Transformational Learning - My Top 3 SENIA 2019 Takeaways
1. The way that it’s always been done, does not have to be “the way.”
Educators and educational institutions would be appalled if they were told the way their students are learning is the same way they did 100 years ago. Yet, what is so drastically different between these two photos.
Keynote speaker Dr. Laura Flores Shaw shared similar photos and argues that we have married learning and sitting at desks, and now we do so as young as kindergarten. Instead of valuing movement and engagement, we’ve convinced ourselves that students need to read, write, and calculate at an earlier age in the most traditional of ways. However, this race to the top has impacted brain development. Her research reveals that experiencing education with more movement will provide a higher level of brain development than trying to force academic milestones (at a desk) to come sooner. Furthermore, when we provide a standing desk or bicycle pedals seats below the desks, we are missing the point all together. Children of all ages are supposed to move and play not just because they’re young, but because it’s literally developing the synapses in their brains.
Nonetheless, it seems modern education is about starting sooner so our kids won’t just be average, but instead above average. We have developed the entire education system around this idea of “average.” I also spent some time with Kristen Pelletier (Redefining Access and Next Frontier Inclusion) discussing the “Myth of Average.” We’ve developed milestones connected to age, grade-level standards, standardized tests, and now nearly everything we teach revolves around the idea that students need to perform within an “average range.” What is average anyway? What if instead of fitting everyone into the average box, we let them build a life that is meaningful and powerful in their own way? What if instead of learning disabilities we talk about learning profiles? What if we truly focus on strengths rather than weaknesses? What if the expectation was - we are supposed to be different from one another - even in the way we develop? Then we could stop comparing ourselves to one another and accept that we are unique individuals that all have the capacity to be successful. Then we stop deciding who can go to our school and who cannot. We shift our mindset to consider how they could be successful and still challenged within our school. We stop worrying about students being within an “average range” and instead focus on “helping them find their bliss” (as principals at Hong Kong Academy have defined as their mission for each kid).
Finally, both of these sessions led me to think a lot about labels (average being just one of them). I believe that labels have a tendency to be more harmful than helpful. Students that learn differently come into our schools with so many labels. And now I am thinking that by even naming specialized programs for “special students” (i.e. Life Skills Program or Life-Centered Education) that we give them yet another label. In my current position, I’m no longer just a teacher in a school. I have a “special program” for “special kids.” This has unfortunately made me a silo, and distant from the learning support system that is here to serve all kids. I’m not sure if knocking down that label will help, but I think one less label is something we all could use.
2. Language is so important.
This isn’t a ground-breaking idea, but an important reminder if we are to humbly make actions of our words.
Take the novel, but simple idea that we should move towards “Both/And” thinking instead of “But” thinking. I’ll illustrate this idea with an example. Two co-teachers are discussing whether or not a neuro-atypical student will be able to access an assessment as it has been designed for the class. Consider how these slightly different versions of the same conversation could reflect and impact our views of the student, or possibly more importantly the capabilities of the student.
“She is really grasping the plot of To Kill a Mockingbird, but she doesn’t understand the themes or literary devices.”
OR
“She is really grasping the plot of To Kill a Mockingbird and requires support to have a greater understanding of both themes and literary devices.
Here we assuming capacity. We know that the student is at a different level of readiness, not capability, than other students in the class, and we acknowledge her potential to grow. The same language should also be applied when providing a student with feedback. When we use the word “but” we negate everything that came before it. Assume capability. Assume capacity. Assume potential. Use “both/and” thinking. I’ll pose the same question that Kristen Pelletier posed to me - Consider your identity as a teacher... What dispositions/skills do you have that allow the modelling of “both/and” thinking?
Let’s consider one more important example of intentional language usage. I’ve long considered the language we use to describe the levels of support our students receive. A glaring example, “Shadow Teacher” – no other words send more shivers up my spine. A shadow, by definition, never leaves you. What student, especially a teenager in the case of my students, wants one teacher to follow them around all day, everyday? That student doesn’t exist. There is no chance of a child gaining greater independence when we provide this type of support. I strongly believe this term needs to go into the abyss where many educational and antiquated terms have gone to die. If your school or community is using this term and model, making this change is a great first step towards inclusion. Some schools may think a child cannot function without it, but challenge that idea and replace your school’s vocabulary immediately with “one-on-one” or “educational assistant”.
3. Distill a single goal.
There is currently a movement within international schools to become more inclusive. It was so refreshing to hear that many schools in Asia are working towards making this a reality. I think in the next couple of years literally hundreds of international schools will be joining this journey. After hearing from schools that, in my opinion, are doing it right, a clear message emerged for me. You can’t do it all at once. The planning and development of growing to support a wide range of student profiles is crucial to a school’s success in being inclusive. School’s must develop short term goals that build up to a long term goal. That being said, this planning needs to start now. If your school has not begun to accept students with moderate to intensive needs, find small ways to begin. Schools have a responsibility to reflect society, and international schools should be no exception. Each teacher has the ability to get this ball rolling. Read research (see below). Collect data. Visit schools that are making it work. And then share this information with the decision makers. It’s 2019, and exclusive schools are a dying breed. It’s time to be transformational.
My Favorite Shared Resources:
The End of Average: Todd Rose & Why Individuality Is the Key to the Future