"Dont kid yourself lass, it's ICT": Generational attitudes towards Computing

I was recently talking to a family friend, a 7-year-old girl, the conversation turned to my occupation and she had to guess what I taught. It took her a while, guessing English, Science, Maths before me giving her a hint by acting out typing on a keyboard and using a mouse. Straight away she shouted “Computing!” When this happened, I paused to think about the difference between generations and what they label my subject.

We know that changes to the national curriculum have resulted in ICT changing to Computing. Computing is the study of the science behind computers, how they work, how to program and the components that constitute a computer. This is a change from ICT: a subject where one studies how to use a computer and the different software on a computer. Both are important, this is not a post about why one is better than the other, they both have their benefits and drawbacks. What I want to focus upon is how, as a teacher of Computer Science (as on my job description) I feel like a snob. I have had experiences where I have been talking to people from older generations and when they talk or discuss my subject they always refer to it as “ICT”. I have even had an experience where a cover teacher asked what I taught, when I stated Computing, they replied with something along the lines of “don’t kid yourself lass, it’s ICT”. As a socially polite young “lass” I just laughed this off, but it made me think about how the title teacher of Computing sounds to different generations. To the cover teacher, it was snobby and perhaps trying to be something that it is not. To the 7-year-old girl it was the subject she was studying in primary school. Either way both of these can be linked to socialisation. The cover teacher must have been socialised in the 2000s era where ICT and OCR Nationals were rife: ICT was screenshotting how you created that bar chart in Excel and creating PowerPoints with far too many animations and transitions. On the other hand, The 7-year-old girl is part of the current generation at the receiving end of the changes to the national curriculum: the focus on coding, Scratch being the favourite at primary school [and sometimes secondary school] level. Myself on the other hand, I am caught between the two, having experienced ICT within my own education, but being trained and teaching Computing.

Coventry as the City of Culture: experiences of place at university

A big part of going to university during my undergraduate degree was the sense of belonging to a place. To me, the socially correct thing to do was to live in student halls for the first year and then move in with newfound university friends during the second and third year. Therefore, studying and living in York were intertwined: my degree reminded me of the city and the city reminded me of my degree. I became involved in local politics, knowing what local constituencies were likely to vote for particular parties; I knew local attractions and no longer felt like a tourist but rather a citizen. Since graduating and moving away from the city, whenever someone mentions the place I get a sense of pride in telling anyone who will listen that I lived there and a sense of protectiveness over their views of the city.

However, this was not the same experience of my subsequent times at university. During my PGCE I studied from a distance, completing full time teaching responsibilities whilst going to university 5 days out of the year. I lived an hour away from the city the university is located within and rarely visited it. Despite studying there, I feel no affiliations to the city. Indeed, my graduation in this city felt different to my undergraduate, my family and I did not “need” to visit a particular spot in the city which I had spent a lot of my time. I did not feel an emotional connection when we passed the university library, in fact, I had never set foot in there. It wasn’t the same pride ridden day as my undergraduate graduation.

I started thinking about university and place about a month ago. As a current student at the University of Warwick, again through distance learning, when logging onto the website I noticed that Warwick were advertising the triumph of Coventry winning the title of City of Culture. At this point I even forgot that the University of Warwick is located in Coventry and not, in fact, Warwick! I am guessing, as I have nobody to ask, that those students who live and study at the University of Warwick may be happy and proud that their city has been given this prestigious title. However, although I study at Warwick, I am far from thrilled. As a full-time teacher in Stoke-on-Trent, another candidate for the City of Culture title, I feel much more attached to Stoke. Having lived in the city for two years now, my sense of belonging is around the same as the city I studied in during my undergraduate studies. As such, when I saw this advert on the Warwick website I felt conflicted, on one hand I felt I should have joined the University of Warwick in celebrating the success of the city in which it is located, but on the other hand, I had no ties to this city and my current residing city had lost the title to Coventry. I have written before about place and the emotional connections one feels, indeed this has involved places one has not even visited. In my experience of university and place, living in the host city conjures up a different sense of belonging to the university. What is your experience of living [or not living] within the city you studied within? Has it changed your perceptions?   

Why is leadership favoured over management in education?

Managing and leading are two actions that can often be used to describe the same thing. As a result, it is often difficult to draw boundaries between the two. When I started my Masters in Educational Leadership I did not know the difference between the terms. Even now, I have to think about what actions pertain to each label. My reading and discussions with colleagues have led me to the following summaries:

Leaders: the ones with the ideas to drive change

Vision, mission statement, ethos, etc. Leaders are the ones that create the underlying ‘feeling’ of the educational institution. Leaders are the ones with the imagination in where they want to take the institution.

Managers: the ones who have to make sure that change happens

Managers are those who are employed to ensure that this vision, mission statement and ethos is achieved. Those who design and implement whole school policies; delegating work to other line managers such as heads of years and heads of departments.

Reflecting back upon my teaching career I have a sense that leaders are favoured over managers. I trained to teach through the Teach First Leadership Development Programme. What is interesting to reflect upon is why Teach First use “leadership” and not “management”. If one is training to teach, and therefore a potential head of department/head of year/senior leader, isn’t management something this teacher should be proficient in? Similarly, lecturers on my masters have stated that many masters courses which were called Educational Management have swapped the management out for leadership. Why was this change made? Although we do not know the true reason for this, it can be inferred that this change was a result of marketing: teachers want to be “Leaders” rather than “Managers”, but why? Is it the connotations that leadership has? I will continue to reflect upon this distinction, hopefully I can come back to the questions I have posed in this post. If you have any ideas, let me know!

Training teachers with 'pop Science': are humans as simplistic as Science suggests?

I have written before about the pedagogy attached to training sessions for teachers (see link here). My thoughts have been brought back to this topic after a recent training session in attachment theory. In particular, the use of popular science when training teachers.

Since I started teaching I have been involved in numerous training programmes, which upon reflection, has incorporated scientific findings about the brain to training sessions. The most recurring example is the synaptic connections within the brain which strengthen knowledge through practice. Similarly, I have become familiar with the amygdala, which according to session facilitators is actively involved with the flight, fight or freeze reactions that humans find themselves within when their “chimp” is out.

Sociology of scientific knowledge has been concerned with researching the effect of scientific knowledge upon social life and this is an example of this. During these training sessions I have often been skeptic of the use of scientific understanding of these social characteristics, which has led me to reflect, why? I think it may be due to my social science training. During A-level Sociology, I learned about the sociology of science and read works by Kuhn, Popper and Potter. Is it really true that social conduct is all down to functions within the brain? Perhaps my skepticism is a weakness and my lack of scientific knowledge is causing me to be ignorant but from my point of view this type of “popular science” is too simplistic and reduces humans to cause and effect models. 

Miss Bowling’s Shining Stars: Has something as simple as gold star stickers ignited my form?

My form, is comprised of those pupils who are punctual, do their homework and often get overlooked within a class due to dominant characters who get into trouble. Obviously, there are a couple of slips where some pupils, perhaps some more than others, forget their basic equipment or cause low level disruption. However, I found myself thinking that these are the “grey” kids who often do not get the attention or recognition they deserve on an individual basis. They may not be the pupil with the most level 1s, an attitude to learning score given to a pupil who has worked exceptionally in a lesson, but they are continuing to work well. Therefore, I decided to create a spreadsheet with all their names on, print it off and physically hand the pupils gold stars for every 1 they achieve within a day. I thought this may be a bit childish, but the reaction I have got has proved that I was wrong.

Since the implementation of the table, pupils are more than ever getting 1s in lesson; they relish in me calling out their name in form to come and collect a star to attach next to their name on the wall. Often, pupils will have achieved 2 or more 1s in one day. In fact, this week two pupils have achieved all level 1s in a day (that’s five 1s!). This may have something to do with actually handing the pupils a shiny sticker which symbolises that they have done well; psychologically putting a gold star next to their name could make them feel responsible for their attitude to learning within lesson. Having the chart visibly accessible for all my classes has made individual rewards for behaviour public. I have noticed that pupils will count how many gold stars other pupils have, then compare this number against their own. This has even proved well when I have been teaching other classes; surprisingly even with year 10. These pupils would count and see how well pupils have been doing even if they do not know them. It could be motivational for them to see that I, as a classroom teacher, am actively involved in other pupils’ education, which may translate into how they behave and act within my lessons.

Furthermore, the chart has created a tool that I can use for monitoring those pupils who do not get 1s and just “get by”: those with two or less gold stars to their name. I could then probe, why are these pupils not stretching themselves within lesson? How could I ensure they do? I’ve also found it is good for those pupils who would not usually aim for a 1 as it has given them something to aspire to within a lesson. 

What I now need to think about is how I will reward pupils once they have reached certain mile stones, any advice on this is much appreciated! 

Preparing pupils for neo-liberal liquid modernity: could high staff turnover be developing pupil resilience?

Figure adapted from Worth and De Lazzari (2017)

Statistics show that the number of teachers leaving their school every academic year, either to pursue another career or to simply move schools, is steadily increasing (Worth and De Lazzari, 2017). This phenomenon has resulted in crises of both teacher retention and turnover (Hilton, 2017). Often, these studies highlight the negative impact of high teacher turnover: for instance, Ronfeldt et al (2012) found a correlation between student achievement and high staff turnover rates; the higher the turnover, the lower the achievement. However, in my school I have begun to witness an accidental by-product of high staff turnover: the development of resilience in the face of the unknown.

It has been recommended that a crucial skill that schools must develop within their pupils is resilience. Resilience is defined by Hinduja and Patchin (2017) as a skill to overcome adversity and adopt a “carry on” attitude despite the stresses of everyday life. There are many ways in which a school can plan to develop this resilience within their pupils. For example, resources have been developed to encourage Dweck’s (2006) growth mind set in order to foster pupils’ resilience (Edutopia, 2017). However, one unintentional method of developing pupil resilience could be the level of staff turnover within a school.

I have observed that pupils are increasingly becoming reliant on the ‘concrete’ structures, such as the behaviour policy and GCSE course structures, rather than specific teachers. As such, pupils are prepared for unknown factors: they can overcome adversity, the foundation of resilience. Indeed, this is preparing pupils for life after school. Participating within liquid modernity requires resilience: society is characterised by insecurity and the insecurity within schools will make the pupils familiar and ready to deal with this feature of society (Beck, 2014). In a way, the school can be seen as a microcosm of society.

Research suggests that high staff turnover happens predominantly within disadvantaged, non-white schools. Although this may be a contributing factor as to why the achievement gap exists, it may foster a resilience gap between disadvantaged schools and those schools who have low levels of staff turnover. As my observations are only that, observations of one school in isolation, it would be interesting to, somehow, measure the resilience levels of pupils attending a school with longstanding members of staff against pupils attending a school with high levels of staff turnover.   

Reference list

Beck, U. (2014). Pioneer in Cosmopolitan Society and Risk Society. Springer.

Dweck, C (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Stanford.  

Edutopia (2017) Resources for Nurturing Resilience. Online, available at: https://www.edutopia.org/article/resilience-resources

Hilton, G. (2017) Disappearing Teachers: An Exploration of a variety of views as to the causes of the problems affecting teacher recruitment and retention in England. BCES Conference Books, 2017, Volume 15.

Hinduja, S and Patchin, J (2017) Cultivating youth resilience to prevent bullying and cyberbullying victimization. Child Abuse & Neglect, 73, 51-62.

Ronfeldt, M. Loeb, S. Wyckoff, J. (2012). How Teacher Turnover Harms Student Achievement. American Educational Research Journal. DOI: 10.3102/0002831212463813

Worth, J. and De Lazzari. G. (2017). Teacher Retention and Turnover Research. Research Update 1: Teacher Retention by Subject. Slough: NFER.

Engaging the disengaged parent within education

Studies within education have consistently found that parental engagement within education positively impacts upon the educational success of young people: this is referred to as “good parenting” (Desforges and Abouchaar, 2003; Goodall, 2016; Goodall, 2017; Goodall and Vorhaus, 2011; Harris and Goodall, 2010). After critically engaging with these studies, it could be inferred that they assume a bias against parents that do not, for whatever reason, value the field of education: it positions this parenting as “bad”. As Bourdieu (1977) attributes parental involvement in education to parents of the middle class, it could be seen that this positioning of “bad parents” replicates some sociological studies which found the distancing and “disgust” of working class individuals (Lawler, 2005).  

Despite whether it is believed that labelling some parents as good or bad should be done, it has been found that the field of education can transform a child’s life (Teach First, 2017). If parental engagement contributes towards the educational success of a child, it is important that this is encouraged for disadvantaged pupils. Therefore, to raise the educational attainment of disengaged and underachieving pupils, educators must firstly engage the disengaged parent. To engage the disengaged parent, schools must strike a balance between encouraging parents to attend training session to support their child’s educational progress and treating them as a colleague: the expert on their child. Literature suggests that this balance should be achieved through engaging parents in a sensitive and personalised manner (Goodall, 2016; Smith, 2016).

There are two strategies, within the literature, that have been proven to engage parents in a sensitive and personalised manner: one that I cannot implement but another which I could adapt. The first one is Save the Children’s FAST programme in which parents and children were brought together for a meal within school (Harris and Goodall, 2010). This non-invasive approach gets the parent into the school to socialise with their child. It could make the parent feel more comfortable within the school environment and encourage them to speak about their child’s studies. Of course, as a classroom teacher, I could not implement this method. However, I found it an interesting social strategy to break down the barriers of parental disengagement. The second strategy comes from Goodall’s (2016) blog post on teachertoolkit.co.uk. This post encourages teachers to shift from reporting to parents at parents’ evening to fostering a partnership to support learning. Treating parents with respect, recognising and acknowledging their efforts to come to the parents evening are encouraged to foster this working relationship (Goodall, 2016). Furthermore, Goodall (2016) suggests giving parents a list of questions to ask teachers to supplement their cultural capital, as some parents may not know how to engage with the teacher. Similarly, Goodall (2016) suggests that teachers should ask the parents how they can facilitate learning for their children. Through treating the parent as the expert, the parent will feel more comfortable and at ease with engaging with teachers (Smith, 2016).

Following this research, I plan to approach parental engagement in a different way than I did last academic year. By moving from reporting to engaging parents to support learning and providing parents with resources they may need to do so. This is especially important within my subject, Computing; often parents will approach me and state that they “know nothing about technology” and that it is their children who are the experts. If parents feel intellectually inferior to their child, how can they possibly help support learning? Therefore, I plan to give a list of resources that may help to these parents and move away from subject specifics at parents evening. As Goodall, in a recent lecture, stated: it does not matter that parents do not know the answer, what matters is they know how to find the answer. I intend to provide parents with the means to find that answer.

References:

Bourdieu (1977) Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

Desforges and Abouchaar (2003) The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievements and adjustment: a literature review.

Goodall and Vorhaus (2011) Review of best practice in parental engagement. Department of Education.

Goodall, J (2016) Reporting to Support. Online: https://www.teachertoolkit.co.uk/2016/08/10/parental-support/

Goodall, J (2017) From project to process. a report of the pilot of a toolkit for parental engagement. 

Harris and Goodall (2010) Helping families support children’s success at school. Save the Children.

Lawler (2005) Disgusted subjects: the making of middle-class identities. The Sociological Review, 53(3), 429-446.

Smith (2016) Swing Time. London: Penguin.

Teach First (2017) Income defines how well children do at school. Online: https://www.teachfirst.org.uk/our-mission/the-issue.