Category: Archived

All the old posts from years gone by.

  • PTC Portfolio – Example Template

    So part of my job is providing PD for our staff on a variety of things, usually anything to do with ICT.

    I have been asked to run a workshop on online PTC portfolios, and so as part of that, I built an example PTC site, complete with How-To guide to get your own PTC Portfolio set up just like it.

    ptcportfolio.wordpress.com

    You can head on over to the site and use it if you’re looking at putting your PTC Portfolio up online. Don’t worry, you can keep it all private and make the most of being able to access your portfolio from anywhere.

    Of course, I used WordPress.com, one of the most widespread CMS’s available, and is what I use personally for my own PTC Portfolio.

     

  • Individual Testing is Killing Teaching

    When I was at school, I can’t remember ever doing a one on one test with my teacher.

    I’m not saying it didn’t happen. I’m saying I don’t remember it. I do remember being tested, in whole class tests, PAT mostly. Colouring in blank circles was fun.

    At some point, teachers or schools or ERO or MOE wanted to know more. They wanted to get more specific information on the learners, to track, to identify gaps, or simply to report against National Standards for.

    And it lead to each individual child in every class being tested individually. Each child’s strengths can be identified, and the gaps they have can then be specifically targeted. Teachers knew what each child needed, and could pass comment on this first hand to their parents or caregivers, through the wonderful National Standard reports that were sent home twice a year.

    Great.

    Except that it is unmanageable.

    28 kids in your class. That’s 28 tests, all carried out individually with the teacher. That’s 27 students who are left to quiet independent work while the teacher questions 1 child. Rinse and repeat. Let’s say that each test takes 5 minutes with the teacher, allowing for arrival, sit down, thinking time, and several correct questions that lead to more difficult ones (and therefore more thinking time) and then leaving time. At 5 minutes a test and 28 students, that’s 140 minutes of testing. 2 hours and 20 minutes to conduct one test for the whole class. 

    This of course does not account for the additional time of hushing students, interruptions, and maintaining a semblance of order over the class while trying to test one child at a time. The testing can take days, usually weeks to get through the whole class one at a time.

    This is the problem though. During those weeks, there is no teaching happening. It’s simply independent work while I test. It becomes too hard to switch between teacher and tester, and so constant switching between these two roles sends one spiralling into minor bouts of schizophrenia.

    Add in that this is one test, for one subject, say Maths. Add in Writing. Add in Reading.

    The stain of National Standards lingers on. While many schools have ditched them, the mindset of the assessments that have been left behind are still causing teachers to be testing, testing, testing – not because of the National Standards, but because of the style of assessment that schools are now using.

    There is no doubt that these tests produce a very accurate and specific picture of what each child knows and doesn’t know, and it becomes very hard to argue against. However, there needs to be some compromise, otherwise we will continue to fall into one of the two modes – teaching or testing – throughout the year.

    But why?

    Why do we test at all – in all honesty?

    In this article, there are numerous points made. Most poignantly is where it says “some countries have achieved better outcomes from their state systems by deliberately shunning standardised testing. In this informative Atlantic article, the Finnish journalist Aru Partanen cites the attributes of a Finnish school system that regularly outscores the US ( and New Zealand) in international rankings of student achievement. Among other things, Finland has no standardised testing, and no private schools at all.”

    In the opening paragraph, it raises exactly where we are at in New Zealand education right now. It says “Testing kids in the classroom sounds like a good idea. Surely that keeps tabs on how they’re doing, and identifies which kids might be falling through the cracks…and that’s all good, right? Well…except that most teachers have always done testing, have always sought to detect kids at risk, and have always managed to strike a healthy balance between teaching and testing. The issue is whether the demands to follow standardised testing procedures (and the practices and attitudes that go with them ) may now be poisoning the whole environment for learning.”

    This was written in 2013. Five years ago. I had been teaching for three years. Now five years later, and approaching a decade in the classroom, I am still teaching and then testing. Now, with the removal of national standards, we have the opportunity to make a change. Something has to change.

    I didn’t become a teacher to make kids sit tests, or even interview kids about what they know and if they can tell me different ways of solving the same problem. I didn’t become a teacher to spend hours on end analysing data and working out what kids don’t know and feel guilty for how much more I should be working.

    I became a teacher to teach. I became a teacher to help kids learn.

     

    Related Reading

  • Letter Keepsafe

    Need somewhere to keep all your classroom display letters? Sick of re-making letters all the time. Keep them safe in this Top Teacher Tip.

  • Sticky Labels

    Always needing labels or needing to stick paper print outs to things? Use this Top Teacher Tip to make your life easier! #FlipTheTape #TooEasy

  • Repeatable Centres

    Need to label a bunch of cubby holes in your class, but don’t want to measure each time to find the centre? Use this Top Teacher Tip to make the whole process easier!

  • Please Restrain Me

    Seriously. The latest in Ministry bull-hockey is in full swing.

    Many teachers were somewhat perplexed at the latest heightening of the issue of restraint in schools, when the Ministry introduced a layer of bureaucracy to the issue of restraining children who were out of control in the school.  In the bulletin dated 21 August 2017, the Ministry states that

    “New rules have come into force which require schools to notify, monitor and report on the use of physical restraint.

    Schools should be, and usually are, a safe and happy place. But there are times when things risk getting out of control and someone needs to step in.

    On rare occasions a student may need to be physically restrained and new rules have now been issued to give greater clarity about when it is okay to do so.”

    Trust is a two way street, and the Ministry here demonstrates exactly the level of trust that it has in it’s teachers. Due to this, teachers are naturally cautious to this, with many thinking of where this leads. While the Ministry say that this is purely for monitoring purposes and to see if the school needs help in managing the behaviour at the school, many teachers are much more cynical, and can see this leading to sanctions on individual teachers who restrain too often, or repercussions to schools who are required to restrain on a regular basis. What’s more, the chances of legal procedures also looms in minds around the country.

    Which is why now, teachers more than ever are hesitant, and on occasion flat out refuse to restrain children, even when student safety is in question. The hassle of filling out the form is one reason for ignoring it, but the process behind the form, and the repercussions it could lead to are much bigger deterrents.

    Of course, the first question on many of our lips was – “What constitutes restraint?”

    The bulletin listed some examples for us, to give us an idea:

    “The legislation says that a teacher or authorised staff member can use physical restraint if he or she reasonably believes that there is a serious and imminent risk to the safety of the student or others, and the physical restraint must be reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances. Situations where it may be appropriate include:

    • Breaking up a fight

    • Stopping a student from moving in with a weapon

    • Stopping a student who is throwing furniture close to others who could be injured

    • Preventing a student from running onto a road.”

    Suddenly, separating two students who are throwing haymakers (an activity that happens at least once a month, if not once a week in some schools) now requires a teacher to fill out a form and report to the Ministry. A copy also goes to their Board of Trustees. An interview (usually by phone) also occurs after the form is submitted.

    So what about if I have to remove a child from class because they refuse to follow my instructions and are disrupting the class? Another form. Another interview. But is it restraint?

    So naturally, schools began asking the Ministry these questions, hoping to seek some clarification around the new laws that were put in place. Somewhat expectedly, the MoE had no answers. They fumbled around and provided comments that amounted to not much more than “We don’t know”.

    Surely they had a plan in place? Surely they could foresee that there would need to be some clarification for those on the front line as they ducked and dodged the furniture being thrown at them?

    Hastily, they put together an all encompassing workshop: “Understanding Behaviour, Responding Safely” or UBRS for short.

    I had the privilege of going to one of these courses today.

    What an absolute joke. Bordering on pathetic.

    The whole basis for the workshop was “Minimising the use of Restraint”. This says one thing; that we (MoE), think all teachers use restraint as step one in our behaviour plan. The majority of the course discussed and elaborated and explained all the ins and outs of managing behaviour, providing safe learning spaces, and building relationships with the children – once again assuming that teachers do not already do all of this.

    Seriously.

    In a room full of teachers, all of whom are wondering what is considered restraint, what isn’t considered restraint, when do I have to fill out the form and when do I not, and some safe and un-harmful ways to restrain children in a suitable way.

    Instead, this question (which was raised in the first five minutes of the workshop) got shut down and dismissed, as “we are looking at ways you can deal with the behaviour before it escalates”.

    Pathetic.

    To assume that teacher’s don’t already do all of that in their class; that they don’t get to know their students, work out what triggers students, work along students to de-escalate conflict, and do everything in their power to NOT get to a point where a student flies out of control, was nothing more than belittling and patronising.

    Yet this is what is being rolled out.

    We were even told that this wasn’t really even designed to be used at this level, and wasn’t about dealing with restraint. Yet on the Ministry website, it is made quite clear on their “Support for schools to manage challenging student behaviour” page which mentions restraint, that the training provided is “The Understanding Behaviour, Responding Safely (UBRS), workshop…” and “…is delivered in modules for whole school staff groups focusing on prevention and de-escalation strategies.”

    It does not mention anything about restraint, which the new laws are about, and are what teachers are actually concerned about, as opposed to managing behaviour focussed on prevention and de-escalation.

    What a joke.

    Look; Teacher’s aren’t walking about looking for kids to restrain. We aren’t going around antagonising and riling up students until they’re out of control and we need to drag them over to the school office.

    But if you’re going to make a “No restraint” rule, but make the exception for certain circumstances, then you’re going to have to do some work with those that are affected, namely teachers, on what those circumstances are, and safe ways (for the student AND the teacher) to carry out any kind of restraint IN CASE it is necessary.

    P.S. Please, please, please; if you’re running an ADULT’s workshop, do not expect us to a) work effectively in groups with strangers and b) do roleplays.

     

     

  • Teacher Back to School Bingo – 2018 Edition

    Last year’s Bingo was such a success that it seemed only right that a new edition for 2018 comes out. Of course, these are largely generic, and last year’s sheet is still playable. Remember, this is nothing more but to have a bit of fun to make those first days back at work a little more bearable. So here it is, the annual Teacher’s Back to School Bingo.

    Have fun as you go back to school!

  • Russell Howard: Hardest Job in the world is a teacher

    View Video on YouTube

    Thanks Russell for standing up for Teachers everywhere.

  • Principal views on parenting and schooling

    This has been an issue that I believe is one of the biggest shifts in society in the last 20 years. As parents get so wrapped up in their own lives, their career, their jobs, the things they love to do, children get left by the wayside. They become an afterthought, a burden, even an inconvenience to some parents continuing their self absorbed lives.

    Don’t get me wrong. This is certainly not all parents, and not all children. But increasingly so, there are so many things that schools are picking up the slack on that traditionally have been parents and families roles. This puts additional pressures on schools, teachers, staff, resourcing and funding that are far in a way more than should be expected under the umbrella of ‘education’.

    Parents are the first teachers.

    Unfortunately, there are an increasing number who leave the basics up to the school to do. We’ve heard reports of children turning up to school in nappies and are not toilet trained, let alone know the alphabet or numbers. We’ve heard in the news lately how parents are expecting teachers to teach about social etiquette, social skills, and other things that have traditionally been the role of society.

    Original article: Principal bemoans threats to schools

    A Dunedin school principal is  increasingly  concerned  by the  social expectations imposed on schools,  and says some parents need to take more responsibility for their children’s actions.

    During the recent King’s High School senior prizegiving, rector Dan Reddiex praised his present cohort of pupils for their outstanding achievements  during the year, but went on to express deep concern about the future of education in New Zealand.

    He said the school’s ability to educate boys “in mind and in heart” was under threat.

    “Alarmingly, in my view, we are increasingly becoming as much a social institution as we are an educational one.

    “The expectations imposed upon us now as a school, to attend to and reverse the ills of our society, are completely unrealistic and they are beyond our resource capability.

    “It seems now, the first questions about the inappropriate text message sent by a school-age person in the weekend, or the under-age young person attending a party that goes wrong, are not ‘what were the parents thinking and what will the parents do about it’?

    “The first questions now are ‘what school does the young person go to and what is the school going to do about it’? And we’ve seen that in the national media this year…

    “I believe it’s not our parent body who thrust these expectations upon us. It’s the media and it’s increasingly a broader societal expectation.”

    Mr Reddiex said the lines of demarcation between parental and school responsibility and accountability had been “completely obliterated”.

    Following the prizegiving, he told the Otago Daily Times there was an expectation that schools would, in part, fulfil the function that historically had been the role of a parent.

    “The vast majority of parents are doing a fantastic job, but there are some who need to take more responsibility for their child’s behaviour.”

    Otago Secondary Principals’ Association secretary Gordon Wilson said it was a widespread issue.

    “Schools are under increasing pressure to help the community solve some of its issues, and often schools are seen as the last place where some of these issues can be addressed.

    “That’s not where schools should be. A lot of these issues that schools are being asked to deal with are not internal issues. They are issues that have arisen from outside the school.”

    Read more.

    Source: https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/principal-bemoans-threats-schools

  • Parents want teachers parenting

    Care provider. Call centre operator. Kitchen hand. Negotiator. Detective. Judge. Medic. Counsellor. Social worker. Psychologist. Personal trainer. Caretaker. Cleaner. Don’t get me started on the numerous things that teachers have to do each and every day. That’s even before they have to teach a class full of students some Maths, English, Science, Technology, Music, Art, Dance, Drama, Social Science, and Languages.

    Original article: New Zealand schools need to teach more life skills.

    Kiwi parents want more life skills taught in school, a new survey shows.

    From cyber safety to sex education and manners, two-thirds of parents believed it was the responsibility of teachers to impart lessons traditionally handled at home, according to a survey of 500 New Zealand families.

    Ethnicity played a role in what parents regarded as important in a public education, with Asian parents more likely to want schools to handle the teaching of life skills.

    Parents perceived schools’ responsibilities increased in secondary school.

    But Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) junior vice president Melanie Webber said that while teachers were role models, it would be difficult to fit more life skills into the curriculum.

    The study by the Australian Scholarships Group (ASG) and Melbourne’s Monash University found a “social shift” away from valuing scholastic success towards a more holistic education, ASG chief executive John Velegrinis said.

    “There are increasingly blurred lines as to where (teacher responsibility begins and ends as parents’ perceptions of their traditional roles and responsibilities change.”

    Asian amilies viewed education more traditionally and set higher standards for their children’s academic success than Pākehā parents.

    About 92 per cent believed a degree would help their child achieve their ambitions and 38 per cent did not think their child could be distracted from learning.

    Just 18 per cent of Pākehā families felt that way about distractions and only 66 per cent said they set “high standards” for their child’s education or agreed a degree was important to their success.

    Asian families overwhelmingly supported schools teaching more about social skills and public behaviour (91 and 88 per cent respectively), with about 42 per cent of Pākehā parents on board.

    Christchurch mother Michele Fantham said she wanted daughters Bella, 10, and Neve, 6, to be taught social skills and financial literacy at their school, Fernside.

    “I think the curriculum is pretty cram-packed full of lots of things the school or Ministry (of Education) think are really important that are just not going to benefit them in the real world.”

    She was concerned technology impacted children’s ability to “use manners and communicate properly”. She was among a third of Kiwi parents who believed teaching cyber safety was a school’s responsibility.

    Read more.

    Source: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/97798269/new-zealand-schools-need-to-teach-more-life-skills-parents-say