Educating Boys'

Males and NCEA

I began my teaching career in a traditional single sex boys high school.  My initial years were grounded in School Certificate, Six Form Certificate and Bursary - these were systems that I was familiar with (I was a product of them myself).  

Peter Lyons - Otago Daily Times

An opinion piece by Peter Lyons (an economics teacher from St Peter's in Auckland) in the New Zealand Herald (click here) raises the issue of gender inequality in education - specifically in NCEA qualifications.  Whilst acknowledging the pitfalls of making generalised statements Lyon's points out that "NCEA is a standards-based assessment system. Many boys seem to adopt the attitude that meeting the minimum standard will suffice."

I wanted to know how reflective this statement would be for us here at Waihi College.  Do we in fact have results that reflect boys struggling in NCEA compared with the girls (and if so what does that mean for us as an educational institution)?

Here are some of our NCEA results from last year...  Level One 2014 had Girls endorsed with Excellence 6.3% (boys were at 3.3%) Girls endorsed with Merit 46.9% (boys were at 23.3%).  Similar results existed for Level Two. Level Three was more even.  So it would not be out of place to say that girls have twice the rate of excelling in NCEA than the boys last year in NCEA.  

Some of the specific issues Lyon has with NCEA include the lack of competitiveness and that instructional nature of assessments; "Boys are also generally less inclined to read instructions carefully. NCEA assessments are laden with instructions, assessment criteria and much additional reading material that camouflages the actual questions that need to be answered."  This are observations which I tend to agree with.  

So what is it that can be done by teachers here at Waihi College to counter these?  I would strongly suggest that regular review of the progress of students through NCEA (one of the core roles of the senior Pouako) would add to the competitive nature among boys.  We have annual goals around endorsement (L1 3 x Exc + 21 x Mer : L2 5 x Exc + 20 x Mer : L3 3 x Exc + 6 x Mer) - we will need boys to be better represented to gain these rates.  

Opportunities and expectations around internal assessments are key.  Are boys not taking the opportunities for 'sign posting' or re-submissions or resits?  Teachers having real conversations about the high expectations for our boys is key.  Are we pushing our boys and creating that environment of excellence?  In ERO's School Evaluation Indicators Domain 4 : Responsive curriculum, effective teaching and opportunity to learn "teachers and students co-construct realistic and challenging learning goals..." 

This post is related to RTC #1. "Establish and maintain effective professional relationships focused on the learning and well-being of ākonga." And RTC #7. "Promote a collaborative, inclusive and supportive learning environment part ii. foster trust, respect and cooperation with and among ākonga.  And ERO's School Evaluation Indicators Domain 4.

Book Review

Changing Our Secondary Schools by Bali Haque

I really enjoyed this educational theory book, especially because this is written by a kiwi, who has worked in the New Zealand system and understands the changes specifically in the New Zealand educational system.  

Bali Haque is a well known figure in the New Zealand educational community being a former principal Pakuranga and Rosehill Colleges, President of the Secondary Principals' Association, deputy chief of NZQA and an executive member of the PPTA.  In recent years he has worked in Rarotonga.  

In Changing Our Secondary Schools Bali has analysed the major changes to the New Zealand Education system over the last three decades.  It is easy to see the level of change our sector has been subjected too.  I enjoyed his summaries and gained from seeing these changes from a management/strategic point of view.  My experiences have been predominantly as a teacher this book helped me see some of the logic behind the theory.  

Bali is highly critical mostly of implementation of the policies rather than the specific policies themselves.  Highlighting the compromises built upon compromises resulting in some avoidable problems.  He focuses much of his criticism on the divisions (and conflict) that exist in New Zealand secondary schooling systems.  

In the second half of the book Bali takes deliberate aim at many sacred cows in the system.  He has strong ideas which can be summarised as incendiary.  Paying excellent teachers 'excellence units', aiming to remove incompetent (and marginally competent) teachers from the ranks, making all but five weeks of holidays an expectation for teachers to be onsite, raising the entry requirement for teacher training a masters qualification, removing the focus from extra curricular, to name a few.  

On the issue of collective professionalism Bali writes "It is important to serious address the problem of incompetent and mediocre teachers... teaching is too important a profession to tolerate free riders and level high flyers unrewarded.".  

I would recommend Changing Our Secondary Schools to teachers who are new to NZ (as it gives some excellent background information about how we got here), teachers who have a mind for the politics of schooling, senior management (as much of the change lies with them).  It is an easy reading book and one that had me thinking late into the night.  

This post relates to RTC #12 - "Engaging with professional literature and reflecting on ones practice".

  

Building Resilience

The Risks Of Praise

There was an interesting article in the Herald on Sunday which challenged the notion of positive praise for students.  It makes for a good read and an excellence source for discussion on teaching and learning.

I like educational articles in newspapers.  You see everyone is a self appointed expert, everyone has been through the schooling system.  I find myself liking this article too, but I think that it can be misused...

University of Melbourne's Professor Stephen Dinham has urged teachers to ditch untested learning styles - including glowing praise and shying away from giving bad marks - if they wanted children to succeed.
That included "self-boosting" where students were saturated in "rampant positivity".

I think that our NZ Curriculum works well with the wider education of the child (the core 'Values' of "excellence, innovation, inquiry, and curiosity").  I like to think that most teachers have a good instincts for pushing and encouraging our students.

Giving children regular, constructive feedback about how to improve was a better policy, he said.
"We need to say to kids that they can do this, they can't do that but to move their learning forward they need to do this, that or the other. What we don't say is you're good or bad at something," said Dinham.
This reinforced a valuable message that effort brought reward.

This is where I believe the notion of 'growth mindset' comes into play (see my posting on Dr Carol Dweck here).  The idea that we can build into our teaching practice that students can achieve more if they're in the frame of mind that they can grow.

This post is related to RTC#1. "Establish and maintain effective professional relationships focused on the learning and well-being of ākonga." And RTC#6. "Conceptualise, plan and implement an appropriate learning programme i. articulate clearly the aims of their teaching, give sound professional reasons for adopting these aims, and implement them in their practice."