Feb 06 2009
Layer Upon Layer
As I was freshening up my classroom appearance this morning, I was struck by information overload. The poor kids are bombarded and I had to consciously stop myself affixing all our current “mandatory” signage on programs offered, policies to follow and people to see re whatever. The reality was, I was running out of suitable wall space. It diluted the message that we fundamentally respect and care for our kids.
When is too much enough? Our place has a strong support network for kids, as most places of learning do. My query is when are too many layers, too much?
I believe we need to consolidate, align and improve the programs that have been delivering considerable benefits over the past few years.
We have refined some of these again this year and need to embedd daily practices more deeply to see if the expected improvements result. The list is extensive and reflects why we have a strong team.
- Student reflective diaries – things to do at home, daily goal setting, reflections on learning.
- Year7 teaming – cross curricula fortnightly meetings of 5 core teacher
- GATs – glympics, W.O.W, mock trial, embedded recogntion,
- Anti Bullying
- Three C’s – care, commitment, co-operation.
- College core values
- SERFF/ROAR programs – age appropriate activities, risk taking, brain food, organisation, ice breakers
- SMS – student merit scheme
- Students Take Charge – STC leadership
- a host of well directed student programs, rock n water, Shine, peer support, combined ministries
- Bowen Therapy – physical well being relaxation
- Real Game/Be Real – careers planning
- OH&S shoes and uniform policies
- various layers of student ”monitoring”.
A personal responsibilty program has been added this year. I may have missed the announced research links but the program appears to be based on Merglers QUT 2006 PHd thesis, please correct me someone if that is wrong. Looks to be an interesting theory, I wonder how we will apply it effectively in the crowded day all our learners have?
In isolation, for a school without what we already have, I can easily comprehend why such a program could be needed. I know we already engage students with conscious reflection through our learning diaries, and so maybe this program just extends what we do further. The benefits of the applied research seem to stack up.
But despite the brief school development and training, I am still struggling to see where it fits into, NOT on top of, what we already do? Maybe it’s just me, but water cooler chat says otherwise.
Unfortunatley I sense considerable risk in not having the requisite support or deep understanding of how it integrates into our existing day to day functioning.
What level are staff expected to be functioning at, let alone the kids, if we potentially have a surplus of products, programs, posters, paper sheets that we are expected to give 100% commitment to each lesson of everyday?
Dilution is powerful science, you end up with an unsavoury product, lacking essence. Let alone the confusion.
Sometime the addage of “doing a few things well” gets lost by striving to offer panaceas for all societal ills. I want to support anything that offers something substantially above what we currently do. I hope it does not reek slightly of applied theory = box ticking meritocracy. Runs on the improvement board take time, not the greasy pole Peter Principle.
Requests for a simple visual flow chart, aimed at an audience of learners including children, to explicitly show the links between all we do, is coming, we trust. This will help considerably in embedding exactly where this new program can best help us learn. I want it to work, well, not be another layer that may dilute past success.
