Agency - Then, Now & Next

First published in Connect Magazine - Online Here

I first met the concept of agency in the early 90s. At the time, I was a student of Sociology & Anthropology at Newcastle University and agency and I just clicked. I didn’t know at the time that agency would come to play an important role not only for my understanding of the interactions between individuals, groups and society at large but also in my life as an educator.

Agency as a concept within sociology carries the potential for a deeper understanding of how individuals or groups experience and respond to society. As a student of sociology, I was shown how agency could help us understand the behaviours of young people growing up in conditions of social exclusion. Punk culture was the perfect exemplar of this.

Emerging out of and parallel with the punk rock movement, Punk was a decadent, exuberant and to some, shocking subcultural rebellion against the polite status quo and the niceness of the hippie movement. The extravagance of the Punk movement made it hard to ignore. It was a youth culture that was most definitely in your face, and it was quickly labelled as troublesome and damaging. Through Punk’s embrace of bricolage and particularly re-appropriation of images of innocence, young people found a powerful, and often very loud, voice. The equally most celebrated and derided image of the punk era perhaps remains that of the Punk, clad in leather, hair dishevelled, and the ubiquitous nappy/safety pin as both adornment of clothing and body piercing. In this image, the Punk thumbs his/her nose at symbols of innocence and declares him/herself unsafe and unfit for polite society. In this image, we see the use of bricolage (an assortment of objects not typically associated with one another) and re-appropriation at work.

Agency helps us to understand Punk. It was a movement that emerged from times of oppression and denial of agency. For many young people, there was much to rebel against, and feelings of disenfranchisement from the existing countercultural movement of hippiedom, with its focus on love and peace, found a new mode of expression. The political and economic conditions which pushed this youth into bleak public housing estates with little hope or promise became the catalyst for a new subculture. Punk took feelings of hopelessness, disconnectedness and shame and turned all of this upside down. As society robbed these young people of agency, they took it back. The denial of agency became the catalyst for agency on steroids. With agency, the Punk reclaims their voice, their body and their place in the public imagination.

It was some years later that I used the word agency within education. It was in a meeting where the topic of student ownership of learning was being discussed. I had been experimenting with Personal Passion Projects on a small scale, and this was beginning to gain attention. My colleagues wanted to understand the benefits of this model, and in responding, I referenced agency. The response I received then became the theme over the next few years; I would talk about student agency, and people would inquire, “What do you mean by agency?” This only became more confusing for people if I was to mention agentic action.

But, overtime agency came to be a term used more frequently. At first, whenever a visiting colleague, academic or expert would mention agency, my colleagues would remark to the effect, “Oh, that’s Nigel’s thing”. Fortunately, this has changed, but I still smile when I hear the word used in a new context. `

“agency”, is the ability to make choices and direct activity based on one’s own resourcefulness and enterprise. This entails thinking about the world not as something that unfolds separate and apart from us but as a field of action that we can potentially direct and influence.” (Ritchhart, 2015 p.77)

Somewhere between then and now, agency became a buzzword. Today it is perfectly normal for educators to talk about the projects they and their schools are doing to support learner agency. Student voice is on the agenda and increasingly a part of our mission and vision statements.

The rationale for this continuing embrace of agency is multifaceted. For some, agency connects with beliefs about human rights. If we attend to the notion that children have rights, then we probably agree that they should have agency regarding their experience of school and learning. Others will focus on the role that self-determination plays in motivating us to learn. The agentic learner is more likely to be intrinsically motivated towards their learning and thus more likely to experience success. This line of thought is also associated with a valuing of life-long learning. When we recognise that learning will need to continue beyond our years of engagement with formal education, we also conclude that learning needs to become a capacity that we are able to engage with independently. The self-navigating life-long learner is also the agentic learner.

“If nothing else, children should leave school with a sense that if they act, and act strategically, they can accomplish their goals” Peter Johnston (2004) - Choice Words: How Our Language Affects Children’s Learning.

The expression of our desire for learner agency is complicated and revealing. Our underlying beliefs about the value of learner agency are reflected in how it is experienced in our schools.

If agency is a right, it is included most often in a peripheral manner, parallel to the main objectives of teaching and learning. Maybe, students are given a voice in parts of the decision-making process. Perhaps there is a Student Resource Council that addresses issues identified by the students; maybe they share ideas with the Principal.

In some instances agency becomes closely aligned with attributions of responsibility and specificallyto whom responsibility is assigned. The "grit" and "effort" movement has recruited agency to their purposes and it is in such instances viewed as a disposition that the individual has control over. “You can be your best” is the slogan that captures this feeling. Students are expected to be engaged and motivated, and those who demonstrate grit and determination are bound to succeed. But agency requires more than sustained personal effort, is not purely determined by individual factors and it is not is distributed equally.

Agency is a product of our personal dispositions and the contexts in which we function. In environments that act against our purposes, where circumstance conspires against our will, and where others act with their agency to limit our self-expression, our agency will be curtailed. If we do not address contextual issues that impact an individuals agency, we risk leaving them to fight an uphill battle while others benefit from a system that functions in their favour. Associating success with personal expressions of agency risks errant attributions of responsibility for success or failure.

Associating agency with self-determination theory leads us towards considerations of autonomy, purpose and mastery. Where I am able to align the goals of my learning with my purposes, where I am able to learn with degrees of autonomy or self-directedness and where I might have access to caring supports that allow me to achieve mastery of new capacities, I am more likely to engage. A school culture that aims to achieve such a setting might incorporate choice and allow my voice to be expressed. Partnerships in learning are more likely, and power relationships will be blurred.

Comparisons between people whose motivation is authentic (literally, self-authored or endorsed) and those who are merely externally controlled for an action typically reveal that the former, relative to the latter, have more interest, excitement, and confidence, which in turn is manifest both as enhanced performance, persistence, and creativity - (Ryan & Deci. 2000)

Schools that genuinely commit to agency will be targeting it at multiple levels. They will provide opportunities for student voice through structures such as student councils and student surveys and respond to the messaging they receive. They will incorporate agency along with student voice and choice in the learning environment and allow it to shape curriculum and pedagogy. They value the benefits that agency brings to the individual now and in their future and the positive impact it can have on the community.

“By giving students a voice you send the message that their ideas and thinking are relevant to the learning that takes place and they begin to naturally take agency over their learning if we hand them the baton.” (Jennifer LaTarte cited in Ritchhart and Church. 2020 p. 19)

Buzz words tend to lose their impact with time, and agency could be the next victim. Compare the example of agency evident in the Punk movement with how it is experienced in many schools, and you see signs of this phenomenon occurring. In Punk, we see agency as acts of defiance, of young people taking a strong stance to be heard. Punk was not convenient, was uncontrolled, uncontrived and radically transformative. Punks were not given agency nor handed the baton; they took it. In schools, the danger is that agency becomes a tool, not for the empowerment of students but a contemporary cage. When those in power and those privileged by the structures of society design systems to empower others, we risk creating conditions where the new systems act primarily to maintain existing norms. When we hand the baton to students in the name of agency, we must be prepared to surrender some of our power. Agency cannot be lent.

As a concept and a cultural force, agency exists within our school whether we choose to attend to it or not, and either way, our actions or inaction will have an impact. Each member of our community experiences varying and changing degrees of agency. As agentic actors, we make choices and enact behaviours in response to our needs, wants and interpretations of our reality. Within communities, our individual agency interacts with that of others, and these interactions play a significant role in shaping our community. Understanding this and striving to make visible the rationale and impact of the behaviours we experience allows us to respond deliberately.

Expanding our conception of agency in our learning environments might be the next step in its evolution from seldom referenced concept to transformative force. As we confront complex social issues connected inexorably to power relationships, we need to see agency as more than granting students a voice. When we recognise that agency is a measure of the degree to which an individual is able to enact their will and achieve their goals within the contexts that they function, we see it also as a measure of equity and access to social justice. We cannot be blind to agency and claim to be concerned about equality.

by Nigel Coutts

Ritchhart, R. (2015) Creating cultures of thinking: The eight forces we must truly master to transform our schools”, San Francisco, Josey-Bass.

Ritchhart, Ron, Church, Mark. (2020) The Power of Making Thinking Visible: Practices to engage and empower all learners. New Jersey; Josey Bass

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Maintaining a focus on concrete representations of mathematical concepts during remote learning.

With much of Australia back in lockdown, we are once again facing the challenges of remote learning. One of these is how to make abstract mathematical concepts tangible to our students. One such concept that is routinely challenging to students is fractions. Somehow, despite our best efforts, students develop some substantial misunderstandings about fractions and a profound fear that blocks deeper learning.

In times when we taught face-to-face, some of these challenges would be overcome through the use of concrete materials, at least with younger students. Unfortunately, it is common for the use of concrete materials to decline as students grow older. There is a sense almost that concrete materials benefit only remedial students. As such, any student who demonstrates a preference for concrete materials is likely to be considered amongst the less able learners.

Fortunately, this pattern, and the prejudiced beliefs on which it is founded, are today being questioned. Teachers are beginning to understand that our students develop a deeper understanding of abstract concepts when they are encouraged to represent them with concrete materials. Students benefit from exploring concepts through multiple representations at all stages of mathematical learning and in all areas of mathematics. In mathematics, representation is a tool for thinking; it is the way that we make patterns visible and one of the key ways in which we reason mathematically. If a student truly understands a concept, they should be able to represent it in many forms, and it is through experimenting with multiple representations that students develop a deep understanding.

“We use representational forms to communicate ideas and as tools for reasoning. Therefore, mathematical proficiency hinges on learning how to construct, communicate, and reason with representations.” (Selling. 2016 p191)

Rather than seeing representations such as a graph, diagram or set of concrete materials as a way of communicating a solution, students should see representations as a tool for achieving a solution.

“In mathematics classrooms, representations are often treated solely as the product of mathematics questions. . . This contrasts with authentic mathematical activity in which representations are constructed when useful as tools for thinking and communicating about mathematics.” (Selling. 2016 p191)

“Dreyfus (1991) argues that learning progresses through four stages: using one representation, using multiple representations in parallel, making connections between parallel representations, and finally integrating representations and moving flexibly between them.” (Cited in Selling. 2016 p192)

While it is important to give students the opportunity to engage with open-ended, real-world mathematical tasks, this alone will not be sufficient to build mathematical competence. Students also require experience with the tools of mathematical thinking if they are to thrive in more open, active and authentic learning environments. As teachers, we must “deliberately cultivate mathematical practices, including representation, in classrooms.” (Selling. 2016 p193)

“…students are never too old or too smart to benefit from hands-on materials so never keep them locked away in a cupboard or storeroom. . . Students should feel they can use concrete materials when and if they need them. After all, we want our students to be critical, creative mathematicians, and hands-on materials assist learning, and promote flexibility in thinking and important problem-solving skills.” Dr Catherine Attard - Engaging Maths

Therefore, students need to be shown a variety of representations, have constant access to concrete materials, consider where particular representations may be more or less suitable, experiment with learned and invented representations, and reflectively evaluate the representations they use. The method of representation should not be decided solely by the teacher. Representations should include diagrams, illustrations, charts, tables, graphs, models, concrete materials, numbers and number substitutes (algebra) in both digital and analogue forms as a minimum.

Lockdown brings fresh challenges and opportunities to teachers hoping to develop the mathematical reasoning skills of their students through the use of concrete materials. While access to the cupboards and crates of concrete materials we rely on in school is not currently possible, teachers can find creative ways to transform routine household items into valuable learning resources. Thanks to a colleague, my students used a collection of tape measures to represent decimals between 0 and 1. With the tape measures including millimetre increments, the students could see how one metre is divided into tenths, hundredths and thousandths. Kitchen maths has allowed another colleague to explore a range of mathematical concepts with her students. I routinely share the mathematics used in my workshop with my students, revealing the practical application of the concepts we are investigating.

Many lockdown lessons have been saved by Mathigon’s Polypad. This online platform does an excellent job of replicating and even enhancing the concrete materials we would use if we were face-to-face. The developers are continuing to evolve the site and are regularly adding new features. The image below shows some of the options available. In addition to this, there is a library of well-designed “Files” that include explanations, teaching notes and activities for students.

View fullsize

Click to enlarge.

Having started our Fractions and Decimals unit just after the first lockdown of this term, we were still congratulating ourselves on our excellent timing when the current lockdown was announced. It was nice to have introduced this traditionally tricky concept while the students were in class, and the “Visualise” activities we borrowed from Jo Boaler et al.’s “Mathematical Mindset” series had given us a strong foundation. Moving into remote, we needed to find a way to maintain this momentum and continue building a deep understanding by maintaining an emphasis on physical representations before moving towards the abstract.

Polypad allowed us to do this and more. If you are familiar with using Fraction Bars or blocks, you will find the Fractions options in Polypad very familiar. As you explore the site’s functionality, you find options beyond stacking Fraction Bars to show equivalence or compare fractions. The virtual nature of the manipulatives makes it easy for them to be adjusted. There is an option to rename fraction bars to show equivalent fractions, and this allows the students to see how halves can be transformed into quarters, eighths, twelfths, etc. It enables students to visualise two quarters minus one eighth and why you can’t just do a simple subtraction and claim to have one quarter. Students see and begin to understand why they need to change both the numerator and the denominator and that, indeed, a fraction is a single number that captures a relationship. When it is time to move on to decimals, Polypad allows the fraction bar labels to be converted to either decimals or percentages, making the transfer of knowledge easier. With access to a tool like Polypad, students move beyond rote learning of the processes for working with fractions and instead build an understanding of them.

By Nigel Coutts

Selling, S. (2016) Learning to represent, representing to learn. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 41 (2016) 191–209

Lessons about learning from learning to turn wood.

Lately, I have taken on the challenge of teaching myself how to turn wood on a lathe. Woodturning is a skill I have always admired, and so for me, the past few months have been quite a journey. Along the way, I have often paused to reflect on how this learning journey compares to the sort of learning my students engage with and how might I use my experience as a learner to extend my understanding of learning.

For those who might not be familiar with the process of turning timber on a lathe, a brief description might help. The lathe itself is a relatively large piece of machinery. It uses a reasonably powerful electric motor to spin a piece of wood attached by various means to its headstock. The piece of timber spins at between 1000 and 2000 revolutions per minute. As it spins, the timber is shaped into round forms as the ‘turner’ presses special chisels or gouges against its surface. In the hands of a master turner, beautiful forms may be created. Delicate spindles and bowls emerge from the timber as though they had always been there, just waiting to be set free.

For the novice, the initial experience with this craft brings a natural degree of fear and trepidation. There are, as you would imagine, great forces involved and much potential for calamity. As the tool touches the rapidly spinning piece of wood, shavings and dust are thrown in all directions. In most cases, the piece of timber is at first rough, square and out of balance. As it spins, you feel this imbalance and the passing of the out-of-round edges through the tool. Your hands, and suddenly delicate and precious fingers, hold the tool mere centimetres from this spinning madness. Having watched more than a few YouTube videos, I was somewhat aware of what to expect. I was also aware of the very real potential for what is referred to as a ‘catch’, and while I was not sure what this was, I did know it is something you hope to avoid.

It is easy to forget that learning frequently comes with and even out of fear. When we invite our students to engage in new learning, step outside of their comfort zone, and do so in the public and social setting of a classroom, we should remember that we are inviting them to confront fear. Success in such learning will require that they overcome this fear. When our students do not feel safe, supported and cared for, the fear of new learning is likely to overwhelm them. But fear gets a bad rap. Fear can be an emotion that primes us for peak performance. The biological responses that allowed us to survive fear-inducing circumstances in our prehistoric origins remain with us as we confront fear today. When we learn to trust that we can confront and overcome our fears, we can recognise that our physical and psychological responses to it are merely our bodies getting ready for what is to come. This reconception of fear can only occur in environments of trust and emotional safety.

In my learning journey, I have had intrinsic motivation on my side. There is no extrinsic reward for me in learning to turn wood. I will not make riches from it nor become more employable thanks to my new skillset. This is entirely a hobby, a personal challenge and a lot of fun. I can see at work all of the hallmarks of motivation theory and learner agency. Observing these forces at work in my personal learning is helping me understand the part this plays in my students’ learning. Dan Pink (2009), in his book ‘Drive’, identifies three forces that act to motivate us. According to Pink, purpose, mastery and choice rather than traditional (external) rewards motivate us the most. Once base needs are taken care of, we seek opportunities to master skills and concepts, gaining tangible benefits from the feelings of success that come with doing so. We seek choice and autonomy in how we perform our duties and expend our energies. Clarity of purpose allows us to see the value in what we do, and when it is a purpose that connects us with something that matters to ourselves or those we care about, we are more likely to commit time and energy to the task.

“agency”, is the ability to make choices and direct activity based on one’s own resourcefulness and enterprise. This entails thinking about the world not as something that unfolds separate and apart from us but as a field of action that we can potentially direct and influence.” (Ritchhart, 2015 p.77)

For me, woodturning has become an expression of my agency. Amidst a life of responsibilities and competing pressures, the opportunity to engage in a self-selected and self-directed pursuit is a rewarding escape. As educators, we often look for opportunities to give agency to our students. Such efforts are laudable, but sometimes we are so caught up with actions to give agency to students that we ignore that they are already taking it in other aspects of their lives. I recall a student who shared with me that in his time away from school, he was learning piano, playing soccer, studying Armenian, and attending classes in pottery where he was learning to use a potter’s wheel. Hearing of this boy’s self-organised learning was the catalyst for an optional home-learning programme that acknowledged that some of my students didn’t need to be assigned home-busy-work.

Like so many things we may seek to teach ourselves in modern times, learning woodturning has been made possible thanks to the internet. For almost any worthwhile (or otherwise) endeavour, there is a plethora of websites, blogs, discussion groups and videos available. The internet provides the self-organising learner with access to both information and, in many cases, a community of like-minded individuals. I have found a community of wood-turners online, and their willingness to share their knowledge and skill has accelerated my learning journey. Of greatest use to me in this very hands-on endeavour has been the immediate access to videos that illustrate the methods I am attempting to master. Being able to pause a video or rewind and watch a piece over and over again has allowed me to notice the subtle choices that a master turner makes as they shape a piece of wood. In schools, too often, Google and the internet are viewed speculatively by educators. There is a sense that if a method or solution is Googled, a shortcut has been taken and that the subsequent learning is less robust. There is also a fear that what might be found on the internet lacks the academic rigour of other sources for information. In an age of widespread misinformation, there is some truth to this and caution is rightly advised. But, many, if not most, of the people sharing information to the internet are doing so in good faith. Find the right community on the internet and you can connect with great expertise.

This access to relevant learning resources is what makes the challenge achievable. In self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci. 2005), three factors are identified as playing a part in enabling self-directed goal seeking. A sense of autonomy over the path taken as considered above linked to agency is the first. The second is the competence required to achieve the goal. Without access to the rich learning resources available through the internet, I would have little hope of achieving anything near competence. Indeed, I would barely have known where to start. For developing competence with new learning the internet is a game-changer. I have augmented my learning with books and magazines, but when trying to master a new skill, nothing compares with a well-composed video that is available at the moment you need it.

My woodturning adventures have also revealed something special about the nature of feedback within maker centred learning. When practising a technique or implementing a plan, feedback tends to be immediate and direct. You either get it right, or things tend to go wrong, sometimes expensively, with luck and a lot of care, hopefully not dangerously wrong. There is the somewhat subtle, constant feedback that comes from how a tool interacts with a material. There is the unavoidable feedback that comes when something breaks, such as when the timber at the base of a bowl tears away from the chuck holding it in the lathe. In these instances, the feedback is inherent to the task, direct, and leads to new learning. What you are doing either works, or it doesn’t work. When this sort of natural feedback is combined with the motivation to learn and a sense of curiosity, learning can flow. This is not the type of feedback that is common in education systems. The performance and the learning become separated from each other by formal feedback procedures. When the feedback is provided in the form of a mark or grade, the learner is left to wonder how this quantitative measure relates to what they have done.

There is also the more reflective and evaluative feedback that comes when a piece is completed, and you hold it in your hand for the first time. Does it live up to the expectations you had during the design phase? What flaws can be observed? How might it be improved? What might you do differently next time? The questions I find myself asking once a piece is finished become the catalyst for the next piece I attempt. The learning is very much continuous and ongoing. Here again, there is a difference with the patterns of learning we see in schools. Lane Clark notes how students are likely to spend weeks learning about rainforests only to move on to the electricity unit just as their interest is piqued. There is seldom an opportunity to go deeper into a topic, explore alternate perspectives and build expertise. 

The nature of my learning journey over the past few months has been, at times, an obsession. I have deepened my understanding of what Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi means by “Flow”. I would love to unlock the sense of joy that comes with such intrinsically motivating learning for my students; to bring some of this into my classroom on a more routine basis. I am reminded often of my encounters with the work of Sugata Mitra and his exploration of self-organised learning environments. I wonder how such thinking might play more of a part in traditional schooling. I wonder if sometimes, as educators, we take too much of a step back from exploring the act of learning as it exists for the students we teach? Perhaps what I love most about teaching is that there are always questions to explore and new learning to be had, just like with woodturning.

By Nigel Coutts

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013) Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York; Harper Perennial. 

Mitra, S. (2014) The future of schooling: Children and learning at the edge of chaos. Prospects, 44:547-558

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

Ritchhart, R. (2015) Creating cultures of thinking: The eight forces we must truly master to transform our schools”, San Francisco, Josey-Bass.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Agency and Mathematics

Of all the subjects that our students engage in, mathematics is the one most requiring an injection of learner agency. What is it about mathematics that engenders it to modes of teaching that are so heavily teacher-directed? How might this change if we seek to understand the place that learner agency plays in producing learners who will emerge from our classrooms with a love of mathematics and a deep understanding of its beauty?

Contemplating the effects of traditional mathematics in “A Mathematicians Lament”, Paul Lockhart wrote: 

“If I had to design a mechanism for the express purpose of destroying a child’s natural curiosity and love of pattern-making, I couldn’t possibly do as good a job as is currently being done - I simply wouldn’t have the imagination to come up with the kind of senseless, soul-crushing ideas that constitute contemporary mathematics education.” (Lockhart. 2009 p.2)

The dominant mode of delivery for mathematical education is well-rooted in the history of education. It sends a clear message to learners about the nature of learning in the discipline. In these classrooms, the role of the teacher is to demonstrate the methods that students will then follow. The teacher asks the questions, and the students apply the given method and, if they accurately follow the steps as described, arrive at the required solution. Students learn that mathematics is about the transfer and absorption of a body of knowledge. The roles of the teacher and the student in this model are clear, and it is the lack of any compulsion towards an emotional or personal connection with the content that leads to the “senseless, soul-crushing” model described by Lockhart. 

These traditional methods of teaching maths have more in common with how we programme a computer than what we might do if we wanted to encourage learner agency. The product of most computational thinking, an algorithm is in essence just a step by step list of instructions that a machine can follow. We shouldn’t be overly surprised then when our students consider mathematics as a discipline without soul. There are few, if any, opportunities for creativity or critical thinking and no place for personal expression or agency. How then might we shift this model, and what role does learner agency play in a reimagined mathematics?

Learner Agency is the most transformative ingredient we might add to our math classrooms. Learning is best achieved when it is driven by the learner. When the learner owns the process and when their success in the learning endeavour results from the strategic actions that they take, ‘learner flow’ becomes possible. When critical decisions are made for the learner, when the learning requires that they merely follow directions, when learning happens to you rather than because of you, engagement declines. 

“By giving students a voice you send the message that their ideas and thinking are relevant to the learning that takes place and they begin to naturally take agency over their learning if we hand them the baton.” (Jennifer LaTarte cited in Ritchhart and Church. 2020 p. 19) 

Our children will need a sense of agency empowered by capacities required to activate or perform their intentions (Clapp, et al. 2017). They must become creative problem finders through learning opportunities that allow them to “sense that there is a puzzle somewhere or a task to be accomplished” (Csikszentmihalyi. 2013 p. 95) and respond strategically, creatively and collaboratively towards solutions devised with empathy and a long-term view of impacts and real-costs (Kelley. 2013). Our students must be shown the value of acquiring deep understandings through weaving ideas together, going beyond information and figuring things out (Ritchhart. 2015).

Such learning requires a reimagining of what the discipline of mathematics is about. Instead of teaching our students how to do mathematics, our goal should be to teach them and empower them to be mathematicians. Such an approach requires an understanding of what it is that mathematicians do and what mathematics is. 

“A mathematician, like a painter or poet, is a maker of patterns. If his patterns are more permanent than theirs, it is because they are made with ideas.” (Hardy. 1940 p. 13)

With such a description of what a mathematician does in mind, our approach to the discipline should begin to change. Our students require the capacity to become makers of patterns derived from the mathematical ideas they explore and uncover. Just as a poet or painter expresses their connection with the world, the mathematician finds their voice in the patterns they explore through their mathematical inquiries. Sadly, our current model of mathematics education borrows little from the field of art education, going no further than elementary art appreciation. Our students learn to look at mathematics and copy mathematics without understanding why and with no compulsion to be mathematicians. 

“By concentrating on what, and leaving out why, mathematics is reduced to an empty shell. The art is not in the “truth” but in the explanation, the argument. It is the argument itself which gives the truth its context, and determines what is really being said and meant. Mathematics is the art of explanation. If you deny students the opportunity to engage in this activity— to pose their own problems, make their own conjectures and discoveries, to be wrong, to be creatively frustrated, to have an inspiration, and to cobble together their own explanations and proofs— you deny them mathematics itself.” (Lockhart. 2009)

This reimagining of mathematics begins when we reorient our approach to teaching and learning. Instead of dry lessons that strictly adhere to an “I do, We do, You do” framework, mathematics education can be liberated by first allowing students to explore rich contexts with the potential for connectedness and meaning. “Exploring meaningful and important concepts that are connected to the world often means students want to take action. Providing opportunities and structures for them to do so encourages students’ agency and power while making the learning relevant.” (Ritchhart. 2015 p.8) We can do this by flipping the order of our planned curriculum. Instead of ending our learning journey with a rich problem, this should be the place where a mathematical inquiry begins. When we start our learning with a problem, when that problem matters to the learner and invites them to seek a solution, we begin to invite learner agency into our classrooms. 

“agency”, is the ability to make choices and direct activity based on one’s own resourcefulness and enterprise. This entails thinking about the world not as something that unfolds separate and apart from us but as a field of action that we can potentially direct and influence.” (Ritchhart, 2015 p.77)

Such a definition of agency requires our students to be self-navigating learners who routinely make choices about the directions that their mathematical inquiries will take. Such a model will invoke situations where our learners struggle to find a path towards a viable solution. They will make mistakes and fail. At these times, we have a choice to make, do we allow them to engage in productive struggle, or do we rescue them? The challenge is to trust in our ability to spot the difference between a student engaged in productive struggle and a student who lacks the resources to move their learning forward. Productive struggle is best met by supportive mentoring towards sustained effort and reflective practices. The student who is overwhelmed and lacks the necessary knowledge for a step in the right direction is likely to be open to the introduction of a new tool. The trick is to offer a new tool, not a lifeline. To leave the challenge in place while providing a way forward.

While the prospect of empowering mathematical agency may seem daunting, it does not need to be. Including time for a Number Talk within each mathematics lesson is a simple step in this direction. Doing so sends a powerful message to students about the nature of mathematics. When we emphasise mathematical reasoning, as the curriculum invites us to, we create rich opportunities for student thinking. Mathematical reasoning is defined by the writers of the Australian Curriculum as follows:

Students develop an increasingly sophisticated capacity for logical thought and actions, such as analysing, proving, evaluating, explaining, inferring, justifying and generalising. Students are reasoning mathematically when they explain their thinking, deduce and justify strategies used and conclusions reached, adapt the known to the unknown, transfer learning from one context to another, prove that something is true or false, and compare and contrast related ideas and explain their choices. (ACARA. 2010)

Source: ACARA

In this extract from the Australian curriculum, we see the seeds of learner agency tied closely to the act of being a mathematician. It is critical to note here that it is our students who are developing their capacity for logical thought as they reason mathematically and as they explain, deduce and justify their thinking and adapt to the known and unknown. Such an outcome will not be achieved by pedagogies that privilege rote learning. If our students are to engage with agency in mathematical reasoning, they must encounter learning opportunities that require this within a classroom culture that values thinking. Our students need to routinely engage with learning that requires thoughtful action and justification of chosen methods. This is likely to occur in classrooms where student thinking is named, noticed and celebrated. Teachers who use thinking routines as scaffolds for low-floor, high-ceiling, wide-walled (open-ended) tasks are more likely to foster learner agency. In this, we are describing a task that is accessible by all learners (low-floor), has scope for enrichment and extension (high-ceilings) and has multiple possible solutions and methods of engagement (wide-walls). Such rich tasks, when linked to learning that is likely to matter in the lives our learners are likely to live, are highly engaging and naturally supportive of learner agency.

When we combine opportunities for our students to explore meaningful and important concepts connected to their world, when we encourage them to embrace productive struggle and seek out the patterns and beauty of mathematics, we create a space in which learner agency is valued. When we do these things, and in doing so, invite agency into our math classrooms, we allow mathematics and mathematicians to thrive.

By Nigel Coutts

Originally published in Connect Number 248 May 2021

Connect is an independent practice journal, published bimonthly since 1979!

It aims to:

• document student participation approaches and initiatives

• support reflective practices;

• develop and share resources.

You can access all past issues of Connect HERE

Clapp, E., Ross, J., Oxman Ryan, J. & Tishman, S. (2017) Maker-centered learning: empowering young people to shape their worlds.  San Francisco, Josey Bass.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013) Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention, New York, Harper Perennial

Hardy, G. H. (1940) A mathematician’s apology. University of Alberta Mathematical Sciences Society

Kelley, D. (2013) Creative Confidence: Unleashing the Creative Potential Within Us All”, London, Harper Collins.

Lockhart, P (2009) A Mathematician’s Lament: How school cheats us out of our most fascinating and imaginative art form. Bellevue Literary Press

Ritchhart, R. (2015) Creating cultures of thinking: The eight forces we must truly master to transform our schools”, San Francisco, Josey-Bass.

Ritchhart, Ron, Church, Mark. (2020) The Power of Making Thinking Visible: Practices to engage and empower all learners.  New Jersey; Josey Bass

The Language of Praise & Feedback

Praise and Feedback occupy significant spaces in the lives of our learners. It should not be surprising then that the language we use to communicate praise and feedback can enhance or hinder our efforts. Get the language right and we can help a student move forwards in achieving their learning goals, develop resilience and facilitate a growth mindset. Get it wrong and our efforts can have little impact at all or even have a negative result shifting our students towards a fixed mindset and reliance on shallow praise.

Carol Dweck's now famous research on Growth vs Fixed Mindset shows that our attributions of success and failure shape our disposition towards learning. In overly simplified terms, we have two mindsets linked to our perception of our potential for learning in a particular context. Where we exhibit aspects of a fixed mindset we are more likely to believe that our success and/or failure is a result of factors beyond our control. Because we don't control these factors there is nothing we can do to change the result. If the context requires us to develop a new skill, disposition or capability we are likely to believe that we will not be able to do so. In a context where we have a growth mindset we attribute our success to factors which we are in control of. Through our efforts in combination with our positive learning behaviours we are able to achieve new goals even amidst challenging circumstances. Success might not come immediately and we will make mistakes along the way but the ultimate result is personal growth.

Our mindset plays an important role in how we respond to praise and feedback and it is also shaped by the nature of the praise and feedback we receive.

When we routinely receive praise our feedback that is neither actionable or specific, we are more likely to move towards a fixed mindset. Shallow praise encourages us to associate success with immutable qualities. When we are told that what we have done is 'good', 'amazing' or 'wrong' we are given little information to act upon.

As educators the language moves we make when giving praise and feedback are crucial. When we are mindful of the messages we send through our language choices we can aim for praise and feedback that informs future action. When we name and notice the positive actions that a person has taken to achieve their successes we encourage them to repeat their performance. By doing so we provide the positive benefits of appreciative feedback with specific actions for future success.

What is most worth noticing?

By thinking strategically we can target feedback at the specific needs of our learners; appreciative feedback that encourages growth. Effective praise will identify the actions taken by the individual in achieving their success. We are naming and noticing actions, thinking moves and dispositions that we want our learners to engage with more frequently. With feedback we also identify what has worked well and we add value by identifying actions, thinking moves and dispositions that might be useful in the future. Our feedback is enhanced when it is specific and link to behaviours which the the learner can apply in their next learning journey. We can support our learners by being mindful of the language we use. Praise and feedbackmight sound like "I notice that in your learning you . . . and that helped you . . . and to help you achieve your next goal you might . . .".

Praise and feedback can be allies in learning, they just need a little care in how we deliver them and what we target.

By Nigel Coutts

What might schools learn from McDonald's?

Lately, I have had a number of conversations with colleagues about the value of consistent messaging for teaching and learning. These conversations evolved from discussion about our awareness of the language moves we make with our learners. We had been talking about a common language for learning. The feeling was that if we were consistent with our language choices across disciplines and years of education, our students might be more able to transfer learning from one context to the next. Oddly, perhaps, this got me thinking about McDonald’s. Specifically, what might schools learn from a global fast-food chain like McDonald’s?

Walk into any McDonald’s, anywhere in the world, and you know where you are and what to expect. For the homesick traveller, the consistency of McDonald’s’ design aesthetic is comforting. You know how this is going to work, you understand what to do, and you know what you are likely to get. McDonald’s requires minimal cognitive load on the customer’s behalf.

Compare this to the daily experience of our average student, especially a student who moves from class to class and teacher to teacher during their day. They experience school as a series of mostly disconnected blocks of time, often across a variety of learning spaces. With each ringing of the bell, they move from one learning environment to another, and as they do, they must shift gears and adapt to fresh expectations and norms. Some things, such as school values, stay the same. Many things change or are experienced in ways sufficiently different as to require translation and reinterpretation. In one class, they are expected to construct their written responses using the TEEL (topic sentence, elaboration, evidence, link) paragraph structure; in the next it is PEEL (point, evidence, explanation, link). One class requires hands raised for oral responses; the next deploys a ‘No Hands’ policy. Their maths teacher demands equations are written with lead pencil only; their computer science teacher wants colour coding of algorithms. And then, just as we get the hang of all this, we advance one year and everything changes again.

Our current model requires our students to navigate this varied and shifting landscape. Their teachers are often unaware of how the lack of consistency is experienced or the challenges that it brings. Some teachers and school administrators have tried to remedy this reality by inviting teachers to follow a student for a day. The experience can be confronting on many levels. Spend a day living as a student, and one of the first things you notice is how much of the day is spent sitting and passively listening. The second is how jarring the transitions are and how much of a cognitive reset each ringing of the bell requires. 

What if we borrowed from McDonald’s? What if the challenge of constantly adjusting to a new learning environment was removed from our students?

Doing this would require the development of a school-wide learning design and language. It would require for many schools a dramatic increase in the level of communication that occurs between teachers across year groups and faculties. We would need to share our practices and purposes and, with an understanding of this, synthesise a whole school language of learning. Such an agreed language would encompass not only the vocabulary we use but the whole complex of messaging systems that our learners experience from the design of our classrooms to the routines we deploy.

Such a proposal is likely to be unpopular with many educators. Such thinking impacts on our personal agency as creative professionals. It potentially erodes individuality and replaces it with collectivism. Emotion and culture are linked, and change of culture frequently invokes an emotional response. “A person’s sense of identity is partly determined by his or her values, which can mesh or clash with organisational values” (Smollan & Sayers 2009 p439) Smollan & Sayers found that when cultural change is sought in a school, and it is not viewed as fitting with one’s values, or it calls those values into question emotional responses such as fear, anger or sadness are common. Change in the name of consistency is seen by many to dilute opportunities for self-expression and professional freedom rather than a genuine effort to enable learning across disciplines and time. To extend on our comparison between school and McDonalds, would a chef be excited to flip burgers?

With the likely concerns of teachers and the challenges confronting learners left to navigate a shifting landscape, is there a way forward? Change is always challenging, and any change to culture is doubly so. Smollan and Sayers indicate the importance of understanding the socially constructed nature of identity and the potentially negative impact that change can have on this for individuals, ‘that change ‘dislodges’ identity and leads to anxiety and grieving’ (Smollan & Sayers. 2009 p439) and that this can result in resistance to change.

Research on change management point to certain conditions which might support the introduction of new methods and ideas. With a compelling vision in mind and an inspiring launch behind us, as Kotter & Cohen would advocate, leadership might shift from an inspirational model to what Perkins (2003) describes as an ‘inquiry-centered leadership’ style. In this model, the group’s leadership acts as a facilitator for developing the group’s collective knowledge processing. In such a model, challenges are discovered by the group collectively, and solutions allowed to emerge from within rather than top-down. Such an approach can be empowering and support teacher agency. Given the current pace of change within education, it can be easy for teachers to see change as something that is constantly inflicted upon them. By shifting the locus of control away from external forces such as a new language and culture of learning becomes possible, one where change is a response to opportunities identified by the teacher. 

Research by Gibson-Langford and Laycock (2006) shows ‘that teachers like to learn together through informal knowledge creation and sharing opportunities characterised by critical dialogue, frequent feedback, critical reflection and appreciative behaviours’. This emergent inquiry approach is elaborated on by Burnes, who adds that ‘It also sees change as a process of learning and not just a method of changing organisational structures and practices’ (Burnes. 1996 p13) - Such an approach to change and particularly to the introduction of a new curriculum is more likely to allow teachers to see how it will fit with their existing beliefs about education and how it might benefit their learners. Providing an environment characterised by dialogue and learning aimed at developing understandings of the curriculum and then using this to guide individuals and small teams towards embracing its affordances in their own way can maintain agency and autonomy.

The change models outlined above might offer a practical solution to the dilemma of moving towards a more consistent language for learning within our schools. If the consistency evolves from the language moves and pedagogies already favoured by teachers, then they are more likely to be embraced. The result might be an experience of school that is less jarring for students.

By Nigel Coutts

Burnes, Bernard (2010) Call for Papers: Why Does Change Fail and What Can We Do About It?, Journal of Change Management, 10 (2), pp. 241 — 242

Gibson-Langford, L. & Laycock, D. (2007) So they can fly . . . building a community of inquirers Accessed online 8.10.2016 https://pypchat.wikispaces.com/file/view/So+They+Can+Fly+-+Building+a+Community+of+Learners+copy.pdf 

Kotter, J & Cohen, D. (2002). The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organisations. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press, pp. 1–14 

Perkins, D. (2003). King Arthur’s round table (1st ed.). New York: Wiley.

Smollan, R & Sayers, J. (2009) Organizational Culture, Change and Emotions: A Qualitative Study, Journal of Change Management, 9:4, 435-457

Moving Beyond Rote Learning in Mathematics

We know that our emphasis on the rote learning of mathematical processes is not facilitating the sort of deep-understanding of mathematics that our students need for success. Research from the Office of Australia’s Chief Scientist examined the approach taken to mathematics in 619 Australian schools achieving outstanding improvement in NAPLAN (a national standardised numeracy and literacy assessment) numeracy scores over a two-year period. A significant finding from this study was that “87% of case study schools had a classroom focus on mastery (i.e. developing conceptual understanding) rather than just procedural fluency.”

Our approach in mathematics, more so than in other disciplines is to remove any struggle that our students might experience. I have compared previously the typical approach taken to teaching mathematics with how we programme a computer. When this approach is the norm we shouldn’t be overly surprised then when our students consider mathematics to be all about learning a set of rules that they need to apply in the right order so as to output the correct response.

The product of most computational thinking, an algorithm is in essence just a step by step list of instructions that can be followed by a human or machine. An algorithm is defined by Google as "a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer".  This approach is adopted in mathematics lessons when we teach students the steps they will then take to solve problems that we have assigned them 

The “I do, we do, you do” sequence often empowers the coding of our students. Typically, the lesson begins with the teacher presenting the required method to the students. The teacher begins with step one being demonstrated on the board. Once step one is complete, the teacher demonstrates step two, and then step three and sometimes steps four and five. With triumphant zeal the teacher indicates the correct answer with a flourish of whiteboard marker and perhaps a double underline for effect. In phase two the students copy the process they have been shown with the teacher looking on to ensure the steps have been followed accurately. Naturally there are some bugs and errors that require correction. By the end of the lesson most students are able to accurately follow the steps and arrive at a desirable answer even if some of the numbers are changed.

This tightly controlled method reduces mathematics to a process and the learning of mathematics requires little from the learner other than memorisation. The impact of teaching mathematics as a set of rules to be memorised is reflected in the thinking of mathematical educators such as Ed Southall who writes:

Mathematics gradually became a mysterious entity, whose rules and steps I was expected to unquestioningly memorise – which I dutifully did. However, the process of storing numerous algorithms and their quirky properties became increasingly tedious, and I fell out of love with the subject that once intrigued and excited me. (Southall, 2017 p1)

If we deployed similar methods in the language arts we would not be surprised if we produced students who could decode text but struggle to infer meaning and have no love of reading. A librarian colleague who ignites a passion for reading in the lives of the young people who spend time in her Library refers to readers who “bark at text”. They are able to make the correct noises, but their understanding of the literature they engage with has been stifled by an overemphasis on the rapid reading of increasingly lengthy texts. When we emphasise mathematics as a discipline of procedures, we produce learners who “bark at numbers” with little understanding of their beauty, complexity and mystery. We produce mathematicians with limited knowledge and with no capacity to delve into mathematics for which they have not yet been programmed. 

How might we move beyond this scenario? How might we teach in ways that foster a love of mathematical exploration?

We begin by shifting our thinking away from an emphasis on the correct solving of mathematical questions or problems and focus instead on mathematical reasoning. We invite our students to be mathematicians and we explain that the work of the mathematical mind is to reason with numbers. We create opportunities for students to play with mathematical concepts, to look closely, think slowly, test ideas and see what happens. We flip the instructional model on its head so that the pattern is “you do, we do, I do”. We spend more time on the first two phases of this cycle and we wheel out the “I do” only at the point of need, when only with access to some new knowledge will the learner find a way forward. 

Above all else we value mathematical reasoning. We create opportunities for our learners to share their thinking and explain what they are doing. We often ask questions like “What makes you say that?” or “What do you think is going on here?” or “Explain the approach you are taking here?”. Whether the answer is right or wrong, we are more interested in the thinking that our students are engaging in. We create a classroom culture that values mathematical reasoning more than it does it answers. Indeed, if a question is answered and it solution can not be adequately explained our exploration continues until it can be. 

Mathematical reasoning is defined by the writers of the Australian Curriculum as follows:

Students develop an increasingly sophisticated capacity for logical thought and actions, such as analysing, proving, evaluating, explaining, inferring, justifying and generalising. They are reasoning mathematically when they explain their thinking, deduce and justify strategies used and conclusions reached, adapt the known to the unknown, transfer learning from one context to another, prove that something is true or false, and compare and contrast related ideas and explain their choices.

While the prospect of teaching mathematical reasoning may seem daunting, it does not need to be. Including time for a Number Talk within each mathematics lesson is a simple step in this direction and doing so sends a powerful message to students about the nature of mathematics. Many teachers are already planning a sequence of lessons that would be facilitative of mathematical reasoning if they taught the planned programme in reverse order (beginning with the problem solving task that is traditionally used as the extension activity). When we make these changes and in doing so create opportunities to become observers of our students in the act of mathematical thinking we change the culture of our classrooms. 

Careful questioning within a classroom culture where thinking is the norm, combined with an expectation that methods will be debated and that answers alone are insufficient provides the right environment for mathematical reasoning to thrive. 

By Nigel Coutts

Questions that focus on mathematical reasoning:

• What's going on here?

• What makes you say that?

• What are you noticing?

• What do you wonder?

• Tell me something about the problem.

• Forget about the question for a second. What's going on in this situation?

• What do you estimate the answer might be?

• What do you predict the solution might look like?

Questions that direct students towards mathematical reasoning while problem solving:

• Can you read the problem aloud again?

• Let's go back to the question for a second. Is everything still making sense?

• Let's refresh our memories about what each of these numbers represents. What does "this" mean?

• Let's put numbers aside for a second and think about the units. Do they check out?

• Let's try to visualise what's going on in this problem. Does that seem possible?

• Can we visualise this in another way? What do you notice now?

• What do we know? What don't we know?

• What is not the answer? Why?

• What makes you say that?

• Is there a pattern here? What is it? Can you describe it, draw it or make it?

Southall, Ed. Yes, but why? Teaching for understanding in mathematics (p. 1). SAGE Publications.

Language moves for identity

The word "they" is a dangerous and disempowering word. At its worst, it describes a relationship with an obscure, nameless, faceless other. It places an artificial distance between "us" and "them", inviting us to consider the way that "they" do things, the beliefs and values "they" hold or the capabilities "they" possess to be different from ours. They is not an inclusive word.

But they and its related forms and associated language moves is used commonly in teaching and often when we refer to people or groups of people that we may hope our students would aspire to be.

In our classrooms, the word "they" is often used to refer to specialists or professionals in the field. "They" investigate the world of animals and plants might be how we refer to a scientist or biologist. "They" like to set things out neatly in columns could be how we advocate for mathematical thinking. "They" entertain their audience with their careful word choices describes what an author might do. In each instance, the language choices refer to someone who is not us. Neither the teacher nor the student is a member of this profession, and as such, we separate ourselves from the modes of thinking that such professions normalise. We are, at best tourists, or distanced observers of those with skills we lack.

And yet, every professional was, at some point in their career pathway, a complete novice. At some point, their mindset shifted, and they became what they are today. The shift comes as much from the language we use to describe ourselves as it does from the experience we have accumulated.

What changes when we refer to ourselves or our students as members of the community of thinkers and learners that they are apprenticed to? What changes when we are mindful in our use of a language of identity?

Deploying the language of identity means that we refer to our students as members of the discipline whose knowledge and thinking their learning relies upon. "As mathematicians, we will investigate the shapes present in this image." "As authors, we will use powerful vocabulary to respond to this experience." "As geographers, we will evaluate the impact of people on this environment." Using a language of identity as in these examples is empowering and encourages learner agency. Mathematics stops being something that other people do and becomes something that we do.

As with all of the language moves, shifting our patterns of choice can initially feel strange. Realising the long term benefits that more strategic language moves will bring can make this transition easier. It can also be useful to recruit a trusted colleague who will gently notice and name the occasions when you slip into old habits. It is also worth discussing your desire to be more strategic with your students. Explain to them why you are wanting to make the change and be clear that your language choices are driven by a belief in the value that they will have, not an effort to trick them.

If you are keen to know more about the language of identity and how language acts as one of the forces that shape the culture of our classrooms, please read "Creating Cultures of Thinking" by Ron Ritchhart.

By Nigel Coutts

Language Moves that Encourage Initiative

Why might it be that our students struggle with independence? Maybe it comes from the language moves we make. As with the language of thinking, being deliberate with our choices can help us to create a classroom culture where students demonstrate independence and initiative.

Imagine a classic classroom scenario. A conversation in which a teacher and student are discussing a problem or challenge. The student is struggling to see a path forward with their learning. The challenge posed is achievable but will require their best thinking. If the student thinks the problem through they will be able to find a way to strive towards a solution but at this point they are not quite there. What does the teacher do in this scenario?

The easy path is to be the saviour and offer a solution. Maybe it is just a first step. Maybe the response offered is a reframing or simplification of the challenge. The result is the same, the student is rescued and the teacher is the hero of the day. The student gets back to their work.

When we rescue our students from challenging learning we deny them the opportunity to develop their independence. We transform an opportunity that required them to demonstrate and build resilience to struggle and reinforce dependence. By simplifying the learning opportunity we had planned for our students to a mere process of following the teacher described steps we transform learning into work. We do these things by the choices we make and through the language that we use.

How might we respond differently in this scenario?

The language of initiative might help. Our goal here is to encourage independence and agency. Our language choices should be prompts for thinking and the development of action theories. Instead of offering a solution or describing the steps to be taken we deploy language moves that encourage the student to analyse what they know and use this to develop a strategy.

A key aspect of initiative, or what researchers in sociology and psychology sometimes refer to as "agency", is the ability to make choices and direct activity based on one's own resourcefulness and enterprise. This entails thinking about the world not as something that unfolds seperate and apart from us but as a field of action that we can potentially direct and influence. (Ron Ritchhart - Creating Cultures of Thinking)

When we ask students to describe what they are thinking about a problem or challenge, we begin to encourage initiative. We step back from the role of the rescuer and move into a place where dialogue creates space in which the student might develop insights of their own. Maybe we ask "What do you think is going on with this problem?" or "What have you noticed about this?" We then listen. We wait. We create time for thinking. We follow this up with questions like "What have you already tried?" or "What might you try?". Our language reveals our belief that the solution will come out of the thinking and actions taken by the learner. We continue to listen and we encourage actions and ongoing reflection. "How did you plan go?" - "What worked?" - "What didn't work?" - "What might you try next?" - What makes you think that?" - This pattern of questioning is facilitative and supportive of learner agency. It helps the learner move forward in their learning but does not shift the heavy thinking off their shoulders.

Ron Ritchhart suggests we ask ourselves a question to help us identify whether we are encouraging initiative or rescuing our students; "Who is doing the thinking?" If the answer is us, the teacher, then we probably will want to change our approach and our language to encourage initiative.

You can read more about the Language of Initiative in “Creating Cultures of Thinking” by Ron Ritchhart

By Nigel Coutts

Ritchhart, R. (2015) Creating cultures of thinking: The eight forces we must truly master to transform our schools. SanFrancisco: Josey-Bass  

Language Moves for Thinking

A good place to start in our efforts to shift the impact that our language choices have is with a focus on the language of thinking. If we believe that all learning is a consequence of thinking, it is natural to select language moves that encourage this from our learners.

Our goal here is to notice the language moves we are making and to then become more deliberate and strategic with our choices. As we seek to make thinking a routine part of the culture of our schools, we should look closely at the messages we send with the words that we choose. We begin our journey towards a more strategic approach to the use of language by becoming attentive to the moves we are already making.

Have you ever noticed how often the word “work” is used within schools? Even in schools with a focus on student-centred learning and thinking, the word work is used with great regularity. Students are routinely reminded to get on with their work, do their work, finish their work, get back to work and improve their work. Noticing the frequency with which we refer to work as a part of our student’s day encourages many teachers to seek alternatives.

When we stop and think about what we want our students to be doing, we are likely to consider words other than work. Maybe we want our students to be learning, or thinking, or collaborating, or analysing, or synthesising, or questioning or communicating. Each of these words focus our learners on aspects of their learning more strategic and cognitive than what is implied by the word work. Work is something to be done and out behind us. Learning is an ongoing endeavour that results in growth and change.

The teacher who is aware of this language move will utilise questions that engage their students in thinking. Often the most powerful change we can make to our teaching is the addition of one simple question: What makes you say that? By asking this question, I invite my students to move beyond providing what they imagine to be an accurate answer. By asking, ‘What makes you say that?’ I require that my students offer reasoned logic for the responses they provide. By asking this question often, I send the message that I value their thinking. When I then notice and name the thinking moves made by my students, I reinforce this message. If I praise a student for their critical thinking, for their efforts to make connections or to reason with evidence, I send clear signals that learning requires thinking.

Thinking routines are an excellent set of tools, structures and patterns of behaviour for scaffolding thinking. A well-chosen thinking routine can activate powerful learning for our students. One of the reasons why thinking routines are so effective is that the language choices that they deploy have been planned with deliberate care to achieve the desired result. However, thinking routines are most effective when they are deployed to target a thinking move that we hope to make routine in our classrooms. As Mark Church eloquently states, “Our goal is not to use a thinking routine, but to make thinking routine”.

When we seek to make a particular thinking move routine for our learners, our routine language choices can have an impact greater than our scattered use of thinking routines. If, for example, it is my hope that my students will routinely seek to make connections between and across concepts we are investigating, I will push for this mode of thinking with the language moves I make. I will routinely ask questions that invoke connections, and I will praise student responses that demonstrate their efforts to make connections. In making these moves, I aim to send a message about the type of thinking I valued, and in this way, I shape the culture of our classroom.

View fullsize

So what messages are you sending about thinking? Do your language moves privilege work over learning or thinking? What thinking moves would you like to see your students engage with routinely, and how might you reshape your language moves to facilitate this?

By Nigel Coutts

Perseverance and Mathematics - A mathematical journey to Mars

The landing of the Perseverance rover on Mars is an excellent catalyst for a discussion with students about the nature of Mathematics. It is a chance to inspire curiosity and wonderment and to do so through a mathematical lens. The video of a small, fragile craft descending towards the surface of an alien planet, immediately captures the imagination. As the lander bobs gently beneath its parachutes and as the NASA team communicate critical moments in its descent, one is filled with a sense of awe at what is possible when we dream big and dare mighty things. By the time the lander has fired its rockets to enter a hover above the surface, and as the rover is delicately lowered to the ground on slender cables, the viewer’s mind should be awash with questions. Now is the time to invite our students to ponder the beauty and wonder revealed in the mathematics of what they are observing.

Mathematics rightly viewed possesses not only truth but supreme beauty. - Bertrand Russell (1907) The Study of Mathematics

We often overlook the mathematics that surrounds and makes so much of our daily lives possible. It is easy to think of mathematics as something that belongs inside the walls of a particular type of classroom. It is equally easy to think that mathematics is about the mere mechanics of solving a problem quickly and accurately. Contemplating the nature of the mathematics involved in landing Perseverance on Mars encourages a fresh perspective on a discipline many feel we escaped when we finished school. The Perseverance landing is awash with mathematics, and it should be readily apparent that it is mathematics that makes the whole endeavour possible. This is the mathematics of the real world, where formidable challenges are confronted with questions and creativity.

“Mathematics is not about numbers, but about life. It is about the world in which we live. It is about ideas. And far from being dull and sterile as it is so often portrayed, it is full of creativity”. - Keith Devlin - 2001

Image courtesy NASA

I had the pleasure of sharing the video of the landing with my class of Year Five students. As they watched, I invited them to notice and name the mathematics that might have been required at varying stages throughout the landing. The conversation was enlightening and evolved over time as fresh ideas emerged. From an initial focus on altitude and speed, students began to contemplate the wider range of factors that would need to be considered and included in calculations. The mass of the rover, the rate of deceleration, the gravity of Mars, the size of the parachutes, the time delay from Earth, the speed of light, the orientation of the rover in 3D space, the challenges of navigating a distant planet. We moved well beyond the traditional highly siloed approach where concepts (or curriculum outcomes) are examined in splendid isolation. Here the mathematics was meaningful, complicated, integrated and beautiful.

I’m simply stunned when I think how rarely formal learning gives us a chance to learn the whole game from early on. When I and my buddies studied basic arithmetic, we had no real idea what the whole game of mathematics was about. . . . It was kind of like batting practise without knowing the whole game. Why would anyone want to do that? - Perkins, David. (2009) Making Learning Whole

Investigating the mathematics behind Perseverance’s landing challenges our traditional approach to the discipline. School mathematics sadly has little in common with real mathematics.

Students will typically say it is a subject of calculations, procedures, or rules. But when we ask mathematicians what math is, they will say it is the study of patterns; that it is an aesthetic, creative, and beautiful subject. - Jo Boaler - (2015) Mathematical Mindsets

And, we know that our emphasis on the rote learning of mathematical processes is not facilitating the sort of deep-understanding of mathematics that our students need for success. Research from the Office of Australia’s Chief Scientist examined the approach taken to mathematics in 619 Australian schools achieving outstanding improvement in NAPLAN (a national standardised numeracy and literacy assessment) numeracy scores over a two-year period. A significant finding from this study was that “87% of case study schools had a classroom focus on mastery (i.e. developing conceptual understanding) rather than just procedural fluency.”

By removing the creative process and leaving only the results of that process, you virtually guarantee that no one will have any real engagement with the subject. - Paul Lockhart (2009) A Mathematician’s Lament

Image courtesy NASA

Hidden in Perseverance’s parachute is a beautiful example of the playful creativity of NASA’s mathematicians. Amidst the pattern designed to help NASA’s tracking systems monitor the performance of the parachute is a message only revealed by translating the visible pattern of wide and narrow segments of colour on the parachute into binary and then ASCII code. The message reads “Dare Mighty Things”. Maybe this is a message to teachers of mathematics and their students. A call for us to all dare mighty things as we explore a mathematics that is full of wonder and creativity.

By Nigel Coutts

In search of the conditions required for Spectacular Learning

Not all learning is created equal. Sometimes the learning that we achieve and the success generated through our engagement with a learning opportunity is spectacular. At its very best, our learning unlocks fresh understandings for ourselves and sometimes even for others. What conditions allow for such spectacular learning, and how might we bring these conditions into our classrooms?

When we are engaged in spectacular learning, we know it. There is a sense of energy that we do not feel while engaged in routine learning. We are highly engaged and active participants in the process. We experience a ‘flow' like state where we are completely involved in an activity for its own sake. We almost certainly understand the purpose of the learning and its relevance to goals that matter to us. The outcome of the learning is likely to offer us fresh possibilities and Practical advantages. Our learning journey probably commenced with a sense of curiosity or a need to overcome an obstacle. The culmination of these circumstances is a learning experience in which we are able to achieve more than we might otherwise expect is possible.

A key element of learning like this is that we are connected to both the process and outcome. For learning to achieve such power, there must be an emotional connection. This is an understanding backed by the brain research of Mary-Helen Immordino-Yang (2016), who found that "It is literally neurobiologically impossible to build memories, engage complex thoughts, or make meaningful decisions without emotion. Put succinctly, we only think about things we care about". When this revelation is combined with a fundamental conclusion of research by Project Zero, that all learning is a consequence of thinking, we see the full impact that an emotional connection to what we are learning might have.

"When learning and knowledge are relatively devoid of emotion, when people learn things by "rote" without internally driven motivation and without a sense of interest or real-world relevance, then it is likely that they won't be able to use what they learn efficiently in the real world".(Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, 2016)

Spectacular learning then requires an emotional connection with the content and process, and we must see how what we are learning will matter to us in our lives if it is to live on beyond the scope of the class or programme of learning to which it belongs.

It is perhaps not surprising then that when Jal Mehta and Sarah Fine (2019) went searching for deep learning in American schools, they found it absent in most regular classrooms. The sort of deep learning that they were looking for was more likely to occur inside co-curricular learning opportunities. These co-curricular learning opportunities are less likely to be constrained by state or national curriculum mandates and are more likely to be designed in response to the needs and wants of the learners who choose to participate. It was also the case that in these co-curricular groups, students were more likely to have a strong sense of agency over the content and the process. The endpoint of such experiences is often a performance or product that has real meaning to the students involved and was unlikely to be a test taken in isolation and marked externally. It is also typical for this learning to occur within and amidst a community that has come together for a collective, creative process where learning is a part of the shared experience.

It should be noted that Mehta & Fine did not conclude that this type of learning is only possible within co-curricular programmes. They found that the teacher's pedagogical philosophy towards the discipline being studied could allow for deep learning. Mehta & Fine found that teachers either exhibited a belief that their discipline was closed or open. Those who believed the discipline was closed imagined it as a collection of knowledge to be absorbed by the student. Those who believed the discipline to be open imagined it as a field to which the student might bring fresh perspectives and where new insights might be uncovered through a collaborative process.

If teachers saw their fields as fixed or inherited bodies of knowledge, teaching as transmission seemed like a logical and efficient approach. . . Conversely, if the fields were understood as places where different people would develop different interpretations, experiments, and approaches to problems, it seemed natural to invite students into this process of inquiry, connecting them to the generations of scholars and seekers of knowledge who had come before. (Mehta & Fine 2019)

These teachers understood the true nature of their discipline. They saw themselves as members of a profession that was alive and to which they might contribute new knowledge. Their most valuable knowledge is an understanding of the epistemological foundation of the discipline. They may also possess sound discipline-specific knowledge, but they know that possessing this alone is not sufficient. A scientist is not defined by their recall of the periodic table but by the manner in which they approach puzzles and ambiguity. An author may require a sound knowledge of grammar, but they are defined by their approach to communication as a creative act between their language choices and their audience. Each discipline has its unique epistemological foundation, and deep learning is achieved when teachers invite their students to become participants in this.

The creative process starts with a sense that there is a puzzle somewhere or a task to be accomplished perhaps something is not right somewhere there is a conflict a tension a need to be satisfied. The problematic issue can be triggered by a personal experience by a lack of fit in the symbolic system by the stimulation of colleagues or by public means. In any case without such a felt tension that attracts the psychic energy of the person there is no need for a new response therefore without a stimulus of this sort the creative process is unlikely to start. (Csikszentmihalyi 2013)

I often refer to the quote above from Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's research as it points beautifully to the conditions required to spark a creative process. Spectacular learning is likely to emerge from the conditions that Mihaly describes as the catalyst for creativity. From our sensing that there is a puzzle or a tension within ourselves grows a feeling of curiosity or wonderment. Once our sense of curiosity is sparked, and if we are presented with the right conditions to act upon our curiosity in fruitful ways, spectacular learning becomes a possibility. Curiosity is undoubtedly a powerful driver of learning as the research of Gruber, Gelman & Ranganath details:

When people were highly curious to find out the answer to a question, they were better at learning that information. More surprising, however, was that once their curiosity was aroused, they showed better learning of entirely unrelated information that they encountered but were not necessarily curious about. Curiosity may put the brain in a state that allows it to learn and retain any kind of information, like a vortex that sucks in what you are motivated to learn and everything around it. Second, the investigators found that when curiosity is stimulated, there is increased activity in the brain circuit related to reward. Third, when curiosity motivated learning, there was increased activity in the hippocampus, a brain region that is important for forming new memories, as well as increased interactions between the hippocampus and the reward circuit.

Spectacular learning requires and is a product of high levels of intrinsic motivation. For us to experience a state of 'flow', we must have a great desire to be in and remain in the task. Spectacular learning requires that we bring our very best selves to the task, and this only occurs when we are highly motivated by the learning itself. The research of Ryan & Deci is enlightening here:

Comparisons between people whose motivation is authentic (literally, self-authored or endorsed) and those who are merely externally controlled for an action typically reveal that the former, relative to the latter, have more interest, excitement, and confidence, which in turn is manifest both as enhanced performance, persistence, and creativity - (Ryan & Deci. 2000)

For teachers, social-cognitivist approaches shine a light on the factors which result in motivation towards learning. Learning is said to be enhanced when individuals have positive self-efficacy for learning (Bandura 1977). Motivational theories such as self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) point to three significant needs (autonomy, purpose and mastery) (Ryan & Deci, 2000) as the forces which drive intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. According to Ryan & Deci, our need for autonomy is satisfied when our actions are self-endorsed and in accordance with our abiding values and interests. Our need for competence requires us to sense our potential to be effective within the given context; to recognise the possibility for success. Lastly, and significantly, our need for relatedness requires us to know that we are cared for and belong.

Dan Pink, in his book 'Drive' (2009), identifies three similar forces which act to motivate us. According to Pink, purpose, mastery and choice rather than traditional (external) awards motivate us the most. Once base needs are taken care of, we seek opportunities to master skills and concepts, gaining tangible benefits from the feelings of success that come with doing so. We seek choice and autonomy in how we perform our duties and expend our energies. Clarity of purpose allows us to see the value in what we do, and when it is a purpose that connects us with something that matters to ourselves or those we care about, we are more likely to commit. Spectacular learning requires then opportunities for mastery of things that matter to us or those we care about and is engaged with by choice.

A recent article published by the Global Online Academy and written by Andy Housiaux shares the results of a question posed to students enrolled in a programme at the Phillips Academy Andover. The programme had been explicitly designed to engage students in learning that was deep and durable. The result of the teaching teams efforts is a term-long immersive programme known as "The Workshop". In this programme, students committed their whole efforts to this one programme. At the conclusion of the programme, students were asked, "What's the best work you've done at Andover, and how do you know?". The answers are telling and confirm much of what has been described above. Students identified three key elements that contributed to what they identified as their best work. They had the time and the motivation to achieve mastery and worked with an 'ethic of excellence'. There was not a sense that tasks were there to be completed in a timely fashion and to comply with external demands. Secondly, the students reported a genuine connection with the work they engaged with, and that work was authentic. Students gained a sense of identity from the work and saw themselves as full citizens of the disciplines they engaged with. Lastly, the work allowed a creative pursuit of their 'own line of work'.

The Workshop is similar to the Personal Passion Projects I have described elsewhere. The idea of a 'Personal Passion Project' was not unique when I first experimented with this in 2007 but was less common than it is now. Ideas like 'Google's 20% Time' were not well known in education, nor was the term 'Genius Hour' commonly used. They had opportunities to design their own learning and the time to pursue interests that were important to them. By turning the curriculum over to the students, the relationship between teacher and student changed. A partnership in learning formed, and students had equal responsibility to drive their learning forward. The result was that the class and I sort of fell into the project and learned as we went along. A key to their success at this point were the collaborations that took place between the students. Without prompting from me, they were encouraging and supporting each other through the projects. This collaboration ensured that students were able to manage the complexities of their projects and that individuals never felt overwhelmed by the scale of what they had taken on. Sugata Mitra (2010), in his Kalikuppam Experiment, investigated how self-organised learning environments can thrive. He found that when given access to information and some encouragement to learn, young people are very capable of organising themselves into functional learning communities. This occurred for students within the Personal Passion Project when they were invited to take charge of their learning and were permitted to direct their own learning journeys. Each year the students amazed us with what they produced, and they left us with greatly enhanced confidence in their abilities to manage difficult and complex learning experiences. Running a 'Genius Hour' project can, at times, be exhausting and messy and challenging for all involved. The pay off is a spectacular learning experience that provides a solid platform for future growth.

Spectacular learning is an achievable goal and should be something that all learners experience. If the purpose of school-based education is to inspire students towards a life-long love of learning, then spectacular learning must be a routine part of this. To achieve this, we must partner more closely with our students. We need to provide them with genuine opportunities for agency in their learning and chances to focus on learning that matters to them in ways that are meaningful to them. They will gain much from teachers who invite them into the life of the disciplines that they study and help them to see that there is space within these for creativity and new voices. They will gain much from learning experiences that foster a sense of wonderment and curiosity, where questions are valued more than answers. This spectacular learning will require time and the freedom to pursue ideas through long and convoluted journeys. Spectacular learning is not well served by a straight line, full speed ahead, forced march through the curriculum. And what is spectacular learning for one will not be for others. Choice will matter, and after all, we want our students to choose learning. And at the end of all this, what might our goal be? This:

"The fullest representations of humanity show people to be curious, vital, and self-motivated. At their best, they are agentic and inspired, striving to learn; extend themselves; master new skills; and apply their talents responsibly. (Ryan & Deci. 2000)

By Nigel Coutts

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Immordino-Yang, Mary Helen. (2016) Emotions, Learning, and the Brain: Exploring the Educational Implications of Affective Neuroscience (The Norton Series on the Social Neuroscience of Education) W. W. Norton & Company.

Mehta, J. & Fine, S. (2019) In Search of Deeper Learning: The Quest to Remake the American High School Harvard University Press.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (2013) Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York; Harper Perennial.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1997). "Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life", Basic Books

Mitra, S. & Dangwal, R. (2010) Limits to self-organising systems of learning—the Kalikuppam experiment. British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 41 No 5 p672-688

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.American Psychologist,55(1), 68-78.

Why didn't that work? Maybe it’s culture?

Change is never easy. It is often said that while everyone might want change, few people are prepared to change. It should not be too surprising that most significant changes within large organisations fail. So why is it that so many great ideas fail to survive? Is it that the idea itself didn’t have what it takes to survive, or is it something else? Is it something to do with the culture of the organisation and if so, how might a richer understanding of the cultural factors at play support or change efforts?

Their culture heavily shapes educational organisations with their focus on the provision of human services provided by teachers who closely identify with their imagining of what it means to be a teacher. Emotion and culture are linked, and change of culture frequently invokes an emotional response. “A person’s sense of identity is partly determined by his or her values, which can mesh or clash with organisational values” (Smollan & Sayers 2009 p439) Smollan & Sayers found that when cultural change is sought in a school, and it is not viewed as fitting with one’s values, or it calls those values into question emotional responses such as fear, anger or sadness are common. This is seen in changes that result in teacher professionalism and autonomy being questioned and would include changes to curriculum and pedagogy. This connection between identity and culture and the subsequent emotional dependencies demands the most considered management and awareness of the human factors involved in the change.

In practical terms, any change effort that does not consider the culture into which it is introduced is unlikely to succeed. The worst-case scenario is that the change effort is resisted to such a degree that it is never truly implemented. In many cases, however, the change effort fails to produce the sort of results initially imagined despite the efforts of all involved to adopt the change. Although the new behaviours are adopted, something goes wrong, and it isn’t always that the new idea itself is to be blamed.

Consider a school that is adopting a focus on student thinking. A series of key teaching moves and routines to be implemented by the teachers are identified and agreed to. These can be easily taught, learned and monitored. When introduced to staff through a mix of empathetic and ongoing professional learning opportunities, it is reasonable to expect that the new methods will be acquired and yet things can still go wrong. Somehow the students are still described as reluctant thinkers who focus instead upon reciting answers. What went wrong? Why are the students not embracing these new thinking moves?

The problem probably lies at the level of culture.

Students know what school is about. They learn this from an early age, and the messaging they receive on a daily basis reinforces their beliefs. The teacher might talk about thinking in one moment, but the students will play this rhetoric alongside all of the other messages they receive. Correct answers on the test result in good grades on the report. Fast responses to quizzes in the classroom are rewarded. Good students answer more questions than they ask. Learning is all about memorising the facts. Neat work rules. The most valued subjects occur in the mornings. Smart means knowing more of the answers in subjects like mathematics and English. The students know that while thinking is nice, other things matter more.

It was not that a focus on thinking was not a good idea or even that the particular methods deployed were flawed. The change effort failed because it was only ever at best superficial. It did not sufficiently address the question of culture. If we are to truly focus on thinking then when we need to look closely at how thinking is addressed in every message we send. If there are actions which run counter to our focus on thinking, then we must consider how this can be changed. As we do this, we build thinking into the culture of the school.

Building a culture of thinking is soundly developed through the work of Ron Ritchhart and Project Zero though their work on Creating Cultures of Thinking. The eight cultural forces offer both a Lens and a Lever for those looking to evaluate and change their culture towards one that values thinking. But thinking is not the only change within schools that demands more than superficial treatment. Consider how inquiry-based learning might be implemented in ways that fail to address the cultural aspects of inquiry. Unless there exists within the school a culture that values inquiry as a mode of learning, then it is at best going to be a nice process for responding to a research question. Student agency is another clear example of a concept that can produce insignificant change in schools because it never moves beyond base treatment. When student agency is genuinely embraced, its fingerprints should be evident in the culture of the school. It should be considered unnatural not to include a student voice on any decision that impact students rather than an occasional nicety.

Assessment practices are another case where culture significantly impacts the effect that a change initiative might or might not have. Read the work of highly respected assessment expert Dylan Wiliam, and you will see that the most significant impact occurs when schools embrace assessment for learning or formative assessment approaches. Two quotes from Wiliam shine a light on the key concepts underlying a formative assessment approach:

It is formative only if the information is used by the learner in making improvements that actually take their own learning forward. That is why to be formative, assessment must include a recipe for future action. - Dylan Wiliam

If what you are doing under the heading of assessment for learning or formative assessment involves putting anything into a spreadsheet, if it involves using a pen other than for using comments in a student exercise book, then you are not doing the assessment for learning that makes a difference.’ - Dylan Wiliam

Unpacking the definition of formative assessment further, Wiliam shares “Practice in a classroom is formative to the extent that evidence about student achievement is elicited, interpreted, and used by teachers, learners, or their peers, to make decisions about the next steps in instruction that are likely to be better, or better founded, than the decisions they would have taken in the absence of the evidence that was elicited.” This clearly points us towards practices that allow all involved in the learning to understand where the learner is in their learning, what they might do next and what others (teachers, parents etc.) might do to help. This process is not supported by a mark or a grade. Both fail to shine a light on the specifics of what has been achieved or what might result in growth.

Indeed the problem with the use of grades or marks is larger than we might imagine. Ruth Butler investigated the impact of grades on intrinsic motivation, and her findings are significant. Students given feedback only has comments gained the most from the feedback provided. When students received only grades, or even grades and a comment, the effect was an undermining of their interest and performance. The effort made by the teacher to supplement the grade with a meaningful comment that might guide the student forward in their learning was undone by the provision of a grade.

The challenge that many schools confront when implementing formative assessment stems most significantly from culture and the beliefs which cultivate this. Teachers believe that a part of their job is to provide students with a grade even in situations where this might not be mandated by a system. Teachers also believe that they need to be maintaining a mark book. Parents contribute to this by insisting on grades, and the belief that good grades are a satisfactory proxy for learning is widespread. Students learn from their immersion in this culture that success in school is indicated by good grades. Emily Mitchum, a student reflecting on her learning and the culture she experienced published an op-ed in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette where she wrote,

This system…has caused my generation to develop an unhealthy obsession over grades instead of learning, in my opinion. The harsh reality is that we really aren’t learning as much as we could be. We study because we have tests, and the day after the test we forget all of the information we studied.

Our persistent focus on grades is shaping our student’s perception of what learning is and that imagining is not positive. When we assess the efficacy of our effort to implement formative assessment we must consider the impact that this cultural focus on grades has. Changing our assessment practices without addressing the cultural bias is unlikely to succeed. 

The pattern holds for many aspects of change. Adopting new practices is relatively easy. Changing the culture so that the change becomes a routine part of how the organisation functions is challenging. When it comes time to evaluate a change, the cultural element must also be considered. Too many good ideas have been reviewed negatively not because the idea was flawed but because it did not fit the culture of the organisation to which it was introduced. This point might prove to be crucial as rapidly changing times, and new imperatives are thrust upon education. While we might acknowledge the need for changes in how young people are prepared for the world they will inherit, will the culture of educational systems be able to adjust in time?

By Nigel Coutts

Read this article in Portuguese Here thanks to Rede De Bibliotecas Escolares

Smollan, R & Sayers, J. (2009) Organizational Culture, Change and Emotions: A Qualitative Study, Journal of Change Management, 9:4, 435-457

Thinking throughout the Inquiry Cycle

Deploying some form of process or cycle to facilitate inquiry-based learning makes a lot of sense. What can seem like a messy and complicated process becomes a more manageable one thanks to the degree of structure that an inquiry process brings. By breaking the multifaceted task of managing a robust inquiry down into steps or phases, we are better able to both plan for and then monitor our progress towards a positive conclusion.

There is an abundance of models available to choose from. Some are aimed at a particular type of inquiry, and some are more generalist. If the intent is to develop a design based solution as a result of an inquiry, then a model that incorporates aspects of design thinking is likely to suit our purposes. Indeed the design thinking process with its key phases of understanding the needs and wants of the intended audience, imagining a possible solution, developing and prototyping a solution and then evaluating the result is a model that works well for many forms of inquiry. Even in a streamlined form such as that suggested by Project Zero's Agency by Design team where one begins by looking closely, moves on to exploring complexity and finding opportunity is a model that might be adapted to many scenarios requiring an inquiry process. The Global Digital Citizenship Foundation offers a range of inquiry models, or fluencies, which target specific types of inquiry. As the name implies, their Solutions Fluency is crafted to suit the purpose of developing a response to a design challenge. In contrast, their Information Fluency is well suited to a more traditional inquiry that builds knowledge.

Generalist models also abound, but in these, we also see similar patterns. Typically the process begins with a stimulus material that aims to inspire curiosity. This is followed by a process aimed at building a list of focus questions that will guide the inquiry and then a phase of gathering and then analysing information. Once the information is gathered, there are opportunities to make use of this and in many cases, to share new knowledge or insights with an audience. It is also typical for an action phase to be included where the knowledge gained from the inquiry is applied in some practical way, often for the benefit of others and all models include a reflective phase. The model depicted below is synthesised from several models.

If we believe that all learning is a consequence of thinking, then we should consider what types of thinking our learners are likely to benefit from at each phase of their inquiry. This is where the Understanding Map, developed by Ritchhart, Church & Morrison offers useful guidance. By contemplating the demands of each phase of our chosen inquiry model, we can plan for how we might scaffold thinking moves which will enhance our learners' learning. With these thinking moves in mind, we can then plan for how we will make this thinking routine for our learners and offer them tools in the form of thinking routines to enhance the quality of their thinking.

An example of this is provided in the image below. In this, a six-step inquiry process has been described and presented as a cycle. Learners might move through this cycle sequentially, or might move back and forth in the cycle as necessary or even skip steps if that is appropriate. For each phase of the process, a set of likely thinking moves have been identified from the Understanding Map. The language used in this cycle has been selected to align with the language moves exhibited in the Understanding Map in recognition of the power that consistent language choices have in supporting continuous learning across the multiple learning environments where this model might be used.

View fullsize

This inquiry model, with its associated thinking moves, is offered as a resource for anyone interested in linking the inquiry process with the thinking moves. If you use this, I would love to know how it goes and share your experience here.

By Nigel Coutts

View fullsize

Click Image for Enlargement

What might education focus on post COVID19?

In Australia, schools are just beginning to return after the long summer vacation. Teachers are turning their thoughts to what the new school year might look like, preparing for professional learning days and readying classrooms for a fresh year of learning that we all hope will look more like those we remember pre-COVID. In other parts of the world, schools are entering a new calendar year and where the challenges of remote learning continue to dominate their thinking. On the horizon is the prospect of a post-COVID world thanks to the development and distribution of hopefully effective vaccines.

As we move towards this brighter future with the fear of a global pandemic somewhat alleviated, what might be our next steps? How might we apply the lessons learned so rapidly, and brutally during this past twelve-month period? Might COVID be a catalyst for the reinvention of education that so many have been calling for?

In his book, “The Infinite Game”, Simon Sinek advises readers to look beyond the short term gain. Rather than seek the immediate win by playing a finite game, we are urged to consider how we might best engage with the infinite game where there are no fixed rules, no set players and the game has no end. The concept of finite and infinite games was developed by James Carse in 1986:

THERE ARE at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing the play. (Carse, 1986 p3)

Infinite games have infinite time horizons. And because there is no finish line, no practical end to the game, there is no such thing as “winning” an infinite game. In an infinite game, the primary objective is to keep playing, to perpetuate the game. (Sinek, 2019 p4)

Education is most definitely an infinite game. For everyone involved, particularly in modern times, it meets all of the requirements of our definition of an infinite game. The players routinely change. So too do the rules and the goal posts move just as frequently and are at best fluidly defined by the changing tides of society, politics and culture. There is no endpoint. It might be argued that when we are talking formal education, we are defining a period of time from the moment one enters their first year of schooling as a Kindergarten or Foundation student until they leave with a formal qualification. In modern times such a neatly framed definition of our time in education is laughably ill-conceived. There is little if any doubt that education, and through it learning, is something we shall engage with until long into our sunset years.

Despite this, schools seem to adopt an unhealthy embrace of the finite game. Each school year seems to be viewed as a game with winners and losers. The measures of success are taken as the assessments students complete and the culmination of these is the final school leaving qualification and its associated ranking of students. This exam preparation focus distracts us from the infinite game that we should be giving our attention to. Instead of asking what grade I got for that last assignment, our students should be wondering how it drove them toward their next learning goal. If we were to play an infinite game, our focus would be on how each learning moment better prepares us to achieve the primary objective of playing-on, perpetuating the game of learning.

During our COVID adventures with remote learning, at least after the initial shock and rapid responses to the most immediate challenges, educators grappled with new challenges and found exciting solutions. Many of these allowed us to move a step away from playing the examination focused finite game. We recognised that a prime goal was to develop in our learners, new levels of independence. Unable to control every moment of their learning, we confronted a reality in which partnerships between learners and educators became essential. Remote learning also revealed to us that education could occur across boundaries of time and space. Freed from the constraints of the physicality of the classroom learning took on new shapes, new forms and achieved new possibilities. Our students saw their role in learning differently too. They were able to take ownership of the process in ways they did not have access to in a traditional setting. The almighty timetable and daily schedule became somewhat more flexible. Learning was less a thing that happened to them during set hours of the day and more a thing that they could choose to engage with in an almost à la carte fashion.

In a post COVID world, how might we continue to build learners who own their learning? What approaches to learning and pedagogy might we continue to engage that are supportive of independence and learner agency?

Such skills and dispositions are both timely and timeless. The World Economic Forum routinely publishes a list of the most desirable skills for the workplace of the not too distant future. For 2025 their top five connect beautifully with a vision for education focused on playing an infinite game. Each has value now, tomorrow and long into the future. Each is resistant to changing circumstances. Each equips a player in an infinite game with the capabilities they need as they adapt to changes in the game and to play as drivers of change.

1. Analytical thinking and innovation

2. Active learning and learning strategies

3. Complex problem solving

4. Critical thinking and analysis

5. Creativity, originality and initiative

6. (WEF - Future of Jobs Report 2020)

These are skills that we can develop and learn but never truly master. Nor are they pieces of knowledge or base capabilities which are likely to become irrelevant with time. We shall continue to call upon these dispositions over time, and we can refine and relearn how we approach each as new challenges and opportunities emerge. As society continues to evolve, new strategies, tools, modalities and ideologies are bound to emerge, but our capacity for engagement with these changes will be defined by these skills.

Education, as a finite game, will always tend to undervalue these skills. They are too easily seen as obstacles to the teaching of essential content required for exams. To win the finite game of education, one’s needs are seen as best served by privileging the specific knowledge and skills assessed in the next test. Time spent on teaching active learning strategies, innovation, creativity and initiative is too easily seen as a series of distractions which stand in the way of achieving the more immediate goals. Like a player in a soccer game, we are focused on scoring the winning goal but blind to the reality that there is no winning goal to be had in this game.

Perhaps this is the ultimate challenge for education post COVID, to shift our focus towards how we prepare our students to play the infinite game of education.

By Nigel Coutts

Carse, James. (1986) Finite and Infinite Games (p. 3). Free Press. Kindle Edition.

Sinek, Simon. (2019) The Infinite Game (p. 4). Penguin Books Ltd. Kindle Edition.

Pondering metaphors for the impact that we have as educators

I often think in metaphors. They help me to clarify and communicate my thinking. A metaphor can make a complex idea accessible and comprehensible. They invite understanding and are a useful catalyst for conversation. A metaphor can be made even more powerful when it is combined with a practical demonstration. One metaphor I like to share with colleagues revolves around the impact that we might have as teachers.

Imagine a glass of water. It sits calmly on a bench, the surface of the water it contains is untroubled by motion. We take a spoon and place it delicately into this glass of water and note the ripples that form on the surface. We begin to stir. Slowly at first. The motion of the spoon agitates the water. As we accelerate our motion, a small whirlpool begins to form in the class. We notice bubbles forming at the interface between the spoon and the water. Some of the bubbles detach and rise to the surface. The water at the edges of the glass has risen, and the whirlpool at its centre has deepened. Our once calm glass of water is a maelstrom of chaos.

We stop stirring. Gradually the motion of the water slows, the whirlpool subsides. Soon the water in the glass is once again calm and still. No evidence of the chaos remains.

Now consider a second glass. It too sits calmly on a bench, the water it contains is still. We place into this glass a small orange disc. The disc touches the water, and as it sinks slowly to the bottom, we notice bubbles forming energetically on its surface. Soon the disc is covered with hundreds if not thousands of bubbles and their formation and escape from the disc is causing the water in the glass to bubble. The surface of the water moves erratically as it is rocked by the small explosions of gas created as more and more bubbles escape from the now shrinking disc. Slowly the disc dissolves, and as it does, the motion in the water slows. Now very few bubbles can be seen. With time the water in the glass is once again calm and still.

But the water in the second glass has changed colour. After the chaos of the discs dissolution, the water has transformed from crystal clear to bight orange. Its contents have also changed. What was once pure water now is enriched with a mix of vitamins and a refreshing orange taste.

The glasses represent our classrooms, the water our students and the stirring and introduction of the disc represent the actions we take as teachers. The story of each glass is a metaphor for the impact that we might have.

In the first instance, the teacher brings great energy to the class. They provoke their students into action. The classroom is alive with motion, and the students are active and moving. While the teacher is teaching the students appear to be learning. As long as the teacher is present, things are happening. But once removed, we see that in just a short time the impact that the teacher has dissipates and soon there is no evidence of their presence. Despite all of our efforts, we have not had a lasting impact; true learning has not occurred.

In the second glass, we see a different story. The teacher in this glass acts upon the class from within. Their energy and the energy of their students combine. It is the reaction and the interaction of the two, which causes a change to occur. In time the teacher disappears, but a change has occurred that is lasting and endures despite their absence. Learning has been achieved and persists. In the words of Ron Ritchhart, these are the residuals of education; the dispositions and habits of character that we have nurtured and enculturated over time.

Our aim is not to merely stir the waters. If we are to achieve our purposes as educators, then we must aim for lasting impact. If the activities that we engage our students in and the teaching we deliver does not cause a lasting change in our students, then our enduring impact is minimal. If we measure our success not by what our children do during a lesson but by what remains beyond their time with us, we gain a more genuine measure of our impact.

By Stellina Sim

Great Reads for the Holidays

As schools prepare for the upcoming Christmas break here is a list of books that are bound to get you thinking.

A Synthesizing Mind: A memoir from the creator of Multiple Intelligences Theory - By Howard Gardner

If you are interested in how the mind works and the nature of intelligence you have most likely encountered the work of Howard Gardner. Although best known for his work on Multiple Intelligence Theory, Gardner has also played a significant role in the work of Project Zero and more recently The Good Project. A measure of the breadth of Gardner's thinking and his impact on education is revealed when one considers that he has written thirty books.

In A Synthesizing Mind, Gardner turns his thinking towards the functioning of his own mind. He explains how he developed his theory of Multiple Intelligences and discusses how his work has been used and abused by others. He shares insights from the full range of his work and contemplates the value of a mind like his, a synthesizing mind in times of rapid change and uncertainty.

Looking for more about Multiple Intelligence Theory? - Read "Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons" by Howard Gardner

The Infinite Game - by Simon Sinek

There are broadly speaking two kinds of games. There are those that are finite. They have a beginning, a middle and an end. There are known rules, known players and a clear objective. At the end of a finite game someone is declared the winner. Then there are infinite games. In an infinite game there is no end, the players change and so do the rules. There is never a winner. Infinite games are the ones we play in life, in organisations, in the worlds of work and education. They are complex and playing them well requires an understanding of their infinite nature and the right mindset.

For anyone playing in an infinite game, this book by Simon Sinek is a must read. If you found "Start with Why" a compelling read then you will enjoy "An Infinite Game".

Looking for more on Infinite Games? - Read "Finite & Infinite Games" by James P. Carse

Looking for more by Simon Sinek? - Read "Leaders Eat Last"

If you lead a team of people, this book will show how you can have a positive impact in their lives. When leaders eat last, when leaders embrace their humanity and act with humility and build workplaces where emotional safety is truly valued, everyone is able to thrive.

“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.” Simon Sinek

The Power of Making Thinking Visible - by Ron Ritchhart & Mark Church

The Visible Thinking community set alight by the recent release of Ron Ritchhart and Mark Church’s new book “The Power of Making Thinking Visible”. In this book the authors explore how visible thinking empowers learning. If you are a teacher who enjoys using thinking routines, this book will elevate their use to new levels. The book reveals the Six Powers of Making Thinking Visible and reveals approaches that will ensure each is maximised. An added bonus is a set of 18 new Thinking Routines developed by the authors and practised in classrooms around the world. The book includes comprehensive notes for each routine along with examples of their use.

“We are thrilled to announce the publication of our latest book, The Power of Making Thinking Visible due out in April, 2020. Since Making Thinking Visible was first published in 2011, Mark Church and I have continued to research the use of thinking routines and their impact on learning (we share both qualitative and quantitative data in the new book). At the same time, we have been developing new routines to help structure, facilitate, and enhance learning and thinking. This companion book of new thinking routines draws on the work we have been doing in schools around the world and provides rich examples of the routines in action across multiple grade levels and subject areas. We also articulate exactly why and how the practice of making thinking visible is so powerful for teachers and students.” (Ron Ritchhart)

By Nigel Coutts

Fostering a dispositional perspective of curiosity

When we are young, we are naturally curious. We ask many, many questions. As we encounter the world, our consciousness is bombarded by a plethora of opportunities for curiosity. And at this early stage of exploring and discovering the world we inhabit, there is no filter between our sense of curiosity and our expression of it. If we are curious, we will be asking questions and heaven help anyone close enough to be a potential source of answers.

Harvard’s Project Zero asks us to consider a triadic-model of dispositions where there is the required capacity, the necessary motivation and a sensitivity to the utility of a particular set of behaviours. When all three are present, we can say that the individual has a disposition towards behaviour of a particular nature. In the case of our curious youth, we see evidence of a sensitivity to curiosity and a motivation towards actions that appease their curiosity; however, there is an ill-formed capability for effective actions in response to their wonderings.

Traditionally, good thinking has been defined as a matter of cognitive ability or skill. Hence the term, "thinking skills." Certainly, good thinkers have skills. But they also have more. Passions, attitudes, values, and habits of mind all play key roles in thinking, and, in large part, it is these elements that determine whether learners use their thinking skills when it counts. In short, good thinkers have the right "thinking dispositions." - Project Zero - Patterns of Thinking

When we are young, our capacity to take actions to satisfy our sense of curiosity is limited. We can ask questions, but we cannot yet devise a plan of our own to find an answer. Nor are we adept at framing our questions in ways that move us towards a fruitful inquiry. At this stage in our learning journey, we rely upon others to do the work of inquiry for us. Our sense of curiosity gives us the motivation to be inquisitive, but we lack the capability to act upon this.

How others respond to our youthful expressions of curiosity can have significant consequences for how we engage in inquiry as we mature. When we are handed an answer, our sense of curiosity is appeased, to a degree, but our desire to inquire, explore and question is not. This is why the follow-up response to a perfectly complete answer is likely to be “but why?”. By asking “why?” we are revealing not only our curiosity for the particular object or phenomena that is the subject of our inquiry but also a desire to engage with the processes of inquiry as we imagine them to be. Asking questions becomes a goal in itself when we are young. Our propensity to ask questions is likely to invoke frustration from those who become the target of our curiosity. It is not surprising then that the objective of the unfortunate adult is a rapid termination of our inquiry rather than a quest to expand and extend our line of thought. The net result is that we develop a belief that curiosity results in questions that have a correct answer and that inquiry involves asking these, mostly closed, questions to the right adult who might provide us with that single correct answer.

As we get older, our capacity to find answers of our own is increasing. We can be curious and act upon it. Inquiry becomes something we do in response to our sense of curiosity. Curiosity is the catalyst for inquiry, and our expanding capacity to inquire enables us to become constructors of knowledge. Knowledge transforms from something that we are given by others to become something that we can create. We incorporate inquiry into our patterns of play. We devise experiments, investigate, look closely, sniff things, taste things (often things we shouldn’t) and explore. All of this culminates with us theorising about why the world is the way it is, and although our conclusions are often false, they are ours. Inquiry is something we do because it satisfies a powerful desire to not only know but to construct knowledge and achieve an understanding. We retain our motivation for curiosity and our sensitivity to its utility and our capacity to engage in inquiry as a response to our curiosity is developing even if it lacks any formal structures that might lead us to defensible conclusions.

As we grow, our sense of curiosity is filtered. We continue to encounter many things that we wonder about, but some connect with ideas or concepts that we have an intense interest in and others do not. At the same time, we begin to recognise that there are things that can lead to an engaging inquiry and things that do not. Our capacity and our desire to inquire become additional filters for what sparks our curiosity.

At school, our relationship to both curiosity and inquiry changes. Choices that were once ours are now made by someone else. What we are expected to inquire about is chosen for us. The topics of our investigations, experimentations and wonderings are dictated by the pages of a curriculum that we have no say in. We are taught how to inquire, how to question and how to communicate our results. We learn again that there are right answers and wrong answers. If we return to our triadic model, we see that our capacity for inquiry has been expanded as we added new skills and methods, but our motivation and sensitivity towards curiosity has declined. Inquiry becomes an item on our timetable rather than a self-initiated response to our sense of curiosity. We should not be surprised then that we lose our sensitivity to opportunities for inquisitive exploration along with our motivation for the same.

In times of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity, our capacity to deal with the unknown becomes increasingly critical. The traditional model of schooling might, if successful, encourage a desire in some students to become consumers of knowledge. Where knowledge is certain, models of schooling that focus on the transfer of content might be valid. Where knowledge is uncertain, an inquisitive, curious disposition is paramount. We need not only the skills to know what to do when we don't know what to do but also a sensitivity to such times and the motivation to respond appropriately. As Webb & Kirby share "Having additional opportunities to ‘not-know’ becomes a mode of being open, attentive and prepared to respond, and offers possibilities for children to shift into ‘being’ participants rather than simply recipients of adult-generated knowledge." (Web & Kirby - Covid-19 and schooling for uncertainty)

The trend here is a move away from agentic curiosity towards performative inquiry. Where once we engaged in inquiry as an expression of our sense curiosity and agency, we now perform the processes of inquiry on cue. In place of inquiry as exploration of our wonderings and path to our construction of knowledge, it becomes an act of compliance scripted others. This pattern of declining agency extends to learning in general as both the content and means of learning are increasingly managed for us.

In a recent webinar, David Perkins reminded his audience that learning should be about more than the transfer of knowledge. Our learning journeys should include time for our self-initiated exploration of questions and wonderings that stir our hearts. Learning that matters includes room for what inspires us, what intrigues us and makes us wonder how can that be and what might be if. More than a foundation for the practicalities of life, education should develop our capacity and motivation to transform our sense of curiosity into action. In this way, we are learning how to wonder and what to do with our wonderings. We are developing a disposition towards curiosity where we have the capacity to wonder about our world, a sensitivity for the opportunity for wondering and the motivation to not only wonder but to act towards the satisfaction of our curiosity.

For schools, the challenge is to do more than teach our students how to construct an inquiry in response to the curriculum mandates. If we teach our children the mechanics of inquiry but fail to connect the dots between these new skills and the learner’s sense of curiosity, we have failed. Suppose we encourage our children to be curious problem seekers, sensitive to opportunities for wonderment and empower them with the capacity to design and implement purposeful inquiries. In that case, we might also ignite a passion for lifelong learning.

By Nigel Coutts

Related Posts

Curiosity as the edge of knowledge phenomenon that drives learning

Powerful Provocations for Learning: Sparking curiosity and increasing engagement

Curiosity, critical thinking and agency as responses to the Australian Bushfire Crisis

Helping students to become problem finders

Taking a Reflective Stance

In a previous article, I wrote of the importance of reflective practice as a piece of the learning puzzle (Read More). As John Dewey shares, "we do not learn from experience, we learn from reflecting on experience". I wrote that "If we genuinely value reflective practice, we need to take a more proactive approach. Instead of leaving it to chance and hoping our students will make the right moves, we need to build reflection into our teaching and their learning." I suggested that the Eight Cultural Forces, as explained by Ron Ritchhart, are an excellent tool for ensuring reflection is an enculturated part of our classroom and school culture. Building on from the ideas in this article I'd like to suggest that there is another step we can take towards ensuring meaningful reflection is not just something we do but is a part of who we are.

To ensure reflective practice is more than an activity added to our schedule, we need to take a reflective stance.

Too often, reflection becomes the thing we do at the end of a task or the end of the day. We look back and contemplate what was, and with that in mind, we look forward to what we might do differently next time. It is in this way a very reactionary process. By all means, this form of reflection has its place, and it can be a powerful strategy to deploy as we seek to learn from experience. If we value reflective practice, we will be sure to set aside time for this form of reflection on a routine basis. By engaging in reflection habitually, we ensure that it is a routine part of our day.

But adopting a reflective stance can make this more powerful.

A reflective stance requires a deliberate effort to move away from reflection being the activity that terminates our learning journey. Instead, it becomes something that we are routinely engaged with before, during and at the end of our learning. It means that we not only allocate time to the practice of reflection but that we understand its value as a cognitive tool that empowers our learning.

A reflective stance moves us from behaviours towards metacognition.

Metacognition is defined within Habits of Mind, by Costa & Kallick as "Thinking about thinking. Know your knowing. Be aware of your own thoughts, strategies, feelings and actions - and how they affect others." According to Costa & Kallick "metacognition, or thinking about thinking, is our ability to know what we know and what we don't know. It is our ability to plan a strategy for producing the information that is needed, to be conscious of our own steps and strategies during the act of problem solving, and to reflect on and evaluate the productiveness of our own thinking. . . . Intelligent people plan for, reflect on, and evaluate the quality of their own thinking skills and strategies." As with each of the 'Habits of Mind', and dispositions more broadly, metacognition thrives when there is an inclination to deploy the habit based on a sensitivity to its value and commitment to developing the capability.

If we are to maximise the benefits of metacognition, we must be aware of our ability to plan for purposeful and effective thinking. We must then monitor the effects that our thinking is having in the moment and be aware of how our thinking and acting is evolving. Finally, we also then take time to reflect on both the evolving processes of our learning journey and the results thusly achieved. In an article for "Improve with Metacognition", Costa & Kallick identify the need for planning for thinking to be combined with self-monitoring through consciously looking forward and looking back. End of day or end of task reflective practices are overly reliant on the efficacy of one part of this process; looking back.

A reflective stance allows for each part of this reflective process in ways that habitual, end of day practices do not. A reflective stance includes mindful attention in advance of cognitive activity, during cognitive activity and as reflection on cognitive activity. A reflective stance becomes an ongoing cycle of planning, noticing and reflecting on the efficacy of our thinking and acting.

A reflective stance doesn't mean we are forever analysing our thinking.

Engaging in full-blown, mindful metacognition all of the time would be exhausting and largely pointless. "Thinking, Fast & Slow", by Daniel Kahnemann invites us to see our thinking as being a result of two metaphorical systems. "System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little or no effort and no sense of voluntary control. System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations." Each system has its advantages and disadvantages, and in most cases, we shift between the two effortlessly and seamlessly, one supporting the other.

Consider the task of driving. For the experienced driver, it is normal to travel great distances with the task of managing the vehicle, navigating the roads and avoiding obstacles with our minds in autopilot. Only when the task requires heightened concentration, do we become focused on the task and fully aware of the choices we are making. When we reflect on our journey, we will recall these moments in vivid detail while others are not recalled at all. The same is true of much of the thinking that occurs throughout our day. However, when we adopt a reflective stance, we plan for the times when we will deliberately engage our full mental capacities and the moments where we will notice how our thinking is evolving and the effect that has. Because we value our reflective practices, we take actions to ensure we will have the impact we desire and that we notice the actions and thoughts that we deployed towards this goal. We are not leaving things to chance; we are planning for and monitoring which system we require.

Our reflective stance will also enhance how we learn in the future.

As noted, we learn from reflecting on experience. When we adopt a reflective stance, we recognise the benefits of particular patterns of action and thought. By recognising these patterns and the impact that they have in the moment, and by then reflecting upon our noticings, we allow ourselves to incorporate the more effective patterns into our future planning and refine or abandon those that are not working.

A reflective stance requires a commitment and a valuing of reflective practice as more than a set of behaviours we schedule into our day. The fullest benefits of a reflective stance are achieved when we plan for notice and reflect upon our actions and then use the information gained as a result to inform our future choices.

By Nigel Coutts

Read this article in Portuguese - Leia este artigo em Portugues

Read - Playing with Habits of Mind

Explore - Strategies & Routines that Support Metacognition

Costa, A. & Kallick, B. (2008) Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. ASCD, USA

Costa, A & Kallick, B. (2015) Metacognition: What Makes Humans Unique  https://www.improvewithmetacognition.com/metacognition-what-makes-humans-unique/

Kahnemann, D. (2012) Thinking, Fast And Slow. Penguin, Random House Books; UK

Does your mission and vision drive your actions?

Explore the website of any school, and you will undoubtedly find a page dedicated to their Mission and Vision. Here you will find carefully crafted statements of purpose couched in the vocabulary of educational excellence and reflecting the pinnacle of human possibility. A blend of educational philosophy and marketing speak designed to promote student achievement and enrolments. The question is, to what degree does the lived experience of the typical student align with the stated purposes? Does the product do what it says on the tin?

In a recent Podcast, Ewan McIntosh of NoTosh ponders this question. He refers to the notion of “Plastic Purpose” to describe the type of purpose that is laminated and placed on the wall and is never read, never used and never remembered. Plastic Purpose is too often what you find on school websites.

Having a clear statement of our purpose is, of course, vital. If we are not able to articulate our purpose in clear terms, how do we hope to live it? This is the key message behind Simon Sinek’s thinking on the importance of starting with why. Organisations that are clear on their purpose are more likely to succeed than those that are not. A clear purpose reveals the direction that the organisation intends to take. An inspiring purpose inspires us to give our best efforts and promotes innovation as we seek new ways to achieve it.

Simon Sinek tells us that “Very few people or companies can clearly articulate WHY they do WHAT they do.” For many organisations the title of Sinek’s now iconic book “Start with Why” became a mantra. Unfortunately, too many organisations also “Stop with Why”. Having a clear statement of their purpose, they failed to consider how they ensure their why is reflected in everything they do and so their why became plastic coated.

As Ewan McIntosh shares, an organisation’s purpose plays a vital role in filtering ideas. When the purpose of an organisation is clear, ideas that drive it in the desired direction pass through the filter while those that act in opposition to its purpose are rejected. Steve Jobs understood the role that purpose plays in filtering ideas. In a conversation with Nike CEO Mark Parker, Jobs shared that “I’m actually as proud of the things we haven’t done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying ‘no’ to 1,000 things. You have to pick carefully.” What allowed Jobs to decide which ideas passed through the filter was his relentless focus on his most important priorities; his purpose.

Ensuring that your purpose acts as both filter and compass demands the courage to promote ideas that bring your purpose to life and say no to those which do not.

David Perkins offers us the concept of action theories. An “action theory” makes a connection between our beliefs and the actions that we take. As Ron Ritchhart reflects “They are the “rules of thumb” and the “internal compass” with which we operate.” Perkins speaks of the gap between theory and action. On the one hand, we have the theoretical knowledge that comes from science; on the other hand, the application of science evident in engineering. We can extend this idea to consider how we translate our purpose into action or how we make visible the connection between our actions and our purpose. When we act with our purpose in mind, when we filter our actions by their alignment with our purpose, the action theories we invoke should reveal this.

To avoid “plastic purpose”, we must look for how we translate our mission and vision statements into action. Just as the engineer might apply the science of physics to the design of a more accurate timepiece, we need to transfer our vision and mission into the work that we do.

The challenge is to do this consistently. This requires an understanding that even the smallest component of an organisation contributes to its overall shape. Our purpose must be reflected in everything we do. This is where many schools fall down. On the large and readily visible components of their offerings, they ensure alignment with their vision and mission, but the less glamorous aspects send a different message. Consider the school that advocates for learner agency but utilises a reporting system where student voice is absent or the school with a focus on a culture of thinking and an examination regime that emphasises rote learning. These are symptoms of plastic purpose.

By all means, “start with why”, but then proceed with why. Make your why apparent in everything you do. Let your “why” be your filter and your compass. Be proud of your why and let it inspire you and those who depend upon you. Take your purpose down off the wall, peel off the plastic, and let it run wild in your organisation.

By Nigel Coutts