KĀHUI AKO, NOVEMBER 16, 2O23: POSITIVE REFLECTION ON INQUIRY FOCUS QUESTION

KĀHUI AKO, NOVEMBER 16, 2O23: POSITIVE REFLECTION ON INQUIRY FOCUS QUESTION

Inquiry Focus Question:

Will:

-teaching with CAD software and machines (3D Printer and Laser Cutter) improve measurement and geometry?

-giving students with behavioural needs and low attendance a dedicated class and design tasks to improve social engagement?

Kia ora koutou, ko Jackson tōku ingoa,

In my seven years of teaching as the STEM specialist at PES I have been concerned by all of our students' abilities in measurement and geometry. This was the catalyst for my inquiry. I also wanted to assist year 6 to 8 students who were having difficulties with attendance and behaviour.

I spent a considerable amount of time identifying the students, accessing the expertise of our SENCO, Social Worker and Deputy Principal to choose students who would benefit. Reflecting on my own strengths, I chose students who I already had good relationships with and who had shown extra interest in the 3D Printer and Laser Cutter.

I made significant changes in my teaching due to the dynamics and behaviour of the cohort whose attendance was unpredictable. I never had the same group of students each week. Building a more positive class culture was a change I needed to make and became the priority. Students who had been enthusiastic and focussed one on one, were becoming hostile to each other and reluctant to work on independent projects.

Therefore, I changed the learning from individual tasks to all students learning the same skills - starting with laser engraving their wooden rulers. The engagement with learning improved markedly as did students collaboration

Students were excited to visit our local Art Gallery, The Good, The Bad, where they completed workshops with Gary Silipa, a well known GI artist.This was valuable as they were in a familiar place outside of school, some already knew Gary while others started visiting the gallery after this visit, recognising it as a safe, creative space in their community where they are not judged.

The most important, difficult, change I made was to essentially pause my first inquiry question, to focus on the second. The social dysregulation among some students was disturbing others so I consciously became stricter and less tolerant of anti-social behaviour.

This was difficult as my intention was to give all students a secure space, however this applied also to students who were feeling uncomfortable. I was glad that students felt safe telling me their concerns. Students who had been disciplined still wanted to come to the class, and would apologise to me with sincerity. I see this as an achievement in my teaching style.

We have recently started a group project- decorating and labelling the school’s Pātaka Kai.. This hands-on, real-world task engages students, and finally addressed my first inquiry question. We are using metre rulers, tape measures and protractors to measure the structure, and identifying and recording the correct standard units for further design work.

Anecdotal data that gives me hope and encouragement is the number of times these students have asked me after weeks I have been away sick whether the class has been discontinued, or asking for a reminder for when the next session is. This shows me they value this opportunity, even if they do not participate in the most kind or efficient ways.

KĀHUI AKO, NOVEMBER 14, 2O23: NEGATIVE REFLECTION ON INQUIRY FOCUS QUESTION

NOVEMBER 14, 2O23: NEGATIVE REFLECTION ON INQUIRY FOCUS QUESTION


Inquiry Focus Question:

Will:
-teaching with CAD software and machines (3D Printer and Laser Cutter) improve measurement and geometry?

-giving students with behavioural needs and low attendance a dedicated class and design mission improve social engagement?

I cannot answwr this first question as I unfortunately was unable to assess my cohort comparatively before, during and now near the end of the year as I could not collect consistent data to reach any academic conclusions.

This is directly related to the second question. My once a week, hourly class had objectively terrible attendence. This was due partly to their existing behaviour around attendance and the 9AM Monday morning timeslot, but also due to me being sick for 6 out of 20 sessions this year. Building positive class culture with students who were often defensive and hostile to each other was a priority, and one I wish I had thought about during the selection process.

Students who were enthusiastic and proud of their creativity working one on one in lunchtimes or before school were often anxious and hesitant to work on individual projects in the class, so I fliped this strategy 180 degrees and gave the the same project to work on.

I can't tell, due the inconsistancies of all of our attendance, whether that attendance at shool or in the group increased over the period. The hard data of the roll showed no patterns other than an average 50% atendance rate. some children would be away from school one week, others the next.

The anecdotal data that gives me hope and encouragement is the number of times these students have asked me after a period I have been away whether the class has been canned, or asking for a reminder for when the next session is. This shows me they value this opportunity , even if they do not participate in the most collarobative or efficient ways.