Educational improvement: Insights from policy, research and practice in the New Zealand context, and implications for teacher education
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT: INSIGHTS FROM POLICY,
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN THE NEW ZEALAND CONTEXT,
AND IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION
Claire Sinnema
The University of Auckland, New Zealand
Email: [email protected]
ducational reform and change relating to curriculum,
pedagogy, standards, evaluation and professional learning
E
have an important role to play in educational improvement
initiatives. In this paper, I explore insights from policy, research
and practice initiatives across key aspects of the New Zealand
education landscape, relate those to improvement efforts
internationally, and highlight implications and possibilities
for teacher education. In particular, the focus is on curriculum
reform, inquiry oriented practice, and collaborative inquiry-key:
Elements of those policy turns are outlined, and consideration
given to the implications for initial teacher education.
Received: 4/5/2019
Reviewed: 8/5/2019
Revised: 25/5/2019
Accepted: 12/6/2019
Released: 21/6/2019
DOI:
Keywords: Industrial revolution 4.0; Teacher education; New
Zealand; Educational improvement.
Curriculum Reform: Responsive Pedagogy
learning and assessment.
While there are distinct differences between the
curricula of various countries that have a national
curriculum, many recently revised curricula not
only signal desired outcomes for students, but
also promote certain pedagogical approaches.
This is apparent, for example, in the introduction
to Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence which
highlights that “[the curriculum is] concerned
both with what is to be learned and how it is
taught”. It is also apparent in the section of the
New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) that addresses
“effective pedagogy” (The New Zealand Ministry
of Education 2007).
The fourth is responsiveness to a growing
body of evidence of relevance to practitioners
about effective teaching approaches; this requires
the promotion of inquiry into practice in ways
that demonstrate engagement with practitioner
and research evidence. The fifth dimension of
responsiveness calls for strengthened partnerships
with parents in efforts to support better student
learning; this requires educators to more seriously
engage in partnerships with parents in relation to
teaching and learning. This turn to competencies
is currently central to the OECD Education 2030
curriculum framework.
The pedagogical approaches promoted in
these and other recently revised curricula are
characterized by five dimensions of responsiveness
that address the extent to which these approaches
are being implemented. The first is responsiveness
to the kinds of learning relevant for 21st century
learners; this requires that educators move their
attention beyond content knowledge and discrete
skills outcomes to encompass Jfr:eil*lon t° students’
competencies for lifelong learning. The second is
responsiveness to demands for increasing emphasis
on values in teaching and learning, which requires
the integration of values across the curriculum. The
third is responsiveness to increasing ecogmtion that
students have both the capability and the right to
be deeply involved in decisions relating to their
education; this requires pedagogical practices that
enhance student agency in decisions about teaching,
Responsive Curriculum Dimensions
The following section outlines key elements of
five dimensions of responsiveness that were the
basis for the responsive curriculum scale arising
from an evaluation of New Zealand’s most recent
national curriuclum (Sinnema & Ludlow, 2014):
key competencies, values, inquiry, student agency
and partnerships.
Beyond content knowledge and skills to key
competencies in curriculum
Increasingly curriculum policies have moved
towards emphasizing 21st century competencies for
lifelong learning. So what are key competencies?
Key competencies integrate knowledge, attitudes
and values in ways that lead to action. They cannot
be taught discretely, are context dependent, and
involve practice and application in authentic real-
64
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
world contexts (Rychen and Salganik 2003). Unlike interdisciplinary studies (Scottish Executive 2004).
discrete skills, key competencies are described The interdisciplinary aspect focuses on students
as having transformative potential (Reid 2006)- experiencing learning in stimulating contexts,
that is the potential to transform students’ and and that learning being relevant, challenging and
teachers’ experience of teaching and learning to enjoyable. It also prioritizes students’ development
be quite different to traditional approaches. Key of deep understandings through revisiting
competencies also have a dispositional character, learning and considering multiple perspectives.
which requires attention not just to students’ ability Interdisciplinary studies are also likely to involve
to use them, but their readiness and willingness to student learning in contexts beyond the school site,
do so appropriately in a range of contexts (Carr in ways that enrich their learning and emphasize
and Claxton 2002, Hipkins 2007, Cowie and competencies alongside content.
Hipkins 2009). Key competencies involve a range
of psychosocial resources (including skills and
attitudes) that are applied in particular contexts.
They promote trans-disciplinary thinking in ways
that enable the development of new expertise
(Australian Ministerial Council on Education and
Youth 2008).
The place of values in curriculum.
Increasingly, national curricula reflect demands for
emphasis on values in teaching and learning, not as
a stand-alone or peripheral consideration, but as a
vital element of curriculum design. As Lovat and
Toomey put it “no longer is Values Education on the
periphery of a curriculum that enshrines the central
Globalisation and modernisation are creating roles to be played by the teacher and the school in
an increasingly diverse and interconnected world. our society. It is at the very heart of these roles”
To make sense of and function well in this world, (2009, p. 11). The expression of values in recent
individuals need for example to master changing curricular reforms also make clear that while values
technologies and to make sense of large amounts education should transform beliefs and behaviour
of available information. They also face collective this does not require the imposition on students of
challenges as societies - such as balancing economic different sets of beliefs and values than those they
growth with environmental sustainability, and already held. It does, though, mean “challenging
prosperity with social equity. In these contexts, the students to see that whatever beliefs and values they
competencies that individuals need to meet their brought with them are but one set, one life- world,
goals have become more complex, requiring more and to consider the life-worlds of others” (Lovat
than the mastery of certain narrowly defined skills. and Toomey 2009).
The call to move beyond narrowly defined
Keown, Parker, and Tiakiwai (2005) signal the
skills in revisions to national curriculum policies risk of approaches that lead to simplistic practice in
is evident in curriculum revisions in a number of the teaching and learning of values, based merely
countries. In the current development of a national on lists of agreed values, but in which “the wide
curriculum in Australia, for example, general range of meanings and concepts across ideologies
capabilities are outlined:
are not fully explored” (p. 179). Recent curriculum
reform in New Zealand has sought to address that
risk by outlining values to be encouraged, modeled
and explored in teaching and learning. While
values have always had a place in the New Zealand
curriculum, this aspect is much more prominent in
the most recent curriculum (2007) than in previous
curriculumframeworksandgoeswellbeyondmerely
determining sets of desirable values to be upheld.
In addition to setting out a list of widely supported
values that students should be encouraged to hold
(including for example excellence, equity, integrity,
respect), the new curriculum signals that students
should also learn about values, and how to express,
explore and critically analyze values (Keown,
Parker et al. 2005). References to values in this
sense are also evident in the curricular of Northern
Ireland (Council for the Curriculum Examinations
and Assessment 2007) Such prominence of values
is evident internationally.
Increasingly, in a world where knowledge
itself is constantly growing and evolving, students
need to develop a set of skills, behaviours and
dispositions, or general capabilities that apply
across subject-based content and equip them to be
lifelong learners able to operate with confidence
in a complex, information-rich, globalised world.
(Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting
Authority 2010, p. 18).
More recently, the Education 2020 framework
has extended the competencies to encompass
‘creating new value’, ‘reconciling tensions and
dilemmas’ and ‘taking responsibility’ to address
environmental, economic and social challenges in a
rapidly changing world (OECD, 2018).
The key purpose of Scotland’s Curriculum for
Excellence demonstrated the early 2000s move to
competencies in promoting the development of four
capacities (to enable each child or young person to
be a successful learner, a confident individual, a
responsible citizen and an effective contributor) and
The responsiveness of curriculum here is not
in terms of the inclusion of values in curriculum,
but in the positioning and emphasis of values as a
Volume 8, Issue 2
65
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
pursuit that is central and pivotal to the endeavors and participation in curriculum: (1) Children are
of teachers, schools and systems “rather than being listened to; (2) Children ^pj£upported in expressing
on their margins” (Lovat & Toomey, 2009, p. 9).
their views; (3) Children’s views are taken into
account; (4) Children are involved in decision-
making processes; (5) Children share power and
jesponsibility for decision-making (Shier 2001,
p. 112). He also makes clear the link between this
kind of participation in schooling and Article 12
of the UN Convention and suggests that there are
openings, opportunities, or obligations that can
occur for each of the participation levels. „
Emphasizing inquiry in curriculum. The
close examination by teachers of the impact of their
work on students is “the pedagogical imperative”
(Shulman 2002) and reflects the professional nature
of teaching (Stoll, Fink et al. 2003). As Cochran-
Smith argued, it is important that teachers treat “their
own work as sites for systematic and intentional
inquiry into their own and other’s research as
generative of new possibilities” (Cochran-Smith
In the New Zealand Curriculum, the call for
2005, p. 8). This requires them to take an inquiry student agency in teaching and learning is most
stance to their practice which involves much more apparent in the key competencies, but is also
than being reflective or questioning. It involves a suggested in many other elements of the document.
“continual process of questioning and using the data Since student agency can only be achieved in
of practice to investigate those questions critically action, of particular importance to this research was
and collaboratively” (Cochran-Smith and Lytle the expectation that students become increasingly
2009, p. 121).Anotable characteristic of curriculum active participants, alongside their teachers, in
reform efforts is attention, to varying extents, to this decisions about curriculum, teaching, learning and
kind of inquiry. In some curriculum policies, the assessment.
suggestion of inquiry is hinted at through reference,
for example, to the curriculum promoting reflection
on what has been learned and how that learning
occurred or through mention of assessment being
organized ‘to support and influence teaching and.
In the New Zealand system, however, the notion
of inquiry as a curriculum concern is much more
prominent.
Strengthening partnerships with parents
in curriculum. The importance of partnerships
between those responsible for educating students
in school settings and their parents is gaining
increasing attention. Such partnerships are crucial to
system improvement as signaled in The McKinsey
report, which describes engagement with parents
as a high impact means of improving outcomes for
The NZC sets out a model of effective pedagogy students (Mourshed, Chijioke et al. 2010). School-
- teaching as inquiry - that requires educators family partnerships are, potentially, particularly
to engage in three kinds of inquiry as they seek educationally powerful (Epstein and Sheldon 2006,
to achieve curriculum goals: focusing inquiry, Robinson, Hohepa et al. 2008). While different
teaching inquiry and learning inquiry (Aitken and types of school-home connections vary widely
Sinnema 2008, p. 52). student outcomes and inquiry in their effectiveness in promoting social and
into the relationship between the teaching and those academic outcomes (some can even be counter-
outcomes. This dimension will be elaborated in the productive), joint interventions involving parents
next section.
and teachers have been found by Robinson et al.
(2008)- in a meta-analysis of 37 studies, syntheses,
and meta-analyses reporting on outcomes for over
180,000 students - to have a very high effect size
(1.81).
Promoting student agency in curriculum.
Agency is the ability to exert control over, and
give direction to one’s life (Emirbayer and Mische
1998). Student agency, or the ability for learners
to exert control over their experience of teaching,
It is not surprising then that national curricula
learning and assessment, is described as important are increasingly urging high quality partnerships
in several curricula. It involves students making between schools, teachers and parents. Scotland’s
connections between their past learning experience, Curriculum for Excellence indicates the importance
and aspirations for the future, which ẹnạblQthem of working in partnership to support students, and
to take action the present. Tomanovic describes of involving parents and caregivers in curriculum
children as being afforded autonomy, control, and planning. This reflects Scottish legislation (2006)
influence in thisaction in ways that acknowledge that aims to help parents to be involved with their
their competence (Tomanovic 2003). This contrasts child’s education and learning, welcomed as active
a kind of participation whereby students act mainly participants in school life, and encouraged to
in response to teachers’ decisions and demands-a express their views on school education.
distinction between what Shier (2010) frames as
participation as social control versus participation
as empowerment.
Similarly, the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum
has ‘community engagement’ as one of its eight
principles, and places far greater emphasis on
Shier outlines five levels of participation that this notion than the previous curriculum. It
are useful in analyzing the focus on student agency requires schools and teachers to encourage greater
66
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
involvement of parents and local communities prescription and regulation over curriculum, with
in their children’s learning. Most importantly, expanding curriculum content and a more explicit
it signals the involvement of parents not just as emphasis on core knowledge.
recipients of communications from schools, but as
meaningful partners in teaching and learning efforts
for their children.
The analogy of tides and curricular autonomy
works in at least two ways. First, like tides, levels
of curricular autonomy are different in different
places at the same time. While the issues that
national curriculum reviews often respond to are
sometimes quite similar in different contexts (the
need for improved teaching quality, higher student
achievement, schooling improvement and greater
education system equity, for example) some
systems take the autonomy route, while others the
prescription route. That contrast is evident currently
in the curricula of New Zealand and of England.
Second, like tides, levels of curricula autonomy
are constantly changing. A national curriculum
that is highly prescriptive at one point in time is
often reported to be much less so at a subsequent
point in time, and vice versa. These changes in the
nature of curricula are influenced by perceptions of
the problems that policy makers seek to address in
the design, or re-design, of a national curriculum.
During curriculum developments in New Zealand
in the mid- 2000s, for example, overcrowding in the
curriculum of the preceding decade was considered
a problem (Le Métais 2002). That problem was
emphasized in calls to revise the curriculum and
strengthen its role as a lever for improving student
achievement. The revised curriculum of 2007
sought to address the over-crowding problem by
significantly reducing prescription. In addition a
great deal of emphasis was given, in the national
curriculum itself, to the importance of schools
designing a locally relevant curriculum to give
effect to broad curriculum requirements.
Autonomy in national curricula
Characteristic of educational policy in many
jurisdictions in recent times is an emphasis on
curricular autonomy, or at least moves toward
increasedcurricularautonomycomparedtoprevious
curricula. Whilst the degree of autonomy and the
elements of the curriculum it relates to vary from
place to place, and systems offering low levels of
curricular autonomy remain fairly common across
OECD countries, “the most common configuration
is the one that gives schools the freedom to make
curricular decisions” (OECD 2011, p. 45). That
increase in school-level authority to make decisions
about curriculum content have been noted in
relation to the curricula of Scotland and New
Zealand (Sinnema and Aitken 2013) and of Finland,
Japan, Brazil and parts of China and Canada (OECD
2011). Curriculum, and I refer here specifically to
the planned curriculum, is increasingly deemed
to be not only the concern of policy makers, but
also the concern of practitioners based in schools,
including school leaders and teachers. Schools
are asked to address the challenges inherent in
designing and implementing a local curriculum
in a manner that also ensures they give effect to a
national curriculum. Those challenges are strongly
impacted by the degree and nature of autonomy in
the national curriculum.
Whilst there is evidence of increasing curricular
autonomy in many jurisdictions, the pattern
internationally is mixed. Describing the current
pattern across nations with regard to curricula
Inquiry oriented practice
The New Zealand Curriculum sets out a model
(and their autonomy) is complex, given those of effective pedagogy—teaching as inquiryn - that
curricula are in a constant state of change - at any requires educators to engage in three kinds of
given time countries are often either embarking inquiry as they .seek to achieve curriculum goals:
on, in the midst of, or responding to curriculum focusing inquiry, teaching inquiry and learning
review processes of some sort. Central issues that inquiry (Aitken and Sinnema 2008, p. 52). This
are typically addressed in those reviews are about inquiry approach is central to many initiatives
alternatives in what a revised curriculum should including those focused on teacher professional
emphasize: autonomy versus prescription, reduced learning and development. The focusing inquiry
versus expanded curriculum content; expanded requires careful attention to prioritizing what
curriculum content; local versus national priorities; matters most for the teachers’ students given the
and knowledge versus competencies. In some curriculum requirements, community expectations,
countries, New Zealand and Scotland for example, and most importantly, the learning needs, interests
curriculum change has led to increased local and experiences of the learner. The teaching inquiiy
decision making, greater autonomy for schools, requires attention to both outcomes-linked research
reduced content prescribed at a national level and evidence and practitioner experience to inform
emphasis on competencies and capabilities. The tide decisionsaboutwhatteachingstrategieswillbetried.
of curricula autonomy in those countries might be It encourages teachers to view research evidence as
described as high (with high freedom for teachers). the basis for explaining findings about the impact of
In England and Australia, by contrast, the tide has their own practice on their students’learning, and as
been going out - with tightening of national control, sources of better- informed conjectures about what
Volume 8, Issue 2
67
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
might enhance learning for students in their classrooms. The learning inquiry requires consideration of the
impact of teaching actions on student outcomes and inquiry into the relationship between the teaching and
those outcomes.
The origins of teaching as inquiry
Each of us has our vision of teaching at its best. This is powerfully shaped by our experiences as
teachers and as learners, where we remember teachers who taught in ways that worked for US. This
leads US to think about teaching in what is commonly referred to as a style-based way, with effectiveness
measured by how closely a teacher’s actions match our ideal. But not all learners are like us. A view of
effective teaching needs to accommodate something larger than a personal, idiosyncratic interpretation of
effectiveness.
A more refined view of the style-based approach is to derive our vision of ideal teaching from the
research literature. There is a long tradition of educational research that seeks to identify the qualities and
practices of effective teachers. So we get lists of qualities that effective teachers are expected to match,
such as warmth, enthusiasm and being business-like, and practices they should undertake, such as direct
instruction, clear ^nations and efficient routines. Most recently, this approach has been refined lịhróúgh
the use of meta-analysis to rank practices according to their effect size (see e.g., Hattie, 2009; Marzano,
Pickering & Pollock, 2001). As Stanford Professor Lee Shulman pointed out many years ago in relation to
the findings of process-product research Shulman,1987), what such work does is establish the principles
we need to employ as about our teaching. What it does not do is prescribe specific methods or liilEPụrs that
determine effectiveness or excellence. The contexts within which teachers teach (age of students, cultural
context, prior knowledge and experiences of students, subject, time of day and the like) are so diverse that
no prescription of particular practices will suffice to capture an inclusive aspiration for the profession.
And in any case, a style-based way of thinking leads US to look in the wrong place - at the actions and
behaviours of the teacher, not at the responses and outcomes for students. As Berliner points out, following
a style- focused view of effective teaching, a student teacher can be judged to be good if they model the
desired practices irrespective of whether the students learn (Berliner, 1987).
An alternative view is, therefore, to define effective teaching by student outcomes (see Table below).
This approach has popular appeal and a simple logic: effective teachers cause students to learn. Thus,
high student achievement can be attributed to effective teaching and low achievement can be attributed to
ineffective teaching. The league tables of school pass rates in national examinations reflect such logic - the
implication being that the best have the highest pass rates and by extension have the best teachers.
TABLE. The ideas and claims of style- and outcomes-based views of effective teaching
A style-focused view of effective teaching
An outcomes-focused view of effective teaching
Key ideas
Related claims (examples)
Key ideas
Related claims (examples)
Outcomes in
terms of what
students
achieve
indicate
Style in terms of
personal attributes
indicates teaching
effectiveness.
Effective teaching is evident when a teacher’s
students achieve well. Effective teaching
can be seen in the progress demonstrated by
students.
Effective teachers display
warmth. Effective teachers are
enthusiastic.
teaching
effectiveness
Style in terms of
particular
teaching
techniques
indicates teaching
effectiveness
Comparison of
students’
achievements
The comparative’ effectiveness of teachers
is best determined by comparing the
achievements of the students they teach.
Judgements about more and less effective
teaching can be made by comparing: how
well various teachers’ students achieve.
Effective teachers provide an
overview at the start of teaching
something new. Effective teachers indicates
use a variety of interesting
resources in each lesson.
comparative
teaching
effectiveness
Comparisons
of the value
teachers add to
students’
achievement
indicates
comparative
teaching
effectiveness.
Effective teachers minimise
the amount of time they are
teaching the whole class from
the front (direct instruction).
Effective teachers facilitate the
The comparative effectiveness of teachers
is best determined by comparing the added
value they contribute to the achievements of
the students they teach. Judgements about
more and less effective teaching can be made
by comparing how much difference various
teachers make to their students’ achievement.
Style in terms of
general teaching
approaches indicates
teaching effectiveness. joint construction of knowledge
through teacher-student and
student-student conversations.
While there is no disputing the need to base the assessment of teaching effectiveness on student learning
68
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
and achievement, this simple logic has several flaws. the students - that is: Teaching as Inquiry.
The first is that differences in student achievement
may not be attributable to a teacher’s teaching. The
significanceofpriorknowledgehasbeenconsistently
associated with student achievement and cannot
be overlooked. On the basis of their intensive
monitoring of students in classrooms, Nuthall and
Alton-Lee are definite about the influence of prior
knowledge on achievement. In particular, they note
that when there is a significant misconception or
misunderstanding in a learner’s prior knowledge,
the learning that would otherwise be expected, is
subverted (Nuthall & Alton-Lee, 1993). This makes
it unfair to compare the summative achievements of
students and to attribute the differential to superior
or inferior teaching.
A more refined view of the outcomes approach
is the value-added approach that links teaching
effectiveness not to achievement but to learning -
in other words, to progress between time point one
and time point two. The difficulty here is that the
measurement of such learning, if it is to be genuinely
attributed to a teacher’s teaching, is either very
simplistic and restricted to narrow outcomes that
are easy to measure, or it IS extremely complex.
The complexity arises because learning is not just
influenced by teaching but by factors such as family
background, ethnicity and social class. A genuine
measure of a teacher’s contributiony to learning
would need to take account of these significant
influences. Furthermore, even when such a measure
is available there is no guarantee that the learning of
a student is attributable to the teacher. The student
may well have received extra tutoring or support
from external sources.
The nature of teaching as inquiry
The model of Teaching as Inquiry as described
in The New Zealand curriculum (Ministry of
Education, 2007) emerged during the development
of a best evidence] synthesis - a synthesis aimed
at making the findings of multiple research studiếẫ
accessible to teachers. The studies included were
those that showed how teaching social sciences can
impact positively on outcomes for diverse learners.
It became clear! however, that merely providing
the research findings for teachers, and doing so in a
way that suggested certainty about the impact those
strategies would have when applied, was not ideal.
While looking to research findings has clear
benefits for teachers, and it is a professional
obligation to do so, there are also risks involved
that need attention. There are risks associated with
looking to general research findings since they may
not appear to offer anything new - teachers may
believe they are already employing the suggested
approach when in fact there are subtle differences
(Sinnema & Aitken, 2011). There are also risks
when looking to particular research findings since
those particular approaches are certain not to
work in exactly the same way in different contexts
(Sinnema & Aitken, 2011). As can be seen in
the various teaching strategies described in the
social sciences best evidence synthesis (Aitken &
Sinnema, 2008; Sinnema & Aitken, 2012), some
quite similar strategies worked in one context, or
for one leamer/group of learners, or in relation to
one outcome, but did not work in another context,
for another leamer/group of learners or in relation
to a different outcome.
The value-added approach also takes no account
of the student’s contribution to learning. A teacher’s
ability to progress a student between time point
one and two is influenced by factors internal to
the student such as personal organisation, interest,
motivation, personal attributions of success or
failure, and self-efficacy for particular subjects
and tasks. While it is certainly true that a teacher
can mitigate these influences, they cannot be
simply dismissed as irrelevant to student progress
and by extension to the assessment of teaching
effectiveness.
The style-based approach has given welcome
and renewed prominence to scientifically grounded
research findings and their implications for teachers’
practice. Whereas, the outcomes-based approach
has given undeniably important prominence to
student achievement and learning. However,
neither approach is sufficient on its own to define
teaching effectiveness. What is needed is a view
of effectiveness that is based on the systematic and
consistent interrogation of the relationship between
what the teacher is doing and what is happening for
To address those risks we proposed a model of
Teaching as Inquiry as vital to effective pedagogy.
The model, as it stands in The New Zealand
curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007), presents
three key components that are detailed below -
focusing inquiry, teaching inquiry and learning
inquiry. Those inquiries, as argued in an elaboration
of the teaching as inquiry model (Sinnema, Meyer
& Aitken, 2017) are strengthened by drawing on
resources, including a body of knowledge (about
learners, learning, society and culture, content,
pedagogy, content pedagogy, curriculum and
assessment); competencies (cultural, intellectual,
critical, relational and technical); dispositions
(such as open-mindedness, fallibility, discernment
and agency); and through commitment to ethical
principles (commitment to learners, families, the
profession and society) and commitment to social
justice (through challenging racism, inequity,
deficit thinking, disparity and injustice).
The following sections discuss the key
components of the Teaching as Inquiry model -
Volume 8, Issue 2
69
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
focusing inquiry, teaching inquiry and learning of practitioners includingtheir own and others’
inquiry. This model does not simply describe (Furman, 2018) and the second is research
actions; it is underpinned by a set of attitudes evidence (Sinnema & Aitken, 2014).
towards teaching and learning:
Let us say, for example, a focusing inquiry
Foremost among these are open-mindedness, establishes that students havẹ weaknesses in
fallibility, and persistence, open¬mindedness refers understanding fractions and also establishes that
to a willingness to consider teaching approaches learning fractions is a high priority for a particular
that may be unfamiliar or that may challenge one’s group of students. In the teaching inquiry, the
beliefs about the best ways to teach. It refers also teachei should consider (alongside their own and
being open to what the evidence shows about the colleagues’ previous experience) whaj research
effects of teaching on student Reaming. Fallibility evidence suggests might be useful in addressing
refers to the lively realisation that however strong that learning priority. The| might turn to a synthesis
the evidence may ^e’ educational research findings of mathematics education research evidence
are always conjectural because they are context- (Anthony & Walshaw, 2007) or to a particular
bound. Fallibility involves accepting the possibility study cited in that-synthesis. A study carried out
that what was, or what has been, successful with one by Kazemi and Stipek (2001), for example, reveals
group of learners may not be successful for another the importance of teachers creating a high press
and that, for this reason, well-designed intentions for conceptual thinking through their practice. The
might fail to generate the desired response. The need researchers used videotapes of lessons about the
for persistence directly follows from fallibility, as addition of fractions in four low decile classrooms
teachers must inquire again into the focus of future and analysed the conversations to establish whether
learning and into the possibilities for future, more they demanded high or low press for conceptual
effective action (Aitken & Sinnema, 2008, p. 53).
thinking. In two of the four classrooms there was
a consistently high press for conceptual thinking.
The researchers noticed that in the high press
classes: (a) explanations were not just procedural
These kinds of attitudes have implications
for each of the inquiries detailed in the following
sections.
descriptions, but included
a
mathematical
Focusing inquiry
argument; (b) mathematical thinking was shown
to involve understanding relations among multiple
strategies; (c) errors were used as opportunities to
reconceptualise a problem, explore contradictions
in solutions and and pursue alternative strategies;
and (d) during collaborative work there was an
expectation that each student would be accountable
for thinking through the mathematics involved in a
problem and consensus would be reached through
mathematical argumentation.
In the other two classes there was typically a
lower press for conceptual thinking. Unlike in the
high press class: (a) instructions were given in a
general way (e. g., “work with a partner”, “work
together on this”); (b) often the work was not shared
amongst all students in a group; and (c) students
who weren’t sure what to do often withdrew and
allowed someone else to take over. For example,
one student who wasn’t sure what to do took on the
role of listening and agreeing and wasn’t required to
think through the mathematical ideas as they would
have been required to do in the high press class.
The example above regarding the role of research
in the teaching inquiry shows three things. First, it
shows how reading and engaging with research is
relevant to the real problems and dilemmas facing
teachers; such research has been carried out in real
classrooms and so speaks to real teachers. Often
publication of such research includes examples,
case studies, quotes, summaries, and the like that
make the research particularly useful and applicable
In the focusing inquiry teachers consider the
priorities for their students’ learning. There are
countless things that are important for students to
learn. It is a teacher’s responsibility to think about
which of those things are most important. Being
clear about those priorities, through knowing the
relative importance of many possible important
outcomes, enables a clear sense of direction. It also
makes decisions about how to allocate time much
easier, which is useful since there is limited time
available in each lesson, each week, each term and
each school year. How the available time is spent
should reflect the learning priorities for students.
For teachers to make good decisions about
priorities for their students they need to know and
understand where their students are currently at, and
they need to know and understand what the national
and school-level curricula set out as desirable
outcomes. They need, therefore, to be able to carry
out assessment and use the results formatively to
respond to those in ways that move students toward
meeting the goals of local and national curricula.
Teaching inquiry
In the teaching inquiry teachers consider how
they could and should go about teaching in ways
that are most likely to help learners achieve the
priority outcomes established in the focusing
inquiry. There are two key informants of teachers’
decisions about what approaches and strategies
are most likely to work - the first is the experience
70
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
for practitioners. Second, it shows how such for another?” Answering those questions calls for
research provides insights not only into what might data of all sorts - data about student achievement
work by describing it, but also provides insights gained from more formal tests and tasks, as well as
into how and why such strategies might work qualitative accounts of student learning that might
through explanations. The date of publication of the be drawn from student work samples, observations,
research in this example (2001) is a reminder that student reflections, images, and so on.
while there is a need to look to current and recent
research, there is also a tradition of research that
can be drawn on - research that strives to be useful
in improving teaching and learning and also provide
understanding of the deeper processes involved in
teaching, learning and education (Berliner, 2004).
The form of teaching as inquiry
While the sections above signal what Teaching
as Inquiry is about, here we will elaborate on how it
happens - the various forms of Teaching as Inquiry.
Teaching as Inquiry is a means of thinking about,
talking about or writing about practice. The form of
each inquiry can vary in the following ways:
Learning inquiry
In the learning inquiry teachers consider the
impact of their teaching on outcomes for learners.
They ask about the extent to which their teaching was
successful in helping students to achieve the learning
established as most important in the focusing inquiry.
They ask not only about student achievement or
progress, but also about student experience - for
example, how did the approach impact on students’
engagement, interest, motivation, enjoyment or view
of themselves as learners.
There is also a need to use data gathered in
the learning inquiry to consider various levels of
impact - the impact on each student (how was each
individual student impacted by the teaching?), on
groups, classes and cohorts of students (perhaps
those of special interest). Failure to consider the
various levels may lead teachers to miss important
cues about where their focus should be. A focus
only on individual students may mask patterns in
terms of groups that are responding well or not so
well to the teaching. A focus on groups of learners
may obscure the experience of individuals within
those groups that are vital to respond to.
To be rigorous in carrying out a learning inquiry
requires a focus not only on where the impact of
teaching was positive (the good news story) bút also
attention to where the impact may not have been as
positive as desired. “Which aspects of the teaching
were successful?” is an important question, but
equally so is “which aspects of the teaching were
unsuccessful?” Similarly, while it may be tempting to
notice the learners who experienced success in their
learning as a result of the teaching, just as important
is teacher’s attention to those learners for whom
the teaching led to less success than they deserve.
Noticing the impact on learners (both positive and
negative) refers not only to groups of learners, but
also to individuals, since there are implications for
a teacher for both of those foci. In a high quality
Teaching as Inquiry, having described the positive
and less-than- positive impacts, teachers would then
seek to explain the impact. They might ask “Why is
it that my teaching was successful in one aspect, but
not on the other?” and ‘Why is it that my teaching
was less successful for one group of learners than
Duration: from short - to medium - to long - term
Participants: from the individual to the collective
Formality: from the informal to the formal
Start point: focusing inquiry or teaching inquiry
or learning inquiry.
The duration of an inquiry can vary from one
that happens spontaneously in relation to. a short
teaching instance over moments, to an inquiry
into the teaching over a day, a week, a term or a
school year. In a short ‘moments’ inquiry, a teacher
may notice, for example, as he or she observes a
discussion that students’ responses are short and
rarely responded to by other students. They could
then briefly contemplate how they might adapt
their teaching approach to promote richer responses
from students and encourage interactions between
students, which may lead them to reduce the number
of questions they ask during the discussion. They
would then monitor the impact of their adaptation on
students’ participation in the discussion that follows.
Aschool year-long inquiry, however, might see a
teacher deciding early on in the year (based on data
from her students’ previous teachers) that fractions,
decimals and percentages are a priority for most of
the students. That could lead to a search for research
evidence about approaches most likely to improve
students understanding of fractions, decimals and
percentages. Consideration of that evidence would
then inform a plan for learning and trying various
alternative approaches over the course of the year.
The learning inquiry could then involve ongoing
monitoring of the success of the various approaches
for each student and a comparison of the overall
success in teaching in this area as compared with
previous years.
Teachers will sometimes carry out Teaching
as Inquiry individually as they reflect, consider,
wonder, plan .and respond on their own. But most
often inquiries will involve collaboration between
teachers (often syndicate/department groups), school
leaders or professional learning providers. While the
guiding questions of the Teaching as Inquiry cycle
are useful to teachers contemplating their practice on
Volume 8, Issue 2
71
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
their own, they are also useful to guide colleagues
The prominence of Teaching as Inquiry in policy
as they discuss each other’s inquiry. So long as such andeducationinitiativesandthewidespreadpositive
interactions are not ‘thwarted by norms of politeness response to it is heartening, but there are reports of
and the absence of challenge’ (Timperley, 2008, p. a need for greater rigour in its implementation. In
19) they can challenge teachers to be rigorous in a review by the Education Review Office, it was
their thinking, and to defend decisions that arise reported that while most schools had processes in
from consideration of the questions. A colleague place to promote Teaching as Inquiry, in 28 per cent
might, for example, challenge a teacher’s response of schools there were minimal or no processes in
to the question ‘What is most important?’ by seeking place. Furthermore, in schools that were promoting
their reasoning, or by prompting them to consider Teaching as Inquiry, the review revealed many
alternatives.
approaches to be lacking rigour. For example, in
relation to the teaching inquiry, ERO reported that
teachers typically do not refer to research. Rather
they tend to select strategies from an existing
repertoire of their own practice or that of colleagues.
Teachers’ inquiries can also range in terms of
how formal or informal they are. Many schools
have adopted a formal approach to Teaching as
Inquiry (see Fowler, 2012), using it as the basis for
school-wide professional learning, team meetings,
While there are merits to choosing known
for teacher appraisal or mentoring. It can also be approaches, the risks are that these do not
used in a much more informal manner. In this way, necessarily align well with the currently identified
discussions about learning priorities, evidence- issues. Thinking about the possibilities that could
based approaches to teaching and the impact of lead to better outcomes for students should include
teaching on learners become business as usual.
There is no given start point for Teaching as
Inquiry. At times, it makes sense to begin with the
looking at what other teachers and researchers have
found to be effective.
They reported that there were similar gaps in the
focusing inquiry. In other situations the priority may quality of inquiry at every phase.
already have been Established and be quite certain,
and so it makes sense for the inquiry to begin
with the inching inquiry - to ask what approach/
es might be most likely to work in achieving
ib®’already established learning priorities. Other
inquiries may begin with a learning inquiry, where a
particular teaching approach has already been tried
or is already in place; the important starting point
question in that case may be about the impact of
that approach.
Collaborative inquiry
The prominence of teaching as inquiry, together
with moves in the New Zealand context to promote
the role of collaboration in educational improvement
has led to an increase in attention to collaborative
inquiry. Many national and local initiatives
foreground such collaborative inquiry, one example
of which is the Teacher Led Innovation Fund.
The Teacher-led Innovation Fund (TLIF) is
a Ministry of Education initiative designed to
support quality practice that improves student
achievement and that can be shared and adapted
for use across schools and kahui ako. It is open
to all primary and secondary kaiako/teachers in
state and state-integrated kura/schools that meet
application criteria1. TLIF is one of three initiatives
that are part of the broader IES Government
initiative aimed at raising student achievement and
strengthening teaching and education leadership.
TLIF provides funding for groups of teachers to
develop innovative teaching practice in order to
improve learning outcomes, particularly for Maori
students and Pasifika students, students with special
education needs and students from low socio-
economic backgrounds.
Teaching as inquiry in practice
There has been a widespread positive response
to the inclusion of the Teaching as inquiry model in
The New Zealand curriculum (Sinnema, 2011). The
model has been used as the organising framework for
many initiatives and publications aimed at supporting
curriculum implementation in New Zealand. It is the
framework for a series of case studies drawn from the
Quality Teaching Research and Development project
(Sinnema, Sewell, & Milligan, 2011) to illustrate
how teachers used an inquiry approach to become
more culturally responsive and improve outcomes
for their Maori and Pasifika students (Ministry of
Education, 2010). It is also the main organiser in the
pedagogy section of the recently revised guidelines
for Education outside the classroom (Ministry of
Education, 2009a) and is described as “at the heart”
of curriculum guidelines for the teaching of te reo
Maori (Ministry of Education, 2009b). Teaching as
Inquiry has also been central to a number of national
professional learning and leadership initiatives since
2007, and informed the development of an inquiry
cycle in the context of teacher professional learning
(Timperley et al., 2007).
TLIF provides teachers with time and expert
support to inquire into their practice to find ways
to help students succeed; and to share what works
with other schools and educators. TLIF aims to
have long-term impacts on students, the workforce,
early learning centres/schools/kura and on teaching
practice.
The underpinning principles of the TLIF fund
72
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
Successes and promise
are:
Collaborative Inquiry: groups of teachers
working together to understand their practice and
the impact on students.
Expertise: leveraging expertise within schools
and kõhui ako, complemented by support from
external experts.
Flexibility and adaptability: project teams and
fund administration need to respond to change.
Overall there is very high regard for the
opportunities presented through involvement in a
TLIF project-teachers, project leads, and external
experts were grateful for the opportunity to
participate, and keen to continue.
Comments from teachers often indicated
quite profoundly positive attitudes towards their
experience of TLIF. Some referred to TLEF,
for example, as the best professional learning
experience they had ever been involved in,
inspirational, a turning point, or an absolutely
rewarding opportunity that was a highlight of their
professional life.
Almost unanimous endorsement of TLEF from
both teachers and external experts involved with
projectteams.Whenaskediftheywouldrecommend
to others being involved in a TLIF project, 99.2%
of teacher indicated either “yes, definitely” or “yes
with some conditions”. All external experts who
responded indicated similarly (100% endorsement).
The greatest impact on teachers, indicated by
questionnaire ratings, was on their dispositions
(6.91), practice shifts (6.79), and knowledge and
understandings (6.75). Ratings for impacts on
students (6.3) and skills (6.22) were “slightly lower1.
While the quality of TLIF projects is variable,
in most, their efforts have resulted in improved
conditions for collaborative inquiry with more
regular and routine opportunities for deprivatised
practice, professional dialogue about innovations
being investigated, and learning with/from
colleagues they had not had the chance to learn
with/from before.
Many teachers reported that TLIF had provided
the impetus for them to try new and different
practices that were not part of their existing teaching
repertoire. In many cases, the notion of ‘innovation’
was a relative one—the practices being investigated
were new to the particular teacher or group of
teachers, but not necessarily highly innovative in
terms of pushing boundaries or revealing practices
new to the field. In some cases, highly innovative
approaches were explored, offering new insights
that others could learn from.
Many teachers described attention to gathering
student voice for insights into both teaching and
learning that they had not previously paid so much
attention to. While student voice data tended to
focus mostly on their preferences or satisfaction
(rather than data from students about the impact of
particular innovations or the reasons for the success
or otherwise of an innovation) the move to include
Knowledge mobilisation: knowledge gained
from projects needs to be shared.
A recent evaluation of the initiative used a
theory of action approach (Sinnema, 2018), a
constraint inclusion account of problem solving.
It highlighted both important areas of promise,
and key challenges to such a collaborative inquiry
initiative contributing to professional learning goals
to improve teaching and learning.
Findings from across the data sources indicate
notable successes in terms of the initiative overall,
and some problematic patterns that could be
addressed in ways that Continue to strengthen the
TLIF initiative. The findings are summarised below.
Problematic patterns
Successes and promise
Overall very high regard for
the opportunities presented
through involvement in a
TLIF project
Data confidence and capability
issues
Lower impact on teachers’
skills (in particular data use
skills) or on students than on
dispositions, practice shifts or
knowledge and understandings
Big pockets of profound
positivity about the TLIF
experience
Discussions tended to be
more supportive/collegial than
challenging/rigorous.
Almost unanimous
endorsement of : TLIF
Often almost exclusive
Impact on dispositions,
emphasis on successes and little practice shifts and knowledge
attention to failures
and understandings
Attention to priority learners or
target groups in proposals not
always carried through to the
data collection, analysis and
reports
Establishment of conditions
for collaborative inquiry
Teacher confidence lower in
relation to collaborative items
than items relating to own
inquiry and practice
Opportunities to make
deprivatising practice and
engaging in professional
dialogue about it a norm
Uncertainty about the
robustness of claims about the
impact of innovations
Innovative (forthe teacher/s
involved) practices being
tried and explored
Attention to student voice for
insights into both teaching
and learning
1. Items were scored on an 8-point Likert scale ranging from ‘1’ for
‘Strongly Disagree’ to ‘8’ for Strongly disagree (1); Mostly disagree
(2); Moderately disagree (3); Slightly disagree (4); Slightly agree (5);
Moderately agree (6); Mostly agree (7), Strongly agree (8)
Some exceptional projects
These points are elaborated below with reference
to data from the evaluation.
Volume 8, Issue 2
73
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
data from students is commendable.
Attention to priority learners or target groups
evident in proposals was nó| always carried through
to the data, data analysis and reports.
The TLIF initiative has revealed some project
teams with considerable expertise in leading and
carrying out inquiries, learning about the impact
Teacher confidence lower in relation to items
of innovations, and mobilising knowledge from about ability to collaborate witlf (and influence)
their inquiries in a way that is relevant to others. other than items relating to own inquiry and practice.
These exceptional projects provide a resource for
others, and a basis for sharing not only innovative
teaching/classroom practices likely to be effective,
but productive processes for collaborative inquiry.
Uncertainty about the robustness of claims about
the impact of innovations! Most claims were quite
general-they referred to increased achievement of
student! without specifying which students were
impacted, in what ways, or how much theif learning
improved, and without sufficient supporting
evidence. Some projects we| further, and specified
details of which students improved, how and how
much. But, v<n few provided robust explained
claims where there was, in addition, clear, logical
atg evidence-based explanations about how the
innovation was related to improvements.
Problematic patterns
Data confidence and capability stands out as
the biggest issue facing teachers, teams and those
supporting them. Teachers themselves reported
much lower confidence in. their own ability to
analyse data in ways that give important insights
(6.18), than other aspects of their inquiry work.
Those issues were also evident project reports
where the quality of the data collected was often
questionable, with typically generic descriptions of
analyses and generality in claims about impact and
causality. For example, claims like this one-“Overall
the inquiry... has resulted in the uplifting of student
achievement, particularly for our target students,
and the teaching and learning of our teachers” were
often left without evidence to support them, and no
indication that data had been collected or analysed
in a way that supported the claim of success.
Characteristics of Effective TLIF Projects
Insights from the various data sources suggest
that the following characteristics are associated
with more effective TLIF projects. By effective,
I refer to the TLIF purposes of a positive impact
on outcomes for teachers (their knowledge and
understanding, skills, dispositions and practice), for
students (their learning experiences, relationships,
and achievement), and the generation of new
knowledge, understandings and learning that can
As a consequence of the issues regarding data be mobilised to others. These characteristics both
capability, there was often a lack of robustness in increase the likelihood that innovations teams tty
the claims able to be made about the impact of are successful and, equally important, the likelihood
innovations on learners and uncertainty about what that teams will determine, in a timely manner, when
knowledge could be mobilised to others.
Overall, teachers reported lower impact on their
skills (in particular data use skills) (6.22) or on
and why they are not successful where that is the
case. The characteristics are:
Unrelenting commitment to and focus on
students (6.30) than on dispositions (6.91), practice improvement-improvement of both teaching and
shifts (6.79) or knowledge and understandings (6.75). learning;
Discussions tended to be more supportive
Levels of risk-taking and innovation appropriate
(7.55) or collegial (7.50) than challenging (7.17) to the capacity of the teachers and contexts involved;
or rigorous (7.10). That finding is important since
we found a robust positive relationship between the
quality of project discussions (including rigour and
challenge) and impact of TLIF. That is, the better
teachers rated their project discussions, the stronger
they perceived the impact of the project on their
knowledge (r = 0.75**), dispositions (r = 0.64**),
practice shifts (r = 0.67**), skills (r = 0.55**) and
on students (r = 0.59**).
The finding that there was often an almost
exclusive emphasis on success and very much
less attention to any failures is problematic given
the likelihood of failures being associated with
innovation, the importance of attention to failure
and its causes to puzzles of practice, and the role
of fallibility and open mindedness as disposition^
conducive to high quality inquiry.
High quality collaboration-well-established
collaboration routines and norms, that are regular,
involve deprivatised practice and occur over an
extended duration;
High quality data and data analysis relevant to
the logic of the innovation;
Highqualitydiscussion—supportiveandcollegial
and simultaneously challenging and rigorous;
High quality expertise from internal sources
(teacher leadership) and external sources (relevant
quality research, and external experts whose
expertise aligns with team needs).
Enablers and barriers
The extent to which project teams were able to
carry out high quality inquiries into their innovation
was influenced by a range of barriers and enablers,
74
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
summarised below:
them important considerations for initial teacher
education Where such initiatives prompt new and
different roles for teachers, they also prompt new
and different emphases and approaches for initial
teacher education. In the New Zealand context, this
has led to calls for a quite new emphasis for the
accreditation of initial teacher educator providers,
one that makes more prominent attention to the
quality of assessments of graduating teacher
capability than to the inputs of teacher education
programmes.
Barriers
Enablers
Collaboration time
Inquiry orientation
Logistics and project
administration (including
time, release issues, personnel
changes)
Resistance
Knowledge-building
opportunities
Data capability
Contribution of external
expertise
Reporting demands
The capabilities required of teachers working
with curricula that promote responsive pedagogies,
student agency, competencies and partnership
require not only different knowledge, but different
skills, attitudes and values of those who are being
prepared to teach such curricula. Similarly, systems
that promote teacher inquiry, and particularly
those that promote collaborative inquiry need to
pay attention not only to the vast potential of such
approaches, but the quite particular demands such
approaches have on the capabilities of teachers,
including the capabilities to work in and strengthen
social networks, and to interact effectively with
others in ways that solve problems of practice
and generate through rigorous inquiry, deep
understandings about the priorities for learners, the
approaches most likely to address those priorities
and the impact of teaching on learning. Such
demands have implications not only for the content
of initial teacher education, but the processes
involved in programme design, teaching, learning,
practicum and assessment.
Leadership support
Summary of Key Messages
With a focus on the purpose of the TLIF
evaluation to inform continuous improvement of
TLIF’s design, implementation and monitoring,
the following figure presents a summary of key
messages, the current ‘story’ of TLIF as it were.
These messages, derived from the evaluation
evidence are key because, if attended to, they hold
much promise for next steps in improving the
initiative overall. Some of these messages represent
problems to be solved, but there are strong grounds
and good conditions for solving them, given the
widespread endorsement of and regard for TLIF,
the establishment (or strengthening) of relational
conditions conducive to inquiry and innovation,
and the presence of some exceptional projects to
learn from.
Implications for initial teacher education
Curriculum,
inquiry
and
collaboration
initiatives of the sort outlined above bring with
References
Aitken, G. & Sinnema, c. (2008). Effective
pedagogy in social sciences/Tikanga à iwi:
best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington:
Ministry of Education.
Anthony, G. & Walshaw, M. (2007). Effective
pedagogy in mathematics/p’angarau: best
evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington:
Ministry of Education.
Berliner, D. (1987). Simple views of effective
teaching and a simple theory of classroom
instruction. In D. Berliner & B. Rosenshine
(eds), Talks to teachers (pp. 93-110) New
York: Random House.
Berliner, D. (2004). Toiling in Pasteur’s
quadrant: the contributions of N.L. Gage
to educational psychology.Teaching and
Teacher Education, 20, pp. 329-340.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). The new teacher
education: For better or worse? Educational
Researcher, 34(7), 3-17.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, s. L. (2009). Inquiry
as stance: Practitioner research for the next
generation. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cowie, B., & Hipkins, R. (2009). Curriculum
Implementation Exploratory Studies: Final
educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/
curriculum/57760/1.
Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). ‘What is
agency?’. American Journal of Sociology,
103(4), 962-1023.
Hk Fowler, M. (2012). Leading inquiry at a
teacher level: it’s all about mentorship. SET,
3, pp. 2-7..
Carr, M., & Claxton, G. (2002), Tracking
the development of learning dispositions.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy
& Practice, 9(1), 9 - 37.
Furman, c. (2018). “Descriptive inquiry:
cultivating practical wisdom with teachers.”
Teachers and Teaching: 1-12.
Volume 8, Issue 2
75
KHOA HỌC, GIÁO DỤC VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ
Hart R. A. (1996). Children’s participation: from
tokenism to citizenship. In H. Shier (Ed.),
Giving children a voice: Camden Social
Services.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis
of over 800 meta- analyses relating to
achievement. London: Routledge.
Marzano R., Pickering, D. & Pollock, J. (2001).
Classroom instruction that works: research-
based strategies for increasing student
achievement. Virginia: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Ministry of Education (2007). The New Zealand
curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
Shier, H. (2001). Pathways to participation:
Opening, opportunities and obligations.
Children & Society 15(2), 107-117.
Shier, H. (2010). Children as public actors:
Navigating the tensions. Children & Society
24(1), 24-37.
Shulman, L. s. (1987). The wisdom of practice:
managing complexity in medicine and
teaching. In D. Berliner & B. Rosenshine
(eds), Talks to teachers (pp. 249-i 271). New
York: Random House.
Sinnema, c., Aitken, G., & Meyer, F. (2017).
Capturing the Complex, Context- bound and
Active Nature of Teaching through Inquiry-
oriented Graduating Teachers Standards.
Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 9-27.
Mourshed, M., Chijioke, c., & Barber, M.
(2010). How the world’s most improved
school systems keep getting better. CA:
McKinsey & Company
Sinnema, c. E., & Aitken, G. (2012). Effective
pedagogy in social sciences. In;
Reid, A. (2006). Key competencies: A new way
forward or more of the same? Curriculum
Matters, 2, 43-62.
Sinnema, c. & Aitken, G.(2011). Teaching
as inquiry in the New Zealan curriculum:
origins and implementation. In J. Parr, H.
Hedges & s. May (eds) Changing trajectories
of teaching and learning (pp. 29-48).
Wellington: NZCER.
Sinnema, c. (2011). Monitoring and evaluating
curriculum implementation. Final evaluation
report on the implementation of the New
Zealand curriculum 2008¬2009. Wellington:
The Ministry of Education.
Robinson, V., Hohepa, M., & Lloyd, c.
(2008). School leadership and student
outcomes:
and why. Best evidence synthesis
iteration Wellington: Ministry of
Identifying
what
works
educationcounts.govt.nz/goto/BES
CẢI CÁCH GIÁO DỤC: NHỮNG HIỂU BIẾT TỪ CHÍNH SÁCH,
NGHIÊN CỨU ĐẾN THỰC HÀNH TRONG BỐI CẢNH GIÁO DỤC
TẠI NEW ZEALAND VÀ ẢNH HƯỞNG ĐỐI VỚI VIỆC ĐÀO TẠO
GIÁO VIÊN
Claire Sinnema
Đại học Auckland, New Zealand
Email: [email protected]
Tóm tắt: Cải cách giáo dục và những thay đổi liên quan đến
chương trình giảng dạy, phương pháp sư phạm, tiêu chuẩn, đánh
giá và giáo dục nghề nghiệp có vai trò quan trọng trong các sáng
kiến cải tiến giáo dục. Trong bài viết này, tôi tìm hiểu từ các sáng
kiến về chính sách, nghiên cứu và thực hành trên các khía cạnh
chủ yếu của giáo dục New Zealand, cải thiện những nỗ lực quốc tế
để nêu bật ý nghĩa và khả năng đào tạo giáo viên. Đặc biệt, trọng
tâm là cải cách chương trình học, thực hành theo hướng điều tra
hợp tác: Các thành tố của chính sách này đã được phác thảo và
xem xét để đưa ra các hàm ý cho giáo dục ban đầu của giáo viên.
Ngày nhận bài: 4/5/2019
Ngày phản biện: 8/5/2019
Ngày tác giả sửa: 25/5/2019
Ngày duyệt đăng: 12/6/2019
Ngày phát hành: 21/6/2019
DOI:
Từ khóa: Cách mạng công nghiệp 4.0; Đào tạo giáo viên;
New Zealand; Cải cách giáo dục.
76
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC MINORITIES RESEARCH
13 trang
14000
Free
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Educational improvement: Insights from policy, research and practice in the New Zealand context, and implications for teacher education", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- educational_improvement_insights_from_policy_research_and_pr.pdf
