-: WALOs (Wicked Awesome Learning Opportunities):-
Reflect on your practice
Share with a colleague
1) Olympics for grade 5-6
2) Pedal Power for grade 7-8
3) Culture in a box for 7-8 ( this project collaborates with a school in North Korea)
4) Idioms for elementary school.
Lead your community
These are some of the things I am currently involved with, on regular basis…. My reflections have helped me to review my current practices for improvement/ refinement - for documentation/ recoding and specific learning outcome from each!!
- I have in past have recorded some my sessions. I have discussed the same my colleagues and students. But this certainly is not a regular feature, it was more like one of the activities and like students I too was uncomfortable for the very first session (which needless to add according to me was a disaster) but later sessions were more participatory and effective.
- I now plan to record the sessions more often, with a purpose and for follow-up, and for connecting with self. May be more for the Project that I will be working on. I am looking forward to learn from such reflections. Learning to avoid self-consciousness of this process.
- I regularly write to reflect! I may not call the same as journal! I also share my learning with my colleagues. I regularly share books read, my lesson plans, best practices in teaching, articles and research in field of education, about discussions in my class, and student’s responses with them. Reflecting upon this practice now, I realize that these are “unplanned sessions” and are not recorded with a purpose of learning. I need to be more specific with these sessions and use protocol to make them effective and meaningful. Though it certainly helps me revisit topics and helps me reflect on my work.
- I do have video records of presentations done by students reflecting their learning especially for TOK. They choose their own topics from current situation, and connect them to TOK and talk about knowledge issues identified by them for 10-15 minutes.
Share with a colleague
- There have been colleagues, visitors and principals form other schools who have observed my ToK classes. Last such interaction was in 3rd week of July a visitor was part of my class. His participation in our activity and interaction with class was useful feedback for all of us. As part of my profile I do observe classes – sessions taken by my colleagues and give them feedback on various aspects.
- My “classroom walk through” helps me look at fabric that school decides to work upon. This is part of my role .Creating a protocol for this process may help me being productive and more effective. (emerging understanding for me is using protocol for certain practices for refined outcome.)
- As part of my profile mentoring team members is also part of my responsibility! These are planned meetings, though sessions are not video recorded, some notes are certainly taken and reflections take us to the next level. My personal belief for mentoring; “there is place for everyone and unless everyone is in place -picture is not complete. It does not matter whether you are “center piece” or a “corner piece” as in jigsaw… each one needs to find the appropriate place and to accommodate others too”!
- My colleagues may say that they are “victims” of my sharing of books that I read!! Just to name a few Neha/ Shridhar / Siddharth (all 3 of them are HTH participants apart from other team members) are regular ones to get a recommendation of a book from me to read!! I also share reading material, information about websites, blogs, links, through mail with other colleagues. At a very personal level, I also run a “Book club” wherein members meet every month and each member takes turn to discuss / review / share and answers questions from the group.
- My next quest certainly is to produce a card for Unboxed!! Though it may sound “out of box” response at this time!!!
1) Olympics for grade 5-6
2) Pedal Power for grade 7-8
3) Culture in a box for 7-8 ( this project collaborates with a school in North Korea)
4) Idioms for elementary school.
Lead your community
These are some of the things I am currently involved with, on regular basis…. My reflections have helped me to review my current practices for improvement/ refinement - for documentation/ recoding and specific learning outcome from each!!
- Online courses from ASCD/ Coursera for professional development every year.
- Attending conferences and workshops NSTA/ NCTM/
- National level conferences organized by educational boards in India
- Participating in IBO related workshops / as teacher/ as examiner
- Attending professional courses offered by institutes of repute- IIM (Ahmadabad) idisscoveri,
- Contributing for Mindspark* and Detailed Assessment* programs offered by EI ( www.ei-india.com)
- Working with NGO ( Collaboration with Area Net work and Development initiatives. www.anandi.org)
- Working with C
- LSP team.
WALO- 2
WALO for me is an unlearning and relearning experience. I wanted a different challenge this time. Something, that takes me out of comfort zone for this WALO. Having read the Power of Protocol, and practiced some protocols like project fine tuning, analyzing student work, protocols for meeting; I wanted to sharpen my skills with a new protocol. I reflected upon various roles that I play in the school environment and decided to practice ‘Shadow protocol’, with a purpose to create a new guideline, a learning environment for self and to share the same with my team members.
There are two parts to this WALO: Part one deals with answers to direct questions and Part two is the Reflection, process and describes the learning.
Describe your experience
Shadowing, Leaders in TGES is not new and I have been shadowed by team mates in past. Shadowing a student was new and was not done earlier. I was bit apprehensive and had my own fears about the outcome. I also was not sure if I would be able to do this myself. I decided to give 1 full day for observation and that also was demanding for other tasks on hand.
Though a bit skeptical in the initial phase, I am glad that I decided to shadow a student and this certainly is very different than teaching, training, demonstrating, writing IEP, talking to students, meeting parents or presenting papers.
How has it impacted your practice?
How has this WALO experience influenced your thinking about your Leading Schools Project, and what are your next steps?
WALO has helped me not only refine my LSP but also has helped me look into student relationships. It has given me a unique insight into children’s lives and what lies beyond those faces in classrooms.
I plan to go through this documentation and process again, sharing the same with others for making myself familiar with this process and looking at critical aspects of this protocol.
Shadow Protocol:-
Introduced and developed based on work done by Janet Mannheimer Zydney, aims to see student’s work and shadowing through one day at school. The purpose of the shadow protocol is to situate a student’s work within the context of his or her own complex school life, and thus to understand the student better and to teach him or her more effectively. (Page 99- The Power of Protocols)
The Four Requirements:-
1) Teachers working with Child
2) Student/ parent’s Consent
3) Shadower
4) Close communication between Shadower and Facilitator
Background and Information about NM:-
During first week of November I was on medical leave and upon joining, I was informed by the team, that NM had been suspended from school for 3 days and he was to come the day I joined school.
NM, male 12 years old in grade 6, has been showing difficulties in adjusting to the school environment for a while now. This year has been fairly difficult for him to adjust in the classroom and with his peers (he has a new group this year as he has changed his shift/school timings); teachers found it very difficult to accept his behavior and his concerns for academics took a different turn. NM failed to keep to IEP’s created by the Counseling dept and his behviour was a consistent concern. Teachers group responsible for him were finding it increasingly difficult to get academics/ behavior and social responses from NM, as they were far from the acceptable norms. A group of teachers had attempted various strategies, guided and spontaneous, under guidance from counseling dept, in consultation with parents. But sheer lack of motivation from NM was making the task daunting for all adults in the picture.
Lack of support from family was an added concern. NM has a special situation at home. NM is the youngest child in the joint family. The family is struggling with the separation between NM’s parents. They are not officially divorced nor have they initiated the process. Separation and social impact of this situation is immense and naturally traumatic. NM has picked up the opinion and language of the family and feels that his mother is ‘responsible’ for all the trouble /mess at home. Whenever he says this “she” shouldn't come back to this house… Family members take pride in his decision and feel that child also ‘understands”!!
This academic year NM was often sent to my office; mostly to deal with his behavioral issues, as punishment, to keep him away from peer fights, or any other reason… Each interaction with NM reflected that most of his actions were for seeking attention. To me, he seemed lost in himself. There were two sides of NM:
1) NM bullied others and claimed that he couldn’t control his hands: a handshake was no different from the act of strangling others. He was more interested in what was happening around him than what he should be doing, never opened his book to write, always argued and was full of complaints…
2) A very friendly NM, who has “friends” all over in building with people older to him, may be from higher classes, who got ‘information’ from here and there with others. He seemed to have information from all corners and was very confident while talking, sharing and making his points without getting worried about consequences of such acts. He would often inform teachers of plans (for bullying others) his class mates were making beforehand, thereby preventing trouble.
I decided to shadow NM.
Consent from father was quick to come and teachers were more than willing to help me/NM. Though, father wanted assurance that we wouldn't document this process in the form of photographs and videos. We accepted this for NM, reluctantly.
I was hopeful that it would throw some light, leading to a better understanding of the situation; that we could have a strategy to build upon to facilitate a change leading to getting him back in the mainstream.
Shadowing:-
NM came to school at 9.00am sharp. I received him at the school reception. He seemed happy and willing to cooperate. We walked together from reception to his work area on the second floor. On our way, we talked about his daily schedule.
It was very evident that he was independent and did not need help with regard to his ADL.
He enjoyed the attention he got and felt very special. We came together to the designated area and his teacher JG was present.
NM did not greet JG and took her presence for granted. As the session progressed, within 10 minutes NM digressed and started talking about his grandmother. Getting him to the assigned tasks was a concern for JG. In fact he started running in the class. He talked about a TV serial that he had seen the previous night. After 10 min he was better and started working again, this time to get up after 6 minutes to drink water and use the washroom. It was evident these were strategies to escape from task.
As per his timetable for that day, the next two slots were for sports and he wanted JG to listen to his plans for the day in sports complex.
Of the 50 minutes, NM was able to complete tasks for 24 min (this was with help and constant support).
On sports field, he was excited initially and actively participated but after 15 min he was busy disturbing and eventually left the basketball court on his own and went to table tennis area. He watched others for 15 min and then started disturbing his class mates. He got into a scuffle but managed to get out of the argument on his own without intervention from any adult around. For the next 20 minutes he watched others playing, none of his classmates asked him to join their games. Rest of the time NM kept moving from one game to another and wherever his acceptance was seemingly difficult he bullied himself into the game.
During break, NM was attempting to be friendly while his peers choose to be indifferent towards him. He consumed his snack box bought from home and spent an additional Rs 50 to buy food from the canteen. He ate clumsily, lost in his world.
NM wanted to eat post break time also and took the longest possible route to washroom. He spent 15 min peeping into each classroom and at times tried to disrupt classes by asking a question or wanting to talk to a teacher/ friend. NM kept complaining that no one was interested in him.
Next slot was for Math and he was taken to a Computer Lab for Mind spark (a computer based mathematics learning tool). He took out his iPad and started work for the topic assigned. He did not even read questions and kept clicking randomly on some options. Some of his answers were correct (this was more out of luck/ trial and error in choosing the right option). He wanted to play/ surf after 20 min …. And had argument with teacher and walked out of class.
Similar things were noted for next two sessions.
NM claimed that he worked very hard; he was tired and wanted to leave early! NM also enjoyed the attention that he got because of shadowing.
This was practiced on Day 2 also. Day 2 observations were done by teacher JG mainly to consolidate the observations and check for similarity and differences in observations. There was NO change in NM’s behavior (a probable variation from the given protocol).
Presentation/ Observations and recommendations by Shadower:-
Time allotted for this meeting was more than an hour as we were aware of the family circumstances, difficulty in accepting NM’s shortcomings and blame that ‘mother” is responsible for all that is missing.
His father took some time to open up and actively participate in this meeting. When he felt assured that NM will be part of school and “exclusion” is step towards “inclusive teaching” he was relaxed and shared details about NM and his behavior at home. NM blackmailed his great grand mother and aunt to get anything and everything. His communication with his father was limited to his needs/ demands and materialistic demands like- PSP/mobile/games/money for canteen/chocolates/clothes and stationery. NM has a new laptop/iPad and a mobile to himself! The father after listening to detailed report of observation shared similar instances. Father broke down and started talking about his personal issues. Meeting for a while lost focus from NM to his father and his struggles. Father accepted suggestions from school and agreed that he would take follow-up with the doctor, school counselor and dietitian. Next day father arrived with NM’s pediatrician to school so that he could have a detailed report from all stake holders. Things suddenly seemed different. The doctor was happy with detailed observation reports and checklists from school (attached here) and soon will share his plan of action with school. Family is visiting dietitian for his weight gain/ issues with his compulsive eating and options that could be given to him for his age and growing needs.
Some Questions by participants/ Teachers:-
1. Will NM be able to complete this academic term with extensive support?
2. Will he continue swimming?
3. Acceptance of Diet – restriction on food
4. Some changes in his home environment and ability of family members to support him
5. Medication- role and impact- tangible/ intangible
Planning/ next steps:-
I am glad I choose to opt for this Protocol.
There are two parts to this WALO: Part one deals with answers to direct questions and Part two is the Reflection, process and describes the learning.
Describe your experience
Shadowing, Leaders in TGES is not new and I have been shadowed by team mates in past. Shadowing a student was new and was not done earlier. I was bit apprehensive and had my own fears about the outcome. I also was not sure if I would be able to do this myself. I decided to give 1 full day for observation and that also was demanding for other tasks on hand.
Though a bit skeptical in the initial phase, I am glad that I decided to shadow a student and this certainly is very different than teaching, training, demonstrating, writing IEP, talking to students, meeting parents or presenting papers.
How has it impacted your practice?
- An overwhelming feeling persists. Shadowing helped me look at Child’s life from his perspective. And there is a huge difference in both worlds. World perceived by teachers and world seen by students.
- Slot, time frames, home work, assignments, projects, competitions, assessments, expectations from parents, teachers, difficulties in accepting what seems normal and obvious, what is acceptable vs. expected and dilemmas they face, spontaneity vs. impulsiveness, friends, issues in friendship, various forms of bullying which seem invisible from adult eyes!! Social mirrors and peer pressure… experiencing this was whole lot different than expected and imagined. It can be difficult to be a “different adolescent” and survive!!
- Also a whole lot of new understanding emerged for concept called ‘classroom management’.
- It certainly is helping me understand the meaning of “inclusive” classrooms and the fact that we may be under prepared for these at all levels. Be it school, class, teacher, involvement of parents and other stakeholders.
- Efforts, consistency and reviewing them without giving up till the task is achieved.
- Areas wherein some individuals need help in dealing with special need students
- Refining IEP and Behaviour Modification plans
- Involvement from other stakeholders
- Acceptance of this as practice by stakeholders
- Review and refinement at every step
- Relearning and paradigm shifts
- How can this be transferred to all students?
- Will it be possible for teachers to practice this all the time? What happens to other students and their time in school?
- Regular tasks that get piled up for a teacher and documentation process.
- Shadowing is not just one time action; it needs constant and rigorous follow-up and commitment.
- What if the child does not feel the need to change? What if he is fine with his present status and condition?
- Who decides that a child has to change? More so, a child coming from a disturbed family?
- Most important: - what if I have made some mistakes? And its repercussion?
How has this WALO experience influenced your thinking about your Leading Schools Project, and what are your next steps?
WALO has helped me not only refine my LSP but also has helped me look into student relationships. It has given me a unique insight into children’s lives and what lies beyond those faces in classrooms.
I plan to go through this documentation and process again, sharing the same with others for making myself familiar with this process and looking at critical aspects of this protocol.
Shadow Protocol:-
Introduced and developed based on work done by Janet Mannheimer Zydney, aims to see student’s work and shadowing through one day at school. The purpose of the shadow protocol is to situate a student’s work within the context of his or her own complex school life, and thus to understand the student better and to teach him or her more effectively. (Page 99- The Power of Protocols)
The Four Requirements:-
1) Teachers working with Child
2) Student/ parent’s Consent
3) Shadower
4) Close communication between Shadower and Facilitator
Background and Information about NM:-
During first week of November I was on medical leave and upon joining, I was informed by the team, that NM had been suspended from school for 3 days and he was to come the day I joined school.
NM, male 12 years old in grade 6, has been showing difficulties in adjusting to the school environment for a while now. This year has been fairly difficult for him to adjust in the classroom and with his peers (he has a new group this year as he has changed his shift/school timings); teachers found it very difficult to accept his behavior and his concerns for academics took a different turn. NM failed to keep to IEP’s created by the Counseling dept and his behviour was a consistent concern. Teachers group responsible for him were finding it increasingly difficult to get academics/ behavior and social responses from NM, as they were far from the acceptable norms. A group of teachers had attempted various strategies, guided and spontaneous, under guidance from counseling dept, in consultation with parents. But sheer lack of motivation from NM was making the task daunting for all adults in the picture.
Lack of support from family was an added concern. NM has a special situation at home. NM is the youngest child in the joint family. The family is struggling with the separation between NM’s parents. They are not officially divorced nor have they initiated the process. Separation and social impact of this situation is immense and naturally traumatic. NM has picked up the opinion and language of the family and feels that his mother is ‘responsible’ for all the trouble /mess at home. Whenever he says this “she” shouldn't come back to this house… Family members take pride in his decision and feel that child also ‘understands”!!
This academic year NM was often sent to my office; mostly to deal with his behavioral issues, as punishment, to keep him away from peer fights, or any other reason… Each interaction with NM reflected that most of his actions were for seeking attention. To me, he seemed lost in himself. There were two sides of NM:
1) NM bullied others and claimed that he couldn’t control his hands: a handshake was no different from the act of strangling others. He was more interested in what was happening around him than what he should be doing, never opened his book to write, always argued and was full of complaints…
2) A very friendly NM, who has “friends” all over in building with people older to him, may be from higher classes, who got ‘information’ from here and there with others. He seemed to have information from all corners and was very confident while talking, sharing and making his points without getting worried about consequences of such acts. He would often inform teachers of plans (for bullying others) his class mates were making beforehand, thereby preventing trouble.
I decided to shadow NM.
Consent from father was quick to come and teachers were more than willing to help me/NM. Though, father wanted assurance that we wouldn't document this process in the form of photographs and videos. We accepted this for NM, reluctantly.
I was hopeful that it would throw some light, leading to a better understanding of the situation; that we could have a strategy to build upon to facilitate a change leading to getting him back in the mainstream.
Shadowing:-
NM came to school at 9.00am sharp. I received him at the school reception. He seemed happy and willing to cooperate. We walked together from reception to his work area on the second floor. On our way, we talked about his daily schedule.
It was very evident that he was independent and did not need help with regard to his ADL.
He enjoyed the attention he got and felt very special. We came together to the designated area and his teacher JG was present.
NM did not greet JG and took her presence for granted. As the session progressed, within 10 minutes NM digressed and started talking about his grandmother. Getting him to the assigned tasks was a concern for JG. In fact he started running in the class. He talked about a TV serial that he had seen the previous night. After 10 min he was better and started working again, this time to get up after 6 minutes to drink water and use the washroom. It was evident these were strategies to escape from task.
As per his timetable for that day, the next two slots were for sports and he wanted JG to listen to his plans for the day in sports complex.
Of the 50 minutes, NM was able to complete tasks for 24 min (this was with help and constant support).
On sports field, he was excited initially and actively participated but after 15 min he was busy disturbing and eventually left the basketball court on his own and went to table tennis area. He watched others for 15 min and then started disturbing his class mates. He got into a scuffle but managed to get out of the argument on his own without intervention from any adult around. For the next 20 minutes he watched others playing, none of his classmates asked him to join their games. Rest of the time NM kept moving from one game to another and wherever his acceptance was seemingly difficult he bullied himself into the game.
During break, NM was attempting to be friendly while his peers choose to be indifferent towards him. He consumed his snack box bought from home and spent an additional Rs 50 to buy food from the canteen. He ate clumsily, lost in his world.
NM wanted to eat post break time also and took the longest possible route to washroom. He spent 15 min peeping into each classroom and at times tried to disrupt classes by asking a question or wanting to talk to a teacher/ friend. NM kept complaining that no one was interested in him.
Next slot was for Math and he was taken to a Computer Lab for Mind spark (a computer based mathematics learning tool). He took out his iPad and started work for the topic assigned. He did not even read questions and kept clicking randomly on some options. Some of his answers were correct (this was more out of luck/ trial and error in choosing the right option). He wanted to play/ surf after 20 min …. And had argument with teacher and walked out of class.
Similar things were noted for next two sessions.
NM claimed that he worked very hard; he was tired and wanted to leave early! NM also enjoyed the attention that he got because of shadowing.
This was practiced on Day 2 also. Day 2 observations were done by teacher JG mainly to consolidate the observations and check for similarity and differences in observations. There was NO change in NM’s behavior (a probable variation from the given protocol).
Presentation/ Observations and recommendations by Shadower:-
- Behaviour Modification plan for NM (for emotional stability)
- Merging the same with learning goals and IEP (more of review)
- Shorter school day for him (only 3 hours: 2 hours of academics and 1 hour of exclusive sport activity(swimming was recommended for him)
- Only 2 subjects and special time for sports on daily basis
- Practicing Sustained Silent Reading on daily basis ( 10 min to begin with)
- Meeting with teachers everyday for Log/observations and sharing
- Creating a separate work station – more of one on one teaching for some time.
- Parent meeting/ follow-up every alternate day
- Father to escort him to/from school ( avoiding other issues related to transport)
- Involving Doctors/Dietician as supportive educators
Time allotted for this meeting was more than an hour as we were aware of the family circumstances, difficulty in accepting NM’s shortcomings and blame that ‘mother” is responsible for all that is missing.
His father took some time to open up and actively participate in this meeting. When he felt assured that NM will be part of school and “exclusion” is step towards “inclusive teaching” he was relaxed and shared details about NM and his behavior at home. NM blackmailed his great grand mother and aunt to get anything and everything. His communication with his father was limited to his needs/ demands and materialistic demands like- PSP/mobile/games/money for canteen/chocolates/clothes and stationery. NM has a new laptop/iPad and a mobile to himself! The father after listening to detailed report of observation shared similar instances. Father broke down and started talking about his personal issues. Meeting for a while lost focus from NM to his father and his struggles. Father accepted suggestions from school and agreed that he would take follow-up with the doctor, school counselor and dietitian. Next day father arrived with NM’s pediatrician to school so that he could have a detailed report from all stake holders. Things suddenly seemed different. The doctor was happy with detailed observation reports and checklists from school (attached here) and soon will share his plan of action with school. Family is visiting dietitian for his weight gain/ issues with his compulsive eating and options that could be given to him for his age and growing needs.
Some Questions by participants/ Teachers:-
- Mostly administrative- like time table and keeping teachers free when NM is in School
- Working with learning gaps of NM
- Assessment for NM
- Documentation and preparation time
- Strong observation skills
- Ability to communicate with all age groups
- Emotional/caring
- Ability to respond orally and confidently as compared to his written work and quality of written tasks
- Accepting swimming as alternative and swimming daily for 1 hour
1. Will NM be able to complete this academic term with extensive support?
2. Will he continue swimming?
3. Acceptance of Diet – restriction on food
4. Some changes in his home environment and ability of family members to support him
5. Medication- role and impact- tangible/ intangible
Planning/ next steps:-
- Teachers plan their work schedules in such manner that NM is always with a teacher in school
- New set of worksheet- based on revised IEP
- Creating alternatives for NM- his acceptance and ensuring his acceptance by peers
I am glad I choose to opt for this Protocol.
WALO -3
Attending Subject Specific Seminar (SSS) for Theory of Knowledge (TOK)
February 27th to 3rd March 2013
Oberoi International School, Mumbai - Organized by IB Asia Pacific region
Background:
TOK is an essential and a core component of the IB diploma program. Unlike a standard academic discipline, this subject uses a process of discovering and sharing student’s views on ‘Knowledge issues’. It offers students and teachers the opportunity to
SSS was important as TOK structures are changing for 2015 examinations and new curricular guidelines for the course, assessment and presentation are to be implemented from 2013. These seminars offer an important opportunity for teachers who have completed 5 years teaching the component, to fully acquaint themselves with changes to a particular subject area. They explain and exemplify the teaching and learning framework, the guidelines and requirements for implementation, the objectives and criteria, and the assessment tools and task types.
TOK as a subject does not have the benefit of being an established university course. It can be connected to Philosophy, but it indeed is very different from Philosophy since the purpose of TOK is very different. The scope of the subject is what teachers and students make of it. TOK is really a social construction that, like most social constructions, has evolved over time, with a rich history, through the interaction of many different groups.
The Process
TOK teachers from Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, China, and India formed this group of 50 educators of Asia Pacific region. The purpose of the group was to share their views, common practices, and understanding of proposed changes and its impact in classroom for students, assessment, presentations and other concerns for implementing proposed changes in curriculum during SSS.
According to the original plan, the workshop leaders Mr. Vivek Bammi (who specializes in humanities and arts and works in Indonesia) and Dr. Anna Marsden (who is Ph.D in chemistry and works in Swaziland) were to work in two groups of 25 people each. They had never met earlier in person prior to this workshop. Their announcement during the introductory session of clubbing the two groups initially formed was therefore, quite a surprise. There was silence in the auditorium and people accepted this grudgingly. One could read the silence. Though nobody raised any concern, everyone had the same questions; will the group size not affect the learning? No one protested or asked questions and all were willing to give this process of learning a chance before rejecting it. The first session began on a slow note but eventually, as the discussion enfolded, there was a growing clarity amongst us. They established a rule that every time a person entered the room they needed to be in a different group and amongst new people; our number (50) made this interesting for sharing and learning was inevitable.
Combining the groups helped in two ways:
1) Comparison if one class / workshop leader was better than the other, or materials that were shared were of different quality.
2) All 50 participants freely shared their personal knowledge, skills, experience and resources within the group and this made each learning session a uniquely rich learning experience. We collectively created a Wikispace which enabled links for all the resources to be shared with all. This wouldn’t have been as effective had the group been limited to 25 people.
As a group of TOK teachers we discussed various aspects for the components added in the TOK curriculum and their connections with personal and shared learning:
· What is the significance of the key points in the historical development of this area of knowledge?
· How has the history of this area led to its current form?
· How would these questions be answered 100 years ago?
· Is it conceptually possible that this area of knowledge would look different if history were repeated?
· Why is this area significant to the individual?
The learning:-
Knowledge questions are about knowledge. That is, they are not questions about knowledge themselves but instead focus on the methods and mechanisms that produce knowledge – in TOK terminology they focus on ways of knowing and knowledge frameworks. In this sense knowledge questions are a little different from many of the questions dealt with in the subject classrooms. They are second order questions.
To illustrate this, consider a few examples. ‘What is the atomic mass of Hydrogen?’ is not a knowledge question. It fails on both counts. It has a definite answer: 1 which is not controversial and it is an actual statement of Science rather than being about knowledge in Science. What makes knowledge questions controversial is that they often depend crucially on the contested understanding of one or other key idea leaving room for disagreement.
As per the earlier (2008) guidelines, students were taking the view that knowledge was belief plus ‘something else’. Usually that ‘something else’ was that the belief was true and justified. In many senses this condition is rather strong and leads to a situation in which very little can be taken as known. This produced difficulties in dealing with areas of knowledge in which knowledge seemed to be evolving such as the natural sciences. Quite often while identifying knowledge issues for the given essay title, and the conception of knowledge adopted by students and their teachers based on these knowledge issues did not allow a balance between the possibility of knowledge being answerable to the outside world and the fact that it is a product of human social cooperation. Perspectives – that hallmark of IB reflection and crucial component of TOK thinking – seemed to be difficult to integrate with such a rigid view of knowledge as being basically ‘true’?
The interpretation of TOK that is appropriate for the interconnected world in which we live is the main focus for the revision in TOK . After all, we are not living in the world of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment when most of what was called knowledge was held by individuals. We are living in the world where knowledge is produced through cooperative endeavors usually aided by breathtaking technology. The 21st century presents contexts and problems that require TOK to adapt. An individualistic approach just doesn’t tell the whole story.
SSS aimed at understanding guidelines that were aimed at:
• Encouraging schools to offer a broad TOK curriculum, and
• Reinforcing the notion of academic honesty in TOK.
These would in turn bring the following changes:
1. Knowledge can take many forms
2. We can make a distinction between shared and personal knowledge
3. Most knowledge is shared knowledge
4. Much of this shared knowledge is organised into areas of knowledge
Why Changes
The current marking of TOK essays is based on an analytical marking structure, where a number of separate judgments are made within each of the four criteria and which are then aggregated by the examiner to come up with a mark. Current TOK marking style is, also arguably, unnecessarily detailed and time consuming and, as alluded to earlier, contributes to some unreliability.
“Analytical marking makes some questionable assumptions. It is assumed in analytical marking schemes that there is a fixed weighting for separately marked criteria, where as it can be argued that the different criteria to be considered have varying significance in the assessment of individual scripts. Different criteria can also be more or less important, depending on how the student has approached the task and what kind of grade is at issue.”
(McCurry and Raivars, 2010 CR Team)
Consequently a holistic marking scheme (using the global impression descriptors referred to earlier) will be introduced to allow the trade offs and on balance judgments that are needed for making an overall assessment using prescribed marking criteria.
Teachers and examiners will use a global impression approach to assessing the TOK essay. At the heart of this approach is the following question:
Does the candidate present an appropriate and cogent analysis of knowledge issues in discussing the title? The CR team believes a process of global impression judgment is appropriate because it will encourage a common understanding of different levels of performance and will produce higher levels of agreement between examiners.
My Fierce Wonderings:
Reference: - www.ibo.org ( SSS-TOK)
February 27th to 3rd March 2013
Oberoi International School, Mumbai - Organized by IB Asia Pacific region
Background:
TOK is an essential and a core component of the IB diploma program. Unlike a standard academic discipline, this subject uses a process of discovering and sharing student’s views on ‘Knowledge issues’. It offers students and teachers the opportunity to
- Reflect critically on diverse ways of knowing and areas of knowledge.
- Consider the nature and role of knowledge in their culture and cultures in the wider world.
- To illustrate changes to assessment model using specimen examinations papers and scripts with rubric
- To offer example of students work which reflects these changes
- Explore teaching and learning strategies to support these changes
- Explore changes in Procedures associated with submission of student and teacher work due to these changes.
SSS was important as TOK structures are changing for 2015 examinations and new curricular guidelines for the course, assessment and presentation are to be implemented from 2013. These seminars offer an important opportunity for teachers who have completed 5 years teaching the component, to fully acquaint themselves with changes to a particular subject area. They explain and exemplify the teaching and learning framework, the guidelines and requirements for implementation, the objectives and criteria, and the assessment tools and task types.
TOK as a subject does not have the benefit of being an established university course. It can be connected to Philosophy, but it indeed is very different from Philosophy since the purpose of TOK is very different. The scope of the subject is what teachers and students make of it. TOK is really a social construction that, like most social constructions, has evolved over time, with a rich history, through the interaction of many different groups.
The Process
TOK teachers from Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, China, and India formed this group of 50 educators of Asia Pacific region. The purpose of the group was to share their views, common practices, and understanding of proposed changes and its impact in classroom for students, assessment, presentations and other concerns for implementing proposed changes in curriculum during SSS.
According to the original plan, the workshop leaders Mr. Vivek Bammi (who specializes in humanities and arts and works in Indonesia) and Dr. Anna Marsden (who is Ph.D in chemistry and works in Swaziland) were to work in two groups of 25 people each. They had never met earlier in person prior to this workshop. Their announcement during the introductory session of clubbing the two groups initially formed was therefore, quite a surprise. There was silence in the auditorium and people accepted this grudgingly. One could read the silence. Though nobody raised any concern, everyone had the same questions; will the group size not affect the learning? No one protested or asked questions and all were willing to give this process of learning a chance before rejecting it. The first session began on a slow note but eventually, as the discussion enfolded, there was a growing clarity amongst us. They established a rule that every time a person entered the room they needed to be in a different group and amongst new people; our number (50) made this interesting for sharing and learning was inevitable.
Combining the groups helped in two ways:
1) Comparison if one class / workshop leader was better than the other, or materials that were shared were of different quality.
2) All 50 participants freely shared their personal knowledge, skills, experience and resources within the group and this made each learning session a uniquely rich learning experience. We collectively created a Wikispace which enabled links for all the resources to be shared with all. This wouldn’t have been as effective had the group been limited to 25 people.
As a group of TOK teachers we discussed various aspects for the components added in the TOK curriculum and their connections with personal and shared learning:
· What is the significance of the key points in the historical development of this area of knowledge?
· How has the history of this area led to its current form?
· How would these questions be answered 100 years ago?
· Is it conceptually possible that this area of knowledge would look different if history were repeated?
· Why is this area significant to the individual?
The learning:-
Knowledge questions are about knowledge. That is, they are not questions about knowledge themselves but instead focus on the methods and mechanisms that produce knowledge – in TOK terminology they focus on ways of knowing and knowledge frameworks. In this sense knowledge questions are a little different from many of the questions dealt with in the subject classrooms. They are second order questions.
To illustrate this, consider a few examples. ‘What is the atomic mass of Hydrogen?’ is not a knowledge question. It fails on both counts. It has a definite answer: 1 which is not controversial and it is an actual statement of Science rather than being about knowledge in Science. What makes knowledge questions controversial is that they often depend crucially on the contested understanding of one or other key idea leaving room for disagreement.
As per the earlier (2008) guidelines, students were taking the view that knowledge was belief plus ‘something else’. Usually that ‘something else’ was that the belief was true and justified. In many senses this condition is rather strong and leads to a situation in which very little can be taken as known. This produced difficulties in dealing with areas of knowledge in which knowledge seemed to be evolving such as the natural sciences. Quite often while identifying knowledge issues for the given essay title, and the conception of knowledge adopted by students and their teachers based on these knowledge issues did not allow a balance between the possibility of knowledge being answerable to the outside world and the fact that it is a product of human social cooperation. Perspectives – that hallmark of IB reflection and crucial component of TOK thinking – seemed to be difficult to integrate with such a rigid view of knowledge as being basically ‘true’?
The interpretation of TOK that is appropriate for the interconnected world in which we live is the main focus for the revision in TOK . After all, we are not living in the world of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment when most of what was called knowledge was held by individuals. We are living in the world where knowledge is produced through cooperative endeavors usually aided by breathtaking technology. The 21st century presents contexts and problems that require TOK to adapt. An individualistic approach just doesn’t tell the whole story.
SSS aimed at understanding guidelines that were aimed at:
• Encouraging schools to offer a broad TOK curriculum, and
• Reinforcing the notion of academic honesty in TOK.
These would in turn bring the following changes:
1. Knowledge can take many forms
2. We can make a distinction between shared and personal knowledge
3. Most knowledge is shared knowledge
4. Much of this shared knowledge is organised into areas of knowledge
Why Changes
The current marking of TOK essays is based on an analytical marking structure, where a number of separate judgments are made within each of the four criteria and which are then aggregated by the examiner to come up with a mark. Current TOK marking style is, also arguably, unnecessarily detailed and time consuming and, as alluded to earlier, contributes to some unreliability.
“Analytical marking makes some questionable assumptions. It is assumed in analytical marking schemes that there is a fixed weighting for separately marked criteria, where as it can be argued that the different criteria to be considered have varying significance in the assessment of individual scripts. Different criteria can also be more or less important, depending on how the student has approached the task and what kind of grade is at issue.”
(McCurry and Raivars, 2010 CR Team)
Consequently a holistic marking scheme (using the global impression descriptors referred to earlier) will be introduced to allow the trade offs and on balance judgments that are needed for making an overall assessment using prescribed marking criteria.
Teachers and examiners will use a global impression approach to assessing the TOK essay. At the heart of this approach is the following question:
Does the candidate present an appropriate and cogent analysis of knowledge issues in discussing the title? The CR team believes a process of global impression judgment is appropriate because it will encourage a common understanding of different levels of performance and will produce higher levels of agreement between examiners.
My Fierce Wonderings:
- Isn’t this similar to what Project Based Learning is all about? Identifying the real life question and then exploring the same?
- Can TOK be a ‘project’ now?
- How will students, who still will be assessed on 1600 words Essay and a Presentations and will receive grades, take these changes?
- Will Global Impression marking neutralize the impact for students?
- What kind of discussions will now be part on Online Curriculum Center,( occ is online forum for teachers from IB community) given that all changes recommended are incorporated by CR team.
- Will this help students see “connections” in TOK?
- Will they be able to see links between personal knowledge and shared knowledge?
- What changes I will have to bring in myself to introduce these changes in my classrooms and how will I change my habits of past 5 years.
Reference: - www.ibo.org ( SSS-TOK)