A new model of curriculum implementation What do we want our kids to be? Capabilities Teaching through knowledge FOR capabilities (i.e. key competencies) Knowledge and its organisation Disciplinary knowledge is the basis through which we teach for capabilities (as outcomes in their own right)

We could read the science learning area like this New ‘nature of science’ integrating strand (based on generic Key Competencies) Understanding about science Investigating in science Communicating in science Participating and contributing Content included through integration Living World Material World Physical World Planet Earth and Beyond

Representing ideas … What is different about this way of showing the water cycle? What do the pictures on the “game” represent? What do the pathways represent? Why are they different colours? What do the arrows represent? What is not represented here? Misinterpreting the circles A number of students thought the larger circles in each cartoon depicted the sun. The artist is making it clear that the more pressure you put on the sun the less heat it makes. It is showing how the sun gets heat from the greenhouse's effects. But the enhanced greenhouse effects will be too much hard work for the sun. Misinterpreting the arrows Some students thought the arrows represented gases rather than energy. The message about the greenhouse effect is that we will all not be happy when the greenhouse effect is enhanced as it means that more gases will be entering and exiting the atmosphere so it really isn't a good idea. Misinterpreting the use of colour Some students interpreted the colour difference, intended by the artist to show a hotter atmosphere for the enhanced greenhouse effect, to be a representation of a visible pollution-related change in the atmosphere: If we have a relatively clean environment the earth will not get too hot because the sun's rays will go out of earth's ozone, but if we have a dirty environment the earth will get hotter and hotter.

The disciplinary potential in ULST Provides the language, including ‘meta’ language, to help students think; awareness that texts are structured differently for different purposes; multiple representations of ideas; unpacking conventions and thinking about how different disciplines work; valuing systems level thinking and complexity; These ideas will be illustrated with some of our recent ARBs and other new NZCER resources. These resources focus on ULST and Thinking. We decided to start here because research by Boyd and Watson (2006) showed schools were struggling with ULST and Thinking is vital to all the competencies.

Teaching for ‘deeper understanding’ Experts know their area deeply – the theories, the unanswered questions, the research methods, the practical challenges of deploying these, the work of their peers, the reputable journals, the professional rivalries and so on… They may not know other related areas as deeply – but they will know the right questions to ask – that is, they’ll draw on their expertise to identify what it might be that they don’t know (and now need to find out), assuming they are disposed to do this… Source: www.mfe.govt.nz Students from Papakura South School Can students become experts so they too can experience these powerful capabilities? What are the implications for teaching?

Connecting questions students could ask Relating more general conceptual ideas to specific contexts Making coherent links between topics and ideas within a discipline area Developing multi-disciplinary links across learning areas Building bridges between powerful conceptual learning and everyday life

Challenges for alignment in any education system! Knowledge era: new views of knowledge, ICTs, globalization, diversity, rapid change, etc. New types of assessment (e.g. NCEA, assessment for learning) Curriculum review (lifelong learning, key competencies, content reduction) By implication... Deep changes in teaching and learning - both in practice and in [tacit] beliefs about their nature

What about assessment of “progress”? What do these outcomes look like? Capabilities Teaching through knowledge FOR capabilities (i.e. key competencies) Knowledge and its organisation Disciplinary knowledge is the basis through which we teach for capabilities (as outcomes in their own right)

Should we assess KCs? If key competencies can transform learning outcomes, then asking how we might assess them per se seems to be the wrong question. Is this a better exploratory question: What can changed outcomes look like when key competencies are used to transform disciplinary learning? This is a question we’ve been exploring for a while now, and will keep working on. The new science ARBs and Kick Starts resource are tentatively pointing to new directions…

More questions than answers Can competency be reported from single tasks or should evidence be accumulated across a range of tasks and learning contexts? (Sufficiency of evidence) What role (if any) should extracurricular activities play in making judgments about a student’s capabilities? What does making progress in developing capabilities look like?

How might progress be described? More certain outcomes Standardised tests measure traditional academic outcomes Making rich connections across ideas and contexts Zooming in Zooming out Using new skills and knowledge in unfamiliar and more demanding contexts Key competencies transform learning outcomes After Carr, 2008 Outcomes more uncertain

New assessment questions We already know how to assess basic literacy and numeracy well. Why would we change? If they are “necessary but not sufficient” to meet the multi-literacies demands of the 21st century, what other aspects of these learning foundations should we be looking to grow? How will we know if our teaching has been successful? NZCER currently has a research project directly exploring this question – “Lifelong Literacy”, funded by the Cognition Trust. ARBs research is contributing too.

What could count as evidence? More certain outcomes Standardised tests measure traditional academic outcomes Perhaps some inquiry outcomes would sit here? What else? Zooming in Zooming out How much do we know about “making progress” in all the curriculum learning areas? Do we even know what we are looking for? How could we look for and document growth that transforms our children’s “being”? After Carr, 2008 Outcomes more uncertain

Purposes for inquiry: what might evidence of learning look like in each case? Developing inquiry skills Learning to learn/fostering lifelong learning dispositions Developing deeper understanding of a topic/ issue/ context/ concept/ system or etc Learning about research as a process of knowledge building (the constructed and contested nature of knowledge)

We’re all on a learning journey We’re all on a learning journey. It’s important to take it slowly and think carefully about the way ahead. But this is not an excuse for inaction… The assessment questions I’ve posed here seem to be “on the edge of our knowing” – but have we even got the right questions? We can only answer questions like these if we work together

References Carr, M. (2008, 13 March ). Zooming in and Zooming Out: Challenges and choices in discussions about making progress. Paper presented at the NZCER Conference: Making Progress - Measuring Progress, Wellington, March 2008. Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the Knowledge Wave? The Knowledge Society and the future of education. Wellington: NZCER Press. Hipkins, R. (2007). Assessing key competencies: why would we? How could we? Wellington: Ministry of Education. Reid (2007) Key competencies: a new way forward or more of the same? Curriculum Matters, 2, 43-62. (Journal available on subscription from NZCER)