Guest post from Sean Canavan, teacher and pastoral lead at a comprehensive school in South Wales.

Guest Post

Renaissance Man and Enlightenment

We are in challenging and unprecedented times in terms of learning and teaching and I personally am in unprecedented times in my reflection on my pedagogy and practice.  The pace of change in my ‘long’ career has always been a challenge; new governments, new strategies, explosion of tech, academisation, devolved powers, National Curricular changes and so the list goes on.  This does not even begin to take into account the most important aspect of the role, the young people and the way they have changed over that time. However, the pace of change in practice and expectation in the last 6 weeks has been nothing short of astounding.

In the beginning (for me) things were very simple and you planned, delivered, did a half term assessment and put a number on a sheet (in a ring binder!).  Over time, sheets became electronic, assessments became more frequent (in class progress had to be seen) and planning and delivery more prescribed as we moved into a time of increased inspection and accountability.  What was the impact on children in all of this? In theoretical and ideological terms, increased outcomes for them and making them more successful but what was the reality? As a now pastoral leader I saw the mental health of young people in my care deteriorating as staff allowed the hierarchical pressure of inspection to cascade down to those they were meant to care for.  Fast forward twenty-five plus years and this has now become embedded (and endemic) in many schools. Of course, there are other contributory factors in the mental health of young people being affected such as social media, technologies, and the dynamic of parent/child changing over time. But what about the role of education in this? Is it too easy to blame parents, media and the internet?

I never really understood the need for, ‘experience in at least two schools’, when looking for a more senior promoted post.  If I am good at my job, why does this matter? I am now fully aware of why – my ‘enlightenment’ happening slowly at first and now front and centre. Experience in learning cannot be bought and I have seen people come and go through ‘fast track’ schemes.  An outstandingly academic Oxford and Stellenbosch graduate lasted about 6 weeks in his teaching post when his lack of Emotional Intelligence meant learning did not take place (or indeed could not). Conversely, I have seen pupils engaged in fun lessons, but again, no learning taking place, but they were happy; inspectors and leadership less so. 

In addition, until recent times I never fully appreciated the impact curriculum has on the young people.  The approach in too many schools is to disapply a pupil when things are not working (progress/behaviour/mental health) and put them in a support base of some description where their needs can be better met.  This sticking plaster approach meets the short term needs of class teachers and school. However, what about the impact on that young person? What are we telling them about themselves? What are we teaching them about overcoming difficulty?  However, that is to put it all back on the young person – what if we, as school leaders, got it wrong in the first place with our approach and curriculum?

My ‘enlightenment’ has been accelerated in recent times through reading, networking, a challenging PLN and change of circumstance.  Being so pastorally orientated has meant I have always surrounded myself or been with like-minded people and as such the expertise ‘was in the room’.  Or was it? There was expertise, no doubt, and some of the best minds I have worked with are in ‘that group’, but what about others who wanted to input?  Did they get equal time from ‘us, the experts’? Definitely not.

Recent research around diversity has been highlighted as major failing of security in US leading up to   9/11; not diversity as in age, ethnicity and gender but cognitive diversity based on experiences and knowledge and subsequent communication failures.  Too many people all from same backgrounds and same expertise. All experts, but all in a narrow field. Useful information needs to be aired and shared but what if no-one in the group has the key information because they all had similar education, same training led by same people and then there is no diversity.  Often known as a ‘shared ignorance’. Appointing people from outside of the organisation is often a risk that leadership teams don’t take; not limited to education either. However, that voice of difference, the voice from the outside may ask the questions that the others didn’t ask, not because they were afraid too (although that does happen) but because they did not know that was a question to ask.

The opportunity we have in Wales with new curriculum is massive and is viewed with envy by so many on the outside.  However, is it an opportunity or a threat. The timing of this virus could be seen similarly within the scope of the curriculum development.  In so many meetings about this the voices begin to merge into one and the cognitive dissonance that people once had, turns into an echo chamber of the most senior voice.  When a meeting is held and the leader share a view how many then parrot to it. However, consider idea of brainwriting, where people individually (and anonymously) write ideas and thoughts and then they get shared around room on boards and not verbally, where again people could be tempted to parrot the leader or dominant voice.  Consequentially allowing a range of views to get aired and providing the diversity is right then this meritocracy is powerful.  

How often will a curriculum model for next year/the future be put to staff by a member of senior staff who has consulted with other curriculum senior staff in other schools and subject middle leaders in their own school?  Middle leaders will ‘discuss’ contact time as being important and the core will be priorities as that what is measured and so on. When was the last time a school’s curriculum model was discussed by a pastoral team? Conversely, when was the last time the well-being policies were looked at by curriculum leaders?  Leadership groups often see themselves are the experts. An alternative viewpoint from somebody outside of the ‘knowledge base’ is often overlooked and dismissed. A dissenting voice should be welcomed and given consideration. How is down to leaders who see the strength of diversity not the challenge to their authority.

Perspective is key and as a profession we have increasing access to more research about learning than ever before and I believe we are, as a profession, engaging in it in increasing numbers.  How many of us remember the professional learning sessions during our degree/PGCE and looking at the work of Piaget, Bruner and Vygotsky and then moving on. How many new teachers to the profession are now being exposed to alternative work of people Dweck and Canter in addition to Bloom et al.?  We are information rich but what is right and why do we get it wrong?

Reflection is one of the most powerful tools we have but often we are too busy trying to move forward and find the ‘next best thing’, that we have not fully reflected on what we have been doing.  Consider curriculum design in school and options – nothing much has changed in 30 years since the first NC was published. Diversity has gone. Uniformity is king.

Back to my renaissance and the fact that I now believe, through my reading, networking (social and physical), experience and having conversations with diverse individuals, that curriculum is significantly the most important thing in school (after people!).  If we get the curriculum design right, we do not get the levels of anxiety, disengagement, disapplication from subjects, exclusion and other blights on our practice, but we get the opposite. Pastoral care and well-being successes should be based on prevention and informed planning rather than intervention and cure.  There will always need to be support for trauma affected young people but how much quality time could we find for them if we are not just reacting? With the curriculum, we must, to quote a colleague I respect greatly, ‘get ahead of the curve’, and avoid just doing what we do as it is comfortable and easy. We must expose ourselves to the risk of listening to those whose ideas may be ‘outlying’, and embrace cognitive diversity and design a curriculum that is truly child centred.  It must strike a balance of mastery, skills, academic rigour, vocational balance and life preparation. The assessments that make up this and the way that arises is for another day and another post.  

As a pastoral leader and advocate for all, especially the most vulnerable, this curriculum has to be brave, new and above all inclusive; the lives of all need to be enriched by it for the good of the pupils, our communities and the future of our nation.

Sean Canavan