The Rider has many strengths - it is a thinker and a planner and a keen analyst, enabling us to plan and strategise. It’s a visionary, able to make short-term sacrifices for long-term gains (which is why it clashes with the Elephant who likes instant gratification). However, its big weakness is over-analysis, which means it gets paralysed and tired and stuck. What I found particularly interesting was as analysts, we tend to focus on the problems and the negative. In a study of 558 emotion words, psychologists found that 68% of them were negative. In wider studies, it has been found that across the board, we have a strong tendency to focus on the negative more than the positive - we remember bad events longer than good ones; we show more interest in negative stories than positive ones, we reflect more on negative events than positive ones; the list goes one. In summary, bad is stronger than good. And when it comes to tackling change, this means we tend to have a problem focus when what we need is a solution focus. When leading or managing change we need to be repeatedly asking ‘What’s working and how can we do more of it?’ and ‘what is the ratio of time I spend solving problems to the time I spend up-scaling successes’1. By finding and focusing on the bright spots - successful efforts worth emulating - you spark hope as well as illuminate the road map for action.
I’ve always been acutely aware of both the Rider and the Elephant in myself (and others), although I’ve not given them those names before. I’ve also been aware of the tension that exists between the two, the tendency of both to derail projects and the difficulty of getting them both to work in harmony. Similarly, I can think of examples where a change effort has been successful and, unpicking that, can recognise that there was agreement, co-operation and even collaboration between the rational and emotional parts of my brain, each of which was engaged.
The Rider has many strengths - it is a thinker and a planner and a keen analyst, enabling us to plan and strategise. It’s a visionary, able to make short-term sacrifices for long-term gains (which is why it clashes with the Elephant who likes instant gratification). However, its big weakness is over-analysis, which means it gets paralysed and tired and stuck. What I found particularly interesting was as analysts, we tend to focus on the problems and the negative. In a study of 558 emotion words, psychologists found that 68% of them were negative. In wider studies, it has been found that across the board, we have a strong tendency to focus on the negative more than the positive - we remember bad events longer than good ones; we show more interest in negative stories than positive ones, we reflect more on negative events than positive ones; the list goes one. In summary, bad is stronger than good. And when it comes to tackling change, this means we tend to have a problem focus when what we need is a solution focus. When leading or managing change we need to be repeatedly asking ‘What’s working and how can we do more of it?’ and ‘what is the ratio of time I spend solving problems to the time I spend up-scaling successes’1. By finding and focusing on the bright spots - successful efforts worth emulating - you spark hope as well as illuminate the road map for action.
0 Comments
I recently read Switch: how to change things when change is hard by Dan and Chip Heath, which is about creating and managing change and decision-making. They begin by boiling the concept of change down to the fact that for anything to change, someone has to start acting differently. While change is commonly perceived as difficult, in reality we all regularly seek and embrace change in many areas of our lives - seeking new jobs, having babies, moving house or countries, embracing new technology. The Heaths put this schizophrenic attitude to change down to there being two parts of the brain - the rational and emotional side (the Rider and the Elephant as they call them) and often these are not aligned. For successful and sustainable change to take place both the rider (the rational side) and the elephant (the emotional side) have to be simultaneously engaged in a complementary way. Importantly, change needs to be engineered in a way that does not exhaust people. The self-control involved in many changes requires effort and exhausts people. When people are exhausted they are less able to be creative, positive, resilient or seek solutions to problems that inevitably arise. Changing things often involves replacing or adding to behaviours that have become automatic which requires little mental energy being with behaviours that require careful supervision by the Rider (at least initially) and therefore high mental energy. As a result, there needs to be crystal clear direction, without which the riders in us will stall and spin and not necessarily get where we are trying to go, as well as hope, a sense of achievability and regular celebration of achievement to keep the Elephant motivated. Finally, what often appears a people problem is actually a situation problem - instead of trying to change people, change the environment or the situation (much easier) and people will follow, making the path of least resistance also the path that leads to change. This forms the basis of their three part framework (see below), which my next blog posts will explore in more detail. Levin argues that an effective change strategy, aimed at creating lasting improvement in terms of a broad range of student outcomes, requires the following eight elements. I've tried to summarise the main points of each element.
Goals and Targets
A positive stance on improving all schools and success for all students.
Capacity Building
Multi-level engagement with strong leadership and a ‘guiding coalition’
Continuous learning through innovation and effective use of research and data
A focus on key strategies while also managing other interests and issues
Effective use of resources
A strong implementation effort to support the change process
I've just finished reading Ben Levin's policy booklet presenting a summary of emerging research on creating lasting, school-wide improvement in the quality of schools, with an emphasis on capacity building and an inquiry orientation to change. On a side note, I was interested (alarmed?) to see that the booklet is part of a series 'designed to summarize what is known, based on research, about selected policy issues in the field of education. The series was designed for rapid consultation ‘on the run’ by busy senior decision-makers in ministries of education, who need ready access to summaries of research that can improve educational policy' and therefore 'restricted in length – requiring around 30–45 minutes of reading time; and sized to fit easily into a jacket pocket or to be read online – providing opportunities for readily accessible consultation inside or outside the office'. While I'm aware that we all live in a fast-paced world and I am glad to see that are at least efforts among our politicians to be informed, I would hope that policy decisions about our education system are based on more than 35-40 minutes of reading from a pocket-sized booklet in a rapid consultation on the run.
Anyway, the booklet held some interesting ideas closely related to my current research, which I want to summarise on this blog. Levin presents some of the key lessons that have been learned over the last 20 years about effective, large-scale improvement in the quality of school systems operating from a sound base of universal access, reasonably capable teachers and adequate facilities and operating in an environment of relative political and social stability. Change He begins and ends by acknowledging that although change knowledge is increasingly understood and used, there are barriers to how successfully it is being used. He cites three reasons for this.
However, he argues, the shift towards wanting/ needing educational improvement that affects all classrooms and fosters sustainable quality and equity, coupled with poor results from previous reform efforts and a better understanding of how to implement change, means that change, and more specifically capacity building, will become more common place in such efforts. Achieving real and lasting change in student learning outcomes requires the focused, sustained and collaborative effort of all parts of the system, with careful attention paid to implementation as well as policy-making. He lists 8 key elements for an effective change strategy in improving school systems, which I will elaborate on in my next few blog postings:
Research and evidence-informed practice One of the things he highlights is that teaching, like any other profession, needs to develop its use of research evidence as a prime determinant of effective practice, something which I was reading about recently on Alex Quigley's blog: The Problem with research evidence in education and The Problem with research evidence in education Part 2. There is a growing knowledge base about what works and what doesn't work in education. Hattie (2008) and Marzano (2003) provide excellent summaries of the growing knowledge base about effective practice. Yet practice lags well behind still. Levin argues that while we should be looking to reference such sources more in our decision making, we should not be too discouraged by the gap between knowledge and practice - 'it can take many years to translate what research has unequivocally demonstrated to be effective into common practice'. We should therefore keep on trying. References Levin, B., 2012. System-wide improvement in education. Education Policy Series: 13. IAE: Brussels and IIEP-UNESCO: Paris. Hattie, J. 2008. Visible learning. London: Routledge. Marzano, R. 2003. What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. There seems to be some overlap between these two terms and definitions vary between organisations and between cultures. It is something that has been discussed a lot between participants in the MOOC I have been taking called Coaching Teachers. While, as the name suggests, the course is about a coaching model that can support the development of effective teaching, what has emerged from the discussion forums is a confusion about what is coaching and what is mentoring that stems from the level of direction/ advice/ guidance that the coach/ mentor provides. Participants from the course have provided, and I have added to, some useful pointers, definitions and resources to demonstrate some of the thinking they have encountered on this:
What seems most important is that the organisation or group within which this support is taking place has clear and shared definitions and understanding of the process they are engaging in. Week 3 of Coaching Teachers: promoting changes that stick and this week we are examining the role of a clear instructional vision in the coaching process. 'As a teacher coach your job is not just to get teachers to change behaviours but to promote changes that will have meaningful impact on student learning'. This is one of the biggest time and effort wasters I think I've experienced both as a teacher and in supporting other teachers. If you don't focus on things that really impact student learning, then what is the point? You put in a lot of work for little results because you're not making tha changes that are most effective in terms of student learning. But sometimes that can be really tough. Teaching (not to mention learning) is a really complex activity. Knowing which areas to focus on, in what combination and at what time is one of the hardest things to get right. Clarity of instructional vision is not just a vision of what teachers are doing, but a clear vision of what students are doing, thinking and saying in an optimal class period of learning. A coach should make links for the teachers between their actions and efforts and how that is affecting students. And ultimately the vision of what the teachers are doing needs to driven by a vision of optimal student learning. Central to the process is a vision for effective teaching and Orin (the course instructor) advocates the use of a rubric to avoid coaching sessions becoming a grab-bag of topics related to teaching which are great conversations but not necessarily focused on the things that will have greatest impact on classroom practice and student learning. Coaching sessions should focus narrowly on skill acquisition – on developing the types of skills that a teacher needs to advance the instructional vision that you have laid out in your rubric. If you are able to bring urgency and focus to the time you have in coaching teachers you are going to shorten the skill acquisition loops. This is really just to share a post from Edna Sackson, whose blog, What Ed Said, I have been following for some time. However, it turns out she is a member of the learning community taking the course Coaching Teachers (it's a small world especially the virtual one). Having talked in one of my recent posts about having guiding principles that articulate common beliefs about teaching and learning in order to frame and lead conversations, I was reminded of one of her posts: Learning Principles. As she says 'Often our practice doesn’t really reflect what we say we believe', so a set of clearly articulated principles draws us back to our beliefs and encourages us to be accountable to what we say we believe, as well as providing a common language and a framework within which to discuss practice. Thank you Edna!
One of the things I experienced when I was mentoring other teachers was that even those most resistant to feedback would respond if they saw an improvement in the way students responded to their teaching. Even if they were skeptical, if they tried something out and experienced positive results, their mindset towards learning (of their students' and their own) began to change.
I'll give you an example. A Grade 1 teacher is teaching a Math lesson. He has a clear learning goal, good instructional strategies and has planned opportunities for students to practice the new skill. But by the end of the lesson, few students had achieved the lesson's objective because the learning environment was chaotic and the teacher had no classroom management strategies. Now the feedback was quite easy to give. There were lots of strengths to draw on, the problem was clear and it was easy to suggest some strategies that would change the situation. But the teacher did not want to hear it. The kids were simply naughty and incapable of concentrating and there was nothing to be done. So I encouraged him to target a change that would be easy to achieve (i.e. not cost the teacher too much effort or risk), cajoled a little, and then watched it happen. I also watched the teacher not only improve his teaching and therefore the student's learning, but I also watched the teacher open the door to the potential for infinite improvement by witnessing that he can learn and his students can learn. no amount of me telling him that could have achieved that - he had to see it for himself. This is what Orin, the instructor on Coaching Teachers: making changes that stick, calls the Snowman effect. One of the most important things in learning for teachers (and children for that matter) is not the acquisition of a new skill, but the development of a growth mindset. With this, when teachers need to learn a new skill (when don't they?), they'll come to the experience with fewer change deflecting behaviours, which means internal processing and implementation happens quicker, driven by the confidence that the acquisition of a new skill, no matter how hard, will have a positive pay off for his students. Without that, hours of workshops or coaching will have little effect at all and be a waste of time and money, which is all too familiar a scenario. So what does this mean? It means venturing into a new world for teachers. A world in which we are not only held accountable for what we do and the scores our students get, but for who we are and how we get better scores. Will we go there? I don't think we have a choice. Last week, in my Coaching course, we were introduced to a formula for effective coaching which included quality instructional goals, quality of feedback and fixed mindset tax. This week, we are focusing on the latter. Based on Carol Dweck's work, a growth mindset indicates an attitude that abilities are not fixed but elastic and that with effort and feedback, skills can be improved, whereas a fixed mindset is underpinned by the belief that skills and abilities are innate and relatively immutable, even with practice, feedback and effort. Mindsets are not overall dispositions, but fluctuate across tasks and time and effective coaching needs to be able to work with both. The fixed mindset tax refers to the behaviours that prevent a teacher from hearing or engaging with information which suggests they need to change or improve. Effective coaching reduces those behaviours to affect successful change. If you can't stop fixed mindset behaviours, that are designed to deflect critical feedback, you are never going to be able to have a conversation that actually helps solve the problem. Four Horsemen of fixed mindset #1: You're right! I suck! #2: You're wrong! I rule! #3: Blame it on the rain! #4: Optimist without a cause! So how do you reduce those behaviours? Ross, the course instructor, suggests the first thing is to name the behaviours, as above. This makes them into something that can be recognised as behaviours most of us engage in sometimes; it creates a common language that facilitates hard conversation (with humour too!); and it helps teachers be more mindful of these behaviours and change them for themselves.
Watching this week's videos had me in stitches, as I saw myself and nearly everyone I've met in the roleplayed scenarios used to demonstrate each 'horseman'. I actually can't wait to try these techniques. Images courtesy of Match Education and Coursera. I'm currently engaged in MOOC through Coursera (well, actually a few) called Coaching teachers: making changes that stick takes a look at effective coaching for teachers, something I have written about before. While there is still a dearth of evidence about how effective (or practical) coaching is as a form of professional development, evidence is beginning to stack up that it at least can be highly effective (although the practicalities remain a challenge). So this course attempts to look at what makes effective (as opposed to good) coaching. So what have I learnt from Week 1? They introduced a formula for effective coaching which facilitates teacher change in order to improve student learning. For teacher change that results in improved student learning and lasts:
I'm particularly interested in the process of establishing a shared vision of what effective instruction looks like. In Singapore, they have guiding principles for teaching, which consist of a set of overarching principles about teaching which have been derived from the findings of research about children's learning from a range of fields, such as psychology, education, neuroscience. With these as their touchstone, providing deep conceptual understandings about teaching and learning, the teachers are able to make lessons focused on learning, personalised and student-centred, in a range of subjects and disciplines. I was recently at a workshop with Ban Har, a leading expert in professional development in Singapore, who, when I asked him what he thought the key was to effective professional learning, cited common guiding principles for teaching and learning, research-based and accountable to evidence, which form the basis of all professional discussions. In fact, he said, with that, teachers were not only able to engage in discussions that worked in a similar way to the coaching described above regularly and easily, but did it without even realising. Of course, there are issues of teacher autonomy and democracy and avoiding group think etc to be considered. But I think they're on to something. |
AuthorI'm an educator driven by the desire to see people realise their potential by gaining the tools they need to be successful. I love being part of a community of learners for whom there is always more to be known and understood. For me, learning and teaching is cognitive, social and emotional and takes the whole self. Archives
July 2015
Categories
All
|