Activity 8: Changes in my Practice

http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/RefPract/Osterman_Kottkamp_extract.pdf

Wow, I cannot believe that I am coming to the end of my 32 week Mindlab journey. It has been a journey which has taken me to the edge of my learning; at times terrifying as I worked through the research to realise ways in which I could apply to my practice.

I enjoyed the first 16 weeks of face to face presentations but went on to feel somewhat isolated in the next 16 weeks as we went online. In saying this I also believe my deepest learning has occurred in the last 8 weeks when sharing with others and reading a variety of blogs which have made me look at differing perspectives. Osterman & Kottkamp (1993) explain this by saying reflective practice is challenging, demanding and often a trying process that is most successful as a collaborative effort. I have found this to be true for me and now better understand how I work as a reflective learner.

My assumptions as an RTV have been challenged, and in many instances affirmed by research. Over time I have been challenged on topics that I had never really thought about before. By digging deep into the literature and the BLENNZ Expanded Core Curriculum (BECC) which is aligned to the New Zealand Core Curriculum I have found that I have a deeper understanding of ITL 21 Century learning skills required when working with blind, low vision and deaf/blind (BLV) akonga, I just hadn’t made or thought of the connection before when looking at e-learning. This goes well beyond using a device to replace pen and paper which we so often assess use on. I am a SAMR fan.

It has been hard for me to choose just 2 criteria as the biggest growth areas. All criteria have been scrutinised and intertwined along this journey. This I believe is how it is supposed to be, one does not sit alone.

Criteria 4: Demonstrate commitment to ongoing professional learning and development of personal professional practice

32 weeks of solid reading, research, planning and conceptualising is commitment. Not to mention the new online programmes I have learnt to use along the way. Mindlab study is something which I chose to do to enhance my practice in digital and collaborative learning for the purpose of supporting the learners which I have who are BLV and in doing so I have promoted an awareness of these learners.

I have gone on to participate and contribute my learning with colleagues. Some times through the passing of knowledge but I am hoping the deeper learning is happening when they join in with our learners at iPad club. 

Criteria 12: Use Critical inquiry and problem-solving effectively in their professional practice.

1) Sytematically and critically engage with evidence and professional literature to reflect on and refine practice.

I had always thought of myself as a problem-solver and it was easy to see problems in class pertaining to my learners. I would reflect on issues to find solutions but rarely used reflective practice to look at me and how I worked within each school environment. By engaging with evidence and professional literature I have looked at my pedagogical approach so as to empower those I work with rather than being seen as the provider of information.

      http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/RefPract/Osterman_Kottkamp_extract.pdf

2) Respond professionally to feedback from members of their learning community.

Using a blog has been a new learning for me. I have learnt a lot from reading other peoples and from comments made on mine. This feedback has increased my own reflection and lead to deeper learning.

3) Critically examine their own beliefs, including cultural beliefs and how they impact on their professional practice and achievement of akonga

      http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/RefPract/Osterman_Kottkamp_extract.pdf

The last reading on reflective v traditional professional development has really resonated with me and I believe is relevant to all learners. On the one hand my learning has been deepest when I can apply it to practice, on the other hand there are many priority akonga in classes taking subjects that have little relevance to them and we continue to wonder why they are not achieving.

      http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/RefPract/Osterman_Kottkamp_extract.pdf

Where to from here?

It is time to relax a bit and put into practice what has been learnt. I am hoping that when I go into schools I can continue to make positive connections and offer needed support in digital and collaborative learning when working with akonga who have low vision. My aim has been to improve connections with high school teachers... so far going well.

I am also looking at the continual growth of the iPad initiative which has grown from one group to 3 groups this year utilising peer mentors.

References

Ministry of Education (nd). Practising tecaher criteria and e-learning. https://elearning.tki.org.nz/Professional-learning/

Osterman, K & Kottkamp, R (1993). Reflective Practice for Educators.California : Cornwin Press,Inc.

http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/RefPract/Osterman_Kottkamp_extract.pdf

Activity 7:Crossing the Boundaries Discussions

Interdisciplinary Connections

Mindmap

In my role as a Resource Teacher Vision (RTV) my professional life is full of interdisciplinary collaboration as defined by Andrews (1990). He says occurrences of interdisciplinary collaboration happen "when different professionals possessing unique knowledge, skills, organisational perspectives, and personal attributes engage in coordinated problem solving for a common purpose." (cited in Berg-Weger & Schneider, 1998)

As an RTV the common purpose involves the learner who is blind, low vision or deaf/blind and the partnerships entered to enhance deeper learning and achievement for that learner. We take an holistic approach to goal setting. Jones (2009) suggests that this approach will help develop higher order thinking skills and be more creative.

Mulligan and Cuban (2015) identified three elements required for successful interdisciplinary collaborations to happen and this model has aided me in identifying areas for personal growth and improvement when considering my place in the secondary school team as an itinerant.

Common Goals 

There needs to be ownership by all stakeholders. This is seen in the Individual Education Plan (IEP) process which I lead or for which I am part of. 

Such IEPs in a secondary school are attended and/or lead by the SENCO who represents the teacher voice. Often there appears to be consensus at the meetings and SMART goals are established but it is what happens next where things can drift. 

As the subject teachers have not been directly involved in the process they may not buy in to the established goals. It can, and more likely does, happen that subject knowledge and NCEA assessment outweighs any other holistic and deeper learning goals when student successes are discussed.

Quality and Attitudes

When there are common emotional qualities, a collaborative relationship can remain collegial and productive (Mulligan et-al, 2015). At an IEP meeting all stakeholders are invited. The low vision learner is key in this process and often, but not always, has been involved since a young age. This, when all goes well, works to empower and gives student voice when at times they may feel unheard in class.

Barriers can start to appear at secondary level when classes become less collaborative and more subject based. Many more teachers are now involved and transparent communications can be challenging to maintain. I also need to clearly establish my presence.

Work Place and Conditions 

Even if we have the other two elements working, work place and conditions may impact on the success of the IEP. For example, most secondary schools I have worked in have very set plans of curriculum learning and what achievement looks like. This becomes even more evident in NCEA years where there appears little flexibility. IEP goals, regardless of deeper learning needs end up revolving around subjects and credits. Interdisciplinary connections can appear non existent at these times as interdepartmental collaborations are minimal.

An example is when I was in a school and had been speaking with a student in regards to the problems she was having in level 3 health on the topic of abortion. Later, in the same school, when supporting another student in philosophy I noted theme connections. Immediately I imagined if only these teachers had spoken to each other what a rich, cross department, deep learning experience could have been achieved for all.... but alas this had not happened.   

Then at another school, there was the student who had achieved excellence in a math paper in NCEA level 2. I was surprised when he had to do the paper again the following year. 

Why? The student, after experiencing a significant vision loss during the previous year needed to repeat his level 2. When discussing the fact that the student had already achieved excellence in this particular paper I was informed... "this is what the class is doing..., he is in this class..., he does it..."

I do not blame the teachers for these mindsets, for this is how the schools worked. Conditions are placed at management level as NCEA credit achievement becomes the norm.... But I still ponder, just because it is so, should it be so?

And finish with a strong inspired student voice who says, "Now we are in a globalised society everything is integrated throughout the world and you can not learn about one subject by themselves." (Ross Institute, 2015)... perhaps as educators we need to listen.

References

ACRLog. (2015). A Conceptual Model for Interdisciplinary Collaboration. Retrieved from http://acrlog.org/2015/05/14/a-conceptual-model-for-interdisciplinary-collaboration

Berg-Weger, M., &. Schneider, F. D. (1998). Interdisciplinary collaboration in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 34, 97-107. 

Jones, C. (2009). Interdisciplinary approach: Advanatages and disadvantages, and the furure benefits of interdisciplinary studies. ESSA17 (26), 76-81. retrieved from

Ross Spiral Curriculum: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Science. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHZhkB0FJik

Activity 6: Professional Online Social Networks

I’m not a prolific user of social media, in fact Mehuish (2013) would probably call me a “lurk”; that is someone who reads and uses the resources but doesn’t put themselves out there by commenting. The truth is I feel somewhat anxious and am unsure how my comments would be taken or if they are relevant. I fear offending someone

In my personal life I use facebook but rarely post. I prefer using messenger and communicating one on one or to small groups. I do SKYPE, respond to group emails, and have just signed up to whatsapp. I have an Instagram account as a follower; have attempted, but not got engaged yet with Twitter and am trying my best on the Mindlab G+ group. I confess with the last two I am out of my comfort zone writing and sharing. Mehuish (2013) is correct, I am a “Lurk”. Thankfully Arnold & Paulus (2010) argue that this is still a legitimate way of learning. I however do get that this approach doesn’t do much to build online community.

In my professional life as an RTV I am trying to get more connected with social media in a collaborative manner. I get inspired when I hear things like: “surround yourself with passionate educators” and “the most impactful thing that you can do in your profession is get connected.” (Connected Educators, 2013). But what does this currently look like for me?

Our schools national online development space has faded over time. Email and phone continues to be the preferred manner of communication amongst colleagues. This is not to say that individuals aren’t well connected, I’m just not one of them. I have pondered why the online site is not being used much. According to Sharples et al, (2016) the facilitator is key to ensuring people engage and are kept engaged. In the early days of the site this was so.  I would also add that there needs to be ease of access and relevance to your daily practice. I wonder whether it is time for our network to have a makeover with a new injection of "X factor" starting by asking the question: What do we want?

In School use.

Kathy Cassidy (2013) talks of the connected world in school needing to reflect what is happening out of school. Children of today have grown up with internet and are surrounded by devices. Through my practice I am guided by what is happening in schools and what support is needed by learner, whanau and teacher. As yet I have not seen much use of social media but feel it is “brimming” as talk is happening regularly and I read through the G+ community that this is in fact happening.

I first came across the use of facebook as a tool for learning in a high school in 2014. Although there was Educational purpose and learner uptake the student I worked with could not participate at this time due to his low vision. Things have changed since then with this platform becoming more accessible and equitable… but then, I now go into other schools and Facebook is blocked.

Currently I work with a learner doing distance lessons weekly. We use SKYPE, Google Docs, TeamViewer. I feel we are only at the very beginning of connectivity and would like to explore other ways of expanding this learners connected world for learning as he is in a rural school. I have also used SKYPE for connecting other learners in different schools.

The schools I visit are on many different platforms and social media use is evolving. Working with Low vision learners can have its challenges when using social media. I need to be aware of what is being used so as to aid access if/when required as sites are not always inclusive to all learners. All things being equal though social media can be a great tool for learners who are blind and low vision to collaborate as it can level the playing field in ways that they may have previously been excluded from. I agree with comments made by Sharples et al, (2016) stating that social media can bring learning to life. These sites can support creativity, collaboration, communication and sharing of resources.

Assumptions however can be made around the use of social media. It has been assumed that all students have a level of knowledge that has them “doing” and “knowing” how to, however the reality can be quite different. Careful scaffolding of skills are required.

References

Melhuish,K. (2013) Online social networking and its impact on New Zealand educators' professional learning. p36-44,Ch. 3. The University of Waikato. Retrieved 05/05/2015 from

 http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/8482/thesis.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y:

Office of Ed Tech. (2013, Sep 18). Connected Educators. [video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=216&v=K4Vd4JP_DB8T

Sharples, M., de Roock , R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Looi,C-K, McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M., Wong, L. H. (2016). Innovating Pedagogy 2016: Open University Innovation Report 5. Milton Keynes: The Open University. Retrieved from http://proxima.iet.open.ac.uk/public/innovating_pedagogy_2016.pdf

voparents. (2013, May 21). Kathy Cassidy. Using Social Media in the Classroom.[video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riZStaz8Rno

Activity 5: Law & Ethics Influences

As a Resource Teacher Vision (RTV) we are responsible for trialling and writing applications for assistive technology's which are funded by the Ministry of Education (MOE). We work in partnership with whānau/family, school and learner.

In this example the funded technology is for low vision learners (LVL) for the purpose of access to the curriculum and homework. The device/s transfer from one school to another with the learner and are upgraded as necessary. The learner does not own the equipment and the school that they are at becomes responsible for it. There is high trust required from stakeholders. Cybersafe policy seem lacking in addressing this unique situation.

Ethical issues that come to mind:

Account ownership: The age of the student and who creates the account and password. Netsafe guidelines (2015) recommend consideration to ensuring that learners are above the minimal age and logons/passwords are not shared.

Previously the Ministry of Education (MOE) have created usernames for a device but in recent times have stopped this. Now for trial purposes the device has come to the RTV to set up.

Who should make the account?

Parents? who may or may not be experienced in such technologies but who can legally create an iTune account for their child.

School? Who are responsible for the device.

RTV? Who did the application and give post trial support for the use of the device as approved by MOE.

Is the password shared and to whom?

Sharing happens. Passwords have been used in the past to download non approved apps as well as approved apps. They have also been changed without notification and forgotten. Restrictions have gone onto devices and passwords lost.

Learners rely heavily upon adults to do the right thing. There is high trust needed on both sides.

Now looking forward, and analysing the issues in terms of the steps outlined by Hall (2001) 

What is the problem?
A LVL with individual learning needs requires a specialist device to access the curriculum and for homework. The device does not belong to the LVL but requires a username and password for the sole use of the learner.

Who are the main stakeholders? LVL, ,School, RTV, whānau/family, MOE (remembering they have funded the device)

Which stakeholders should be given priorities?

LVL,whānau/family, school followed by other stakeholders. 

What restrictions are there to my actions?  

Age restrictions for accounts, and sharing passwords.

What course of action is possible?

The device is set up with username and password by the school (or by parent, RTV, MOE) for the LVL for its intended purpose. The password is only held by the account holder who will do all updates or password is held by selected stakeholders for ease of support.

Username will be updated when the LVL moves school.

A moral dilemma is created when setting up an account and knowingly providing false information in breach of terms and conditions and sharing a password.

Which course of action should I follow?

The immediate hunch would be to follow the terms and conditions and have the parent create an account and password for the minor. However this is not always possible or desirable.

Otherwise I think the school should create an account and password and monitor the device in partnership with RTV and whānau.

Should we all have access to the passwords? Does it matter? Netsafe (2015) says “Yes”. I think this needs further discussion as all cyber policy I have read say “don’t share passwords”

How to implement the course of action

Establish rules through IEP in partnership with learner, whanau, RTV and school.

What does this incident teach about ethical decision making?

It is never as simple as first looks. Technology is evolving fast and at times you need to use best judgement. Policies and procedures need to be regularly updated and take into consideration individual needs.

References

Hall,A (2001) What ought I to do, all things considered? An approach to the exploration of ethical problems by teachers.

Family Sharing & Apple ID for a child. (2016) https://support.apple.com/en-ie/HT201084 

Ministry of Education. (2015). Digital technology - Safe and responsible use in schools. Retrieved from http://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/School/Managing-and-supporting-students/DigitalTechnologySafeAndResponsibleUseInSchs.pdf