Redesigning learning ecosystems: lessons from Australia's Learning Fron8ers Workshop objec-ves • Exploring and tes8ng the design features or learning ecosystems • Developing case studies that illustrate the design features from within the GELP community • Seeking advice from the GELP community in order to advance local ecosystems Learning ecosystems revisit ü A compelling purpose that unites par8cipa8on ü Shared norms and collabora8ve work ü Local governance arrangements ü Breadth of engagement ü Transfer of learning and prac8ce ü Shared accountability ü System-‐wide influence Learning Fron-ers is a collabora8ve ini8a8ve created to transform teaching and learning so that every child succeeds in an educa8on worth having. Learning Fron-ers is: A large scale collabora8ve enquiry Learning Fron-ers is: A system level interven8on Learning Fron-ers is: A scaling and diffusion program Learning Fron-ers is: High quality professional learning Why focus on engagement Research now suggests that individual experiences of being engaged in learning contribute to growing mo8va8on over 8me. In other words, being an engaged learner is addic8ve: with every deep learning experience, you’re more likely to become a learner for life. Liem & Mar8n, 2011 Munns & Mar8n, 2005 long-term enquiry into student engagement in learning and in school. They describe three different kinds of engagement: academic, social and intellectual. What we mean by engagement The need for a distinction between ‘academic’ engagement and ‘intellectual’ engagement reflects the view that good performance at school does not necessarily equate to lasting learning; nor is it sufficient for success in work and life after school. Academic engagement Social engagement Intellectual engagement covers the commitment to work that is typical of high achieving students – attending lessons, regular homework, participation in lessons. covers the school-level forms of participation in which a student might participate in without being engaged in school work – for example, having a feeling of belonging at school, being part of extra-curricular activities, good attendance. is defined as “serious emotional and cognitive investment in learning” that results in “confidence as knowledgebuilders, problem-solvers, conceptual thinkers, self-motivated learners; orientation to original work and often collaboration” (Dunleavy and Milton, 2009: 12). 4 LEARNING LEARNINGFRONTIERS FRONTIERSInsights Insights&&Ideas Ideas22 Engagement in learning vs engagement in schooling School • AVendance • AVen8veness • Conformity • Exam Results • Behaviour Learning • Energe8c and enthusias8c • Learning all the 8me, everywhere • Taking responsibility for learning • Achieving a wider set of learning outcomes We believe that engaging learning is • • • • Co-‐created Personal Connected Integrated Why hub? This is a ques8on we get asked a lot! • Mee8ng the challenge • Collabora8on and risk management • Sharing the load • Trus8ng and produc8ve partnerships • New opportuni8es and new players Learning Fron-ers as a learning ecosystem 1. COMPELLING PURPOSE 7. SYSTEM-WIDE INFLUENCE 6. SHARED ACCOUNTABILITY • Commitment to participate after extensive engagement with and co-construction of the case for change • Active representation of system in hub activities and success in petitioning system for $ • No $ for schools attached to buy-in of case for change – they acknowledge that learning and schooling need to change • Same PL activities taken to scale to entire system • Agreement that they have a shared responsibility for every student in every school but yet to translate into consistent practice. • Hubs engaged in visioning activities based on key questions • Driven by purpose – way beyond what AITSL and the IU can offer. • Engagement of different parts of the “system” (e.g., digital technologies team) to improve sharing and learning • Domestic and international exposure at conferences and in the media – all with positive sentiment. 2. SHARED NORMS 5. TRANSFER OF LEARNING AND PRACTICE • Working groups (shared interest in practice) are the means by which hubs are sharing learning and transferring practice – early days! • Shared values and goals unite the hub, but agreement on how to reach them drives action • Local governance is one mechanism for supporting collaborative work and allowing it to be scaled • Engaging with innovation methods to collaborate is starting to show signs of combatting “not invented here” mentality. • Design thinking methods support schools into a disciplined process to explore problems and solutions • New ways of working (e.g., hackathons, prototyping) break down barriers and old paradigm assumptions like time and $. 3. LOCAL GOVERNANCE 4. BREADTH OF ENGAGEMENT • Introduced to simple leadership and governance structures but time invested in determining “hub engine” and “enabling leadership” groups • From pilot team within school to communities of practice, engagement and interest • Working groups focus on particular, shared interest • Beginning to think about and engage organisations and community groups in their work to increase learning opportunities for students and teachers. • These arrangements are common but all have been customised. • Increasingly accessing the diverse knowledge and experience of colleagues Your local learning ecosystem • Real or ideal • What evidence or examples do you have against the design features? OR • What would you see to know they are strong? Individual, pair or small group 15 minutes 1. COMPELLING PURPOSE 7. SYSTEM-WIDE INFLUENCE 2. SHARED NORMS 5. TRANSFER OF LEARNING AND PRACTICE Local ecosystem (real or ideal) 3. LOCAL GOVERNANCE BURNING QUESTIONS 6. SHARED ACCOUNTABILITY 4. BREADTH OF ENGAGEMENT NEXT STEPS... Discussion and feedback • In pairs • Seek feedback or collabora8vely problem solve Feedback plenary • Feedback on design features • Iden8fica8on of any gaps • Were any difficult to evidence or embed Ac-on and reflec-on Email, note, tweet a key takeaway and ac8on item Find out more @aitsl @LFron8ers @innova8on_unit aitsl.edu.au innova8onunit.org
© Copyright 2024