INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS INQUIRY PROJECT

“MINDSHIFT! RETHINKING EDUCATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY”

FINAL SCHOOL REPORT – April 2012

SCHOOL:

INQUIRY TEAM MEMBERS, GRADE(S) TAUGHT, SUBJECT, FOCUS (please list):

SCHOOL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT FOR THE PROJECT:

1

“I now know how to contribute to the collaborative planning process on Rubicon. It was modeled for me and now I can run with it to take responsibility for my part… The learning has been differentiated for our staff – we require differentiated learning and personalized in-service. Modeling and clear expectations has simplified the process. This new

Tanya de Hoog – Assistant Head/IB PYP Coordinator Cathy Russell – IT Coordinator/Junior Division HeadKendle Sohier – Grade 1Samantha Mizel - Grade 3Evita Strobele – Grade 6 (on maternity leave)All team members collectively focused on the concept of collaboration for this project. Collaboration is a large component of how we plan and implement our curriculum. Within the IB Framework there is required curriculum documentation, including the use of a unit planner and scope and sequence documents.

Branksome Hall is an independent IB school (JK-12) for girls in downtown Toronto offering all three International Baccalaureate Programs, including the Primary Years Program (PYP). Given the degree of implementation of the PYP, collaboration, critical thinking and IT are heavily embedded into teaching and learning. A major element of the PYP program is the “Transdisciplinary Skills” (Research, Thinking, Communication, Self-Management and Social Skills) which connect directly to 21st century skills. As teachers of primary and junior aged students, a major goal of our program is to instill lifelong learning through concept based teaching and the application of skills through inquiry and critical thinking. We believe that the adults in our community need to explicitly model the skills we wish to nurture in our learners. Because the students learn through inquiry-based instruction within a variety of subject disciplines, there is a high need for meaningful collaboration among teachers. With both time and technology being factors in the success of

Branksome Hall Junior School

OUR ESSENTIAL QUESTION:

OUR ACTION RESEARCH STORY: 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH AND HOW IT MAY HAVE CHANGED:

2

How can a shared understanding of collaboration and the effective use of technology (Atlas Rubicon) enhance our collaborative practices?

Initially, we explored the different 21st century skills through the context of our IT program. We agreed that our IT program is embedded into teaching and learning to a high degree of effectiveness in an age appropriate manner. We all began to shift our focus towards collaboration and directing our action research towards how to enhance student collaboration. After much discussion, we came to the conclusion that teacher collaboration is essential to building a collaborative learning community within a school. We decided that examining how we could collaborate as a team to enhance teacher collaboration within our school would be a worthy focus, given how essential collaboration is to the implementation of the PYP program within an IB school. As Junior School teachers, we believe that explicit modeling of the skills we want to help our student develop and grow is essential to their success. Given the importance of collaboration not only in schools, but in the wider world, we felt this was a worthy focus for our research. Collaboration is highly encouraged in our practice and programming; however, it is always a challenge to provide time and to make the most of the tools available to facilitate collaborative practices.

Knowing how busy our faculty are, we felt it would be relevant to explore ways to enhance collaboration (both the use of time and technology) in order to make collaboration more purposeful. Collaboration is something that is valued by the faculty at the Junior School and is also necessary to ensure the ongoing implementation of the IB PYP within the school. IB requires that teachers spend time planning in vertical and horizontal teams and that homeroom teachers and specialist teachers collaborate to ensure that the program is transdisciplinary in nature.

2. FUNDING AND SUPPORT:

3. PROJECT PROCESS:

3

We are most grateful to the Head, Academics for providing funding for us to participate in this project. This included fees for participation as well as the costs of supply teachers to cover absences from classes for Mindshift sessions, as well as release time between sessions to plan, collaborate and reflect.

Branksome Hall is committed to best practice teaching and opportunities for professional growth. The opportunity to participate in action research relating to 21st century skills, with a specific focus on collaboration was timely and relevant, particularly because we were also embarking on a whole school reflective process to prepare for an external evaluation by a visiting team from International Baccalaureate. Having these run parallel provided many great opportunities for reflection and collaboration.

We explored the concept of collaboration with our JS faculty. We examined our “current” practices and then sought ways to facilitate a shift in use of time to make collaborative planning meetings more purposeful and productive, as well as a shift in the use of technology (Atlas Rubicon) to streamline curriculum documentation.

Action Research Timeline:

October 2010 – First Mindshift Symposium: heavy discussion around 21st C skills and existing implementation of IT in the Junior School. Discussion focused on the Grade 6 PYP Exhibition, and the school wide need to ensure girls are exploring and practicing the skills of collaboration from JK-6. Conversation begins to shift toward teachers as models and teacher collaboration; discussion about Atlas Rubicon vs. Sharepoint.

January 2011 – First draft of key question and lines of inquiry completed. Rough questions and consideration in place:

· Teacher collaboration – use of meeting time – how effective/productive is it?

· Use of technology (Atlas Rubicon) to enhance planning

4

May 2011- staff meeting presentation by Mindshift Team surrounding the nature of our action research. Distribute Mindshift Survey #1. Purpose-to collect further baseline date to further understand colleagues understanding of collaboration, practices and use of technology to enhance planning.

June 2011 – Analyze results as a team; plan next steps. Decision to create a collective definition of collaboration (See Exit Ticket)based on information collected through survey and wider research.

Decision at leadership level to shift planning meetings to reflection meetings. Data collected indicated meetings were not as productive as they could be and that timing of the meetings did not facilitate planning. Shift to reflection meetings where people could share feedback on taught units with the aim of documenting feedback as a means of reflecting to plan ahead. Planning meetings only used for new units of inquiry.

September 2011: Began projecting Rubicon planner on screen/smart board at wider reflection meetings. Purpose to model usage and provide a visual focal point for meetings)

October 2011: Mindshift Team Collaborative planning session – wider research on collaboration and reflection on data collected thus far into collaboration and collaborative planning norms. Group establishes criteria for collaboration at Branksome Hall Junior School based on 7 Norms of Collaboration (Adaptive Schools, Garnston and Wellman; Houston Independent School Distirict). Generation of essential agreements for collaborative meetings based on feedback received in surveys.

5

November 2011: Presentation of “Enhancing Collaboration” booklet at a JS Faculty Meeting. Present and discuss 7 Norms and obtain consensus on adopting the proposed Essential Agreements for Collaboration. Half day professional development session on using Rubicon Atlas and clarifying expectations. (Revisit Completion Checklist for Planners on Rubicon to clarify expectations for level of detail – originally given to faculty in June 2010; adopted Branksome Hall Inquiry Cycle and Task/Tool/Criteria for recording of assessments for planner work).

December 2011-January 2012 – Completion of “Exit Tickets” at the end of reflection meetings – stars and wishes, use of technology and application of 7 Norms.

February 2012 – compile data from Exit Tickets.

March 2012 – Final Survey to measure change trends in thinking about collaboration and use of technology.

Within our team, we found that making time to work together was critical. Planning ahead and choosing dates that worked for everyone was very important. We did utilize the four half day releases between May and October; November to February; and February to April. A total of 4 half day sessions

STRATEGY:

a) DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA COLLECTION:

6

Our main source of data was the teachers themselves. The sample size of the group was approx.17 teachers. This does not include those of us participating in the action research or administrators. Data was collected initially through observations of planning meetings and then followed up by surveys and exit tickets. Sample planners from Rubicon Atlas also serve as evidence in a growing shift in the use of technology to enhance collaborative practice surrounding the written curriculum. The assessments that proved most useful were the survey results and comparatively analyzing the data to note trends and changes. Post analysis of the planners on Rubicon was also very telling. Comparing planners archived in June of 2011 to planners completed over the 2012 school year revealed significant changes, which can be directly related to an increase in faculty using Rubicon for curriculum documentation and a shared understanding of expectations surrounding documentation.

Baseline Data: Observation Notes

Midline Data – First Survey and Exit Tickets

Culminating – Final Survey and Rubicon Planner Comparison

Quantitative Data Qualitative Data

b) MAKING SENSE OF THE DATA:

7

“How has collaboration changed? It happens! There are scheduled times for us to come together to ensure that the curriculum being delivered is differentiated and consistent. Different perspectives are brought to meetings. Colleagues are more open to constructive feedback and are also more open to new suggestions and ideas. The planner is becoming a living document instead of staying static. Receiving feedback from multiple sources helps. People have become more engaged in the planning process. There is now meaningful talk and reflections.”

Quantitative Data was compiled into column graphs and pie graphs to show visual trends and changes in specific areas taken directly from responses from the survey data – both the mid-point and culminating surveys.

Qualitative Data was also compiled, compared and contrasted through the lens of our ongoing research. The qualitative data played a significant role in guiding our process as we tried to base our work on what we learned about collaboration and use of technology (specifically Rubicon). Professional development and ongoing teacher education and expectations regarding the purpose of our meetings (e.g. shift from planning to reflecting to plan ahead, and PD session Rubicon and shoulder to shoulder support).

Through both aspects of our research we tried to validate and challenge commonly held beliefs amongst faculty about collaboration through data collection, research and action.

c) ARTIFACTS, GRAPHICS, IMAGES:

c) FINDINGS:

8

9

10

11

12

13

d) FINDINGS

14

Quantitative Data Findings:Our data shows a definite trend shift in use of Rubicon Atlas for curriculum planning and documentation. There is a noted increase in the number of times faculty logon during units of inquiry, inclusive of both homeroom and specialist teachers. In the culminating survey, data indicates that faculty are logging on between 3 and 5 times per unit of inquiry, a significant shift from our mid-point survey. For the number of times faculty update and add reflections to planners on Rubicon, there is a noticeable trending shift from the 0-3 range (mid-point survey) to the 3-6 range (culminating survey).There was not a lot of change indicated in level of engagement of collaborative planning between grade teams. This was not a surprise for us. However, there was a significant shift from the 2-3 ranking (mid-point survey) to the 3-5 ranking (culminating survey) in level of engagement in shoulder to shoulder collaborative meetings with the IB Coordinator. The most significant change in engagement in collaborative planning occurred between Grade and Specialist Teachers. There was a shift from the 2-3 (mid-point) to the 4-5 range (culminating survey).An interesting finding was that it was nearly a 50-50 split among respondents in measuring whether their perspective on collaboration grew or shifted. While perspective may not have changed for some, other data indicates that practice has changed, regardless. Approximately 75% of respondents indicated that they are more aware of the 7 Norms of Collaboration throughout the duration of the action research. Qualitative Data Findings:Through meeting observation logs, it was noted that there was evidence of:

· Willingness to share ideas, active listening, building on each other’s ideas, direct questioning, and discussion of curriculum expectations

· Lack of clarity of meeting focus, lack of preparation prior to coming to meeting, not all teachers contributing ideas (especially specialist teachers), using meeting time to discuss other aspects of school life not related to curriculum

Through the first survey, we collected peoples’ definitions of collaboration. Commonalities were:· Working with others to achieve a common goal/working together· Being open minded · Dialogue about curricular and pedagogical issues· Providing support for each other· Working shoulder to shoulder·

The level of increased detail in Atlas Rubicon documentation has been significant. Comparing planners completed between Sept. – April of 2011-12 to planners completed between Sept. – April 2010-11 revealed many positive changes:

· Having a common frame for documenting assessments and learning engagements means all teachers (including specialists) are clear on HOW to document this information

· teachers now select learning outcomes (PYP and Ministry)· Reflections are more specific and include the reflections

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PROJECT: WHAT WERE MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS – YOUR NOTABLE

15

Exit Tickets – as changes were being implemented, colleagues were asked to complete exit tickets to share their perceptions of collaborative practices at meetings.

· Keeping discussions focused and on track

· Increased participation from specialists

· Sharing feedback from everyone

· Increased awareness and accountability to the 7 Norms

Final Survey – overall, comments indicate that colleagues are more engaged with collaborative planning, the 7 Norms of collaboration and their use of Rubicon.

Some Quotes from the qualitative data:

“I am more conscious of listening and being positive.”

“I have become more conscious of the 7 Norms.”

“Collaboration is key and now happens consistently.”

“We are getting better at this!” (use of 7 Norms)

“I think the layout of the 7 Norms of collaboration is a good reminder of how to get the most out of collaborative planning.”

Both our qualitative data and our quantitative data reflect the same outcomes, which confirm for us as a team that there was definitely a Mindshift in use of time and technology within the framework of a shared understanding of collaboration.

SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES? WHAT WERE KEY RESULTS AND KEY PROFESSIONAL LEARNINGS?

16

Challenges: At the beginning of our data gathering and observation phase we had wanted to video tape some of our planning meetings as baseline data. However, after videotaping 2 meetings some of our colleagues came forward and expressed that having the video camera in meetings made them feel uncomfortable and that they did not wish to participate if the video cameras were going to remain. Although we were disappointed that we would not be able to collect video evidence, we understood and respected the perspectives of our colleagues and stopped videotaping.

Keeping the momentum going was also challenging at time. Finding time to meet for our team was at times difficult with all of our busy schedules and other collaborative meetings. When we

Successes: Overall, we found that we succeeded in our inquiry and in our collaborative practices as a Junior School. Our colleagues were receptive to our work and as a result, we were able to gather meaningful data and make changes that supported the value placed on collaboration within our faculty. The creation of our collaboration booklet, the increase in usage in Atlas Rubicon by all teachers and shared awareness of collaboration are definite successes in our eyes. Our work helped us to focus our purpose as team and in turn we were able to find ways to support our colleagues through Professional development, changing the structure of our collaborative meetings, and using technology to help focus our conversations and keep our time

CONCLUSION: HOW DID OUR ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT IMPACT YOUR INSTRUCTIONAL AND/OR ASSESSMENT PRACTICES TO REFLECT EDUCATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY?:

17

“Even as we inquired together as a group, we found such a shift in our workflow as we sought to apply The 7 Norms of collaboration. Raising our own consciousness surrounding collaboration has had a significant impact on our work with each other, colleagues and in our classrooms.”

Tanya de Hoog, Team Leader/Administrator

Teacher collaboration has always been an integral part of our philosophy and pedagogy. It has also been a source of frustration, as colleagues’ views on what collaboration should look like differ, and time and tools can often be a hindrance instead of an enhancement. Because collaboration is highly valued by our faculty, we felt that an inquiry into how we could enhance our collaborative practice so that our understanding of collaboration could become a shared vision where the tools and time allocated are viewed as supports. A shared belief of what purposeful collaboration should look like, sound like and feel like was a significant shift in our understanding of collaboration. Defining what collaboration means in our school and adapting and adopting The 7 Norms of Collaboration to guide us in our time together became critical to helping to enhance and refine our collaborative practices. It is important to note that it was not our intention to narrow our limit peoples’ already established definitions of collaboration. Instead, our hope was to adopt a shared definition to help direct our purpose together and to build a common understanding regardless of background or level of experience. Another significant outcome of our work was a more in-depth understanding of how Atlas Rubicon works and how it can be used as an ongoing digital tool to aid with curriculum documentation. A nice byproduct of deepening our collective understanding of Atlas Rubicon involved setting explicit guidelines to ensure consistency and clarity. We are deeply satisfied with the growth and change we have seen with our colleagues surrounding how and why we collaborate face to face and through Atlas Rubicon. Even as we worked together as a group, we found such a shift in our work as we sought to apply The 7 Norms within our own work. Overall, the response from our colleagues was very receptive. Faculty was very open to complete surveys, exit tickets, allow us to observe meetings, and most importantly to adopt the 7 Norms and reflect on them. Very recently we had an

The Path Forward….

· Making placemats to use in meetings to continue to focus on applying the 7 Norms.

· Implementing the use of “Entrance Tickets” to collaborative meetings so that colleagues have the opportunity to pause and prepare before coming. (e.g. a success to share, a challenge and a possible solution to share, a wondering/question to share)

· Moving towards using the language of the 7 Norms with our students

Resources For Professional Learning Teams:

18

Garmston, R., and Wellman, B. (2009) The Adaptive School: A Sourcebook for Developing Collaborative Groups, 2nd edition. Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon.Seven Norms of Collaboration: A Supporting Toolkit. Centre for Adaptive Schools, 2006 (www.adaptiveschools.org)

Centre for Adaptive Schools: Building Capacities for School Improvement: http://www.adaptiveschools.com/

Seltzer, Leon F. Criticism vs. Feedback: Which One Wins? Psychology Today, June 30, 2000. (http://www.psychologytoday.com)

How to Take Feedback. Psychology Today, March 2011. (http://www.psychologytoday.com)

US State Department: http://www.state.gov/m/a/os/43984.htm (7 Norms of Collaboration)

http://webserver3.ascd.org/ossd/collaborativeplanning.html

http://vocserve.berkeley.edu/centerfocus/CF2.html

Randy Nelson on Learning and Working in the Collaborative Age http://www.edutopia.org/randy-nelson-school-to-career-video

http://www.districtadministration.com/article/benefits-teacher-collaboration

http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/Reform/pt2d.html