Illustrating quality practices through an example of practice linked to criteria and evidence

Context

The Associate Principal contacted Cognition Education to run a review of GaTE at their school.  The school had previously hosted an external withdrawal GaTE class for one day a week but this was discontinued in 2015.  The school wanted a review of how gifted and talented education was currently being catered for in regular provision and where they needed to set their goals for the future.  They wanted to set and run a two year plan to ensure that all teachers were identifying and catering to gifted students.

Background information

·         Decile 1 urban Auckland contributing school (Year 1-6).  18% Māori, 22% Cook Island Māori, 1% Indian, 38% Samoan, 18% Tongan, 3% Other.

·         High levels of pastoral care for students but a lack of personalised or differentiation instruction in the classroom.

·         Strong community belief that “every child is gifted”.

·         Previous negative PLD experiences meant that staff were initially reluctant to engage with the gifted and talented PLD.

Area of focus for the PLD

The Senior Leadership Team wanted a “strengths based approach” that would validate good pedagogical practices but also strengthen differentiation and high expectations for their students.  PLD was structured as “a rising tide lifts all ships” (Renzulli) with a focus on “at least one year’s growth for one year’s input” (Hattie).  It was designed to be practical in nature with staff being able to take something to use from each staff meeting.  There was to be a focus on the strengths of the school, especially the strong relationships between all key stakeholders (Bishop).  The PLD was developed around the Spiral of Inquiry (Timperley, Kaser, & Halbert).

How the area of focus was decided

Scanning: A 360 Degree GaTE Review was undertaken

The 360 degree GaTE review that myself and my team have developed, looks at all areas that impact on gifted and talented students – in class, in school, at home and in the community.  This allows school leadership to target PLD planning to their specific needs.

It involves:

·         The GaTE team completing a strengths and needs analysis on a rubric on the seven domains of best practice for gifted students.

·         Facilitator focus group meetings with students, teachers, leaders and parents/whānau.

·         Data analysis with GaTE coordinator on SMS, GaTE Register, tracking and above level testing.

Focusing: Qualitative data analysis

The 360 degree GaTE review identified the strengths and weaknesses of the current gifted and talented provision at the school.   This provided the qualitative data basis for the PLD programme.

Associated inquiry

Developing a hunch: The PLD action plan was developed

Due to the previous negative PLD experiences of the staff, there was a reluctance to participate in the GaTE PLD.  This was the focus of my developing a hunch. I discussed with the GaTE team how previous PLD had been run with the staff. My hunch was that the PLD had been “top down” and not practical in nature.  The GaTE term confirmed that there had been a lot of directed “chalk and talk” and not much involvement from teachers. To test my hunch, we co-constructed the GaTE PLD plan to reflect manaakitanga: we wanted to lead and support staff to provide a respectful and caring environment to enable Māori and Pasifika achievement.   Each meeting was to have a strong strengths based collaborative focus and allow teachers to leave with something to use in the next few days. The action plan was based on enhancing the strengths of community and managing the weakness.  We decided to set staff meetings around creating a shared understanding of GaTE in their context plus what practical provision can be provided.  The GaTE team meetings were targeted at developing systemic organisation for identification and tracking of gifted students.

New learning: Whole staff PLD

To ensure that the PLD was being culturally responsive to the needs of the school, I based my own new learning around the work of Russell Bishop and how this integrates with the experiences of gifted and talented students who are often a marginalised group in Aotearoa. New learning for the staff was pinpointed at the strong relationships that teachers have with their students whilst raising the level of teaching pedagogy and strategies that were being used with students.  There has been a strong emphasis on whole class differentiation strategies across multiple subject areas. The GaTE team and I developed a culturally appropriate identification process that allow gifted students to be identified from Term 1.  The ID process identified the learning, social and emotional needs of the student as well as what could be done in class, around school, at home and in the community. Many of these strategies include learning with digital technology as a way to meet identified needs.

Findings/outcomes/resulting actions

Taking action: Theory into practice

Due to the practical nature of the PLD, teachers were challenged to turn theory into practice and trial techniques with their students. For many teachers, this was the first time that they had trialled whole class differentiation and they worried it would be “out of control”.  We used staff meeting times, to set up activities that would allow whole class differentiation in a structured way (e.g. Tic-Tac-Toe activity sheets) that allowed choice and challenge without making the teachers feel “insecure”.  At the next meeting, teachers discuss the impact that these changes have had for their students (more engaged students, higher level of work etc.) and what impact it had on their planning, class management etc. This was crucial as it allowed me to closely monitor at which stage in the development of pedagogy teachers were at, and structure differentiated PLD to meet these needs.

Checking: Self review

Informal review was done through the conversations with teachers about the implementation of their theory into practice.  For the PLD to achieve sustainable change, it needs to be meaningful to teachers who see the new learning, strategies and technologies as being beneficial to their students as well as not putting additional pressure on their limited time. By continually discussing the impact, and views of the teachers, I recognised their contribution to the learning of their students and responding to the needs that they are identifying for themselves. 

An interim Strengths and Needs Analysis was completed in July 2016 to formally check the progress of the PLD.  The results are outlined below with the higher number being the closest to best practice.

Evaluation and Evidence

As part of this Review, I demonstrated wānanga by actively seeking out values and responding to the views of Māori parents, whānau and hapū.  I ensured that the participants understood my whakapapa and what my role was at the school.  This created a strong, supportive and open environment between us where I recognised the expertise that the parents, whānau and hapū bring to the school for the benefit of the learners. It was essential to begin the review with the voice of the students and their whānau as it ensured that the GaTE programme was based on whanaungatanga.

Throughout the new learning there has been an influence of ako by providing and supporting ongoing professional learning for staff that strengthens the school’s ability to raise the Māori and Pasifika learner achievement.

The manaakitanga approach to the PLD has built mutually respectful relationships with all teachers in the school and the Associate Principal has told me that staff announce that they “can’t wait for the staff meeting” when I am coming in to the school. Staff also discuss at lunchtime the strategies that they are trialling and how they are working for their students. Many of these strategies are being shared with parents and whānau (for example, MOOCs like Coursera) as the PLD is based on tanga whenuatanga – acknowledging Māori parents, hāpu and iwi as key stakeholders in the school. These strategies allow whānau to be active participants in meeting the identified needs of gifted students.

This PLD is currently six months into its delivery and it proving successful. The key areas of foci have been on shared understanding of gifted and talented students in this context and setting up systemic identification processes. The main areas of foci for the remained of the PLD programme is on embedding practices and continuing to improve upon teacher pedagogy for meeting the needs of gifted students, both within the regular classroom and beyond.

Criteria/indicators

I have planned and structured the GaTE PLD using the Spiral of Inquiry (Timperley, Kaser, & Halbert).  The PLD refers back to data being collated and it is adapted based on teacher, student and/or leader feedback.  I guide the school in data analysis and problem posing to deepen the understanding of effective change practices and ensure sustainable change. This illustrates Criteria 11 – model critical inquiry to challenge practices and support change leadership.

In the 360 Degree GaTE Review, I collected student, teacher and parent/whānau voice on current gifted and talented provision.  This allowed me to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current GaTE programme. This illustrates Criteria 9 – demonstrating mindfulness of context, existing knowledge and improvement efforts.  I recognised the need to acknowledge and build from existing knowledge and beliefs about gifted and talented education. The PLD action plan validated the school’s language, identity and culture as it was a “strengths based approach” that confirmed good pedagogical practices. There was a focus on the strengths of the school, especially the strong relationships between all key stakeholders thus delivering PLD consistent with the language expressed by the needs of the setting (Criteria 2).

The strengths and needs analysis outlines best practice across seven different domains. I have worked with the GaTE team to use this information to develop the outcomes of the PLD action plan as well as linking in the GaTE PLD with previous and current PLD foci.  This illustrates Criteria 10 – understanding how contextual and situational factors influence leaders and teachers’ responses and learning processes.

By structuring the PLD action plan to reflect manaakitanga, I was establishing and maintaining effective professional relationships focused on the learning and well-being of students, teachers and leaders (Criteria 5).  The strengths based approach to PLD modelled the qualities of relational trust (Criteria 8) as I respected the personal integrity of the students, staff, whānau and recognised the wide variety of skills that they brought to the school community.

The interactive staff meetings with practical applications challenged and supported teachers to work toward achieving shared goals, targets and priorities (Criteria 7).  Whilst the culturally responsive identification process, which includes twice exceptional learners (those who are gifted plus a learning issue), challenges and supports teachers to recognise and meet the needs of diverse learners (Criteria 6).  Teachers and leaders have learnt how to meet these needs using a range of methods, including pedagogy and technologies to build digital fluency that accelerates educational change and improvement (Criteria 12).

As the Spiral of Inquiry has been integrated with Tātaiako, I have demonstrated a commitment to the bi-cultural partnership in Aotearoa (Criteria 3 and 4) and I have shown an ability to work effectively within the bicultural context of Aotearoa, showing respect for and relevant use of te re Māori in my mahi (Criteria 1).