Pedagogies and critical reflection: key understandings for transformative gender justice

It is widely acknowledged that quality pedagogy is central to improving the educational outcomes of all students. In improving the social and academic outcomes of boys, and more specifically disengaged boys, the productive pedagogies model has been presented as a way forward. In terms of drawing on this model in socially just ways; to facilitate a broadening, rather than reinscribing of boys' narrow constructions of gender identity, this paper illustrates the imperative of teachers interacting with key feminist understandings of masculinity. Organized around the four dimensions of productive pedagogy, the paper draws on ( predominantly Australian-based) seminal work in the sphere of masculinities and schooling to discuss key strategies and initiatives for improving boys' educational outcomes. Against this backdrop, the paper demonstrates the importance of two principle understandings. The first relates to teachers understanding masculinity through feminist lenses, as constructed, regulated and maintained through inequitable social processes and the second relates to teachers understanding pedagogy as critical and transformative practice. These understandings are presented as vital to enabling gender justice.

Virtual vignettes and pedagogical potentials : Insights into a virtual schooling service

-

Alternative schooling programs for at risk youth : three case studies

This thesis develops a critical realist explanatory critique of alternative schooling programs for youth at risk taking place at three case study sites. Throughout the thesis the author pursues the question, \Are alternative provisions of schooling working academically and socially for youth at risk?. The academic lens targets literacy learning and associated pedagogies. Social outcomes are posited as positive social behaviours and continued engagement in learning. A four phased analysis, drawing on critical realism, interpretive and subject specific theories is used to elicit explanations for the research question. An overall framework is a critical realist methodology as set out by Danermark, Ekstrom, Jakobsen and Karlsson (2002, p. 129). Consequently phase one describes the phenomena of alternative schooling programs taking place at three case study sites. This is reported first as staff narratives that are resolved into imaginable historical causal components of \generative events., \prior schooling structures., \models of alternative schooling., \purpose., \individual agency., and \relations with linked community organisations.. Then transcendental questions are posed about each component using retroduction to uncover structures, underlying mechanisms and powers, and individual agency. In the second phase the researcher uses modified grounded theory methodology to theoretically redescribe causal categories related to a \needed different teaching and administrative approach. that emerged from the previous critique. A transcendental question is then applied to this redescription. The research phenomena are again theoretically redescribed in the third phase, this time using three theoretically based constructs associated with literacy and literacy pedagogies; the NRS, the 4 Resources Model, and Productive Pedagogies. This redescription is again questioned in terms of its core or \necessary. components. The fourth phase makes an explanatory critique by comparing and critiquing all previous explanations, recontextualising them in a wider macro reality of alternative schooling. Through this critical realist explanatory critiquing process, a response emerges not only to whether alternative provisions of schooling are working, but also how they are working, and how they are not working, with realistically based implications for future improvement.

Supervising practice based research

Practice based research appears to have emerged within several Higher Education agendas including the professional doctorates and the teacher as researcher. One way of thinking about this methodological approach is to consider its research paradigm – a practice based epistemology, and from this perspective to consider what special application to research supervision the paradigm invites. Within a “supervision as pedagogy” agenda these applications can be considered as pedagogies. This paper has been written in the style of practice based research, drawing on the author’s own experiences of supervising students undertaking practice based research. It adopts a position that research supervision is pedagogy and draws on the model of ‘Productive Pedagogies” to articulate strategies to help novice research students develop a research proposal.

Making use of pedagogic models as reflective catalysts for investigating pedagogic practice

The notion of pedagogy for anyone in the teaching profession is innocuous. The term itself, is steeped in history but the details of the practice can be elusive. What does it mean for an academic to be embracing pedagogy? The problem is not limited to academics; most teachers baulk at the introduction of a pedagogic agenda and resist attempts to have them reflect on their classroom teaching practice, where ever that classroom might be constituted. This paper explores the application of a pedagogic model (Education Queensland, 2001) which was developed in the context of primary and secondary teaching and was part of a schooling agenda to improve pedagogy. As a teacher educator I introduced the model to classroom teachers (Hill, 2002) using an Appreciative Inquiry (Cooperrider and Srivastva 1987) model and at the same time applied the model to my own pedagogy as an academic. Despite being instigated as a model for classroom teachers, I found through my own practitioner investigation that the model was useful for exploring my own pedagogy as a university academic (Hill, 2007, 2008). Cooperrider, D.L. and Srivastva, S. (1987) Appreciative inquiry in organisational life, in Passmore, W. and Woodman, R. (Eds) Research in Organisational Changes and Development (Vol 1) Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp 129-69 Education Queensland (2001) School Reform Longitudinal Study (QSRLS), Brisbane, Queensland Government. Hill, G. (2002, December ) Reflecting on professional practice with a cracked mirror: Productive Pedagogy experiences. Australian Association for Research in Education Conference. Brisbane, Australia. Hill, G. (2007) Making the assessment criteria explicit through writing feedback: A pedagogical approach to developing academic writing. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning 3(1), 59-66. Hill, G. (2008) Supervising Practice Based Research. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 5(4), 78-87

Fusing curricula : science, technology and ICT

Curriculum demands continue to increase on school education systems with teachers at the forefront of implementing syllabus requirements. Education is reported frequently as a solution to most societal problems and, as a result of the world’s information explosion, teachers are expected to cover more and more within teaching programs. How can teachers combine subjects in order to capitalise on the competing educational agendas within school timeframes? Fusing curricula requires the bonding of standards from two or more syllabuses. Both technology and ICT complement the learning of science. This study analyses selected examples of preservice teachers’ overviews for fusing science, technology and ICT. These program overviews focused on primary students and the achievement of two standards (one from science and one from either technology or ICT). These primary preservice teachers’ fused-curricula overviews included scientific concepts and related technology and/or ICT skills and knowledge. Findings indicated a range of innovative curriculum plans for teaching primary science through technology and ICT, demonstrating that these subjects can form cohesive links towards achieving the respective learning standards. Teachers can work more astutely by fusing curricula; however further professional development may be required to advance thinking about these processes. Bonding subjects through their learning standards can extend beyond previous integration or thematic work where standards may not have been assessed. Education systems need to articulate through syllabus documents how effective fusing of curricula can be achieved. It appears that education is a key avenue for addressing societal needs, problems and issues. Education is promoted as a universal solution, which has resulted in curriculum overload (Dare, Durand, Moeller, & Washington, 1997; Vinson, 2001). Societal and curriculum demands have placed added pressure on teachers with many extenuating education issues increasing teachers’ workloads (Mobilise for Public Education, 2002). For example, as Australia has weather conducive for outdoor activities, social problems and issues arise that are reported through the media calling for action; consequently schools have been involved in swimming programs, road and bicycle safety programs, and a wide range of activities that had been considered a parental responsibility in the past. Teachers are expected to plan, implement and assess these extra-curricula activities within their already overcrowded timetables. At the same stage, key learning areas (KLAs) such as science and technology are mandatory requirements within all Australian education systems. These systems have syllabuses outlining levels of content and the anticipated learning outcomes (also known as standards, essential learnings, and frameworks). Time allocated for teaching science in obviously an issue. In 2001, it was estimated that on average the time spent in teaching science in Australian Primary Schools was almost an hour per week (Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). More recently, a study undertaken in the U.S. reported a similar finding. More than 80% of the teachers in K-5 classrooms spent less than an hour teaching science (Dorph, Goldstein, Lee, et al., 2007). More importantly, 16% did not spend teaching science in their classrooms. Teachers need to learn to work smarter by optimising the use of their in-class time. Integration is proposed as one of the ways to address the issue of curriculum overload (Venville & Dawson, 2005; Vogler, 2003). Even though there may be a lack of definition for integration (Hurley, 2001), curriculum integration aims at covering key concepts in two or more subject areas within the same lesson (Buxton & Whatley, 2002). This implies covering the curriculum in less time than if the subjects were taught separately; therefore teachers should have more time to cover other educational issues. Expectedly, the reality can be decidedly different (e.g., Brophy & Alleman, 1991; Venville & Dawson, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers report that students expand their knowledge and skills as a result of subject integration (James, Lamb, Householder, & Bailey, 2000). There seems to be considerable value for integrating science with other KLAs besides aiming to address teaching workloads. Over two decades ago, Cohen and Staley (1982) claimed that integration can bring a subject into the primary curriculum that may be otherwise left out. Integrating science education aims to develop a more holistic perspective. Indeed, life is not neat components of stand-alone subjects; life integrates subject content in numerous ways, and curriculum integration can assist students to make these real-life connections (Burnett & Wichman, 1997). Science integration can provide the scope for real-life learning and the possibility of targeting students’ learning styles more effectively by providing more than one perspective (Hudson & Hudson, 2001). To illustrate, technology is essential to science education (Blueford & Rosenbloom, 2003; Board of Studies, 1999; Penick, 2002), and constructing technology immediately evokes a social purpose for such construction (Marker, 1992). For example, building a model windmill requires science and technology (Zubrowski, 2002) but has a key focus on sustainability and the social sciences. Science has the potential to be integrated with all KLAs (e.g., Cohen & Staley, 1982; Dobbs, 1995; James et al., 2000). Yet, “integration” appears to be a confusing term. Integration has an educational meaning focused on special education students being assimilated into mainstream classrooms. The word integration was used in the late seventies and generally focused around thematic approaches for teaching. For instance, a science theme about flight only has to have a student drawing a picture of plane to show integration; it did not connect the anticipated outcomes from science and art. The term “fusing curricula” presents a seamless bonding between two subjects; hence standards (or outcomes) need to be linked from both subjects. This also goes beyond just embedding one subject within another. Embedding implies that one subject is dominant, while fusing curricula proposes an equal mix of learning within both subject areas. Primary education in Queensland has eight KLAs, each with its established content and each with a proposed structure for levels of learning. Primary teachers attempt to cover these syllabus requirements across the eight KLAs in less than five hours a day, and between many of the extra-curricula activities occurring throughout a school year (e.g., Easter activities, Education Week, concerts, excursions, performances). In Australia, education systems have developed standards for all KLAs (e.g., Education Queensland, NSW Department of Education and Training, Victorian Education) usually designated by a code. In the late 1990’s (in Queensland), “core learning outcomes” for strands across all KLA’s. For example, LL2.1 for the Queensland Education science syllabus means Life and Living at Level 2 standard number 1. Thus, a teacher’s planning requires the inclusion of standards as indicated by the presiding syllabus. More recently, the core learning outcomes were replaced by “essential learnings”. They specify “what students should be taught and what is important for students to have opportunities to know, understand and be able to do” (Queensland Studies Authority, 2009, para. 1). Fusing science education with other KLAs may facilitate more efficient use of time and resources; however this type of planning needs to combine standards from two syllabuses. To further assist in facilitating sound pedagogical practices, there are models proposed for learning science, technology and other KLAs such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), Productive Pedagogies (Education Queensland, 2004), de Bono’s Six Hats (de Bono, 1985), and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1999) that imply, warrant, or necessitate fused curricula. Bybee’s 5 Es, for example, has five levels of learning (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate; Bybee, 1997) can have the potential for fusing science and ICT standards.

Researching for social justice: Contextual, conceptual and methodological challenges

Reforming schooling to enable engagement and success for those typically marginalised and failed by schools is a necessary task for educational researchers and activists concerned with injustice. However, it is a difficult pursuit, with a long history of failed attempts. This paper outlines the rationale of an Australian partnership research project, Redesigning Pedagogies in the North (RPiN), which took on such an effort in public secondary schooling contexts that, in current times, are beset with 'crisis' conditions and constrained by policy rationales that make it difficult to pursue issues of justice. Within the project, university investigators and teachers collaborated in action research that drew on a range of conceptual resources for redesigning curriculum and pedagogies, including: funds of knowledge, vernacular or local literacies; place-based education; the 'productive pedagogies' and the 'unofficial curriculum' of popular culture and out-of-school learning settings. In bringing these resources together with the aim of interrupting the reproduction of inequality, the project developed a methodo-logic which builds on Bourdieuian insights.

The heart of quality teaching : a values-based pedagogy for pre-service teacher education

In an ever changing world the adults of the future will be faced with many challenges. To cope with these challenges it seems apparent that values education will need to become paramount within a child.s education. A considerable number of research studies have indicated that values education is a critical component within education (Lovat & Toomey, 2007b). Building on this research Lovat (2006) claimed that values education was the missing link in quality teaching The concept of quality teaching had risen to the fore within educational research literature in the late 20th century with the claim that it is the teacher who makes the difference in schooling (Hattie, 2004). Thus, if teachers make such a difference to student learning, achievement and well-being, then it must hold true that pre-service teacher education programmes are vital in ensuring the development of quality teachers for our schools. The gap that this current research programme addressed was to link the fields of values education, quality teaching and pre-service teacher education. This research programme aimed to determine the impact of a values-based pedagogy on the development of quality teaching dimensions within pre-service teacher education. The values-based pedagogy that was investigated in this research programme was Philosophy in the Classroom. The research programme adopted a nested case study design based on the constructivist-interpretative paradigm in examining a unit within a pre-service teacher education programme at a Queensland university. The methodology utilised was qualitative where the main source of data was via interviews. In total, 43 pre-service teachers participated in three studies in order to determine if their involvement in a unit where the focus was on introducing pre-service teachers to an explicit values-based pedagogy impacted on their knowledge, skills and confidence in terms of quality teaching dimensions. The research programme was divided into three separate studies in order to address the two research questions: 1. In what ways do pre-service teachers perceive they are being prepared to become quality teachers? 2. Is there a connection between an explicit values-based pedagogy in pre-service teacher education and the development of pre-service teachers. understanding of quality teaching? Study One provided insight into 21 pre-service teachers. understandings of quality teaching. These 21 participants had not engaged in an explicit values-based pedagogy. Study Two involved the interviewing of 22 pre-service teachers at two separate points in time . prior to exposure to a unit that employed a values-explicit pedagogy and post this subject.s lecture content delivery. Study Three reported on and analysed individual case studies of five pre-service teachers who had participated in Study Two Time 1 and Time 2, as well as a third time following their field experience where they had practice in teaching the values explicit pedagogy. The results of the research demonstrate that an explicit values-based pedagogy introduced into a teacher education programme has a positive impact on the development of pre-service teachers. understanding of quality teaching skills and knowledge. The teaching and practice of a values-based pedagogy positively impacted on pre-service teachers with increases of knowledge, skills and confidence demonstrated on the quality teaching dimensions of intellectual quality, a supportive classroom environment, recognition of difference, connectedness and values. These findings were reinforced through the comparison of pre-service teachers who had participated in the explicit values-based pedagogical approach, with a sample of pre-service teachers who had not engaged in this same values-based pedagogical approach. A solid values-based pedagogy and practice can and does enhance pre-service teachers. understanding of quality teaching. These findings surrounding the use of a values-based pedagogy in pre-service teacher education to enhance quality teaching knowledge and skills has contributed theoretically to the field of educational research, as well having practical implications for teacher education institutions and teacher educators.

Literacy and numeracy project: Final report 2009

Literacy and numeracy are critical for young people during and after their schooling. The subjects and courses that students undertake during their school years incorporate a range of academic literacy and numeracy practices which students must be able manage if they are to be successful. Pathways beyond schooling also require specific, and changing, understandings of, and proficiencies with, literacy and numeracy as new communication technologies increasingly impact on further study, work, and everyday life. Teaching and learning numeracy is a new emphasis in the SACE and as yet we have little understanding about the ways in which secondary schools handle this area. Students in Years 10 and 11 are at a crucial point in their educational and life pathways as they begin to refine their future aspirations. For those who have difficulty with academic literacies and numeracies – and often a long history of such problems – this period can be fraught unless teachers are able to provide specific support when it is needed, or students are able to access it from care-givers or community members. The School to Work Literacy and Numeracy Project involved teachers from nine schools across the three sectors and university researchers working together to design curriculum interventions for students with a history of low measurable achievement in literacy and/or numeracy. The project started from the premise that working with ‘rich tasks’, an approach to learning and assessment developed in the Productive Pedagogies work undertaken in Queensland (Hayes et al., 2006), would improve students’ motivation, engagement and learning and that this work could best be done by teachers working in school-based, cross-curriculum teams with a school leadership team member and a university researcher as mentor. A key idea in designing rich tasks is that students will have opportunities to demonstrate their learning in assessments which are aligned with the learning expectations (for example a film festival to publicly launch student-produced films, advertising to sell student-made cubby-houses, a household budget based on students’ likely incomes in future work). In other words the assessments should be designed to allow for authentic communication and displays of what the students have learned through serious engagement with the curriculum. The project was conducted from Term 1-4 2009, with follow-up checks with some project teachers in the early weeks of 2010.

An ePortfolio Approach: Supporting Critical Reflection for Pedagogic Innovation

This chapter investigates the capacity of a well-supported holistic ePortfolio program, the QUT Student ePortfolio Program (QSeP), to support critical reflection for pedagogic innovation in higher education, by exploring practice examples. The chapter looks across faculty and discipline areas to illustrate a range of ePortfolio learning case studies, which have led pedagogical innovation across a whole institution, to enhance student learning and support academic teaching. The ePortfolio strategies discussed support innovation in learning and teaching where academics use the ePortfolio approach in different ways to develop connectedness (productive pedagogies) within learning. Students are supported to develop awareness of the connections between formal and informal learning opportunities and between their learning and personal and professional goals. Students are guided to understand what they have learned and how they have learned in terms of generic employability skills or graduate attributes and also in relation to professional standards and competencies and personal goals. In essence, the ePortfolio-supported pedagogy creates capstone events enabling students to develop a professional identity and understanding of ongoing professional development. The examples are drawn from distinct discipline areas and illustrate the capacity of ePortfolio to underpin pedagogic innovation across discipline areas: • Bachelor of Information Technology—the ePortfolio approach supports students to explore the IT industry as a means of clarifying personal expectations and goals, thereby enhancing student potential in the course c• Bachelor of Nursing and Master of Nursing Science—students develop a professional ePortfolio to show development of the nursing competencies • Master of Information Technology—Library and Information students compile a Professional Portfolio for assessment in the Professional Practice subject • Bachelor of Laws—Virtual Law Placement (VLP) is a unit of study that challenges students to critically reflect on their performance and development duringthe work placement Each case study illustrates the academic teaching goal and student ePortfolio task in context. Issues, challenges and support strategies are identified. Comments from the students and their lecturers give an indication of the effectiveness of the ePortfolio approach to meet learning and teaching goals.

Implementing restorative justice practice in schools: what pedagogy reveals

In the ongoing pursuit for creating safe, nurturing and relational school cultures, educators continue to turn to restorative justice (rj) principles and practice. Predominantly, schools begin to engage with rj in an effort to address harm done, causing its discourse to be situated in literature tied to classroom management and behaviour. However, in this location, the effectiveness of rj can be limited because the power relationships underlying the original punitive, managerial structures maintain their grip. Drawing on a qualitative study that examines the experiences of educators committed to implementing rj principles, this article explores how placing rj in the context of engaged, productive pedagogies better nurtures the hoped for relational and peaceful school culture.

Designing relational pedagogies with jam2jamXO

This paper examines the affordances of the philosophy and practice of open source and the application of it in developing music education software. In particular I will examine the parallels inherent in the ‘openness’ of pragmatist philosophy in education (Dewey 1916, 1989) such as group or collaborative learning, discovery learning (Bruner 1966) and learning through creative activity with computers (Papert 1980, 1994). Primarily I am interested in ‘relational pedagogies’ (Ruthmann and Dillon In Press) which is in a real sense about the ethics of the transaction between student and teacher in an ecology where technology plays a more significant role. In these contexts relational pedagogies refers to how the music teacher manages their relationships with students and evaluates the affordances of open source technology in that process. It is concerned directly with how the relationship between student and teacher is affected by the technological tools, as is the capacity for music making and learning. In particular technologies that have agency present the opportunity for a partnership between user and technology that enhances the capacity for expressive music making, productive social interaction and learning. In this instance technologies with agency are defined as ones that enhance the capacity to be expressive and perform tasks with virtuosity and complexity where the technology translates simple commands and gestures into complex outcomes. The technology enacts a partnership with the user that becomes both a cognitive and performative amplifier. Specifically we have used this term to describe interactions with generative technologies that use procedural invention as a creative technique to produce music and visual media.