This was a guest post for CORE education, which originally appeared as: Making the change we know in our hearts is essential…by building a coaching culture.
This was a guest post for CORE education, which originally appeared as: Making the change we know in our hearts is essential…by building a coaching culture.
What is leadership within professional environments – and how does it differ from management? There have been whole books written on the nuances, but in a nutshell: a manager plans, organises and coordinates a group a group or a set of entities to accomplish a goal, whereas a leader influences, inspires, motivates, and enables others to contribute to achieving organisational aims and success (Murray, n.d.). This definition does not preclude a manager being a leader, or a leader also being a manager. Rather they are overlapping, complementary roles.
If you are going to work on leadership or management skills, it is worth unpacking this a bit more, and identifying some of the key differences.
administers and plans detail
innovates and sets direction
builds teams and talent
maintains and communicates
persuades and develops
focuses on systems and structures
focuses on people
controls and directs
Inspires, influences and facilitates
asks how and when
has objectives and are focussed
has vision and creates shared focus
accepts the status quo
challenges the status quo
react to change
have people who work for them
have people who work with them
René Carayol (2011), suggests that we “manage a little less and lead a little more”, because the positive culture (‘the way we get things done around here’) within an organisation is much more powerful than strategy. Also, while organisations can have similar strategies, the thing that makes an organisation unique is its culture.
So, while management and leadership go hand-in-hand, supporting the growth of leaders within an organisation can help ensure that an organisation’s heritage is not its destiny – that opinions and processes change because the culture is supportive of that change.
Carayol, R. (2011). Authentic leadership [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1ACR-odNR4&feature=related
<Murray, A. (n.d.). What is the Difference Between Management and Leadership? Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://guides.wsj.com/management/developing-a-leadership-style/what-is-the-difference-between-management-and-leadership/.
Juggling balls. CC ( BY ) licensed Flickr image by William Warby: https://flic.kr/p/j9EWYV
“I realize that I am more inclined to coach women. I have recently become aware that, although I have two sons and a great husband, all of whom I have close and cherished relationships with, I am not in a man’s life or a man’s body or brain. I cannot view the world from their perspective and experience.
Because I have no brothers, a struggling first marriage and am sometimes very surprised by a male perspective on things, when my husband and I were first together, I often “interviewed” my husband about a man’s perspective on things so I could learn. That being said, I notice that most women – including me, are more emotional and more easily connected to spirit or a spiritual perspective. I have a different experience of the world just because I have different cultural biases, a different functioning body, I use makeup, I wear dresses and skirts not just pants, the media sees me differently, etc. I think it’s safe to say there are some gender differences even if they are culturally stimulated.
So I tend to have female clients with some notable exceptions like a single parent father with a child and a female ex- to deal with. I know that I am more drawn to talk about certain things with women – sex, feelings, even business perspectives. I am not saying one is better than the other for a woman. Just different. I often have had some great short-term coaching from my husband and occasionally some other male coaches but most likely I’d never hire a male coach for an on-going experience. I need a women’s coach.”
Source: Maia Berens, http://youuniversityonline.com/
I must admit to having quite a visceral reaction to the post I have quoted from above. As a woman I could never assume to know what a ‘man’s’ perspective is (if there were such a thing), just as I can’t assume I know any other human’s perspective of life and their place in the world. One of the joys of mentoring and coaching is that I am constantly surprised by my mentees’ and coachees’ viewpoints – but not more by one gender than the other.
I see my coachees and mentees as whole, culturally shaped, human beings who may or may not identify as male, female, transgender, androgynous, or bigender. People vary in their emotional and spiritual engagement during our sessions – with tears, for example. I also work mainly online, so I am unsure whether my my coachees and mentees are wearing makeup and I cannot see the clothes they are wearing. The subjects covered are varied and diverse, and do not appear to be gender specific. My role, I feel, is to respect each person – to listen to them, try my absolute best not to make assumptions, and to let them ‘take me’ where they need to go.
I have no personal preference for male or female coachees and mentees, nor for my own coaches and mentors. I have a preference for a coach or mentor who is non-directive, has a developmental approach, and asks really powerful questions – something I have experienced with males and females.
The research still isn’t available to say whether the human brain is ‘gendered’, and the most reliable evidence we have “suggests that both males and females share the same neural circuitry, but use it differently” (Stix, 2015, n.p.). Neuroscientists have found “few differences: more neurons or more neuronal spines here and there in one sex or the other, with great variations from one individual to the other but that’s about it” (Stix, 2015, n.p.).
So, I feel, while we are, for certain, shaped by our society and our culture – and how we perceive ourselves within a range of contexts impacts how we live our lives – when it comes to coaching and mentoring an attempt to make generalisations based on gender are not helpful. In fact, in some cases, they can reinforce damaging stereotypes.
Maybe I’m missing something? What are your thoughts?
Reference: Stix, G. (2015). Is the Brain Gendered? A Q&A with Harvard’s Catherine Dulac. Retrieved from http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/is-the-brain-gendereda-q-a-with-harvard-s-catherine-dulac/
Image: Woman thinking. CC ( BY NC ) licensed Flickr image by patriziasoliani: https://flic.kr/p/9cdeng
Most of today’s leaders are expected to deal effectively with people ́s motivation and be able to inspire them to their best performance. An essential part of this is fostering the courage to act, develop new ideas, take risks, and “make the changes that we know in our hearts are essential and right in the world” (Robertson, 2015, p. 15), and a strong coaching relationship is one way of supporting employees to do this. As such coaching skills need to be an integral part of any modern manager’s toolkit. However, sometimes coaching in an organisation will also have a negative reputation because, for instance, managers have previously used it as a performance management tool, rather than as a genuine way to support employees’ professional learning and development. In these cases there will need to be a concerted effort to reframe coaching to help ensure it is perceived positively, and part of this is likely to be supporting managers to develop their own coaching skills.
One of the first considerations is that, by definition, a manager is not ideally placed to work as a coach for someone who is reporting directly to them. Robertson (2015) advises that vulnerability, power relations or conflicts of purpose “can adversely affect the relationship. But these tensions are not insurmountable if the relationship is sensitively negotiated and understood” (Robertson, 2015, p. 12).
A coaching manager will need to be a coachee themselves prior to taking on a coachee of their own. They will also need the ongoing support of their own coach to help them continue to develop strong coaching skills, and to use integrity and patience to build the trust with the coachees on their team. A coaching manager’s “ability to deeply listen is just as important as asking the questions that count” (Robertson, 2015, p. 12), especially where the goal is to ensure the coachee feels “sufficiently safe to move away from covering up any perceived areas of weakness” (Robertson, 2015, p. 12). Over time, as the coaching relationship matures, ultimately both the coaching manager and the coachee should become more aware of shifts in perspectives and thinking, “eventually introducing conflict to promote self-examination and further development of alternative perspectives” (Stokes, 2011, p. 8). Other factors Stokes (2011) identified as critical to the relationship were motivation, recognition and celebration of positive growth, and the provision of “a mirror… to extend the…[coachee’s] self-awareness” (Daloz, 1986, in Stokes, 2011, p. 8). These factors help a coaching manager and coachee watch for indications “that the relationship may be transformative and growth producing for both partners” (Stokes, 2011, p. 8).
Whilst the primary purpose of a coaching relationship is to help the coachee, nevertheless usually both the coaching manager and the coachee gain from the experience. For instance a coaching manager is likely to find that there is real satisfaction in helping another person to learn and grow in confidence and self-esteem, while they also practise and enhance skills, such as the ability to listen and question, to support and challenge, and to be non-directive and non-judgmental (Manukau Institute of Technology, 2009). Listening to the coachee can provide a fresh perspective and range of insights into an organisation’s culture and way of working, as well as the products and services they provide (Manukau Institute of Technology, 2009).
As indicated above, coaching managers play a fundamental part in building the future capability of employees and the organisation in which they both work, particularly by helping some of its talented professionals develop further than they might if they were not involved in a coaching relationship. As such, a coaching manager can support their coachee to:
(Adapted from Manukau Institute of Technology, 2009)
Some of the practical ways in which coaching can be applied in modern management are by:
If people “learn best when they see a practical application of the new knowledge / skill in their job and / or daily life” (Southern Institute of Technology, n.d.), coaching can enhance this tendency by helping an employee develop conceptual connections and explore implications for their team and the wider organisation. The long-term nature of the resulting changes can make a large-scale impact on how well an organisation functions, how content the workforce feels, and in turn, how much their customers value it. As such, coaching managers play an essential part in helping to ensure an organisation’s efficiency and profitability.
Aas, M, & Vavik, M. (2015). Group coaching: a new way of constructing leadership identity?, School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation. 35(3). 251-265.
American Management Association. (2008). Coaching: A Global Study of Successful Practices – Current Trends and Future Possibilities 2008-2018. Retrieved from https://www.opm.gov/WIKI/uploads/docs/Wiki/OPM/training/i4cp-coaching.pdf
Brent, M. (n.d.). Why Don’t More Managers Coach? Retrieved from http://www.ashridge.org.uk
Cheslow, D. (2013). The Coachability Index. Retrieved from http://www.debcheslow.com/the-coachability-index/
Gitsham, M., & Wackrill, J. (2012). Leadership in a rapidly changing world: How business leaders are reframing success. Retrieved from http://www.ashridge.org.uk/Website/Content.nsf/FileLibrary/444E6C7531EC5EFD802579CE0048E830/$ file/Leadership%20Mar%202012-print.pdf
Harkins, P. (2005). Getting the organisation to click. In H. Morgan, P. Harkins, & M. Goldsmith (Eds.), Leadership coaching: 50 top executive coaches reveal their secrets (2nd ed., pp. 154-158). Hoboken, NJ: John Wileys & Sons.
Hay, J. (1995). Transformational Mentoring: Creating Developmental Alliances. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.
Krishna, R. R. (2015). The coachability index. Retrieved from http://coachfederation.org/blog/index.php/4301/
Manukau Institute of Technology. (2009). Mentoring Guidelines and Mentor Training Resource. Retrieved from https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/ako-hub/ako-aotearoa-northern-hub/resources/pages/mentoring-guidelines
McLagan, P. A. (2000, February). Portfolio Thinking: Performance Management in the New World of Work. Training and Development. 44-52. Retrieved from http://www.workinfo.com/free/downloads/229.htm
Owen, Hazel; Dunham, Nicola. (2015). Reflections on the Use of Iterative, Agile and Collaborative Approaches for Blended Flipped Learning Development. Educ. Sci. 5(2). 85-103.
Owen, H. (2015 a). Making the most of mobility: virtual mentoring and education practitioner professional development. Research in Learning Technology 2015 (ALTJ), 23, 25566.
Owen (2015 b). Professional learning, any time, any place with virtual mentoring. EDULEARN15 Proceedings, pp. 386-393.
Robertson, J. (2015). Deep learning conversations and how coaching relationships can enable them. Australian Education Leader 37(3). 10-15.
Southern Institute of Technology. (n.d.) Whom can I coach? (Module D) [Lecture notes]. Retrieved from CBC101 (NET).
Weekes, S. (2008, July). Catch on to coaching. The Edge. 28 – 32. Retrieved from http://qedcoaching.fastnet.co.uk/pdf/catch-on-to-coaching-ilm-edge-article.pdf
Whitmore, J. (2009). Will coaching rise to the challenge? The OCM Coach and Mentor Journal, 2-3.
Jumping. CC ( BY NC ND ) licensed Flickr image by Bernat Casero: https://flic.kr/p/3ewuQn
Everyone has times when they have two (or more) alternatives to choose from and are not sure how to make a choice that they feel they won’t regret later on. They may have already made a pros and cons list for each and tried to make a comparison, but still feel it isn’t clear which choice is likely to be best for them.
Two coaching wheels
Coaching can be a great way to work through this situation. When a person asks me to work through it with them, one tool I use is the coaching wheel as it helps chunk the options and prioritise them. However, instead of using one version of the coaching wheel, we’ll use two, with each wheel representing an option.
I work with the coachee to identify the key factors for them that would span both options, and these would be listed, then written into both wheels. The next step is to, for both options (i.e. both of the wheels), revisit all of the factors and mark them, on a scale of 1 to 10, how well they are represented in each option (Southern Institute of Technology (a), n.d.). As a final step the factors are evaluated and a colour used to represent any that the coachee identifies as ‘non-negotiable’. Those that the coachee doesn’t see as non-negotiable can then be framed at a level the coachee wouldn’t negotiate below.
Tui: The two job offer dilemma
Usually, it becomes really clear, based on the coachee’s values and beliefs, which of the options makes the most sense for them. Take for example, a coachee, Tui, who has been making really strong progress toward her goals, and has applied for and been offered two jobs. Both roles seem like dream jobs and appear to offer great opportunities for career progression. Tui is anxious to make the ‘best’ decision. Which to choose?
The first step I take to support Tui is to ask her to visualise what her ideal job and role look and feel like. After a moment or two I then ask her to state the most important factors for her. Tui pauses to think, and then identifies: professional development, collaborative workplace, autonomy, opportunities for progression, opportunities to assume management responsibilities, close to home or near public transport, has a cafeteria that has healthy eating options, and has a gym on the premises or nearby. I am taking notes while the Tui is talking so that she can focus on her thoughts rather than on writing them down. The notes are useful in the next step where I ask her to double check the list of criteria. She confirms that it looks complete and these are the criteria she wants to use.
Using two blank coaching wheels I invite Tui to add in the criteria, and to place each section on the 1 to 10 scale. After she has completed that step, I then ask Tui how important the criteria are to her, and if there are any on which she might compromise. Having chosen ‘opportunities to assume management responsibilities, opportunities for progression, and a gym on the premises or nearby’ as her non-negotiables, she then colours these sections green. ‘Professional development, collaborative workplace, and autonomy’ she identifies are open for some negotiation and she colours these orange. The remaining ones she colours blue.
It is immediately clear to Tui and I, just by looking at the prevalence of green on one of the wheels, that this job is the job that will be the better fit according to Tui’s criteria. Tui is both relieved and delighted. She reveals that she had a gut feeling about the job that came out on top, and is pleased that she can make an informed decision that reflects her priorities. The job, she feels will stretch her, but she has the peace of mind that it will be in a way that will develop her strengths and move her in the direction she wants to go – and she is likely to get a bit fitter!
There is the option where there are more than two choices more than two wheels can be used, but this can become a bit cumbersome. Also, the approach with two or three wheels can be used when coaching a group. For instance, where a team have to decide between two or more ways forward, and feel as though they are talking in circles. The wheels can be a great way to focus discussions about team values and beliefs. They can also help to ‘depersonalise’ some of the priorities through the use of the visual representation, which clearly illustrates, in one place, the overall team’s criteria.
The main benefit
While it isn’t a watertight approach, using two coaching wheels as a tool to make comparisons does help ensure that the coachee is empowered to make a decision based on their strengths, values, and beliefs. This means that whichever one they choose is likely to be the ‘best’…for them.
Russian Matryoshka. CC ( BY ND NC ) licensed Flickr image by Dennis Jarvis: https://flic.kr/p/7z5fiG
Information is unstructured, especially when it is en masse (think, for instance, the Internet). The amount of available content is doubling every 5 years, and we just don’t have the time or the cognitive capacity to keep up with everything.
People have amazing ideas, but the computational abilities are often not ready. “At the core we are trying to leverage knowledge the way humans record and communicate in natural human language in a a particular text” (video below), to the point where there is a natural interaction between humans and computers”. Ideally, cognitive computing systems expand the boundaries of human cognition and get smarter with use, providing complex information processing systems, able to acquire information, collate and act on it, and transmit it as knowledge.
For example, healthcare. In healthcare cognitive computing can become a “support tool to expand the physicians cognitive boundaries by giving them deeper access to much larger volumes of [selected, filtered, organised] information” (video below). In other words, we are leveraging the computer’s ability to keep up with huge volumes of data. Using semantic analysis to recognise patterns the computer is able to understand the knowledge contained within the data, so that it can be applied to the problem that the physician is trying to solve, and give different alternatives, while also providing evidence that supports those alternatives (evidence exploration). The key here is that we are “adapting the computer technology to work better with the way humans want to work so it’s a more natural relationship between the human and computer” (video below).
A useful visual introduction cognitive computing, the video (2 mins 6 secs) below, Eric Brown (IBM Research) provides a brief overview referring in particular to Watson. For a much deeper overview, have a read of What is cognitive computing ? IBM Watson as an example.
Image: Simplified diagram of Spaun, a 2.5-million-neuron computational model of the brain. Public domain licensed Wikimedia Commons image by Chris Eliasmith: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Architecture_of_Spaun.jpeg
I sometimes work with coachees who will come up with a strategy, and then immediately add the tag “that won’t work because…”. This focus tends to result in some great ideas and strategies never getting off the ground as a result.
The Disney Strategy was developed by the Neuro Linguistic Programme (NLP) practitioner, Robert Dilts. Dilts based the strategy on the approach Walt Disney used with his creative teams to support them to develop ideas. The underpinning concept is that, even if a person has a way of thinking that they find most comfortable, any person can consider something from three different perspectives and switch between them. The approach can be used with individuals, or with small and large groups.
The reason the Disney Strategy works so well in situations where the person is their own worst critic of their ideas is because of the three separate modes: Dreamer, realist, and critic. The strategy, even when coachees are initially sceptical, is effective in part because it also acknowledges a coachee’s perceived barriers – but not until they have explored their initial ideas.
The Dreamer mode is where I encourage all the coachee’s new ideas – the focus here is purely on (positive) creative suggestions and on invention. The sky’s the limit! Barriers and issues have no place here because they are acknowledged in the next two modes.
In the Realist mode I encourage my coachee to consider how to make their ideas work in practice. This is the mode where ideas become detailed plans (with milestones and timelines) that are likely to work in the coachee’s context because it integrates complexities.
The final mode, the Critic gives space for the coachee to look for flaws in their ideas and to identify what might go wrong. This mode helps ensure that the coachee ‘audits’ their idea, registers risks, and considers mitigations; it is a way of keeping the best of an idea – maybe using it as a springboard for a second idea – at which point the coachee and I would work through all 3 modes again. Alternatively, possible big picture fixes could be taken back the the dreamer mode and other two modes again if an idea still holds merit but has some apparent issues.
I carefully facilitate each mode, clearly defining the associated ‘rules’ and describing the modes. Shifts from mode to mode can also be signalled by different coloured items of clothing if the approach feels comfortable.
In brief the Disney Strategy provides time and opportunities for an idea mature and develop because:
Message stones. CC ( BY ND ) licensed Flickr image by: Roselyn Rosesline – https://flic.kr/p/eTzoib
Coaching has a wide range of definitions and approaches. One of the most prevalent understandings is that coaching comprises “a collaborative relationship formed between a coach and the coachee for the purpose of attaining professional or personal development outcomes which are valued by the coachee” (Spence & Grant, 2007, p. 185). Couched within this understanding is the importance of goal-focused activity with a clearly defined outcome. A person embarks on a coaching relationship because they are working through a challenge, or a goal that they want to attain, and they are looking for support to develop effective strategies and solutions (Grant, 2013). As such, a big part of development is setting effective goals that will enable a person to plan and identify clear directions to achieve their desired change.
Beyond the practical aspects of goal-setting, research indicates that setting and evaluating your own goals play a large part in sustained motivation and ongoing action, even in the face of emerging issues (Bandura, 1998). The process of associating attainment of stated (valued) goals with self-satisfaction has a direct influence on “how much effort [a coachee]… expend[s]; how long they persevere in the face of difficulties; and their resilience to failures … [and these contribute] to performance accomplishments” (Bandura, 1998, p. 75).
There are several characteristics to effective goals … and some common mistakes. I’m now going to briefly discuss a few of them.
Challenging but attainable
Goals need to stretch you, but still be attainable .. within your stated timeframe. So, if you have never run a step in your life and are not in the best of shape, it is unlikely, for example, that you will attain a goal of winning a marathon in a month’s time. However, if you decide you would like to run a marathon in say, 4 hours, in a year’s time, and put together a training plan with milestone goals along the way, then you are likely to achieve it. So, a long-term goal, with incremental steps (and celebrations) along the way, and with enough challenge to keep you interested, is the way to go.
Specific and within a timeframe
A mistake that is often made is to identify a goal that says we will try harder, do more of something, or improve a skill. However – how will you know you are making progress, or have achieved what you have set out to without some ‘measure’ that will enable you to evaluate how you are doing. You goals should be as tangible as possible, and specify how many, of what, and by when. Using the example above about the marathon, if, as a sub goal you decide to run the Auckland 10km race in April in under 1 and a half hours, it would be easy to know if you have or have not achieved the goal. It’s not always easy to set such specific goals, but the more specific you can be the greater your sense of progress will be.
Sometimes it’s tempting to identify what we don’t want – things (emotions, behaviours, contexts) we’d like to avoid – rather than looking at what we do want. It is, though, way easier to actively set out to do or achieve something than it is to try to avoid doing it. Again, taking the example of the marathon, compare ‘I will stop eating biscuits until after I have run the marathon’, with ‘Up to when I run the marathon I will eat at least one salad a day, except for Monday which is my day off when I will eat 1 biscuit’.
Other things to include in effective goals
As well as the three key areas discussed above, it is good to also keep in mind the following characteristics of effective goal setting so that you include:
(Southern Institute of Technology, n.d., n.p.)
Even if you set effective goals, sometimes you’ll feel as though you aren’t making progress or that other things are derailing your efforts. At times like these it is good to talk with your coach to work through responses that will help you stick with your long-term goals, while maintaining your motivation – and sanity!
Terry Pratchett in his novel The Wee Free Men sums up the importance of goals as opposed to dreams as follows: “If you trust in yourself. . .and believe in your dreams. . .and follow your star. . . you’ll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things …” (Pratchett, 2004, p. 21). Dreams can be incredibly motivating. However, you need to sit down and work out how to turn them into them reality, and setting effective goals is part of that process.
Back in time. CC ( BY ND ) licensed Flickr image by Hartwig HKD: https://flic.kr/p/6zXq7Y
Image by groovysuvi via FlickrAn article recently published in the Computers in New Zealand Schools Journal, gave the details of a study that examined a teacher’s first implementation of online learning in a Learning Management System (LMS). The programme of learning was Home Economics, and the students and teacher are based in a New Zealand high school. The article, entitled The first blended or hybrid online course in a New Zealand Secondary School: A case study, lists some of the benefits of using a blended approach, including the development of ICT confidence and skills, enhanced interactions, and the fostering of independent learning with increased self management and higher order thinking skills.
Nigel Bailey, who is trialling a blended learning approach with his Geography students at Chanel College, and made the following observations:
“From my experience so far, and the results of the questionnaire that I put out to the students, I would agree with much of what they say in this article but there are a few areas that I feel I have worked through and am possibly in front of where this study has got to.
The need to scaffold the course varies by level (ie Level 1, 2 or 3) and also by the IT competence of the students. I have been amazed by the lack of working knowledge of some of the Office packages that some of the students exhibit so this re-inforces the statement in the article about us assuming that students are digital natives (a phrase that Prensky himself has now moved away from apparently!).
I have found that students are working at their own pace and own level and the course so far has been a great leveller especially for the less able or less confident students. Online questioning has been invaluable for some of these students. The ability to upload their work, have it ‘e-marked’ and returned quickly has also been a plus. I have found that I am marking far more work and in far more depth now than I have for years. This is partly due to the increased amount of work the students are producing and also partly due to the fact that I can read what they have written and have space to add a valid comment at the appropriate place in the text, which in the past there wasn’t room for.
Image by wlibrary via FlickrGuy Claxton today facilitated a webinar entitled The Learning Powered School. One of the first things he started by asking was why is it that the 19th century approach to learning and teaching is so ‘sticky’. He suggested that few people disagreed that education in some way needs to change, and proposed a vision that suggested 21st century education needs to help you people to learn to be open-minded and inquisitive, while also discovering their passions. They should also be encouraged to make and repair friendships, enjoy seeing different sides of a subject, and be unafraid of uncertainty. So, as far as the latter point is concerned this would involve the design of a curriculum that offers, regularly, experiences that are increasingly uncertain.
Guy cautioned against using the academic jargon often used in the writing of vision statements, which are as a result impenetrable and inaccessible to a large proportion of, for instance, government ministers. Values, he also feels should be relevant to life in general, not just for a test. Fancy language gets in the way of being taken seriously!
One of the key points Guy discussed was what does it take to so a 21st century education properly? He advised that eight core principles have been distilled from research:
Leadership he advises will really make or break shifts in practice, along with clear, visible endorsement by leaders that reinforces objectives. The traditional education agenda, he argues, will not be changed without strong leadership.
Having an ‘and’ mentality is essential. People who are looking at assessment scores can also be looking at key competencies, but it is reliant on having a complementary set of ways of tracking the key competencies. The government is not stopping us changing by the focus on assessment.
The way in which education needs to change is on a whole lot of different levels. Where the issues are now are in helping and supporting, primarily teachers, but also students, teachers, and members of the wider community how change is going to happen and what it will look like. Where the world is now is moving from “vision to precision”, and it requires clarity around, for instance, the role of parents in their child’s learning experience. Clarity will help address misunderstandings and ‘fogginess’.
While I agree with much of what Guy says (in particular the ‘and’ instead of the ‘one or another’ focus), I did feel that there wasn’t really ‘anything new’ – there was no different strategy to drive change, although there was re-affirmation of some sound steps to take. From a slightly more nit-picky point of view, when did curiosity, risk-taking, building relationships, and being comfortable with uncertainty become 21st century attributes??? I’m coming to the conclusion that the whole focus on a 21st century learner is misleading – rather we need to focus on the process human development and the context and circumstances in which that happens most effectively. Although, I guess, much of the problem is the mammoth that is many education systems – and how to enable change in a environment that is often positively glacial.