Showing posts with label Educational Leader. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Educational Leader. Show all posts

Sunday, October 12, 2014

The Direction of Teacher's Ink.

Greetings & Salutations,

I've been quiet of late, because I stepped out of a teaching and directing role into that of a children’s services advisor. A large part of that job meant I had, I suppose access to people’s secrets, insecurities, strengths and challenges. I wanted my relationships with the educators that I was working with in a mentoring capacity to be based upon trust. While, for the most part, my blog is anonymous, I didn't want to take advantage of others and betray trust. That’s not cool. At all. So I've been quiet more or less for two years. I've still been reflecting, but it’s been more on the inside than the out.

I'm going to be entering into a new phase in my life so that may lead to more documented reflections. I will be pondering the direction of this blog, but I think that I will write about my teaching practice more than anything else. I know I've been political and I know I've thrown around judgements ... but as I may be teaching again, I think I want to really turn the lens towards myself and my skills, strengths and challenges. I'm certainly an imperfect teacher.

I mentioned previously that I wanted to work on Reflective Practice and Intentional Teaching and that still stands. Those two notions will tie in perfectly with the direction I’d like to take this blog. So there we have it.


So that’s where things will most likely be heading ... Stay tuned. 

G @ Teacher's Ink.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Where Am I?

Greetings... I have been quiet for a while as I've been engaged in a few other projects as well as starting up a small business. The small business alone has pretty much take up a year of my life. Plus I work full-time as an advisor and have home-life-responsibilities.

I clearly need to work on my time management strategies! But that's not really a new discovery.

I have two ideas I'd like to explore within the pages of my blog. The first is Intentional Teaching and the second is Reflective Practice. I've been wanting to work on these for quite a while actually - but ya know - TIME. Where does it go, and how does one find more?

I've written my two ideas on a post-it note and I have a page of time management strategy plan thingy-ma-bobs.

I shall write again.

I shall.

- G @ Teacher's Ink.

Friday, December 13, 2013

The EYLF and NQS Programming Industry Brings Me To Tears

The EYLF and NQS programming industry brings me to tears ... tears of frustration. Firstly there is a product money driven industry that has sprung up around the roll out of the NQF. And not everything for sale is accurate or of a high quality.

I don't think programming, planning and documenting should be easy. I don't think it should be impossible either. I think it should be the right amount of challenge and reward. I think it should fit within the paid scope of your employment (i.e. you do your written work AT work), and I think that it should improve you as a professional and I think it should serve a purpose for the children and their families. 

In my role as an over-arching educational leader/mentor I work with programming and planning all day long. It sloshes around in my brain at the best of times. Sometimes it feels like its oozing out my ears. It's what I do. It's my main focus. I work with multiple different styles of programs and plans and not just one. I am essentially a critical friend who provides guidance and feedback for a number of services. Adult learning results from sustained shared conversations. I can't emphasize this enough.

If you don't understand Quality Area 1, don't beat yourself up. Its twisty and convoluted and I don't particularly like it. In fact the whole NQS is so interwoven it is impossible to unravel. Even for me. ANYONE promising you that they have unraveled it is full of the proverbial because it is an impossibility.

I'm looking online today at stuff. And all I can find is crap. Crap that dumbfounds me and makes me want to cry in frustration. I just don't get it. It's wrong. So WRONG. 

Crap that is for wrong and for sale. Crap that is for free. Crap that is about boosting an ego. Crap. 

Crap that has pretty colours, or visual themes, or circles instead of squares because squares are boxes and boxes are bad. Or trees. What the hell is it with trees? Who started this tree thing? What does a tree have to do with anything other than being a visual metaphor for something or other?

If someone tells you there is no wrong way to do the NQS or the EYLF I think they're wrong. If there was no wrong way, then centres wouldn't be getting "Significant Improvement Required" or "Working Towards." 

I think that there are many more right ways than wrong ways, but there is clearly a wrong. 

Please. Please. PLEASE think about what you buy. Just because its pretty doesn't mean its good. Just because its expensive and promises the world, doesn't mean it delivers. 

If you get exceeding at your service it is because YOU did the work and YOU earned it. No one else. Not even me :) 

I think I need to write something and self-publish it. It won't be free - but it will be backed up with evidence and it will be reasonable. And its probably going to take me forever to put it together ... But I just can't sit here and look at crap and not throw my hat into the ring. 

Sunday, June 2, 2013

Groups: Big or Small? Small of course!!!



I actually have two other posts that I have been wanting to publish - they are still works in progress ... but this idea about groups just needed to be written! Certainly to justify my choices - based on research as well as the Standards and Regulations and the EYLF. So here we have it ... My stance on large groups. Ready? It's 4 pages long in MS Word!

I’ll be upfront here about my bias. I don’t like whole groups for children. This is my personal belief around large groups. 

So. I’m tired of people talking about doing whole group experiences, especially with babies and toddlers. It is by no means appropriate. Please don’t justify it!  Just because a child is going to be in the preschool room next year doesn’t mean you need to prepare them when they are two! Just because a child is going to school next year, doesn’t mean you should start preparing them 12 months in advance!
“But the parents ask us to! They expect it.”
“The centre down the road offers it. We need to compete.”
“Their parents want to know what we are doing for ‘school readiness’”
“They want us to give their children homework!”
“They have to learn to be in a group at school!”
“Teachers from schools have told us they have to know!”

People. It is your job to stand up and advocate for what is right. What is right is developmentally appropriate and respectful for children. It doesn’t mean that this will look the same for all children – because all children are different! Services will be in different communities and have different social contexts. But it’s not natural for children to be grouped in large numbers at young ages. Think about our family units. Think about how many children we give birth to and have in our family units. Think about native communities. Think about your own childhood. We played in small groups in our community as children. I did attend preschool, and I only remember one circle time. I was singing. I mainly remember playing with my friends. Three of them. No more. No less. Three. Plus me.

Now this brings us to Dr. Louise Porter. Who? Well, she wrote: Young children’s behaviour: Practical approaches for caregivers and teachers(2008). In her book she talks about groupings of children. She points out that large groups or circle time, is a largely teacher-directed mandatory experience which does not support children in making choices. She also points out the obvious, that while some children may enjoy such events, there will be others who do not. These children often disrupt the event or might sit quietly in sufferance.

Looking at the rights of the child in the context of fairness and equity, how is a mandatory group time fair and equitable? There is NO WAY you are meeting the interests and the developmental level of all the children. If one child is left feeling disinterested or uninvolved or intimidated, how is it fair to that child? It isn’t. How is it fair to:
·         The children who aren’t interested in the topic being delivered?
·         The children who don’t have English as a primary language?
·         The children who are not at a high level of concentration?
·         The children who are full of energy and just want to be running or actively making something?
·         The children with developmental complexities who are NOT able to, either appreciate nor participate?
·         The children who are very introverted and would rather be sitting with two of their peers and their teacher, not sitting in a large group feeling uncomfortable and lost?
·         The educator who really wanted to read the story to a few of the chidlren?
·         The educator who has been told she “has” to do whole groups even though it goes against her personal philosophy?

It’s not fair. It’s not equitable. It’s not realistic. You can achieve the same goal with small groups.

Dr. Louise Porter says that children naturally group with others based on a rough formula: their age plus one. So for example I played with Troy, Kim, Joshua plus myself when I was three. That is my age plus one more (me!).  She also mentions the time frame for small groupings. The general formula is 3 times their age. So a 2 year old, MAY be able to engage for 6 minutes, where a four year old MAY be able to engage for 12 minutes. There is no hard and fast rule. Each child is a unique individual and should be treated accordingly.

So what do we do to offer children group times? Well, Dr. Porter suggests you approach a couple of children and offer them an opportunity to hear a story.  You tell them that story. As the story progresses, others will join based upon their choice to do so. If they aren’t interested, they have the right to leave. You are showing that you think children are capable and competent and able to make their own choices. You are respecting their sense of agency. So, if you repeat this a few times a day, every day of the week, you are giving children the opportunity to hear a “group” story ... It might be 2 children, it might be 5, it might be more. For those children who love stories, they can hear them over and over again. For those that aren’t so in love with them, they can hear less, and have the choice. If you want to see how effective this strategy is, keep a record for a week or two of who attends which groups, and see if everyone is included. If not, then approach those children who you know are missing out on the opportunity, and offer them a story or small group experience that will really inspire them to participate (Porter, 2008 p 148). Dr. Porter also talks about not preparing children for the future  – pointing out that most children will mature into school routines naturally.

 I can hear some of you saying “But what if they don’t mature into school?” Well, that might just be that individual child. There is no proof that if you had done large groups, that the child who takes longer to mature into school would have been more able to settle into the new learning environment. And, to be quite blunt it’s not your job to support children to settle into their first year of school. That is their new teacher’s job. It’s your job to support the transition. Not the actual settling into the new environment.

The EYLF talks about children having a strong sense of identity. Yup, you guessed it. That is Learning Outcome 1. Children will learn to interact in relation to others with care, empathy and respect show interest in other children and being part of a group. It goes on to say that educators will support this by  organising learning environments in ways that promote small group interactions and play experiences (DEEWR, 2009 p. 24).


The EYLF also talks about children being connected with and contributing to their world (Learning Outcome 2). It goes on to say that children develop a sense of belonging to groups and communities and an understanding of the reciprocal rights and responsibilities necessary for active community participation: cooperate with others and negotiate roles and relationships in play episodes and group experiences (DEEWR, 2009 p. 26). 

And now we move on to Learning Outcome 4: Children are confident and involved learners. This is where children are encouraged to resource their own learning by connecting with people and place, technologies and processed materials. Educators are encouraged to think carefully about how children are grouped for play and to consider the possibility for peer scaffolding (DEEWR, 2009 p. 37). How this can happen in large groups?

I also question that not all children are going to experience the same activity in the same way, nor gain the same learning from a small experience much less a large or whole group one. You are not going to be able to give the children equal attention. Nor are you going to be able to articulate what they got from it. If a child doesn’t speak, or if a child repeats what another child says, they aren’t really sharing with you their ‘distance travelled’ ... they may be in the same place as they were before. Or they may have gone backwards a step or two. How often have you left a meeting or a class or a training session and thought to yourself: “Huh?” ... I’ve left meetings feeling particularly stupid. It wasn’t until following some serious reflection and discussion with peers, that I realised I wasn’t the stupid one! I’m an adult. How the hell are children going to feel?! Are you setting them up for failure and feeling small and insignificant! Please don’t do this!

Ok, let’s step over there to Learning Outcome 5. Children are of course, effective communicators. Children will interact both verbally and non-verbally with others for a range of purposes, contributing their ideas and experiences in play, in large and small group experiences (DEEWR, 2009 p. 40). I don’t read whole group. A large group of 3-5 year olds could be 10/11; of 2 year olds it could be 8; and of 0-2s it could be 4. Think of the ratios as a guideline.

Having said that, I have done large groups, and I didn’t like them. The freely-chosen large whole groups I did were free-form dancing discos – but not everyone had to participate! And they were loud and chaotic and silly and often due to long times stuck inside due to weather!

Now, let’s consider the National Quality Standards. The NQS talks about groups of children. It talks about minimising risks of injury and minimising conflicts between children. It discusses grouping children in ways that supports their learning and development. The guide to the standard also says that Assessors will observe your service’s approach to grouping children (DEEWR, 2012 p 86). I don’t see whole-group.

The NQS goes on to say that indoor learning environments provide children with opportunities to make choices and negotiate activities that can be quiet, active, routine, small and whole-group experiences. “These spaces:
·         support children’s emerging interests and allow them to demonstrate their innate creativity and curiosity
·         reflect children’s different cultures, interests, abilities and learning styles
·         recognise children as active learners and decision makers.
 (DEEWR, 2012 p 86)

Again, I question how we can do this confidently in large, whole-groups. How can you cater for everyone’s curiosity, creativity, interests, abilities, learning styles, decisions, etc all in the one experience?!?!? And define whole-group anyway! It might mean that all children have an opportunity to participate in an event, but not necessarily at the same time in the same way!
The Education and Care Services National Regulations talks about relationships in groups:
“PART 4.5 156 Relationships in groups
(1)   The approved provider of an education and care service must take reasonable steps to ensure that the service provides children being educated and cared for by the service with opportunities to interact and develop respectful and positive relationships with each other and with staff members of, and volunteers at, the service. (DEEWR, 2012 p 163)
(2)   For the purposes of subregulation (1), the approved provider must have regard to the size and the composition of the groups in which children are being educated and cared for by the service.” (DEEWR, 2012 p 164)

While it doesn’t specify group sizes, it does specify we need to have regard for it. Why are you doing what you are doing? What are the reasons for your groupings!? Can you have quality relationships with 20 children as opposed to 4 or 5?

Also, in  Element 1.2.3 “Critical reflection on children's learning and development, both as individuals and in groups, is regularly used to implement the program” (DEEWR, 2012 p. 327).  It doesn’t mean you have to work with children in whole groups. It just means you need to consider them as part of a group as well as an individual.

And last, but not least, “Element 1.1.3 The program, including routines, is organised in ways that maximise opportunities for each child’s learning. minimising the times during which children are expected to do the same thing at the same time” (DEEWR, 2012 p 30). And that my friends is pretty self-explanatory.


Well, I think that I have sufficiently stated my position on large group times. And crap. I’ve just realised I’ve spent my Sunday writing a four page essay for “fun” ... purely to make a point. And not for uni!

Thank you for reading!

T.ink.

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013 All Rights Reserved.

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Shameless (well, slightly shameful) Facebook Plug!



I'd like to see a bigger number. That's all. :)
I'm admitting it.
I'm up-front about it.
It's an ego thing.
I'm imperfect.
I'm human.
I'm gonna go with that!

(share us around with your friends!!!) 

Monday, April 22, 2013

So, Have YOU Read the NQS - Quality Area 1?!?!


How many of us have actually read the NQS ~ Quality Area 1? Come on, hands up ... Well, you know who you are ...

Ok, I have ... Originally it was a year ago ... and then I thought I might look at it again about 5 months ago, and then I got distracted, and last week I thought, no, damn it, I’m going to do this! So I did. Wow. It looks different (well, not really, it’s the same, I am different. “It’s not you (NQS), It’s me.”).

So, do we read and know and educate ourselves? Or do we simply blindly do what our management (directors, owners, area managers, CEOs etc) tell us to? And where do they get their information? I’ve read on the world wide interwebz that people are being asked to not only link their observations and planning to the EYLF (Principles, Practices and the Outcomes) and now the NQS. One person said that their Assessor commented at their Assessment Visit upon their NQS linking practice as favourable. Please do not lead us all down that track again.

Come on people! READ!!!

Don’t always do as you are told! Be independent thinkers (The irony here is that this is what we are supposed to be teaching children!).

People are going to tell you lots and lots of (I’m going to swear, look away if you’re sensitive) bullshit (ok, you can look back now). It doesn’t mean that its true and you have to do it.

Please. PLEASE don’t be naive. Please don’t be sheep. Please don’t just do as you are told. Please question! Please read. Please educate yourselves! And I don’t mean go to training (‘cause a lot of them don’t know what they’re doing either ;))! I mean READ and THINK and REFLECT on the NQS as well as the EYLF or whichever learning framework you are using. That’s what they tell us to do: NQS Element 1.2.3. It’s there in perhaps not so plain English.

I’ve stood upon my official Teacher’s Ink. Soapbox before and made declarations on this matter. And I feel the need to do this again. You don’t need to link the observations to the Principles and Practices! They are about the children, their thoughts, ideas ... their learning, development, and skills. Got that?

Look. I can’t really even start to talk to you guys about my thinking on Quality Area 1 because I’m drowning in the thinking of it! I’ve been breaking it down into chunks. I’ve been turning each element into a sort of mind-map and I’ve highlighted the key words that really stand out for me. I don’t know where to start, and I don’t even know exactly what I’d say! I’m a visual learner – so turning each element into a sort of mind-map – really is helping me. Plus I like arrows. It helps me to connect aspects of the elements together. With arrows. Did I mention I’m liking arrows? And colours. I’m doing them in colour so they’re prettier. ‘Cause let’s face it. The NQS isn’t pretty. It’s the small things that excite me these days.

So yeah, I don’t have a lot to say in regards to specific elements of the standards (‘cause I’m still working on this in my brain) BUT I do implore that you don’t be sheep, mindless robots, doers not thinkers.

Think my people! THINK!

Ok, stepping down from the official soap box now ...

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013

Monday, April 8, 2013

Projects? Really? Who says?


I’ve been thinking about projects. A great deal. And I don’t even know where to begin. Why do we do them? Who said we have to do them? What is their purpose? How are they meant to benefit the children? When is it a project and not a theme? When is it a theme and not a project? Do you like doing them? Do you get anything out of them?

Look, I’m not a project expert. I’m not even 100% sure what my feelings are about them. Sure, there are benefits of putting together a document for and with children ... BUT ... unless you really are strong in your practice and you know what you are doing ... well, are you doing more theme-harm than good?

I was planning to write on this weeks ago, but I got distracted and have been downsizing the house. Work before Play after all. And once I get all the work stuff done, then I can play!

Anyway, Projects. I remember being told that I had to do them. That it was a requirement of my teaching practice at the service I was working at. I never really questioned it. I just did them. I did try to do them smartly – put excerpts from the day book and observations and the like into them along with drawings and quotes and mind maps and the like to create these project books. They were simply a collection of random materials that maybe illustrated children’s engagement rather than their learning. They were merely put on display for maybe parents to look at ... they were never really used much. The children occasionally looked at them. They were pretty much a tool for the Director to use to show what we do at the service on a tour ... All that time and effort? What for?

As I was looking for information I came across this from Kathy Walker: http://earlylife.com.au/info/node/4594

 “The reality is that young children are not mini adults and they do not make sense of their world through long, adult driven, adult agenda laden projects and predetermined topics!”

Ok, yes, that statement is a very strong one ... and I’m actually agreeing with it more than disagreeing.

At what point is a project driven by children? What do the children benefit?

I especially ask this, because I see so many people across Facebook or the internet at large, either saying they are doing a “project” with under two year olds on this topic or that, or asking for help on project topics to do with this age group of that age group ... That to me just screams topic or theme. And it really doesn’t illustrate play or natural learning to me.

This blog entry is just about what is churning on inside me right now. I don’t have any conclusions at this point ... just a lot of swirly questions and ideas going through my mind!

And I need to bring in some laundry. Thank you for reading and following and being my quiet secret admirers! It’s much appreciated! Don’t forget there is a facebook page!

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013

Friday, February 15, 2013

Reflections on Observing & Programming

I have been pondering a great many things ... It’s part of my job you see. BUT in this pondering I have had some conscious ideas about my practice as an educator. 

Many people are in this cycle: 
  1. We see the child doing something.
  2. We (the all-knowing-educator) then decide that the child will do something else that we choose based upon all our knowledge (which we can’t admit might be limited!) and our perspective (which again, isn’t necessarily a balanced one!)...
  3. We then observe and make judgements based upon whether the child has achieved what we have set out for them to do.
  4. We then document our findings based upon this one moment where the child may or may not have done what we wanted them to do...

Does anyone else see what might be wrong with this cycle?

This is many people’s planning cycle! This was my planning cycle ... We see, we make choices, then we act, then we evaluate and go again ...
Why don’t we plan for many different possibilities rather than just the one? Why don’t we problem solve and think about how many other ways we can support children in their learning and growing and being and becoming? 

I think the problem is the new is being overlapped with the old ... You know the old school way of doing things where we just essentially programmed in the boxes ... I always hated doing this and I was and am a day book programmer ... But even now I’m thinking of other ways I can do the same thing without the day book ... The day book requires (for me at least) a computer and time to write ... and not everyone will have that. I've started playing around with other ways and am starting to ponder using documentations and mind-maps and webs, even notations!

I’m not providing you with any concrete answers here ... I might even be leaving you with more questions! But what I’m thinking is ... what happens if we provide really excellent learning environments for children that are well thought out (because we write reflections) and have so much content that will support children over time ... 

Time to learn and grow being the key here ... 

What if, when we are writing our observations or reflections on particular children’s learning and growing, we make suggestions about:
  1. Different experiences within the learning environment that might already suit the needs of the child or the group as a whole?
  2. Different teaching strategies that might support that child achieve that outcome or milestone or satisfy their need?
  3. (Here’s some novelty) Act NOW! What can you do NOW to support that child? Is it asking a question or providing a resource to extend their engagement? Could it be role modelling by their side? Or could it possibly be helping them hand over hand? Could it be as simple as a smile of encouragement!? Write THAT down!
So that is what I have been wondering ... how much of what we already do in regards to our teaching practice is left unsaid and undocumented? How much of what we might be able to do, but feel we can’t do because it has to be something that we “follow-up” or do later is left undone, or done so far in the future that it no longer serves a purpose for that child?!?!

Signing off,

G @ Teacher’s Ink.

© Teacher’s Ink. 2013