We’re back in class right now, working on social distancing, thinking about what learning looks like when we have to be a little further away from each other. It’s strange to go against instincts to get kids talking, learning together, wondering with each other. It’s strange not being able to go out right now, staying inside, wearing masks, but I guess this is just a strange time (until we get used to it).
The kids, as always, seem to be flexible and want to learn. They understand things are different and are looking to us for ways of being. So I’m trying to stay calm and model alternative ways of knowing and being, while always stressing that I’m still learning myself.
I wonder if that’s all we should be doing in these times anyway. Acknowledging that things are new, wondering and negotiating ways of being in this new world, and looking for ways to make things a little more better where we can.
The happiness lab podcast has really been helping. Thinking about the brain and how it works, helps us to deal with these situations a little better. Hopefully we can keep it going.
It’s been strange hey? We’ve been living this life for the last little while where we shouldn’t really interact with others. Now we’re slowly opening back up, and I think there’s still some uncertainty about how and who to reconnect.
School is strange because of this, I think more so for PYP teachers. We’ve been encouraged to have interactive lessons, lots of group work, thinking and sharing. My particular job is taking kids outside, exploring, asking questions to community members, and then we couldn’t and now… who knows?
I’m not sure how other people are coping with this. If schools are offering counselling for teachers about anxiety, if there is a solid plan in place, if there are options for different approaches. I know this situation has caught everyone off guard, but is anyone doing it really well? Are there big plans for going back into school? Are we all sure of how to handle more kids around? How do we convince kids it is safe now, when we said it wasn’t before? How do we prepare kids for a future that is more like what it is like now?
Anyway, lots of things to think about before we come back in August, lots of different things to prepare, lots of different things to wonder about.
We’ve been trying to get some of our younger learners more involved outside while being stuck inside. It’s not super easy, but we’ve been looking at this idea of the world as our zoo. While we are stuck inside we can pretend that we are looking into wildlife preserves outside.
We are looking at different connections, having kids draw environments and discussing what they can see and how things are connected. The main thing I find is we have to work harder at making connections as teachers. While the kids aren’t near us, we have to check in a little more and make those connections more meaningful if possible. Stop worrying so much about the academic side and start thinking more about the personal side. I’ve received some awesome images from kids regarding their discoveries and it’s made my day.
Two things for this week that I thought were pretty interesting. I’ve been working on some videos for the kids to learn from (who isn’t I guess) and it’s helped me become more connected with my block. I’m usually outside and walk the same paths, and I’m usually looking as closely as I can. But I haven’t gone out just to look. This time has given me the opportunity to really look at my place. To get to know it a bit better, and I definitely encountered some new ideas.
Secondly, I’ve just started reading The Power of Place: Authentic Learning through Place-based education. While I generally don’t really enjoy education books, perhaps because of my biases I am kind of into this one. I’m not really far into it, but there is a lot of overlap between this book and the IB. I can see me pitching a new type of Open Minds based on this book, so I’m pretty excited to get more into it. The idea of agency and how kids learn more when things are relevant and in their community means a lot to me, but my constant tension is how to do that in an international school, especially one that is in a pretty affluent area.
Anyway, it’s been a good couple of weeks doing some e-learning.
One of the more interesting aspects of a strong program is when we can’t go out and have to really rethink the learning that is happening. I finally had some time to meet with my colleague from the other campus yesterday and we had some talks about what we were going to do for the rest of the year.
Our next two units’ central ideas are “Survival of living things is connected to the environment in which they live” and “Plants are central to sustaining life on Earth”. We’ve been looking at how to do this without going to our national gardens and zoo. It’s been alright so far, but these next two units really need us to be outside.
Right now, I’m wondering about our ethical responsibility to other living things. We’re going to be checking water ecosystems near our school and look at how different living things are connected to their environments, and then how we can maybe create an environment that can sustain a living thing (and then maybe put that thing in the environment). What is our responsibility to these other living things. Is something dying worth the learning experience?
Hopefully we can see more things outside, more hornbills, more birds, more living things, and hopefully learn more about our place.
I’ve been rereading all the articles, trying to add a critique and look more meaningfully at the research methods and purpose of the study. While doing this I’ve really come to rethink some of what I’ve taken from each article. It’s been a great ride so far, only 50 more articles to reread.
Anyway, Semken and Freeman (2008) have this interesting article about how science teachers and sense of place are connected. They talk about the importance of bringing sense back into the classroom and we have to start with connecting the teacher’s sense to increase the opportunity for students to access their senses.
One of the things that always causes tension for me when reading these articles is the desire to quantify a sense of place. Scientists love numbers right? So these two have used a scale to try to understand how a teacher’s attachment to place has grown. I wonder about this for my own work. I wonder how important it is to study a sense of place through a quantitative measure. Is it important to know how much it grows, or is it more important to know how the people feel about their attachment.
Anyway, since I’ve been taking the kids out to more local places I’m hoping that both teachers and students get more connected to places as we start to engage their emotions and physical senses.
Semken, S., & Freeman, C. B. (2008). Sense of Place in the Practice and Assessment of Place-Based Science Teaching. Science Education, 92(6), 1042-1057.
As we continue to work with this virus and what it means for us and our learning, we’ve been able to be outside a little more often. While we still can’t leave the campus there are some opportunities for us to be learning with and for our environment.
We’ve started to explore our school’s person constructed ecosystems. We’ve been measuring the soil ph, moisture and the light that hits the soil. We’ve used these measurements along with data from species collection to start trying to understand the interconnections between living and non-living things.
So far, it’s been a bit of a stretch for the kids, but I think they are starting to understand ecosystem interconnection and how diversity is important. When we look at our field that barely has grass in some areas, look at the soil and the species diversity we can see that some “ecosystems” are badly damaged and we have to work in that system to make it better.
There hasn’t been a whole lot happening other than that, we’ve been working hard at making sure students have an opportunity to be outside and learn, we’re planning things in class for them to do to connect to their own research projects, it’s just a slow process, or so it feels, but hey, slow learning is good too.
I love being outside all day, honestly, it’s amazing. I get to be warm, exploring the different areas of Singapore, and just feel like I am in this place. Sadly, with the coronavirus outbreak, we’ve been forced to stay inside.
That means I have to change some of my programs, which isn’t ideal. The day we heard we had to change I went out to the park and took some videos (like the one above) to have the student experience the river without having to be in the river. With so many videos I was hoping that students could start making connections and exploring the environment.
This happened after some of the classes had been outside, so some kids won’t get to experience this, the videos have helped, but it’s not the same. So as a result we may have to change some of our unit.
It’s interesting how adaptable you have to be in a program like this, even though some things you would think would never have to change, at times they do.
Two articles this week have really grabbed my attention, well one article and one part of a book. So, for the book, I’ve been drawn to this idea that a place is where you view the world from. I’m not always human centric, but I do believe I’m a product of where I’m from. If that’s true, then, I guess what helps me become that product, or what enables me to see the world in such a way, and while culture, social settings, power imbalances, environment, and upbringing all play a part, we see the world from a place, and this establises a “point of view”. A point of view is describing how we see the world from our vantage point, our place (Casey, 2013). I’d never really thought about this before. Where we are from establishes how we see the world, I mean it makes sense when I think about it, but it hadn’t really crossed my mind. So, Casey, although a dense, difficult read, has been helpful (this week anyway). The second article that really got me thinking this week was more a recording of a conversation between a group of teachers talking about “science” (although I’m not really sure they were ever really talking about science). Tippins, Hammond and Hutchison (2006) were looking into how immigrant teachers, or transnational teachers kind of taught about science. The key take aways for me from this article are these ideas of functionalism depends on environment, hybridization of teacher values, and what a globally competent teacher might be. The first idea, is always kind of in the back of my mind, but was interesting to see in this conversation. As someone who grew up in a more conservative educational context, it is difficult at times to really change into an inquiry based teacher. Deep down we fall back into what we know, what we experienced because that feels comfortable. We need to really address the hows and whys of who we are in order to really get this “new” way of teaching going. In order to do that, maybe we need to think about the different function we play in a different place. This might be way it is difficult for people to change in the same place, we see the same environment, but if we move, we may be able to see a different reason for teaching, a different purpose for our actions, which may help us change. I’m not really sure, but it’s something I need to think about for the dissertation. However, as we move towards this new place, and this new function, we are kind of a hybrid of cultures and hidden assumptions, we don’t really have a full grasp on what is happening, especially if we are new to a place, so for a time we are in a kind of limbo. We are also changing the system because we are bringing new values into an established system. This article was looking from an American point of view, and as more immigrants came in to be teachers the system was also changing because of mixed and different expectations. Finally, and very briefly, the authors talk about how we have to change our concept of a globally competent teacher. This is one that has really stuck with me since the concepts of teaching and learning course I just finished. We have assumptions based on who we are and how we we raised or educated. If we move those assumptions might change or develop or be stuck in a hybrid state. But as more and more people move, we need to think a little more clearly about what a “globally competent” person or teacher is. Especially in an international school situation. While the IB has values that are clearly publicized and available, how do we as teacher embody or embrace those values, is it clear as to what those values are? Both of these readings got me back in the mood for research which is a good step going forward.
Casey, E. (2013). The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. California: University of California Press. Tippins, D., Hammond, L., Hutchison, C. (2006). “International teachers negotiating 21st century science classrooms: a question of hybridized identities and pedagogical imaginaries.” Cultural Studies Of Science Education 1: 681-692.