1. Rosemary Hipkins New Zealand Council for Educational Research Key Competencies: Challenges for implementation in a school curriculum Presentation to Onslow College: November 2006

2. R Hipkins 21.11.06 The draft curriculum’s biggest challenge? While the New Zealand Curriculum sets the national direction for learning for all students, each school will design and implement its own curriculum in ways that will engage and motivate its particular students. Schools have considerable freedom in deciding exactly how to do this. (Designing a curriculum. pg. 26) How should schools go about responsibility and responsively exercising this freedom? If the new curriculum “sets the national direction for learning” where exactly do we want to take our school and why?

3. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Why we need to rethink curriculum Rapid growth of knowledge and changes in the way it is disseminated – “lifelong learning” Knowing seen as an activity not a ‘thing’. Preparing for participation in a global economy. Identity issues/managing diversity/stress levels. Connectivity (a focus on shifting networks, complexity, dynamic systems etc). If school doesn’t give our young people the tools to cope with these changes and challenges, who will?

4. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Key competencies are seen as central to curriculum revision

5. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Where did the KCs come from? DeSeCo (OECD) Functioning in socially heterogenous groups Acting autonomously Using tools interactively New Zealand Curriculum Relating to others Participating and contributing Managing self Using language, symbols and text Thinking THINKINGTHINKING

6. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Aren’t these dressed up Essential Skills? Holistic - integrate knowledge, skills, attitudes and values. Demonstrated in authentic contexts and in interaction with others. Demonstrated when we adapt the competency to use appropriately in a new setting. Consistent with situated and socio-cultural views of learning.

7. R Hipkins 21.11.06 The “we already do that” challenge “A lot of what the key competencies and you describe is done or attempted to be done already in schools. Of course how well and for what purpose is all a bit of a grey area when teachers have really been focused on their area of expertise”. Comment from a secondary advisor, CMP on-line The key competencies seem so familiar - yet is there “something more”? How do they relate to the many initiatives already being undertaken in schools?

8. R Hipkins 21.11.06 “I am struggling to get my head around the way the key competency 'Thinking' is articulated in the draft. Thinking in itself means little and is something we all do (some well some not so well - remember when your teacher told you to think harder and you were already thinking as hard as you could - he/she should have said think differently or what is another strategy we could use). It should be the management of our thinking processes or strategies that is the desired competency.(Comment posted on CMP on-line)

9. R Hipkins 21.11.06 “Something more” in the thinking KC? Active practice in cognitively challenging tasks; Learning a variety of thinking patterns and skills; Opportunities to transfer thinking skills from one context into different contexts; Specific feedback on progress in use of thinking tools and approaches; Freedom to think and learn from mistakes. Gaining language tools to think about thinking; Zohar and Schwartzer, 2005

10. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Source: Jamie Mckenzie http://fno.org/dec05/writing.html

11. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Thinking issues and challenges Metacognition is an important (new) emphasis “Thinking” can potentially be integrated with every other key competency - metacognition is important to all of them “Embodied” thinking is important - the brain is no less biological than the rest of the body Thinking dispositions need to be fostered - you have to want to do it! There is no substitute for practice - no one else can do your thinking for you. You have to think about something - content matters!

12. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Do we have to teach the KCs? Yes! They should be integrated into the curriculum (and across the curriculum) While they need a distinct focus from time to time, they also integrate with each other! 1.Think about how you do or could integrate an explicit aspect of “thinking” as a competency (not just a skill) into one curriculum area. 2.Does the school have, or is it developing, a shared language for discussing thinking across curriculum areas?

13. R Hipkins 21.11.06 ULST – is more than literacy and numeracy Symbols are created for different purposes and in different genres Symbols go together in meaning making systems

14. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Why do the arrows go that way? What do they actually represent? Who said they had to be like that?

15. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Verbal media Print/word based Linked to sound Words follow in a temporal sequence Sequencing implies cause/effect logic Words must be “filled with” meaning” Writing conveys the message, images ‘illustrate” Visual media Screen/image based Linked to vision Images appear simultaneously Open to different sequences of reading Images already relatively full of meaning Writing is one (usually minor) part of message Gilbert, 2005; Kress, 2003

16. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Integrating ULST with other KCs/knowledge Senate Business and Professions Committee April 24, 2000 Senator Hayden presents actual photos of Radiation entering an Adult Brain, as well as the Brain of a 5-year-old child: The depth of penetration is markedly more in the child than the adult. Proving radiation from cell phones penetrates the human brain.

17. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Views of curriculum ‘knowledge’ are changing Meta-knowledge is.. knowing how different knowledge areas ‘work’; knowing the sorts of assumptions that underpin each knowledge area; knowing how experts generate, justify and communicate new knowledge in specific knowledge areas. The emphasis is on using knowledge, not just “getting” it This is NOT to say that “knowledge doesn’t matter any more”

18. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Implementation challenges Research with ‘early adopter’ schools shows this is the least easily understood KC, and the one with most variability of interpretation in practice. For curriculum teams: What types of texts do we use in our curriculum area? How explicit are we in discussing their features in relation to the nature of our discipline area? What (if any) guidance does the draft curriculum provide in our learning area?

19. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Participating and contributing Knowledge in the knowledge era:  is something active we use;  develops in teams;  is situated - develops in context;  develops to be replaced, not stored. This is often associated with advocacy for “authentic learning” or “inquiry learning” but care is needed when determining what this will mean for your students/school

20. R Hipkins 21.11.06 ‘Authenticity’ brings curriculum challenges Educational researchers define authenticity as meaningful at both the personal and the societal level (Hipkins, 2006) There are implications for curriculum ownership. How does this ‘fit’ with the learning areas/content of the draft curriculum? How does it fit with NCEA ‘messages’?

21. R Hipkins 21.11.06 What sort of knowledge is needed for ‘authentic’ participation? www.dorkinglabs.com/ fim_popup.php?id=39&title... How do we help students learn for an interconnected world? What does it take to become an informed and active citizen? Philosopher Bruno Latour distinguishes between ‘matters of fact’ and ‘matters of concern’

22. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Participation as school “citizenship” Citizenship education is prone to somewhat contradictory impulses. On the one hand the justification for its development rests on the need for greater participation in order to strengthen democratic structures and processes further; on the other hand, citizens are perceived as subjects to be moulded to state authority. … The citizen is free and not free at the same time. Davies and Issitt 2005. How does this tension play out in schools? How can contradictory aspects be balanced for a successful life in a well functioning society?

23. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Some curriculum areas/initiatives already had this participatory focus Action competence (Health, PE, home economics) Action/reflection cycle (All arts subjects - dance, drama, music, visual arts) Technology design and implement process Education for Enterprise Environmental Education Can we get this focus into all curriculum subjects? What are the implications for the ways curriculum is organised and delivered? Should extracurricular activities “carry” this focus?

24. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Student involvement in assessment as authentic participation Students as: informants on assessment contexts collectors of evidence assessment task designers evaluators of evidence Assessment as inquiry... What does it mean to know? Delandshere, 2002

25. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Advantages of greater student involvement in assessment Consistent with development of dispositions for lifelong learning. Consistent with focus on metacognition and self regulated learning. Consistent with intent of all five key competencies (potentially allows for integration). Potentially makes a space for better assessment of collective work.

26. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Relating to others - just co-operative learning? The competence is not just about social skills (although they are important enablers) Research shows group tasks with built- in cognitive and metacognitive challenges enhance achievement e.g. Karmarski, 2004 What strategy/ principle/tactic can be used to solve the problem? What is the same and what is different about this new task? Is the result reasonable?

27. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Relating to others to build new knowledge There are ways of knowing as a group that are not the same as individual knowing. (e.g. arts performances, teamwork in sports) In the “knowledge era” new knowledge is constructed in interpersonal spaces to which people bring different ways of knowing - a sort of cognitive teamwork.

28. R Hipkins 21.11.06 “Managing self” is not just about behaviour Engagement behavioural - aim is increasing autonomy motivational/emotional - linking learning to effort metacognitive - aim is self-regulated learning (SRL) Identity knowing who you are and how to “be” in specific contexts knowing (and acting on) strengths and weaknesses as a learner The idea of a “learning career” integrates identity and engagement Ecclestone and Pryor, 2003 You have to want to be a ‘lifelong learner’

29. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Autonomy isn’t just “doing it by yourself” Children left to work alone too often are likely to become more passive and dependent on the teacher. Bullock and Muschamp, 2006 What teachers do is important 4 stages of SRL Observation Imitation Self-control Self-regulation Zimmerman and Kitsantas, 1997

30. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Increasing learning “fitness” Physical fitness coach Designing a programme for a starting level Coaching on safe use of fitness equipment Setting targets that challege but don’t risk physical injury Supporting while encouraging taking responsibility for own fitness programmes Being a role model Learning fitness coach Designing a programme for a starting level Teaching specific types of thinking tools Setting learning goals that challenge without being too discouraging Supporting and encouraging regular practice Supporting while encouraging taking responsibility for own fitness programmes Being a role model Source: Claxton, 2003: Gilbert 2005

31. R Hipkins 21.11.06 A new challenge for managing self “In the new online forms of communication, the standard model of individuality is long gone. People routinely use Internet communities (chat rooms, online games and so on) to play with their identity, to construct and reconstruct themselves in ways that have very little to do with their real world, real-time bodies” (Gilbert, 2005, p.117).

32. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Metacognition and screen-based identities i mean, i’d have whole new typing styles for people, like if i were trying to trick someone i knew into thinking i was some-one else, i’d type a lot differently than i do normally. a person’s typing style can give them away like a voice does. As another person I might capitalize my I’s and I’d use full, proper sentences instead of fragments. I probably would not use the word “like” and ellipses wouldn’t show up often, if at all. OR, if i decided to be somebody else, i might type like my cousin and numerous other teenyboppers out there… HeY!wUtz uP wit U?? Lol Thomas, 2004

33. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Traditional contentNew knowledge No riskHigh risk Learner Development Learner Transformation Generic skillsLearning to “be” Learning for an unknown future After Barnett, 2004

34. R Hipkins 21.11.06 High risk Learner Transformation “Open ontologies for an unknown future” Learning to “be” After Barnett, 2004 Dispositions for an unknown future: Carefulness Thoughtfulness Humility Criticality Receptiveness Resilience Courage Stillness What would curriculum look like if we saw the development of these dispositions as a highly valued outcome of school learning? In what ways might this be transformative? Why is this high risk?

35. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Open ontologies for an unknown future Ontology: Where “being” and “reality” meet Examples of open ontologies: Wikipedia, Google, TradeMe (trader profiles) Amazon (book reviews) etc. How do we help our students prepare for a world where anyone can contribute to knowledge building?

36. R Hipkins 21.11.06 Making space in a crowded curriculum If there are truly fundamental principles in science, then the extended study of any few topics in science will eventually bring students into contact with those principles. (And if not, then they were not really so fundamental, were they?) Jay Lemke, 2005 I believe there is an urgent need to address the “so what” question when retaining traditional “content”. Do we need to reduce content in our curriculum area? If yes, what principles should we use to decide how to go about this?

37. R Hipkins 21.11.06 The draft curriculum’s biggest challenge? While the New Zealand Curriculum sets the national direction for learning for all students, each school will design and implement its own curriculum in ways that will engage and motivate its particular students. Schools have considerable freedom in deciding exactly how to do this. (Designing a curriculum. pg. 26) How should schools go about responsibility and responsively exercising this freedom? If the new curriculum “sets the national direction for learning” where exactly do we want to take our school and why?

38. R Hipkins 21.11.06 References (1) Bullock, K., & Muschamp, Y. (2006). Learning about learning in the primary school. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36 (1), 49-62. Claxton, G. (2003). Building up young people's learning power. Is it possible? Is it desirable? And can we do it? Paper presented at the conference Educating for the 21st Century: Rethinking educational outcomes we want for young New Zealanders, Wellington, New Zealand Council for Educational Research. Davies, I., & Issitt, J. (2005). Reflections on citizenship education in Australia, Canada and England. Comparative Education, 41 (4), 389-410. Delandshere, G. (2002). Assessment as inquiry. Teachers College Record, 104 (7), 1461-1484. Ecclestone, K., & Pryor, J. (2003). 'Learning careers' or 'assessment careers'? The impact of assessment systems on learning. British Educational Research Journal, 29 (4), 471-488.

39. R Hipkins 21.11.06 References (2) Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the Knowledge Wave? The Knowledge Society and the future of education. Wellington: NZCER Press. Karmarski, B. (2004). Making sense of graphs: does metacognitive instruction make a difference on students' mathematical conceptions or alternative conceptions? Learning and Instruction, 14, 593-619. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London and New York: Routledge. Lemke, J. (2005). Research for the future of science education: New ways of learning, new ways of living. Opening plenary at VIIth International Congress on Research in Science Teaching, Granada, Spain http://www- personal.umich.edu/~jaylemke/papers/Granada%20Future%20Science%20Edu cation.htm.http://www- personal.umich.edu/~jaylemke/papers/Granada%20Future%20Science%20Edu cation.htm

40. R Hipkins 21.11.06 References (3) Rychen, D., & Salganik, L. (Eds.). (2003). Key competencies for a successful life and a well-functioning society. Cambridge, MA, USA: Hogrefe and Huber. Thomas, A. (2004). Digital Literacies of the Cybergirl. E-Learning, 1 (3), 358- 382. http://www.wwwords.co.uk/elea/content/pdfs/351/issue351_353.asp. Zimmerman, B., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self- regulation: Shifting from process to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 (1), 29-36. Zohar, A., & Schwartzer, N. (2005). Assessing teachers' pedagogical knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1595-1620.