Don’t you think that’s an awesome word?

Even just as a word even without considering its meaning!

Juxta position, Jux ta pos i tion, Juxtaposition.

I first came across the word in an educational sense when I was introduced to Jamie McKenzie, as an ICT Guru, in 1996. This was before we had the glorious disaster of Netday in our school, before one could get on the net and chat to a journalist in Israel and a writer in New York about what they had for dinner, before we could send each other fascinating and silly wriggling emails and share a laugh in our separate but similar four-walled rats cages!

Juxtaposition in the educational sense according to Jamie, was putting two things next to each other which would then trigger a different way of thinking about the two things, or shock us into recognition of the significance of the juxtaposition.

I’m thinking about Jamie McKenzie because he is coming to our school in June/July for a staff training day, and I for one, am very excited about it. Jamie has huge knowledge and experience in the use of ICT’s in schools. What I like about him, is that he is so SENSIBLE. He manages to combine the forward motion of education with the realities of what it is really like for teachers in the classroom. Teachers really need that! Sometimes those with academic stars in their eyes carry out their research and become very excited about what they discover and what the teachers can do about it in their classrooms, but the realities of what it is like at the white-board face are so far away that the implementation of those new and no doubt wonderful ideas is just about impossible. Jamie is sensible about it.

The other thing that Jamie does is realise that if we are going to raise the level of children’s thinking, that we have to raise the level of teachers’ thinking! This is absolutely crucial if we’re going to make a difference.

Back to Juxtaposition.

When you juxtapose what we used to do, with an integrated thematic approach, and what we’re trying to do now – what do we see?

 Firstly, the way we plan has changed immensely.

Aside from an incredible amount of juggling to make what we did fit in with both the school “scheme” and assessment schedule, we would look at all the curriculum areas, and come up with fun and interesting activities that somehow, anyhow related to the topic. We then planned these in, fitting them in with the assessment requirements throughout the term. We then spaced these over the term, hopefully completing all requirements before the last week when lots of children aren’t there – trying to complete assessments with half your class missing is not fun!

Planning now is a much less certain thing! We gather together, and taking our “Fertile Question” we think about what the possible pathways are that the children might take. We then plan immersion activities that we will give the children to do in the first weeks of the term.

“Immersion activities”. What are these?

The immersion phase of our studies are based on the belief that in order for children to be able to pose questions to help them find the answer to our “Fertile Question”, they need to have some knowledge and understanding of the topic. So this is the stage where the teacher “immerses” the children in the topic, by bringing resources into the classroom, and carrying out activities to inform and stimulate children’s interest in the topic. Activities may include activities across the range of curriculum areas. The children may hear stories and information from books, see multi-media presentations, read texts and carry out comprehension activities, look at web-sites, do art work etc related to the topic. This is really the only phase of the process where the teacher is able to plan activities at the beginning of the term for the students to carry out. Planning for the rest of the term, needs to take place much more on the hoof. Teaching for the rest of the term, needs to happen in response to the needs that the children demonstrate in the process of investigation and then reporting back.

This is the second major difference in this juxtaposition.

Previously, we pretty much decided at the beginning of the term what the process of the unit was, and we would stick with that. Good teachers did, of course respond to their diagnostic and formative assessment data, and teach according to the needs shown there. This, however, tended to be a whole class focus. It was rare for there to be group teaching in Social Studies and Science.  In Learning Pathways, regular reflection and discussion with the teacher is crucial, with the teacher identifying what learning needs to take place for the students to be able to continue work on their investigations and presentations. With the process throughout the term, the needs are going to change week by week, and it’s really important that the teacher has a way of reflecting with the students on their progress, and identifying what their needs are. These needs will differ greatly at each stage of the process. For example, it’s not going to be much use teaching students note-taking skills at the end of the term, when the students are deep into the presentation phase of their study. Teachers will find different ways to structure this – possibly with weekly meetings with groups of students, or a regular written reflection showing the progress of the investigation.

The third really big difference, is that the students are far more involved in the decision-making about their studies. They are able to find a question that interests them, and follow this up, which is far more engaging for them, than just doing activities that the teacher plans for them. They are able to make decisions about the way the work will be presented, which will hopefully be a better fit for them, than the teacher making a decision about this for the whole class. This co-construction of learning, is much more deeply involving and requires far greater independent thinking than previous methods.

The comparasion of Integrated and Inquiry learning, is a very large topic, and I have only touched on it very superficially here! I’d be very interested in hearing from you what I’ve left out!

Presenter M Guhlin from California showed us lots of exciting ideas and things kids are into on the net, with the point of view that if they’re doing this stuff on their own, we should be bringing it into the classroom.

I agree with that.

The classroom should at LEAST be able to engage children at the technological level they are already capable of, and where possible, of course, extend that.

However, what I struggled with is the BING BAM BASH thing. That’s where the kids do things like bring together different movie clips to create something different. One example that we were shown had space ships all shooting at each other.

When I  think about what actual critical or explicit learning the children are doing here, I think, hmmmm processing…. umm processing….yup…. processing.

I’m all for processing.

But what I’m actually for is the critical thinking behind the processing. The thinking that says, “I’m trying to show people what I think about this….it’s this person I’m trying to convince, I think they’ll get the idea best if I…… and what about if I include a shot of this….then they’ll know THIS important point that I want to make. And if I put a lot of quick shots of this in then they’ll feel………” To me, that’s a totally different thing than bringing together a BING and a BANG and a BASH to make some exciting movie special FX.

Things that wriggle and jiggle and go BIM BAM BASH are all fun and exciting, and a sure-fire way to pull some kids in, who might be hard to motivate otherwise, but let’s make sure that there is some real and explicit learning going on as well!

Green Bay School uses an Inquiry Learning Pedagogy called Learning Pathways.

Learning Pathways aims to create independent, motivated, skilled learners with well developed critical thinking skills.

The sequence we use at Green Bay initiates with the staff deciding on the context and a Fertile Question, which will be worked on for a whole term. This is followed by  an Immersion phase, because we believe that the students need some knowledge before they begin to form questions. When the immersion phase is complete, the students form sub-questions which will enable them to answer “The Big Question” and proceed to investigate and discover answers to their questions. Whilst the school is currently loosely following Gwen Gawith’s “Action Learning” as this is an Information Literacy Model that is familiar to many NZ teachers, staff are free to use whichever IL Model they feel best suits the needs of their children.

Term 2, 2007, our big question is: Push, Play, Why bother?

Push, Play refers to a SPARC programme which encourages people to participate in at least 30 minutes exercise a day.

This blog is aimed at enabling Green Bay Teachers, and other interested parties, to discuss the issues around the implementation of Learning Pathways in their classroom, what’s good, what’s hard, what helps. It’s a place where you can share your feelings, your successes, and your good ideas.