jump to navigation

Educators as future makers September 18, 2011

Posted by Editor21C in Directions in Education, Education Policy and Politics, Educational Leadership, Social Justice and Equity through Education.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

from Adjunct Professor Greg Prior

Greg Prior reviews the place of education in a rapidly changing world and leaves us with many questions about how eductors, and schools and education systems, can respond to the complex changes and challenges society faces in the current century.

Education is a largely future oriented enterprise.  Amongst its purposes are preparing people to live well in the future: preparing them as future citizens and as future workers.  But more than preparing learners for the future, education plays a significant part in constructing the future.

What and how young people learn in school and tertiary education today very much influences what the world will be like in the future.  Education, then, is a future making process.  Educators are ‘future makers’.

Early in the 21st century we face a number of challenges or change imperatives. These challenges are numerous but five challenges stand out and are often discussed in the literature on 21st Century Capabilities.

We face a social challenge of maintaining and improving the health and vitality of a democratic society – sustaining decent democratic institutions across the many divisions that any modern society contains, and a strong role for fundamental rights protecting entitlements in areas such as health and education.

A major economic challenge is that globalisation and technological change are also placing an increasing premium on education, and skill development and the nature of jobs available to young Australians is changing faster than ever.  Skilled jobs now dominate jobs growth and people with post school qualifications fare much better in the employment market than early school leavers.

A major technological challenge is that the forces of globalisation entail major changes in all our lives: I refer here to the increasing power of and reliance on science and technology; the incredible connectivity that results; the enormous amount of information, often of dubious quality that is at our fingertips; the convergence of cultures in economic, cultural and social terms, and the incessant circulation of human beings of diverse backgrounds and aspirations.  Intimately and inextricably connected to others, we need to be able to communicate with one another, live with one another and make common cause.

Major health challenges include the high prevalence of mental disorders. In affluent countries such as Australia there is a high prevalence of mental disorders. One in five Australians aged 16-85 years had a mental disorder in 2007 and almost one in two (or 7.3 million people) had experienced a mental disorder at some point in their lives. Type 2 Diabetes, a lifestyle disease, is recognised as a serious global health problem.

Australia faces major ecological challenges.  A combination of increased human population, increased consumption, and refinements to technology and organisation of labour has contributed damage to ecosystems that sustain life, resource depletion and increased competition and conflict amongst humans for scarce resources. While these processes have operated for many centuries, the trends to greater harm have accelerated in the 20th and 21st Centuries.

So what capabilities are necessary for us to address these challenges in the 21st Century? The literature indicates that two broad and interconnected capabilities are pertinent:

  • the ability to think well and
  • the ability to live well.

The literature suggests that included in the ability to think well are the abilities to:

  • think critically, (that is the ability to examine, reflect, argue and debate) ,
  • think deeply and logically,
  • solve problems in ways that draw upon a range of learning areas and disciplines, and
  • be creative, innovative and resourceful.

Included in the ability to live well are the abilities to:

  • manage one’s emotional, mental, spiritual and physical wellbeing,
  • relate well to others and form and maintain healthy relationships, and
  • have concern for the lives of other living beings.

The literature on 21st Century Capabilities is very recent.  It raises various significant questions that have been discussed today and will be increasingly in the future.  These include:

What exactly are the 21st Century Capabilities?

How can they be assessed?  Pencil and paper/ tick a box tests do not seem sufficient.

How are 21st Century capabilities best learned?  How can teachers best support students in cultivating 21st Century capabilities?

Assuming 21st century skills can and should be taught within the traditional disciplines, are they different from one discipline to another? (For example, is creativity different in the arts to economics? Is problem solving in the physical sciences different to the social sciences?)

What are the implications for teacher education and professional learning of the imperative of 21st Century capabilities for all?

How can we validly and reliably evaluate education systems’ efficacy in developing students’ 21st century skills?

How do we build the capacity of systems to develop 21st century skills?

Greg Prior is the Deputy Director-General, Schools, in the New South Wales Department of Education and Communities. He is also Adjunct Professor in the School of Education at the University of Western Sydney, Australia. This post was drawn from his presentation to a group of Department of Education and Communities regional and state office directors who spent a day engaging with Professor Yong Zhao on 21 century learning.

First things first – reframing discipline practices to reduce school suspensions September 4, 2011

Posted by Editor21C in Engaging Learning Environments, Primary Education, Secondary Education.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

from Dr Brenda Dobia

In her first post, Brenda Dobia examines the trends in school suspensions and comments on approaches for schools to reduce suspensions by encouraging positive behaviours.

The NSW Federation of Parents and Citizens’ Associations recently made the Sydney Morning Herald with the heading Parents want naughty students to serve time in school. Parents from the Central Coast were questioning departmental guidelines on suspension and the ways some schools were implementing them. They argued for clearer communication with parents, the right of appeal and the option of in-school suspensions.

This follows a recent report highlighting a 33% increase in long suspension rates in state public schools between 2005 and 2009 (Uniting Care Burnside, 2011). The data for suspensions shows disproportionate trends, with regions that have higher rates of social disadvantage showing higher rates of suspension.  Similar disparities have been found in other states and internationally (Hemphill & Hargreaves, 2009). In their Australian study Hemphill et al (2010) found that the higher rates of suspension in disadvantaged communities remain significant even after controlling for factors such as antisocial behaviour, gender, age, family functioning, peer group and academic failure.

Excluding students from school frequently compounds academic difficulties and undermines engagement. Suspension increases antisocial behaviour and has negative impacts on students’ wellbeing in both the immediate and longer term (Hemphill et al, 2010). With 42% of suspensions handed out for ‘persistent disobedience’, there is a clear need for more proactive approaches to encourage appropriate behaviour and re-engage students who may be struggling with school for a variety of reasons.

Effective school strategies address student behaviour and wellbeing. While setting clear limits for behaviours that place students or others at risk of harm, a critical focus is placed on teaching and supporting pro-social behaviours that contribute to students’ sense of personal efficacy and acknowledge their contributions to the school community.

Schools and teachers who adopt this approach understand that discipline does not mean punishment. Discipline, deriving from the latin word disciplina which means ‘instruction’ or ‘knowledge’, is fundamentally about teaching. Effective teachers have a range of teaching strategies at their disposal to help students succeed in learning constructive behaviours.

Establishing the right settings to encourage positive behaviour is key. In Positive Behaviour Support (PBS), or Positive Behaviour for Learning (PBL), getting the whole school on board in order to come up with a set of clear, positively framed expectations is a vital starting point. Ensuring that everyone agrees on the core expectations and that students are taught what it means to be respectful, be safe or be responsible (for example) in the playground, in the corridors, at the canteen or the bus stop, means that everyone knows what is expected (Mooney et al, 2008). Students’ efforts to demonstrate positive behaviours are recognised and valued.

To ensure success a consistent approach is needed. Often parents and teachers think consistency means meting out the same punishment regardless of circumstances. This rarely provides the best outcomes. Efforts to be consistent should emphasise consistent expectations. Providing effective support to meet expectations is crucial.

Just as with any other aspect of the curriculum, different children will need different levels of support to meet behavioural expectations. Some children learn what is expected quickly and need little prompting. Often these are children who already have effective skills for regulating their emotions and getting on with others. For others it is a huge stretch. Targeted approaches that provide focused support according to the specific needs of the child may be needed.

The reasons why some children have trouble conforming to school behaviour expectations are often complex. Perhaps they have had limited experience of effective modelling at home; perhaps there have been disruptions to their lives which have been difficult to cope with; perhaps they have been treated unfairly and as a result are on guard for any hint of possible injustice; perhaps they have experienced trauma that has undermined their trust in others and led to erratic emotional responses. There are many more possible reasons for student misbehaviour, including reasons relating to students’ experience of school.

While schools and teachers are not responsible for circumstances arising outside the school context that influence student behaviour, they can still be responsive to students’ needs. A whole school approach is required to promote positive behaviour and wellbeing. Rather than relying on a system of regulations and sanctions, successful school initiatives are geared to promoting positive relationships, preventing problems where possible, and intervening early where necessary by bringing together students, teachers, parents or carers and support services in order to tailor their approach to the particular needs of the student (Graetz et al., 2008).

Students who experience school as a place where they are cared for, listened to and treated fairly feel more connected to school (Murray-Harvey & Slee, 2007; Resnick et al., 1997; Rowe et al., 2007). School connectedness has been found to reduce behavioural problems (Loukas et al., 2010), increase wellbeing (Shochet et al., 2006) and improve school achievement (Bond et al., 2007).  Building a climate of caring and connectedness between students, staff and parents places emphasis on the quality of relationships. It turns out this is a far more effective way to enhance wellbeing, reduce school suspensions and improve learning (Dix et al., 2011; Slee et al., 2009). By the way, it makes teaching more satisfying too.

References:  Arlington, K. (2011).  Parents want naughty students to serve time in school, Sydney Morning Herald, July 30. [online] www.smh.com.au/national/education/parents-want-naughty-students-to-serve-time-in-school-20110729-1i47o.html#ixzz1TjpUNNgn.   Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., et al. (2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health and academic outcomes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 357.e9–357.e18.   Dix, K. L., Slee, P. T., Lawson, M. J. & Keeves, J. P. (2011). Implementation quality of whole-school mental health promotion and students’ academic performance. Child and Adolescent Mental Health. [online]doi: 10.1111/j.1475-3588.2011.00608.x.    Graetz, B., Littlefield, L., Trinder, M., Dobia, B., Souter, M., Champion, C., Boucher, S., Killick-Moran, C., Cummins, R. (2008). KidsMatter: A population health model to support student mental health and wellbeing in primary schools. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 10(4) 13-20.   Hemphill, S. & Hargreaves, J. (2009). The impact of school suspensions: A student wellbeing issue, ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal. 56 (3/4), 5-11.    Hemphill, S.A., Toumbourou, J.W., Smith, R., Kendall, G., Rowland, B., Freiberg, K. & Williams, J. (2010). Are rates of school suspension higher in socially disadvantaged neighbourhoods? An Australian study, Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 21(1), 12-18.   Loukas, A., Roalson, L. A. & Herrera, D. E. (2010). School connectedness buffers the effects of negative family relations and poor effortful control on early adolescent conduct problems. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1-10.   Mooney, M. Dobia, B., Barker, K., Power, A., Watson, K., & Yeung, S., (2008). Positive Behaviour for Learning: Investigating the transfer of a United States system into the New South Wales Department of Education and Training Western Sydney Region schools: Report. Penrith NSW: University of Western Sydney. [online] http://handle.uws.edu.au:8081/1959.7/19702.    Murray-Harvey, R. & Slee, P. (2007). Supportive and stressful relationships with teachers, peers and family and their influence on students’ social/emotional and academic experience of school, Australian Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 17(2), 126-47.   NSW Dept Education and Training (2010). Long suspension and expulsion summary 2009. Sydney NSW: author. [online] https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/detresources/suspexpul2009_oEuDLGhsYu.pdf.   Resnick, M., Bearman, P., Blum, R., Bauman, K., et al. (1997). Protecting Adolescents from Harm – Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(10),823-822.   Rowe, F., Stewart, D. & Patterson, C. (2007). Promoting school connectedness through whole school approaches, Health Education, 107(6), 524-542.   Shochet, I. M. , Dadds, M. R. , Ham, D. & Montague, R. (2006). School connectedness is an underemphasized parameter in adolescent mental health: Results of a community prediction study, Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 35(2), 170-179.   Slee, P. T., Lawson, M. J., Russell, A., Askell-Williams, H., Dix, K. L., Owens, L., et al. (2009). KidsMatter Primary Evaluation final report. Melbourne: beyondblue. [online] www.kidsmatter.edu.au/uploads/2009/10/kidsmatter-fullreport-web.pdf.   Uniting Care Burnside (2011). School suspension briefing. [online] www.childrenyoungpeopleandfamilies.org.au/__data/assets/file/0008/61784/110411_School_Suspension.pdf

Brenda Dobia is a Lecturer in social ecology and education in the School of Education at the University of Western Sydney, Australia. A psychologist and lecturer in educational psychology, she is particularly concerned about student wellbeing as the basis for student management practices in schools. She is a lead researcher in the PBL research project in NSW, and has previously been seconded to the Australian Psychological Society as National Resources Coordinator in the Kidsmatter project, in which role she was instrumental in developing Kidsmatter curriculum materials.

%d bloggers like this: