In a nutshell, the above visual summarises my take on complex systems using the Education system as an example.
With the education system being made up of human and non-human elements, this puts a whole new perspective on the issue of change for me. There are a couple of points I wanted to reflect on before getting to the task questions!
I left teaching because I could not operate in a system where the change was happening at such a slow pace. I got frustrated that there was research out there but myself and a colleague were acting as lone nuts ‘experimenting’ with elements, noticing positive influences, monitoring and evaluating and seeing emergence of better student learning and then repeating this cycle with the same results only for this positive change not being recognised by the leaders in the school. Is this because it is the leaders who need to be the ones identifying which elements to focus the experimenting on? Is it not enough that teachers are doing this within their own networked system? Is it because the results have not been ‘formally recognised’ so therefore the change has not had a chance to be embedded? Is there something more going on here? Is there an issue with it not being a leader-led change in this context? Does it matter who identifies the elements which need changing? Is there a complex system of leaders?
The non-human systems have a huge part to play in educational change. If we have traditional systems that have been embedded for hundreds of years, then changing these systems by identifying a number of simple elements, experimenting, monitoring, evaluating and doing this on repeat will take a long time to get to a tipping point where change can be embedded. The problem is, change is urgent. It is urgent when we hear about low achievement and truancy. More often than not it is not the students who are failing but the schools that are failing the students. Take for example the embedded system of ‘grouping’ or ‘streaming’ in schools and classrooms. There is research which points to this being a practice which compounds inequities. Personally I have witnessed the detrimental effects of this practice. When there is research about this particular element, why does it take so long for school leaders to begin ‘experimenting’ with the alternative? What are they waiting for? Does tradition overide the research? Is it too difficult to ‘experiment’? Do leaders need more support to ‘experiment’? A ‘change’ like this would need to be communicated to the community system as well. There is more to consider. However, leaders need to make a start don’t they? If they don’t, things stay the same. It’s not enough for a teacher in a classroom to ‘experiment’ with elements, notice positive influences, monitor and evaluate and see emergence of better student learning and then to repeat this cycle (over a number of years) with the same results only for this positive change not being recognised by the leaders in the school.
Identify six elements in your school that you would seek to change in order to enhance the quality of student learning across the school. Provide a short justification for each choice.
In my context, six elements I would seek to change are:
- Grouping for learning – because it is not culturally responsive and is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
- Reading needs to be a silent activity – because building an understanding of a text is more engaging and happens at a deeper level through dialogic practices.
- Reading can be active and not passive – because today’s learners are different and need a form of interactivity to help engage and motivate.
- Implementing technologies into reading – because today’s learners are different and by using the technological affordances we can meet students where they are.
- Connecting beyond the walls of the classroom – because we have the technology to do this but it is not being utilised for this.
- Reading does not have to be an isolated or siloed subject – because a book can be the catalyst for integrated, cross-curricula learning experiences.
a) How can effective collaborative practice be used to mitigate complexity? When networks of teachers (elements) are a complex system in itself, if we can self-organise into smaller collaborative networks of like-minded people we are more likely to interact and share our desires, dreams, strategies and intentions and experiment with elements. Collaborative practice can mitigate complexity because the system is smaller and the amount of elements we can experiment with is smaller.
b) What do you need to consider to lead effectively in complex environments? I need to consider the different and numerous smaller self-organised systems which I will come up against. For example, the system of traditionalists, the system of non-change-makers, the system of non-believers, the system of those in comfort zones.
c) What learning environments or pedagogy need to be in place to enable you to engage with complexity? I will need to have a belief in dialogic pedagogy in place or, if not in place, at least a willingness to investigate and experiment. The learning environment will need to be one of innovation. An environment where the teachers experiment, solve problems, include student voice consistently, and most importantly, know that change is required and here is a place to start.
d) What role could culturally responsive solutions play in facing down complex educational environments? I think that culturally responsive solutions play a fundamental role in facing down complex educational environments. It is one of the main reasons that change is needed – to address the inequities in the system. The problem is, unless people from the dominant culture acknowledge there is a problem with current educational environments, any change will take even longer.
e) How could you meet the needs of diverse learners in a complex environment? By acknowledging differences and finding solutions or ways which suit/support them in change-making. Encouraging self-organised systems of support?
Kerri@learning 