Reflecting on "Reflective Practice for Teachers" using Smyth's Reflective Framework.

             When I first started this course and participated in the ‘on campus’ day, I left the workshop feeling a little uneasy about the content and direction this paper was taking me.  Discussion throughout the day was around lenses and gazes, either/or/AND and these were things that I’ve never really delved into in my role as a teacher.  Call me old fashioned, call me a conformist, but I’ve always just followed the leader in my job as a teacher.  Taught what the curriculum says, in a way the specialists preach it always with the goal of raising student achievement. 

I’ve never been asked to question things and I love what I do and enjoy new learning, so am one of those people that jumps in boots and all and gives it a go.  That’s not to say I don’t recognise when things don’t work, and that’s not to say I’ve never bent things to fit the mould of the students I teach - that’s probably as deep as reflection of my practice ever went.  As part of our school practice, we write a weekly reflection attached to our planning.  My reflections were usually a recount of things that happened in the classroom during the week.  A brief overview of things that worked and things that didn’t in my programme and how I might change them next time, children’s behaviours and how I might address them, and any special events that may have happened in the school.   The most significant part of the learning I have gained since being on this course is without a doubt, the depth of my reflection now.  The importance of ‘critical reflection’ in what, how and why I do things in my own practice and the effects it has on those I work with is so much more magnified in my thoughts, more so now than it ever has.  

            On this learning journey I have come to understand that reflection is about contemplation.  It’s about growing as an educator through understanding where we come from and how our past so inextricably influences and impacts every decision we make - tied to this is having the ability to examine how our culture, beliefs, values and assumptions impact on our ‘espoused theory’ versus our ‘theory in use’ (Argyris & Schon, 1974).  I have discovered throughout this course, that this new learning has opened my mind to the assumptions I make as a manager within the school I work.  I am stopping myself from ‘waiting for my turn to talk’ to ‘listening’ to others thoughts and opinions - all the while reflecting on my thought patterns and contemplating theirs.  Throughout this course whilst carrying out the readings and especially throughout dialogue (both online and ‘on campus’ days), I have developed a deeper understanding of the depth and breadth of reflection.  The breadth of reflection I’m referring to here is the lenses, gazes, stances, spaces, ‘isms’  we have examined, read about and discussed since the beginning.  Most of these I have never consciously considered before in my role as an educator.   Smyth’s framework for reflection gave me a pathway to opening up my consciousness to reflection, it added clarity to the mixed up thoughts, opinions and grey matter that our initial discussions had stirred up.  

            One of the first readings of the semester, John Smyth’s (2011) ‘Teachers as intellectuals in Neoliberal times’, was my first foray into questioning where my ideas on teaching and learning come from and the socially construed nature of these ideas.  I have never questioned the political, social and moral imperatives that influence my teaching and having put these under more of a microscope, I have come to realise that questioning, examining and critiquing these things leads to a transformation or a more fluid liminal space that allows growth and change.  Being in this liminal space is something that requires work and effort, as I have to consciously stop myself to re-examine why I’m thinking the way I am, it’s still new to me and there is no automaticity in my actions yet. 

Bronfenbrenner’s (1994) ecological systems theory encouraged me to contemplate my own upbringing and the microsystems and mesosystems that moulded and shaped me into the person I am today, I now see more clearly how and why these form expectations and presumptions in my role as a manager.  I never realised how narrow my views were around how and why I taught my classes the way I did.  I have always considered where the students I work with have come from.  A large part of best practice is ‘knowing the learner’, and I’ve always considered myself strong in this area - having taught in the Pacific Islands I could make a connection with the many of the students and families I work with.  Now I have a new understanding of the influences of the ‘exosystems’ that function within our families and the direct effect they have on the school I work in.  It was through this reading that I realised schools weren’t as insular as I had taken for granted they were.  I was forced into looking at a much bigger picture than I’d ever considered before.  There is so much more to the school context than what is in and immediately surrounds it.  The idea of governmentality was enlightening for me.  I realised how much of a conformist I really am and how important it is for me to ‘find my power’ through advocacy, open mindedness and autonomy.  This particular stance became real to me through the problematised issue I researched and reflected on for assignment one – Manaiakalni: The Hook from Heaven. Keeping it Human.

Kincheloe (1991) opened my mind to the idea that the pursuit of excellence could be crushed by the search for efficiency.  As a school manager, this led me to confront the bureaucratic element of my job hindering the creative autonomy of the teachers I lead.  My awareness of hierarchies in the workplace lead me to examine our own environment and the structure of management in our school.  In the article, Kincheloe encourages teachers to become ‘researchers’ and to explore what that means for teachers.  I believe that we are heading down this path in my workplace, but that teachers are at different places on this researchers spectrum.  Recently, an advent of my learning from this course, we have extended our weekly reflections to ‘professional reflections blogs’.  During a teacher only day, we had a session on Smyth’s framework for reflection. 

The session was introduced with a quote - "Reflective practice is a deliberate pause to assume an open perspective, to allow for higher-level thinking processes.  Practitioners use these processes for examining beliefs, goals, and practices, to gain new or deeper understandings that lead to actions that improve learning for students (York-Barr)”.  Teachers were given an opportunity to discuss what this quote means and how important reflection is to best practice.  Now, every teacher on our staff has a reflections blog, and many dove straight into blogging the night after our session.  Smyth’s framework will be a pathway for our teachers to grow in their reflective practice and the power knowledge of themselves and their critical pedagogy.  This course has given me the confidence to talk about reflection with knowledge and understanding around how beneficial it is, not just to professional but to personal growth and development as well. 

The idea of ‘living pedagogically’ struck a chord with me.  In reading ‘Burgeo and Back’ (A.Clark, 2012),  I was taken with the idea of being conscious of the learning opportunities that take place around me outside of the workplace.  The idea that tending to ones inner life as an educator is connected to ones success as a teacher in the classroom resonated with me.  I began to wonder if I live pedagogically and I came to the conclusion that while I sometimes am attentive to interactions such as those noted in Burgeo, I don’t often remember or retell the experience, which has been identified as the most important thing.  Being aware of this, has only made me more attentive to opportunities to recognise pedagogy and to recall and verbalise the interaction. Having a professional reflections blog gives me a platform to do this and is something I have already put into use...living pedagogically is new learning I am now living.

The discourse that took place on line in opening up (unpacking to deconstruct) and complexifying ideas was totally enlightening.  Being able to participate in and follow discussions, while carrying out the readings was empowering.  It was almost like connecting the dots.  Kit’s discussion around ‘Synergy’ was completely mind boggling to me initially.  How can we use synergy in an educational system?  Our system is black and white, synergy gives nothing to measure or sign post!  Whilst the idea of synergy and subjective epistemology is very abstract to my thinking, through the discourse which took place, I was able to reflect on my understanding of the idea of ‘either/or….AND’.  It was in part through this line of discussion that I gained a whole new level of thinking around the traditional ideology of our education system versus a more abstract system.  Who controls the big picture and how does change this?

I found that each conference linked to another, just as Kit’s linked up to Molly’s questions around Maori education and where it fits in our education system.  Why are we trying to make people fit the system?  Shouldn’t we be shaping a system to fit the people?  Why can’t Maori just be Maori? The idea’s around synergy and subject epistemology fit with this topic.   This conference really reflected the idea of ‘tensions’ and the never ending arguments that surround this issue. 

How can Maori be Maori when many students don’t know what being Maori is?  When I looked through the microscope lens, I realised that although I am part Maori, I truly don’t know what being Maori is.  I was definitely brought up in pakeha culture, so I was then confronted with what do I know about being Maori and what could I bring to this conference – not just as an educator, but as a Maori/Pakeha? 

This assignment is a personal narrative of my learning and as Diti Hill (2011) suggests it has given me the opportunity to think deeply about the theories/ideas that flow into my practice in a connected, personally meaningful and storied way.   I was able to draw on the literature and connect and confront my own beliefs and assumptions.  I found this a little scary because it did reveal some things that I didn’t know about myself, but also gave me insight into the hows and whys of me - that was both enlightening and empowering.  I think there has been quite a bit of self-transformation taking place on this journey, and the tools that this course has given me has opened up a refreshingly new and exciting path through ‘critical reflection’ that will benefit my practice as a teacher and manager in a school. 

            Argyris, C. Schon, D. (1974).  Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness.  Jossey-Bass Publishers.

            Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994).  Ecological models of human development. International Encyclopedia of Education. Vol, 3. 2nd Ed. Oxford:Elsevier.

            Clarke, A. (2012).  Burgeo and back! or Living pedagogically: Catching oneself in the act of being attentive to pedagogy. In A. Cohen, M. Porath, A. Clarke, H. Bai, C. Leggo & K. Meyer (Eds.), Speaking of teaching... :Inclinations, inspiration, and innerworkings (pp. 55-62). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

            Kincheloe, J. (1991).  Teachers as Researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. Chapter 2. Routledge

            Hill, D. (2011). Theory as a Story: An invitation to engage with the ideas the nourish practice. The first years: Nga Tau Tuatahi. New Zealand Journal of Infant and Toddler Education. Vol.13, Issue 1.

Smyth, J. (2011). Critical Pedagogy for Social Justice. Teachers as intellectuals in neoliberal times.  Bloomsbury Academic.

           

York-Barr, J. (2001). Reflective Practice according to York-Barr et.al. Retrieved from ppt Reflective Practice. HTML -  http://www.specialed.ccsu.edu/nicoll-senft/A%20Brief%20Introduction%20to%20Reflective%20Practice.ppt.

TOD - Strengthening a Strong Staff

Our Teacher Only Day saw the expertise of our staff sharing, discussing and clarifying our understanding of: Running Records, Learn/Create/Share in Reading, Reading Data Analysis, Dialogic Practice and Professional Reflection.  The day was crammed full of new learning for some, clarifying for others and consolidation for many.

Sally led a session on the application and analysis of effective running records.  Discussion flowed around clarification of seen/unseen text, reading to learn and learning to read, administration, RRec versus Probe, senior/junior similarities and differences, teacher judgements and a simulated test.  For my own learning, I felt affirmed around my understanding of the administration of running records in relation to probes.  One area of debate was the suitability of Probe testing for our students, particularly around texts that many of them found difficult to connect with due to language difficulties.  It was agreed that all text must be seen, but not necessarily in guided instruction - to ensure testing of comprehension isn't compromised.  Before students begin tests, teachers can ask students to explain/recount what the story/article is about and also ask if there are any words they didn't know the meaning to e.g names of characters, specific nouns such as 'quilt' - teachers must use their prerogative here to judge whether answers may interfere with comprehension testing. 

Following our running record session, we went into unpacking what learn/create/share looked like in reading in our classrooms.  Each syndicate brainstormed their approaches and shared their ideas with the whole group. In sharing with each other, we could see the progressions across the school of the learn/create/share ethos.

After morning tea, we began a session on 'Dialogic Practice'.  If you look through this blog page, you will see a post that gives a bit of an explanation around what it is.  Kyla lead this session with her and I sharing our new learning of dialogic practice from the Manaiakalani Lead Teachers meeting we attended 3 weeks ago.  During this session we talked about what dialogic pracitice looks like, made comparisons between monologic and dialogic  teaching practice and how we can enhance cognitive thinking and engagement through it.  Towards the end of the session, we shared a clip of an expert teacher in a guided reading situation and identified what dialogic and monologic teaching took place.  Teachers got a clearer picture in differentiating between the two and understanding become clearer as discourse took place.

The final session of the day was around our 'Professional Reflections Blogs'.  Rhonda shared ideas for what and how we use the blogs and discussion centered around what reflections should contain.  Teachers were directed towards John Smyth's framework for reflection.  This framework is an excellent pathway to describing, confronting and reconstructing thinking around the tensions of a problematised topic or idea.  Teacher's were then given time to create their own professional blog and we discussed regularities of posts and expectations.

Our TOD as always showed the professionalism and commitment of the staff at TPS.  Our teachers are true LEARNERS, passionate about their subjects, enthusiastic to share and generate a genuine sense of  value and respect for each other.  I am a very proud member of a very professional group of people. 

National Standards - Moderation - How do we know if we're right?

Since the introduction of National Standards we as a school have undergone PLD, and many a staff meeting and informal conversation, trying to get a united understanding of moderation.  In my opinion, we have made great gains in our understanding of how moderation works and I've watched that understanding grow since its inception in 2010.

My concerns around moderation sit in the 'individual understanding' on a national scale and this is a concern that I'm sure all teachers/managers have.  While there are exemplars, progressions, ELLPs and illustrations of the standards themselves, how can we be sure our judgements are accurate?  How do teacher's remain objective in their opinions and decisions around individual students?  I believe that the answer to these questions lie in the collaborative efforts of teachers and managers to gain a global understanding together - through PLD, discussions and plenty of sharing.  It's imperative that everyone use the resources available, knowing them inside out - back to front, in order to have an understanding that ties all curriculum strands together.

At Tamaki we carry out whole day syndicate data discussions each term, using these discussions as an opportunity to share students progress and make comparisons across the school.  Within syndicates, teachers take ownership of all students...not just those in their own classes.  This means teachers sharing data, comparing progressions and reaching a joint understanding of what learning levels look like across the school.  This year we have created a rubric for writing in students speak (collated as a staff) and students use the rubric from years 1 to 8.  Our next steps from the development of the rubric is to collate exemplars of our students work at each level to illustrate the progressions of the rubric.  After assessment, teachers moderate GLOSS and writing to check judgements and talk through their decisions, debating in a non-threatening environment where all that matters is getting a joint understanding of progressions.  When teachers create OTJs, we gather in syndicates to share samples of work at levels to ensure there is a joint understanding of what the levels 'look' like across the classes.

So while we work hard to have a joint understanding as a staff - and this is ongoing as understanding still varies due to experience and the introduction of new staff members - how do we know if we've got it right on a National scale?  The Tamaki cluster have writing moderation at the beginning and end of the year to check joint understanding of judgements based on the the easttle writing rubric.  These moderation sessions have been successful and as a cluster we've seen accuracy and agreement grow through a collective understanding over time.  These sessions are carried out by school management, and I believe these would be even more effective if we involved more teachers at these sessions as PLD for staff.  As a cluster, we don't collaborate in the development of OTJs understanding.  I think this is an aspect of assessment that needs to be addressed to encourage transparency between schools.  Of course some schools would be hesitant to share their data to this scale, but I believe that this type of collaboration would be beneficial to making National Standards work.  After all...the alternative of Standardised Testing is hardly the path we want to go down.

So if we can come to an understanding in making National Standards work there should be more done to unite teachers, encourage collaboration and provide a platform of trust (not fear) in assessment judgements.  I could keep going into what National Standards identifies as expected levels of achievement and whether these levels are fair and equal to all students...but that's a whole other post!!!  Not exactly comparing APPLES to APPLES...

Mentoring the Mentors of the Mentees.

This year our school has become part of the Manaiakalani Digital Teachers Academy by taking on two MDTA teachers to be mentored by two of our expert teachers.  As we move through this new journey of Teacher education  it's been interesting watching the dynamics take place between the mentors and their mentees (let's just call them MDTAs - mentee is to close to manatee!) and how classroom leadership has transpired. 

While the programme is carefully managed and closely monitored by Manaiakalani, as a manager within the school environment it's important that I keep my finger on the pulse and regularly check on the teams to see how things are going and how they are feeling about how things are going.  After some reflection in my role within this programme, I realised that I was monitoring its progress mostly through the mentors, regularly speaking with them about their classroom programmes, the roles of both teachers in the room, classroom dynamics, behaviour management, professional relationships etc.   So, this week I had my first meeting with the MDTAs in supporting them in the programme, something that I should have done in Term 1!  Interestingly I didn't put our meeting in any overview or calendar, but just asked for them to come to my office for a chat...they ultimately felt like they were being called to the "DPs Office" for a stern talk, so had to reassure them that we were merely having a professional conversation for me to check in and see how they were going.  (Note to self: put our next meeting on the calendar!)  The conversation was open and honest and MDTAs were obviously passionate about their roles and the programme they were in. 

There were a few things I noted throughout the conversation and which I relayed to the mentors later in the day.  Firstly, there are times where the students still consider the MDTAs role secondary to the Mentor teacher in the room.  I wonder how we can change this for future recruits to the programme.  The experience a 1:26 classroom environment provides a beginning teacher is invaluable - being thrown in the deep end is the building block of success and our MDTAs haven't had the chance to gain the lead role as 'classroom teacher' as they weren't given the opportunity from the outset.  Maybe, it would have been better to let the MDTAs start the year solo, with mentors supporting, not in the room, but initially through advice, resourcing, programme and planning guidance.  After sufficient time to set up the class and establish teacher/student relationships, then perhaps we bring in the mentors.  The second observation I made was the professional conversations our mentors and MDTAs were having were always about 'advice and guidance'...but sometimes the MDTAs only need a sounding board.  I realised that our mentors needed to be conscious of what was a 'mentors' discussion and what was a 'colleagues' discussion.  As teachers we like to share our thoughts, ideas and experiences inside and outside the classroom, we don't always seek feedback or feedforward for what we're discussing.  Sometimes the mentors need to take off their Mentors hat and just listen to the MDTAs, let them come to their own conclusions and problem solve their own mistakes.  That's part of growing as a teacher.  My third observation of the meeting was that I myself as a manager needed to be more available to the MDTAs as much as I am to all our staff.  I realised that I speak almost daily to all staff, offering support, monitoring and checking in to see how they and their classes are going, but never really established that same relationship with the MDTAs...this was managed through the Mentors.  But this isn't right...MDTAs are BTs on our staff, exactly the same as the two other BTs on our staff who are sole charge.  My not establishing a the same professional relationship with the MDTAs was putting them in a secondary role behind their Mentors.  This was my greatest learning of the day and one which is now changed and I am acutely aware of.

At the end of the day, I am happy with where we are in our journey with this programme.  We are so lucky to have amazing MDTAs and amazing Mentors to be carrying out this new learning with us.  It all starts with relationships, communication and honesty.  I'm excited to see where these relationships lead us as the pioneers of the MDTA programme.

TAMAKI PRIDE

We received great news this week when we found out that a group of
Y7&8 Tamaki Primary students, who'd entered a Waitangi National Trust movie
competition, came second with their entry.  The students have won an all
expenses paid trip to Waitangi, staying at the Copthorne and
experiencing all the sites and sounds of Waitangi.  This will be a
wonderful experience for our students.  Thank you Kyla Hansell for such a
wonderful job in guiding these students in their creation - it's your
dedication and hard work that sees success come to fruition.

Well Done TEAM!

E-Learning Lead Teachers

We had an E-learning Lead Teachers meeting at Glenbrae Primary School this week.  During the meeting we discussed the online access to students in our area of the cluster, who have been waiting for months for the 'switch' to be activated so that they can get online anytime/anywhere within their community.  Now that this has arrived,  we need to 'up the anti' so to speak with expectations around student output.  There really is no excuse for work not to be finished by students in the Year 7&8 syndicate as these are the students who take their netbooks home.  The learning opportunities for our students has doubled!

Another topic of discussion was the development of a cluster-wide data base in which all data around students and their netbooks can be found.  A one stop shop of information for schools to access.  This will make it easier for schools who acquire students from other schools in the cluster, to have a 'whole' picture of where students are in regard to payments, insurance, device history, repairs and contact details.  This should make keeping track of netbooks and the students more transparent. 

In addition to this, we had a great session with Rebecca Jesson (Wolfe Fisher Research Centre) regarding research outcomes from the 2013 year.  There was a lot to reflect on and plenty of discussion around how teachers can become more critical in their thinking around the challenge of their questions and subsequent activities.  I enjoyed discussion around 'dialogic and monologic' teaching practice and how to shift teacher attention from 'testing student's understanding' to 'deepening their cognitive engagement'.

So, my biggest questions around this idea of diologic approach is 'how do we ensure that there's a shared understanding of what dialogic practice is?  What it looks like in the classroom?... and how do we develop the pedagogy behind it?  My thoughts are with teachers who are unsure about pedagogy, and their first default in teaching is to put on the 'lens' most easily accessible to them - which is usually "Monologic" (often how they were taught themselves). We discussed this as a group and came up with a few ideas on how to develop dialogic practice and understanding across our staff.

• Give staff a 'critical question' each week that they write about on their professional reflections blog.  Questions could be based around something like "How have you used dialogic practice in your class this week?"  "What did you do in class this week that you think is a good example of the 'create' aspect of 'learn/create/share'?
• Hold in-house PLD around critical thinking and the dialogic approach.  Carry out the meeting in such a way as to model the  'dialogic' approach.
• In a staff meeting, give staff groups challenges where they have to create a resource or lesson that promotes the dialogic approach i.e - prompt cards for a text.
• Planned observations both peer and SMT focusing on dialogic practice in classrooms.

I think that when teachers see the differences between a monologic and dialogic approach, this will add clarity to their understanding of the practice.

We want to encourage 'critical thinking' across the school and do away with instructional risk - low challenge creation activities such as copying/colouring in.  These benefit no-one.  Creating to learn is where understanding is developed and imbedded in children's learning.

REFLECTIVE PRACTICE
Through the ideas at the meeting and the discussion that ensued,  I was able to make connections with my 'Critical Reflection in Teaching' paper at Uni.  My most recent assignment has been reflecting on the 'macro/neo-liberal' influences on Manaiakalani and the impact this has on the cluster.  I found that these influences tend to outweigh the social needs of the community and I questioned whether more needs to be done in strengthening the social values, justice and democratic principles of the people we work with.  During discussion around engaging our students in a more dialogic/cognitive based/critical thinking environment, I recognised that in strengthening our students ability to socially interact, develop stronger literacy and communication skills, we would possibly be developing a voice in the political divide between those that have and those that have not.  In developing these skills, we as a cluster also need to think about 'social action' that has meaning and is in direct connection with issues that are taking place around our students. Some of these may be political...so appropriateness would need to be considered, but I think that if an issue has a direct impact on our students, then it's one which should be acknowledged, talked about and possibly actioned upon should the opportunity be there to do so.  This is where I question whether we need to be more open to the idea of using our key competencies and values as a measure of success within our cluster?  Why should we only celebrate the literacy and numeracy successes of the community?  Why not celebrate the 'social actions' too?

Critical Reflection for Teachers

This semester I have been taking a paper a AU called 'Critical Reflection for Teachers' with John Roder.  I have found the paper has given me a whole new lens in which to view my role as a teacher and manager of a school.  Since leaving teachers college all those years ago, I never went back to formal learning outside of professional learning development received in schools I have taught in.  The critical reflection paper has given me the tools to delve into 'why' and 'how' I think and act in my role as a teacher.  

When I first started the paper, we had an 'on campus' day where all of the participants met on a Saturday and John Roder took us through the purpose of the paper.  At the end of that day, I came out with my mind spinning...I didn't have a clue what he was talking about and found it very difficult to connect with his messages of gazes, lenses, either/or...AND.  It was a all a little overwhelming, but exciting at the same time.  Flashes of interest were coming on and a lot of tiny connections between how I think and why I think that way was beginning to filter through.  

The many theorists and readings we have studied in the past few months have introduced me to the idea of 'governmentality' - the idea that we are compelled to stick to the rules and do the right thing (democracy) where we believe we have rights and freedom but within an unspoken dimension.  We think we have 'freedom' but we are in fact restrained without actually knowing it. An interesting and challenging space to be in is a 'liminal space', a space that isn't sitting on the fence, but one which is fluid and allows for investigation and reflection where thoughts and opinions change with learning. 

The theorists I have most enjoyed getting to know are:

•  Diti Hill, who introduced me to personal narratives - being able to convey the complexity of ones thoughts and actions where the focus of practice is for people who have not yet developed advocacy skills of their own.  Hill talks in terms of 'early childhood' but reading her article through my lens as a teacher in a low decile, multicultural school, the connection I had with this reading was very strong.  Her explanation of the four areas of sedimented theory and looking for connectedness through new ideas resonated with me as I was able to reflect on how I use and develop these areas in my own practice. 
• John Codd and his reading around neo-liberalism and globalisation was another I connected with through my involvement in the Manaiakalani Education Programme.  The reading showed me the political aspects of education and how strongly politics influences what and how we teach.   It was mostly through this paper that I realised how much of a conformist I was.  Not that there is anything wrong with Manaianakalani, but that I did need to step back and view the programme as a whole which is what I did when I focused my first assignment on the affects the programme has on not only the educational outcomes of our students, but on the social outcomes as well. Carrying out this assignment gave me opportunity to view  Manaiakalani as a socio/political issue and problematise it.  I had never closely examined the programme through this lens before.  I learned that it is ethical to recognise complex spaces and that questioning the policy makers and programme creators doesn't necessarily need to be viewed as 'cynicism' but 'professional skepticism'.  
• Joe Kincheloe's paper about 'teachers as researchers' reiterated the need for teachers to look deeply into our practice and recognise and understand the principals of 'good' and 'bad' teaching.  It also opens up the idea that teachers have been 'deskilled' into teaching pre-packaged programmes forced upon the profession through politically encouraged public perception that teachers are incompetent.  While I think that this is more heavily directed at the American system, we need to observe and learn through their mistakes and be wary of the same political influence here in New Zealand.  In reflecting on this, I made connections with this reading through our own history of tomorrows schools, national standards and now performance pay.  I recognised the debatable issues in this article, but after discussion in our 'on campus' day in May, I changed my lens to look at the 'good' aspects of these things and realised there are some good things that have come out of these policies.  Tomorrows schools gave schools autonomy, national standards gave teachers expectations and clear pathways, performance pay - the jurys still out on that one!

I could go on and on about each theorist we covered though out this course so far, I have learned something from everyone of them...but I don't want this blog to take days to read!

The most important thing that I have learned so far on this course is that being a reflective practitioner allows me to develop my 'power' through self-care, advocacy and open mindedness.  Not just accept, but reflect and question through different 'gazes' not just the one tunneled lens which I think I've always used.  I know I have reflected through out my career, but I now understand and have identified 'how' I reflect and can develop my reflection further through the different stances, lenses and gazes I have been introduced to...in short, I have developed my tool box in thinking and reflecting more 'critically' than ever before.