Charles Leadbeater on innovation | Video on TED.com

Charles Leadbeater on innovation Video on TED.com Main points to consider: - Is innovation the same as creativity? The terms were used simultaneously in this talk. - Leadbeater is arguing that innovation is no longer going to be a 'top down' imposition but will be created by the end users. How does this relate to education? Is it as much bas involving children in developing their own education? Is there more to it than this? http://www.ted.com/conversations/1481/how_can_we_empower_kids_to_res.html

The Way Forward

Interesting course today led by Trevor Hawes, he of all the Neuro-science stuff of which I am so sceptical.
He did a great synopsis of the challenges currently facing us in Primary education but also painted a fairly positive picture of how we can make the most of the situation. Whatever we think of the political situation, we can get along in the system and do the best as we see it.

As always there are many changes facing us and may of these are still in their embryonic phase and changing all the time. For example, the plans to get rid of Schools Sports Partnerships ended up being scrapped. I was made more aware than ever of the very difficult position we find ourselves in as educators, between government policy, educational research and our own aims based on the children in front of us. I am somewhat heartened by Gove's focus on the 'Importance of teaching', particularly as it seems to go hand-in-hand with a slackening of 'top-down' control. Of course I can see the link between good teaching and good outcomes for children. So, as always the focus is on improving teaching. We need to have a look at how we can tweak our CPD so that we are putting teachers more in control of their own learning. More emphasis on action research and coaching.

As far as the curriculum is concerned, I have no problem with the focus on Lit, maths and science and I can also see the importance of PE and music. History? Not entirely sure that I see that it should have status over Geography, DT, Arts? It looks like there will be enough freedom within whatever curriculum is devised for us to develop what we need.

One of the main things I took away is that I need to look beyond the news headlines about changes to education. In most of the cases outlined, the actual policy allows much more freedom and is much less scary than the news would have us believe.

Still not sure about the neuro-science though...

Everybody can run a school!

First it was Gareth Malone with his 'Extraordinary School for Boys'.

Then, Jamie with his 'Dream School', and now I see that the military are also getting in on the act with the Troops to Teachers program.

My initial reaction, particularly to the 'celebrities' who want to offer their solutions to all problems educational is one of immense irritation. It's not like I go and give advice on running a Choir or a restaurant!

Their motives for wanting to innovate, and their expertise in the area seem to be based on their own experiences of school. In Gareth's blog, he describes his own positive experiences of school and how he uses these and 'research' to develop methods which will improve schools for boys. Jamie describes in the trailer for his Dream School project how his own less positive experiences of school have motivated him to offer more inspiration to children. Something he aims to do by employing teacher 'experts'.

Maybe I need to accept that those outside the field of education can have something to say, after all, education effects all areas of society. Also, they may have something to add by helping us to imagine things in different ways, think differently and look at different solutions.

The cynic in me though can't help but seeing some of this altruistic 'do-gooding' as a bit of a show. In Gareth's program, the teachers he worked alongside seem to be particularly stuck in their ways, boring and contrasting heavily with Gareth's dynamic style. In Jamie's program teachers in the 'Dream School' appear to have been chosen for their status as celebrities rather than any particular teaching abilities. Apparently, David Starkey, chosen for his expertise in historical knowledge, his ability to bring the subject alive for students, etc, can't control the class and ends up being disrespectful towards them.

Undoubtably, questions need to be asked, everyone has a right to ask them and we have a responsibility to look at things in different ways. However, I resent the profession being cast as 'stuck in the mud', boring, and unquestioning. We may not know Daley Thompson, but we are innovating all the time, trialling new ways of doing things whilst working within very tight constraints. I welcome opinion but use the expertise which we have too please!