4.5 - Curriculum Integration: Teacher Understanding After the Unit

Changed Understandings... Benefits Risks Mike ...it’s just more purposeful - that deeper

understanding helps me to make them fit together better.

...starting with the big idea, really helps... the tasks fall naturally out of it, they’re more focused –you know they really tie in with our dispositions.

...it’s clearly defined planning so you know what you need to assess.

They have a big idea as the main thing now to hook the new ideas - it’s scaffolding progression...

...making sure I use that shared language - getting the children to use the language, getting them to understand what the language means.

John ...more emphasis along the lines of the deeper understanding and the learning dispositions. ...it’s actually put a new vigour in to the teaching side of things because there’s more purpose...

There’s more rigour about why we do something... it’s good to hear the kid’s voices coming through and say why are we doing that?

...keeping the deeper

understanding the main thing.

Jane ...it’s quite hard sometimes to be truly integrated. The more I think about planning the more I try to integrate lots of curriculum areas that we’ve identified... so we’ve got the learning intentions or the deeper

understandings and trying to find ways that naturally fit...

...the kids really know more about themselves...

Mike showed much greater insight into curriculum integration at the end of the unit. Mike identified how the use of a Deeper Understanding allowed more natural and purposeful integration and how he was able to more competently create integrated learning experiences. However, his description continued to reflect a multidisciplinary understanding as he still identified curricula areas separately and taught them separately rather than drew on curricula areas as they were relevant to the learning (see section 2.4.2 in chapter 2).

John showed similar understanding to Mike. John, who had a reasonable understanding of curriculum integration prior to the unit, seemed to refine this further as he noted greater focus on process rather than product and the importance of developing a shared language and an approach to how we learn through the learning dispositions. John also noted the importance of ensuring the model was rigorous and purposeful as well as selectivity in planning learning activities, showing development in understanding that integration should occur naturally.

The most notable change in understanding was with Jane as she discussed the

shown a focus on trying to make curricula areas fit, rather than be selective and use those that fit naturally. Jane noted that she still tries to integrate but looks for more natural fits, showing a greater understanding that learning should link purposefully.