CORE Blog

He kōrerorero, he whakaaro

CORE Blog

He kōrerorero, he whakaaro
CORE Blog
He kōrerorero, he whakaaro
  • HomeKāinga
  • About usMātou nei
  • CORE WebsitePAENGA CORE

June

Home
/
2018
/
June
agile-board-feature

Supporting education transformation and innovation through Agile

Posted on June 28, 2018 by Fionna Wright and Rachel Westaway

Agile post-it-board

As an “outsider” to education, I am interested in the challenges the education sector must face when asked to respond to change, often with competing priorities, limited resources, and uncertain outcomes. Would Agile, a project management approach widely used in industry, prove useful in assisting schools and kura to navigate through ambiguous, fast-paced change? Rachel Westaway, Project lead.

As an educator, I see the positive possibilities change and innovation has for the education sector and our learners. However, I also see the challenges. As a project manager, I have a growing interest in Agile — as an approach and a mindset to manage complex projects, handle rapid change, and support innovation. This got me thinking about how Agile might address some of the challenges for innovation and transformation in our schools, kura, and Kāhui Ako. Fionna Wright, Facilitator / Project manager.

Together, we thought it could be useful to begin a conversation about Agile and start to form understandings and wonderings about the value Agile could offer to the New Zealand education sector.


Our education system has always been in a state of change. This includes changes in areas of environment, curriculum, assessment, the way we work with others, and even redefining what it means to be “educated”.

More recently, the adjectives ‘transformational’ and ‘innovative’ have been added to describe the change needed to support 21st-century learners. The 2018 ERO report, Leading Innovative Learning in New Zealand Schools, outlines why this kind of change is needed and the mindsets of both leaders and teachers to support successful innovation.

As part of this research, ERO found that successful innovative school leaders:

  • are proactive in working with the whole-school community to develop a strong, future-focused vision for their school
  • ensure the vision has learner outcomes at its centre
  • are well-informed so that decisions build on best practice for 21st-century learners
  • have a growth mindset — are supportive of experimentation
  • quickly address elements of strategy if those elements are not working
  • develop a school culture of continuous improvement to support the vision
  • maintain coherence across all domains of the school, aligning everything to the vision
  • are effective change managers able to take staff with them on the improvement journey through timely professional development and good communication.

Successful innovative teachers:

  • have a growth mindset
  • are committed to working in new ways
  • work collaboratively
  • personalise curriculum and pedagogy to individual learner needs.

This begs the question: How do schools, school leaders, and teachers initiate, cultivate, and grow these qualities? Maybe Agile could offer some answers?

What is Agile anyway?

The Agile Alliance define agile as

“The ability to create and respond to change in order to succeed in an uncertain and turbulent environment.”1

Originally designed for software development, Agile is a set of values, principles, and practices designed to break down hierarchical silos to emphasise collaboration across multidisciplinary, self-managing teams, build relationships and trust, strengthen organisational capability, and support innovation.2

Agile is a mindset

Figure 1

Agile mindset: Agile is a mindset described by 4 values defined by 12 principles, demonstrated by an unlimited number of practices.

Diagramme adapted from Dr. Ahmed Sidky. Source: The Agile Mindset.

The key values of Agile

Figure 2

1. Individuals and interactions over Processes and tools
2. Working software over Comprehensive documentation
3. Customer collaboration over Contract negotiation
4. Responding to change over Following a plan

The four key values of Agile for software development are outlined in Figure 2 above. The items on the right, should be not abandoned as there is still value in these items. However, proponents of the Agile Movement value the items on the left (green column) more.

The principles of Agile

The Agile values for software development are supported by a set of principles designed to guide and support a common way of thinking about what is important when times get tough.

  1. Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.
  2. Welcome changing requirements, even late in development. Agile processes harness change for the customer’s competitive advantage.
  3. Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale.
  4. Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project.
  5. Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support they need and trust them to get the job done.
  6. The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation.
  7. Working software is the primary measure of progress.
  8. Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.
  9. Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility.
  10. Simplicity — the art of maximizing the amount of work not done–is essential.
  11. The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.
  12. At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behaviour accordingly.

Once these values and principles are understood, a range of tools are available to teams to work with. Frameworks such as Scrum, Kanban and Lean provide teams with a suite of toolsets to help embed these values and principles into agreed ways of working.

Due to the success of Agile in the world of software development, it is now widely used in other domains such as product development, marketing, and even HR. So, this raises the question: How about education?

The Agile school’s manifesto

In 2011, inspired by the values and principles of the 2001 Agile Manifesto, founder of Teaching Making Sense Inc, Steve Peha, fleshed out the essential characteristics of Agile schools by proposing a translation to an Agile Schools Manifesto.

The values of the Agile Schools’ Manifesto

Figure 3

1. Individuals and interactions over Processes and tools
2. Meaningful learning over Measurement of learning
3. Stakeholder collaboration over Complex negotiation
4. Responding to change over Following a plan

Peha has also translated the Agile principles into education speak:

  1. Their highest priority is to satisfy the needs of students and their families through early and continuous delivery of meaningful learning.
  2. They welcome changing requirements, even late in a learning cycle, and harness change for the benefit of students and their families.
  3. They deliver meaningful learning frequently, from a couple of days to a couple of weeks, with a preference to the shorter timescale.
  4. School and family team members work together daily to create learning opportunities for all participants.
  5. They build projects around motivated individuals, give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done.
  6. They recognise that the most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a team is face-to-face conversation.
  7. Meaningful learning is their primary measure of progress.
  8. Their processes promote sustainability. Educators, students, and families should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.
  9. They believe that continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances adaptability.
  10. Simplicity–the art of maximizing the amount of work done–is essential.
  11. The best ideas and initiatives emerge from self-organizing teams.
  12. At regular intervals, teams reflect on how to become more effective, then tune and adjust their behaviour accordingly.3

At face value, we believe that it would be hard to suggest that these values and principles do not lie at the heart of many within the New Zealand education sector; so, could an Agile mindset and tools such as Scrum and Kanban offer an opportunity to work differently and more effectively both in the management of the school’s organisations and in the delivery of learning? Is there a role for Agile to assist with innovation and transformation in the education sector?

Wanted! Your feedback, please!

We welcome any feedback and questions. Please comment below or contact Rachel and/or Fionna directly. We aim to follow up on this post accordingly.

Find out more

Agile Alliance
A non-profit organisation with global membership with information about Agile, resources and a code of conduct.

 


1 Agile 101. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.agilealliance.org/agile101/

2 Rigby, D.K., Sutherland, J., & Takeuchi, H. (2016). Embracing Agile. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/05/embracing-agile

3 Briggs, S. (2014). Agile Based Learning: What Is It and How Can It Change Education? Retrieved from https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/agile-based-learning-what-is-it-and-how-can-it-change-education/

Photo credits:

Feature image (post-it board) by VFS Digital Design on Flickr under CC 2.0.

read more
Posted in
headset-feature

Four effective ways to learn virtually in real time

Posted on June 19, 2018 by Rochelle Savage
uke playing
Photo of Uke n Duet. June (right) teaches her mokopuna via Skype)

Learning online has its advantages — access to experts who you couldn’t connect with face to face; no travel time etc; also, you may not be able to meet in person due to location or time constraints.

Below are four effective ways to learn virtually in real time that are used in my personal and professional life; usually on a daily basis:

1. Find an expert to teach you

Use real-time video technology to teach you using Skype, Facetime, Google Hangouts, Messenger etc

My mother started teaching my tama pōtiki/youngest son the ukulele when he was 6 years old (the musical gene skipped a generation). He is now 10, and they practice three times a week — before school from 8.00 – 8.20am — nothing unusual apart from that he lives in a small North Canterbury town and she lives in Nelson. They do this by using Skype or Facetime.

However, it is important to set yourself up to succeed. Having several sessions face to face before you begin (if possible) can be really beneficial. This is what my mother and my son did for her teaching him the ukulele.

2. Find your tribe

I love going to exercise classes because I push myself harder when others are around, and it also gives me a set time to focus on this. This can also be the case with learning something new.

virtual meeting

One of the most popular parts of the Te Reo Māori online course — Puāwai (Beginners) — are the weekly webinars (using real-time video conferencing technology — in this case, Zoom). It is an opportunity to learn in a supportive environment with others who are the same level as you, and also, often have similar learning goals (teachers wishing to use more Te reo Māori in their classrooms and at home, improved pronunciation).

Whakataukī (proverb) Ki te kotahi te kakaho ka whati, Ki te kapuia e kore e whati
— (Alone we can be broken. Standing together, we are invincible).

3. Work together

My colleagues and I talk every day and work on documents and mahi at the same time — although we are based all over New Zealand.

The video example below is of my colleagues and I using Padlet (online cloud-based software) to brainstorm. However, we also do this with Google Docs, Sheets, etc.

4. Ask for help and teach others

You can ask for help — and show the person you are asking exactly where you are stuck by screen sharing on your chosen video technology.

I have been training a colleague in Wellington by this technique (cheaper, quicker, and easier than flying to her). My team and I also screen share to clarify work or to assist each other at some stage every week.

The video example below is of my colleague screen sharing and showing me which code to change.

So, could you:

1) Find an expert to teach you?
Is there someone who could share their knowledge with you, your family — or your classroom? (for example, is there a grandparent who could share their expertise?)

2) Find your tribe?
Is there an online course that appeals such as Te Reo Māori online courses — Puāwai (Beginners)? Could you and some colleagues and friends organise to study together?

3) Work together?
Do you use padlet or Google docs to collaboratively work together? These can be helpful both for teams that work virtually or in the same physical space. It also means notes can be easily shared and not stuck on a whiteboard or in someone’s notebook — plus the cloud-based options automatically update and you know that you are on the latest update (unlike with WORD).

4) Ask for help and teach others
Try using screen sharing (on Skype, Facetime, Google hangouts etc) if you would like advice from a colleague or friend but they are not physically close by. Or can you assist?

 

read more
Posted in
welcome to texas

Texan approaches to learning — Aotearoa applications

Posted on June 14, 2018 by Amira Aman

Ten years ago, Māori students confirmed for us the central importance of teachers establishing whānau (extended family-like) relationships, Whanaungatanga, to their successfully engaging and achieving at school… Whanaungatanga is necessary and foundational. Bishop, R & Ladwig, J & Berryman, M. (2013).

texas-nz

In October 2017 I was Austin bound to peek in the doors of four schools who held reputations for offering ‘disruptive’ education, inclusive education, and/or high academic achievement.

In my introductory blog, Destination Texas: Disruptive education as a means for student agency and inclusivity, I summarised the schools I was afforded to visit by CORE Education:

  • two private schools offering an alternative entrepreneurial approach KoSchool(middle and high School) and Acton Academy(elementary, middle and high school);
  • Magnolia Montessori for All, a public elementary school created to address the achievement inequities experienced by some children; and
  • LASA East Austin, a selective public magnet high school for liberal arts, science, and mathematics.

In my second blog Student agency and inclusivity: 4 Texan schools I discussed the four key themes that emerged from my visits. Primarily how the schools viewed:

  • inclusivity
  • learner agency (assessment and reporting)
  • the role of $ money — private versus public
  • physical environments and the connection to teaching pedagogy.

So, what does all of this mean for teachers and leaders in Aotearoa, New Zealand? What did I learn about inclusivity, parental expectations around assessment and reporting in disruptive education, and the impact of the physical environments on teaching pedagogy?

Considerations for senior leaders

Inclusivity

In visiting these four schools I could see clear parallels between Texas and New Zealand with regards to lower achievement levels of certain ethnic groups compared with white students. Public schools like Magnolia Montessori for All genuinely focused on key competencies to support their students’ social and emotional needs (as we would say in Aotearoa — whanaungatanga). Private schools like KoSchool ensured that students were wrapped in support from many areas: teachers, school leadership, parents, outside agency support, outside vocational interest businesses. Michael Strong, founder of KoSchool, didn’t want an ‘either/or’ approach. They worked in deliberate ways so that both social/emotional needs and learning needs were addressed concurrently.

What was most apparent was that schools that genuinely put students at the heart of their learning and connected with the cultural, learning, social, and emotional needs of their students, did challenge the low achievement statistics. These students were not seen as the failing ‘tail’ in a bell curve of student achievement that needed to be fixed. These students were viewed as capable of learning like all students, and the teaching methods and curriculum reflected ways to engage and support their learning. The students’ cultures were celebrated and interwoven into the school curriculum and teaching pedagogy. It was part of the fabric of their schools. As a New Zealander visiting these schools, Russell Bishop’s research, Te Kōtahitanga, sat on my shoulder as I walked the corridors of each school, which was working hard to challenge the low achievement statistics of certain ethnic groups.

These ‘successful’ schools didn’t offer this support on their own. Parents were closely connected to their children’s education in the ‘disruptive’ education schools. For example, at the Magnolia Montessori for All learning was considered a priority for parents as well as their children, and they provided regular sessions where parents connected with educators and discussed relevant issues. This level of connection provided a tightly woven community around a student where they felt a sense of belonging. Who they are as individuals was celebrated. So, what could that look like in Aotearoa? I imagine a first response would be concerns about teachers spending time in evening meetings with parents. And it’s a valid concern. At the very least this level of parental involvement is a shift away from a twice-yearly parent-teacher interview where, at some schools or kura, a parent is ‘told’ how their child is performing.

From the experiences I had in Texas, a few of the questions that I’d recommend we continue to ask ourselves are:

  • How we can blur the boundaries between home and school?
  • How can we include a student’s culture so that they bring their identity with them rather than leaving it at the school gate to fit into a Pākeha world?
  • Do we need to look at taking small steps, such as looking at the clothes/uniform students’ wear, so they can come to school feeling comfortable and connected with their culture (as Fraser High School has done)?
  • What other inclusive measures can we take so that students are ready to learn?

 Assessment and reporting

 “This is a story about … whether an entire generation of kids will fail to make the grade in the global economy because they can’t think their way through abstract problems, work in teams, distinguish good information from bad, or speak a language other than [their own].” TIME magazine, How to Build a Student for the 21st Century, Wallis and Steptoe (2006)

I was fascinated to see how these schools reported achievement to parents and whānau. Would they report using traditional modes of using subject grades or would they take a different approach?

At times I could see there was a disconnect between attitudes of learner agency and a focus on inclusivity and the traditional grade reporting system that the schools followed. This was explained by most schools as providing what the parents requested. It’s an important point. We are often defined by our experiences and it is comforting for parents to see familiar reporting methods when wanting to understand the progress of their children. However, the world has changed dramatically since these parents were at primary or secondary school. The competencies our children and students require are vastly different to those their parents were schooled in. If you take a glance over the 2017 Ten Trends you will see highlighted the need for young people to develop competencies in cultural, technology, structural, economic and process areas. Likewise, the OCED in 21st Century Skills: How can you prepare students for the new Global Economy? looks at the capabilities our students’ need for their future (not ours).

Parents who sent their children to ‘disruptive’ schools were less likely to insist on traditional means of reporting, but even they voiced their fears of not understanding how their child was achieving. They were more comfortable in less traditional forms of reporting if it was evident that they:

  • saw value in what their child was studying (and they were heavily involved in the school to view this)
  • they could see tangible progress through set programmes
  • they were aware that their child’s social/emotional needs were being met by the school (and they hadn’t elsewhere).

Clearly, a shift in teaching pedagogy is a major shift for parents and whānau, not just students. Some questions for us to consider include:

  • How do we include our communities in understanding that shift?
  • How do we engage in their understanding of what skills their children need for their futures?

The role of $ money — private versus public:

LASA - Technology workshop
LASA – Technology workshop
LASA -high academic achievement
LASA – high academic achievement

While I could see that it was easier to be inclusive in private schools, with flexible curricula and money for resources, it was also possible in public schools that made it their business to do so. These schools recognised the importance of employing teachers and leaders who represented the students they taught. This was not an uncomplicated undertaking, but it was a stance that Magnolia Montessori for All overtly considered when employing new teachers to reflect the ethnic diversity of their school. It was also an important consideration for LASA, who choose teachers who were outstanding in their fields and later retrained as teachers. They saw these individuals as having the passion and expertise to inspire the interests of specific students, particularly in STEM subjects. The principal, Stacia Crescenzi, spoke of a teacher who had a Masters in Physics and who had worked outside of education. She sought him out after he retrained as a teacher. She chose him specifically to connect with those students who were hugely passionate about physics. Unsurprisingly, Stacia didn’t come from a secondary background either. She taught Psychology at a university prior to being appointed to the prestigious school and was comfortable looking outside of education for teachers who would be able to meet the needs of her students. Likewise, Michael Strong, founder of KoSchool, was careful to choose teachers who showed experience or willingness to teach using Socratic dialogue and support the diverse emotional and social needs of their students.

These schools certainly gave me pause for thought about the tendency of New Zealand schools and kura to ‘advertise the position and wait to see who applies’. These Texan schools were very strategic about hunting for teachers who would support their vision and meet the culture of their schools and specific needs of their students.

Considerations for teachers

As Hattie (2017) has highlighted, the most important factor in student achievement is the teacher; it’s all about our relationships with our students. To a certain extent, the building of a relationship that genuinely celebrates students’ cultural, learning, social, and emotional needs is ‘easier’ in a primary school where teachers spend most of each day with their students. However, that doesn’t let us secondary teachers off the hook. I ask myself:

  • What do we do as ‘ordinary’ teachers to really know the cultural backgrounds of our students, their interests, their ways of learning?
  • How do we challenge their ways of learning within the constraints of our school’s structures?
  • If we have some influence on the number of NCEA credits our students are completing, the length of teaching periods and the structure of the school day, then fabulous, but if we do not, what can we influence once they are in front of us for a period?
  • What deliberate actions do we take to create learning programmes that are about learning rather than NCEA assessments?

If we value learning agency, what does it look like in practice in a traditional secondary school?

The structure of a traditional secondary school doesn’t really enable us to see ourselves as teachers of learning, given that even the timetable states that the students are coming to us for an hour or 45 mins to learn ‘English’, ‘Maths’, or ‘Social Studies’. It is tempting to dismiss the importance of getting to know our students, their needs, and their interests, as we have so many assessments pending. How many schools give their teachers the flexibility to co-construct student assessment programmes with their classes? How many schools put the learning first and treat assessment as a bi-product, rather than a driver of that learning? It’s not an easy task. Teachers have senior leaders, BOTs, and the school community measuring student success through NCEA achievement data. However, I was struck by parental attitudes in the four schools I visited. They wanted their child’s social and emotional needs met, as well as achieving highly academically. And the correlation was right in front of me — students who felt like they belonged because of the efforts of their schools, did achieve well and contradicted the national statistics for their ethnic group(s). The research is undeniable also; students whose social and emotional needs are met achieve better academically (Sparks, 2013).

So, how does our teaching pedagogy reflect that we value student agency? If we are talking about NCEA requirements of students’ creating original, perceptive, and insightful ideas yet we are teaching ‘chalk and talk’ with a few token groups work activities, then I feel we have a disconnect. While the practices of Socratic discussion would take time to evolve, this is a means by which to genuinely give students the time, space, and belief that they can discuss the bigger issues of their learning.

KoSchool - timetable
KoSchool – timetable

The power of goal setting in creating learner agency

Goal setting was an integral part of learner agency in some of the schools I visited. The schools that did this well spent considerable time on supporting the students to form realistic goals guided by the parameters of grade level expectations. Schools like Acton Academy celebrated goal setting at the beginning of a semester by inviting the community to come to a signing ceremony where each student signed their plan for the semester, which demonstrated a high level of support from both within the school and from their whānau. These goals were referred to on a daily, weekly, sessional (the school ran for six weeks of learning at a time before breaking for a week), and semester basis. Meeting goals were recognised and applauded. Students genuinely chose their own pace of working and did not move up to the next grade level (step of their Hero’s journey) until they met the requirements.

It was truly impressive to see students taking ownership of their learning, supported in a multi-level classroom and their guides (teachers) and whānau. This is, I believe, a far cry from a casual attempt to get students to set goals at the beginning of the year, perhaps a loose attempt to refer to them during the year, and then a check in how they got on at the end of the year. In this elementary school, the goal setting was made tangible by individual programmes for Core Skills, so that students could meet their own goals in Maths, Reading etcetera.

The challenge for me was how this could look in practice in Aotearoa — especially in a secondary school. Often, a form of goal setting is a ‘task’ given to a form teacher or similar. The key to success is the frequency by which the students are held accountable to their goals and the support that is wrapped around them. Clearly, there is room for robust discussions around how individual teachers could support students regularly to revisit their goals and their action steps to achieve them. A key question is, how can whānau be involved in this process? You might find it worthwhile reading Rebecca Sweeney’s blog on Beyond Goals | Scrapping Goals in a Complex, Fast-changing Environment where she explores a definition of goal setting by David, S., Clutterbuck, D., Megginson, D (2013). While this blog focuses on cluster/Kāhui Ako goal setting, it still holds relevance for student goal setting too.

Acton Academy ‘Hero’s Journey’
Acton Academy ‘Hero’s Journey’
Goal setting at Acton Academy
Goal setting at Acton Academy
Contract signing celebration at Acton Academy
Contract signing celebration at Acton Academy

 

What is the connection between physical environments and teaching pedagogy?

Because of the opportunities presented by the Canterbury quakes and the rebuild, the idea of MLE and collaborative teaching opportunities emerged, and this has been surrounded by controversy for some. On my trip to Texas, I was, therefore, interested in the teaching pedagogy I would witness and how schools would make use of physical spaces.

One of the things that stood out to me when visiting these four schools was how little the physical buildings affected student achievement in comparison to teaching pedagogy. While schools like Magnolia Montessori for All made a bold and conscious effort to design their buildings like homes rather than classrooms, it was their approach to teaching and learning that stood out in making tangible differences to student success. Even in private schools such as KoSchool, where the buildings and classrooms looked very familiar for any teacher teaching in a ‘regular’ school, again it was the student-centred approach to learning (especially Socratic dialogue) that produced independent, original thinkers.

Classroom at KoSchool
Classroom at KoSchool
Acton Academy classroom
Acton Academy classroom
LASA classroom
LASA classroom
Magnolia Montessori for All classrooms
Magnolia Montessori for All classrooms

Conclusion

It was a privilege to visit, witness, and reflect on the work that these four Texan schools do in Austin. These experiences will sit with me for a long time and influence the work I do with leaders and teachers in Aotearoa, New Zealand. These key themes stand out to me:

  • Relationships matter — if we really want to address the disparities of student achievement for Maori and Pasifika in New Zealand, then this is the first place we must pour our energies. I don’t mean token efforts to ‘know’ our students, but to really know them and build a sense of Whanaungatanga. I can see that these relationships do not just start and end with the student sitting in front of us, but include whānau and community too.
  • Learner agency — is a huge shift in mindset for parents, and we have to lead the way. While it is comforting for parents if we present them with a familiar approach to teaching pedagogy, it is not going to prepare their children for the world they are going to live and work in.
  • School structures support change — while it is possible for individual teachers to embrace a teaching pedagogy that is inclusive, student-focused, and responsive to individual needs, it is certainly easier to do so when a school’s structure also supports that vision.

If you would like to discuss any of the aspects I have mentioned, or questions I have raised, I would be keen to talk with you. So, please feel free to contact me at amira.aman@core-ed.ac.nz

 

Image credits:
Feature image — Greetings from Austin, Texas by chefkeem on Pixabay under CC 0
Map of Texas, by GDJ, on Pixabay under CCO
Map of NZ, by cmccarthy2001, on Pixabay under CC0
All other images by the author

read more
Posted in
design thinking process

DT in DT and HM: Design thinking in the Digital Technology and Hangarau Matihiko Curricula

Posted on June 12, 2018 by Philippa Nicoll Antipas

“With its focus on design thinking, technology education supports students to be innovative, reflective, and critical in designing new models, products, software, systems, and tools to benefit people while taking account of their impact on cultural, ethical, environmental, political, and economic conditions.” (Technology in the New Zealand Curriculum, Ministry of Education, 2017)

design thinking process
With the strengthening of Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko within the Technology learning area in the New Zealand Curriculum, and the Hangarau Wāhanga Ako in Te Marautanga o Aotearoa, this has prompted change for schools, kura, and Kāhui Ako. While there is certainly much that is new to the learning areas, something that is not is design thinking.

Design thinking has always underpinned the Technology and Hangarau curricula because this these are learning areas that are process-driven. Both technology — in all its forms — and design thinking are about identifying problems, creating solutions for people, experimenting, refining, acting on feedback.

So, while we’re grappling with new concepts and content, perhaps the strengthening of Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko is also an opportunity to put the spotlight back onto the process of design thinking and its mindsets.

What is design thinking?

Design thinking is a creative process that can be adopted to find solutions to complex problems. There are various models of design thinking, but one that is often cited is that created by the d.school at Stanford University. This has five phases, as can be seen below:

the five phases of design thinking

The NZC doesn’t suggest a particular model, but in the English translation of the draft Hangarau Matihiko document, the following steps were outlined:

  • Dedication — to people and their thoughts and feelings and knowing the users and their needs. (Empathy)
  • Define — the major issues and the available pathways.
  • Propose ideas — formulating concepts, and outcomes / solutions. (Ideate)
  • Original model — construct an original model. (Prototype)
  • Experiment — test the model and adapt correspondingly. (Feedback)

The two models map comfortably onto one another. But, design thinking is about more than process, it is also about choosing to adopt innovation mindsets.

What are the design-thinking mindsets?

Again, Stanford’s d.school suggest the following mindsets as being key for design thinking:

mindsets of design thinking

Given the opening quote from the New Zealand Curriculum, and the design-thinking process suggested by Te Matauranga o Aotearoa, here, we will focus on three particular innovation mindsets:

  • human-centred
  • culture of prototyping, and
  • bias towards action.

Human-centred

In the context of Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko, the focus is on creating technology to support people. People are, and must be, at the heart of the design process. There is no use designing a solution to a problem that doesn’t work for the people concerned. This is why empathy, being human-centred, is the fundamental component of design thinking.

Culture of prototyping

When we think we have a solution that might just work, it’s important to get that idea out of our heads and into the real (or digital!) world. This allows the idea to be tested, for us to challenge our assumptions, and to find the flaws. Prototyping — making a model — invites us to use our creative and critical thinking. A prototype is primarily a vehicle for feedback from the very people for whom we are designing the solution. Based on their feedback, we refine, adapt, and change our solution: we iterate. This mindset calls on us to hold our ideas lightly, to be human-centred, and to be prepared to alter, or even abandon, our proposed solution based on new knowledge.

Bias towards action

When grappling with a problem it is easy to be stuck:

  • What is the problem?
  • Who is it a problem for?
  • How do we know it’s a problem?
  • What can we do about this problem?
  • What if we try…?

A bias towards action mindset calls on us to acknowledge this learning phase and to move towards doing something about the problem. It is closely linked to the above culture of prototyping mindset. Identify and define a problem; let your imagination loose to find multiple ways of solving the problem; then filter down to one or two key possibilities that you make tangible and test. It is like being in ‘beta mode’. We are used to having to update the apps on our smartphones in order to make them work better and more efficiently. We don’t sit around and wait for everything to be perfect before we release the solution into the wild. We prototype, test, and refine. We innovate.

How might we…

Let’s not lose sight of the underlying design-thinking process and its mindsets when exploring the brave new world of Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko. In fact, we could well use the design-thinking process to give structure to our exploration. Perhaps a starting question could be:
How might we integrate Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko into our local curriculum?

 

If would like help with building a design-thinking approach to your curriculum, get in touch!

 

Resources

  • iCubed: How design thinking develops lifelong learners
  • What is design thinking?
  • d.school K12 Lab Wiki
  • Technology online
  • Kia takatū ā-Matihiko | Digital Readiness

 

Image credits:
Feature image: by the author
5 phases – d.school K12 Lab Wiki (used by permission)
Mindset for design thinking – d.school K12 Wiki (used by permission)

read more
Posted in
gazing-at-mt-taranaki-feature

E kore e pau te ika unahi nui — Restoring the holistic wellbeing of Māori boys through connection and innovation

Posted on June 6, 2018 by Anaru White

Māori boy gazing at Mt Taranaki

E kore e pau, he ika unahi nui
It will not be consumed for it is a fish covered with large scales
Here Taranaki compares its tribe to a heavily armoured and therefore unconquerable fish… (Mead, S. M., & Grove, N. (2001). Ngā pēpeha a ngā tīpuna)

As part of CORE’s commitment to supporting innovative practices, Jason Ruakere and I have been awarded CORE’s Pro-bono research grant, which we are undertaking during 2018.

Puniho Pā, Taranaki
Puniho Pā, Taranaki

The brief for the research is:
“E kore e pau te ika unahi nui” is a collaboratively-based research project with Puniho Pā, whānau, schools and a group of Māori boys living in coastal Taranaki. This is an exploratory study, this kaupapa is investigating and trialing how Ako is applied within ancestral spaces (marae, awa, moana, and maunga), and enhanced through digital interaction (e.g., coding, Google Maps and virtual reality).

Our research is steadily providing knowledge about how marae environments can improve Māori learning outcomes (Te Kupenga Mātauranga o Taranaki, 2011). While kaupapa Māori studies into the effects of marae learning are scant, what is available suggests that these settings provide powerful localised educational content and pedagogy, which can contribute to the following learning outcomes for Māori (Lee, 2012; George, 2010, Doherty, 2009; Hond, 2013):

  • Pragmatic expression and commitment to education solutions for Māori students by Māori.
  • Enhanced cultural belonging, control and innovation, encouraging leadership, collective participation and community action, and improvements in intergenerational learning.

We will endeavour to extend these earlier studies. The project focuses specifically on critically describing processes of ako when framed by ancestral spaces and future-oriented pedagogy and content. The trial team are exploring our own theories about how ancestral spaces can improve and strengthen the holistic wellbeing of Māori boys. Through the generation of pūrākau, this study is exploring effective practices of Ako in marae and hapū environments (Lee, 2009). Pūrākau are described as:

“…a traditional form of Māori narrative, contains philosophical thought, epistemological constructs, cultural codes, and worldviews that are fundamental to our identity as Māori” (Lee, 2009, p. 1).

Laying hīnaki, Matenehunehu River.
Laying hīnaki, Matenehunehu River.

Current inequities between Māori and non-Māori learning outcomes pose challenges to our present education system. New and innovative approaches to supporting Māori boys is needed.

We hope that this project will meet this challenge, and add value to:

  • discussions about the theory and practice of hapū-driven and 21st-century practices of Ako
  • the different ways marae and hapū support learning through pedagogy and programme design, which mirror the knowledge and practices of the local whānau, hapū, and iwi and future-focused learning principles.
Making a hīnaki
Making a hīnaki.

The overarching research question for this project is:

How does Ako in ancestral spaces enhance the holistic wellbeing of Māori boys?

To date we have:

  • Held a wānanga for the boys and their whānau to strengthen relationships and connections with each other and the hapū.
  • Spent a weekend camping and exploring and learning about local areas of significance for the hapū.
  • Established weekly wānanga to support the boys with their schooling and build on the previous knowledge learnt about the local area. We use digital technologies to retell stories about the local area.

We hope that our findings will provide us with key learnings about the elements that encourage and hinder practices of Ako in marae and hapū contexts, and solutions to create mutually beneficial school, kura, and marae/hapū relationships.

We look forward to sharing the learning and outcomes through future blogs and presentations.

 

Useful links:
CORE Education’s Arareo Māori team provides several products and services to cater for kura, schools and private and public organisations. This includes professional development, te reo Māori consultancy, publications, research and events. Ki te hiahia whakapā mai, tuku īmēra ki arareomaori@core-ed.org.

Image Credits:
Feature image — Ānaru White
Puniho Pā – Jason Ruakere
Laying hīnaki — Ānaru White
Making a hīnaki — Anaru White

read more
Posted in
Subscribe to our emails
Make an Enquiry
Subscribe to our emails
Make an Enquiry

© 2021 CORE Education Policies
0800 267 301
© 2021 CORE Education
0800 267 301
CORE Blog
  • Home
  • About us
  • CORE Website
  • Policies