The MatrixLeanne Webb, Sean Hawthorne, Mike Fowler

development processthe matrix and senior English programmes

embracing the new curriculum

QuickTime™ and a

decompressorare needed to see this picture.

What’s been happening over the last year:

A significant programme has been conducted by the Ministry and NZQA to re-write the standards so that they align with the revised New Zealand Curriculum (2007), address parity issues [credit values / work required] and remove duplication between existing standards.The Ministry has contracted NZATE to provide a new matrix for the standards in each subject, along with a rationale for the changes proposed, and information on the changes proposed.

Why?

We’ve got a new curriculum. Assessment is based on the curriculum. The standards must align standards with the NZC.

It’s also been to: improve the design of all standards and coherence between standards

[esp unit and achievement standards] Help improve assessment practice and improve the credibility of the

NCEA and the National Qualifications Framework (NQF).

What has changed for English?All NZC-derived standards have become achievement standards.That means that existing Level 1 – 3 English unit and achievement standards have been replaced by standards in the new matrix.All standards are assessed at achieved, merit and excellence. The new Level 1 standards are based on level 6 of the curriculum. There are sufficient achievement standards at each level to offer a choice of assessment possibilities for a range of learning programmes for curriculum levels 6 to 8.

ASSESSING MAKING MEANING: GENRE STUDIES STANDARDS MATRIX – LEVEL

1

STANDARDS MATRIX – LEVEL 2

STANDARDS MATRIX – LEVEL 3

AS 1.1 Show understanding of specified aspect(s) of studied written text(s 4 - external

AS 2.1 Analyse specified aspect(s) of studied written texts 4 - external

AS 3.1 Respond critically to specified aspect(s) of studied written texts 4 - external

AS 1.2 Show understanding of specified aspect(s) of studied visual / oral texts 4 - external

AS 2.2 Analyse specified aspect(s) of studied visual / oral texts 4 - external

AS 3.2 Respond critically to specified aspect(s) of studied visual / oral texts 4 - external

ASSESSING MAKING MEANING: CLOSE READING WRITTEN TEXTS AS 1.3 Show understanding of unfamiliar written texts through close reading 4 – external

AS 2.3 Analyse unfamiliar written texts through close reading 4 – external

AS 3.3 Respond critically to unfamiliar written texts through close reading 4 – external

INTERNALS ASSESSING CREATING MEANING: WRITING, SPEAKING, PRESENTING

AS 1.4 Produce creative writing 3 – internal AS 1.5 Produce formal writing 3 – internal

AS 2.4 Produce a selection of crafted writing 6– internal

AS 3.4 Produce a selection of crafted and coherent writing 6 – internal

AS 1.6 Construct and deliver an oral presentation 3 – internal

AS 2.5 Construct and deliver a crafted oral presentation 3 – internal

AS 3.5 Construct and deliver a crafted and coherent oral presentation 3 – internal

AS 1.7 Create a visual and verbal text 3 – internal

AS 2.6 Create a crafted visual and verbal text 3 – internal

AS 3.6 Create a crafted and coherent visual and verbal text 3 – internal

ASSESSING MAKING MEANING: MAKING CONNECTIONS ACROSS TEXTS AS 1.8 Explain significant connections across a range of texts 4 – internal

AS 2.7 Analyse significant connections across a range of texts 4 – internal

AS 3.7 Respond critically to significant connections across a range of texts 4 – internal

A SS E SS ING MA K ING M E A N ING: INFOR M AT ION LI T ER A CY

AS 1.9 Use information literacy skills to present understandings 4 – internal

AS 2.8 Demonstrate information literacy skills to present developed conclusions 4 – internal

AS 3.8 Integrate information literacy skills to present informed conclusions 4 – internal

ASSESSING MAKING MEANING: PERSONAL READING

AS 1.10 Read texts independently and present personal responses 4 - internal

AS 2.9 Read texts independently and present developed personal responses 4 – internal

FOR CONSULTATION: AS 3.Z Read texts independently and present informed personal responses 4 – internal

ASSESSING MAKING MEANING: CLOSE READING VISUAL / ORAL TEXTS

AS 1.11 Show understanding of visual/oral text[s] through close reading 3 – internal

AS 2.10 Analyse visual/oral text[s] through close reading 3 – internal

AS 3.9 Respond critically to visual/oral text[s] through close reading 3 – internal

FOR CONSULTATIO N: ASSESSING CREATING MEANING: COLLABORATIVE TEXT PRODUCTION

AS 1.A Contribute to the production of a collaborative text 3 – internal

AS 2.B Contribute to the production of a crafted text 3 – internal

AS 3.C Contribute to the production of a crafted and coherent text 3 – internal

A quick tour of selected standards: AS 1.1/2.1/3.1 [studied written texts] and AS 1.2/2.2/3.2 [oral / visual]

Earlier versions of standards AS 1.1/2.1/3.1 and AS 1.2/2.2/3.2 were not divided by written and visual / oral modes, but based on world texts and New Zealand texts classifications. In response to strong feedback from the first consultation round, written and visual / oral text divisions were then included which is in keeping with current achievement standards assessment foci.

To recognise how “literature contributes to students’ developing sense of identity, their awareness of New Zealand’s bicultural heritage” [p18, English Statement, NZC], teachers are encouraged to include both world and New Zealand texts when preparing students for assessment.

Range statementsAS 1.1/2.1/3.1 [written] and AS 1.2/2.2/3.2 [oral / visual] novel non-fiction Non Shakespearean

drama script Shakespearean drama

script [NB: no prescribed plays]

short story poetry / song lyric print media

film television

production drama production radio production multi-media text graphic novel

Writing: AS 1.4 / 1.5 / 2.4 / 3.4 - Criteria

The four assessment criteria currently used in writing achievement and unit standards [assessing ideas, structure, style and the use of writing conventions] have been conflated to two criteria: [Develop and structure ideas; Use language features] in order to make assessment more straightforward. This conflation more closely aligns the second criterion with the ‘language features’ substrand in the English Achievement Objectives. Language features include stylistic features, vocabulary selection and syntax, as well as the use of written text conventions [including spelling, punctuation, grammar and paragraphing] appropriate to audience and purpose for a selected text type. The separate ideas and structure criteria from writing achievement and unit standards also suit conflation to a single criterion, as ideas together with their structuring and development should clearly be treated as integrated concepts both in how they are taught and assessed. [same ‘two criteria’ principle applies for oral and visual texts standards]

Writing: 2.4 / 3.4 - Levels 2 and 3

At levels 2 and 3, students present two pieces for assessment to encourage the flexible selection of writing genre to suit students and programmes and to align closely with the English Achievement Objectives. Not specifying genre in the level 2 and 3 standards recognises that the creative and formal distinctions are often arbitrary divisions particularly at senior levels, based on the 1994 curriculum poetic and transactional writing functions.

Students should have the opportunity to draft, develop and craft a number of pieces. Writing should not be treated as one or two short assessment events. Programme design should ensure that a student’s best writing is developed then recognised for assessment. Spreading the writing programme over an extended period is essential. Writing activities can be integrated with work towards other standards such as written reports developed to present connections across texts.

Making connections: AS 1.8 / 2.7 / 3.7 - beyond thematic connections; new at Level 1

These standards recognise that making connections across texts is a dominant aspect within several English Achievement Objectives and a significant component within senior English programmes. While these standards are likely to be used by many teachers to explore thematic connections as currently assessed by the popular level 2 and 3 theme study unit standards, a range of other aspects could be examined including connections between purposes and audiences, language features, or structures used across texts.

There are also new opportunities to make connections across texts through the inclusion of this standard at Level 1.

Making connections: AS 1.8 / 2.7 / 3.7- presentation mode; text level

Connections can be presented in any combination of appropriate written, visual and/or oral modes to encourage integration with assessment for other standards.

At all three levels, four texts are set as a sufficient range for assessment purposes. It is important that written, visual or oral texts selected should be appropriate to the curriculum level assessed or have characteristics that enable students to meet the expected level of discussion when exploring and commenting on connections. However, a text below the appropriate curriculum level could sometimes be included in order to develop a broad and interesting range of texts relevant to the focus of the study.

Information literacy: AS 1.9 / 2.8 / 3.8- purpose; curriculum links

The purpose of these standards is to assess the use of a range of appropriate information literacy skills to gather and process information, and then create and express relevant conclusions.

These standards assess information literacy skills centred within the major ‘processes and strategies’ substrand that underpins the other four substrands within the English Achievement Objectives. Key indicators on which assessment criteria are based include integrating sources of information and prior knowledge; selecting and using appropriate processing strategies; evaluating the reliability and usefulness of information as steps to developing and communicating new understandings.

Information literacy: AS 1.9 / 2.8 / 3.8- areas for enquiry; the process

Areas for enquiry should be broad in nature, undertaken within the context of the English curriculum and justifiable in terms of their value and relevance. They should be chosen individually to encourage independent enquiry and to build engagement so students take ownership of the enquiry process.

The assessment criterion focuses on key stages of the process of demonstrating information literacy skills and presenting understandings. Students formulate areas for enquiry into authentic relevant contexts based on gaps in their own knowledge. In the process of locating information, they show an awareness of a range of available sources and are able to then use available sources. As they select information, students know how to evaluate sources, to identify main ideas, to select relevant information and to record it effectively. They can then use this information gathered to create conclusions based on relevant information collected. Conclusions could show various viewpoints, perspectives, or ideas and reflect students’ own thinking about the area for enquiry.

Personal reading: AS 1.10 / 2.9 written, oral and visual; numbers of texts

At Level 1, it was not possible to keep the unit standards 8808, 8809, 8810 separate as oral, written and visual texts presented in earlier iterations of the matrix, as eight credits would have been available just for personal reading. Within the single independent reading standards, visual and/or oral texts can also be included in addition to written texts, in addition to the option of including visual and oral texts at Level 2 in an independent reading programme. The responses to independent reading must be written and/or oral.

At both levels, six texts are set as a sufficient number for students to be deemed as reading ‘widely’ for assessment purposes. The texts selected must include at least four written texts, (two of these must be extended texts); the remaining two texts can be written and/or visual and/or oral texts.

The inclusion of the personal reading standard is as important at Level 3 as at other levels. English teachers are able to make accurate distinctions between texts at all three levels. In guiding students in their personal reading text selections, teachers are aware of the expectations associated with the curriculum level in terms of the appropriateness of the texts selected. In determining whether each text selected is at curriculum level 6, 7 or 8 they consider the following aspects:

o Decisions on text selection are primarily based on text style. Style becomes increasingly developed and relatively complex in language and/or narrative perspective.

o Themes/issues become increasingly sophisticated, exploring adolescent, to young adult, to adult themes.

Assessment activities and exemplars should be developed that include a range of examples of texts with characteristics indicative of the types of texts acceptable for personal reading at Levels 1, 2 and 3, supported by consistent professional advice via NZATE and English advisers and moderators.

Not currently included: Level 3 personal readingNZATE view

NZATE view: personal reading responses assessed at A, M or E

Personal responses to reading should be assessed at achievement, merit and excellence levels. Presenting personal responses means demonstrating personal understandings of, engagement with and/or viewpoints on texts. It can also include responding to links between the text and self, such as personal contexts and prior knowledge; as well as connections between the text and the world, such as connections with knowledge, experience, and ideas from social, cultural, literary, political or historical contexts. At merit or excellence, personal responses become increasingly convincing, perceptive and insightful.

Not currently included: Collaborative Text Production

Outcomes focus on the ‘participating and contributing’ and ‘relating to others’ competencies, as students must listen actively, recognise other points of view, share ideas, as well as take on different roles appropriate to the nature and scope of the production task. These standards demands a high degree of self efficacy as well as a significant degree of ownership in order to see the collaborative text production through to its successful completion.Teacher observation of the collaborative process should be on-going and sufficient to determine that each student has made a significant, appropriate and productive contribution throughout the process. Care should be taken in the setting up of collaborative tasks so that each student has ample and equal opportunity to participate and contribute. The size of the groups should also carefully considered. The collaborative process must result in the successful completed production of a text. A wide range of collaborative text production tasks is possible.

Collaborative Text Production: AS 1.12:Criteria

This achievement standard involves the collaborative production of a text.Achievement Achievement with

MeritAchievement with Excellence

Contribute to the production of a collaborative text which uses text conventions appropriate to audience and purpose.

Contribute confidently to the production of a collaborative text which uses text conventions with control and is appropriate to audience and purpose.

Contribute confidently and effectively to the production of a collaborative text which uses text conventions to command attention and is appropriate to audience and purpose.

NZATE view: Levels 1 - 3 collaborative text production

The collaborative text production standards should be included in the English matrix at all three levels and are very much part of The New Zealand Curriculum. They are designed to reflect changes in society, where people work collaboratively in both face-to-face and online situations. It is appropriate that the collaborative standards appear within the matrix of a major subject such as English so that as large a number of students as possible have the opportunity to develop and to be assessed against these essential skills.

The standards require the development of three key competencies that are not developed intrinsically in the other standards that are retained in the matrix: Managing Self, Relating to Others, and Participating and Contributing.

The standards offer a significant opportunity to develop oracy skills in an authentic context. The collaborative process is part of the listening and speaking outcomes of English programmes, and the listening and interpersonal speaking are not represented elsewhere in the matrix.

The standards cater for diverse learning styles in a way that the individualised requirements of other standards do not. In particular we need to be cognisant of the learning contexts of Pasifika and Māori students.

Literacy and numeracy = ?

Developing new purpose built literacy and numeracy standards (worth up a total of 20 credits):These standards would be:

•internally assessed; •be at "notional" curriculum level 4/5 •provide a bridge to curriculum subjects at NCEA Level 1.

These standards would be written as Unit Standards as they would be assessing functional literacy and numeracy skills rather than the curriculum-derived skills associated with English, Te Reo Māori and mathematics. They would not necessarily be designed for English or mathematics programmes. Rather, they would be generic and outcomes based enabling schools to use relevant cross-disciplinary contexts with them.

An alternative pathway to gain literacy/numeracy requirements for NCEA Level 1 would include the identification of specific Achievement Standards at curriculum level 6 which could be regarded as providing evidence of functional literacy and numeracy. These would be drawn from curriculum derived subjects such as English, history, mathematics, geography, technology, science and others.

Literacy and numeracy = ?

Assessment materials will be developed for standards which have had substantial change. These will assist teachers and students in understanding the changes, how the revised standards might be assessed, and what the standard looks like at each level of performance. The intention is to provide two assessment activities per standard.

Exemplars are crucial. It is intended that annotated examples of students work will be provided for every standard that has had substantial change. The focus will be on exemplifying student work at grade boundaries.

BUT: Fresh new curriculum based materials are required! New materials reflecting NZC based activities and exemplars are required to cover

possible assessment contexts. It’s not appropriate to just make do with what’s there. Several tki based resources are supported by materials and exemplars that are approaching 10 years old and showing their age.

Assessment and exemplar development

The new curriculum and the new matrix provide a major opportunity to take a fresh approach.

You could swap a few headings in your department scheme, or…

Looking at how particular standards might be incorporated into teaching programmes that embrace the new curriculum: how the matrix could be used to build English programmes. the matrix and lower achieving students.

When planning programmes, teachers should consider the range of standards on the English matrix and plan programmes that address the New Zealand Curriculum. The matrix needs to be considered in its entirety, and appropriate decisions made based around the learning needs and interests of students.

“Embracing the new curriculum - Part 1” the second half of the doc / the English Achievement Objectives

1. Start with the NZ Curriculum NOT the matrix2. Your programmes should reflect the key principles of the NZC:

the centrality of the individual learner as a connected, confident, actively involved, life-long learners

flexibility a focus on pedagogy/key competencies valid, fair assessment when the student is cognitively ready [it benefits

students, involves students, is suited to the purpose]3. Balance in programmes is essential: not everything needs to be taught each year, not everything that you teach in a given year needs to be assessed. Plan holistically over a three year period, so that students are not exposed to a narrow range of genre or skills.

Key Messages regarding Senior Programmes and the Draft Matrix

4. “My students will not engage in learning that is not directly assessed.”

This is a student response that comes from an overly assessment driven programme, particularly one in which assessment forms the basis of curriculum design. A thematic approach integrates all texts and modes within a learning context and assessment opportunities ‘fall out’ of the teaching and learning. How the teacher constructs the programme for the year, and where the teacher places the emphasis is critical. Engagement of students with the learning in a programme is the key place to start and choice within programmes for students is an opportunity for teachers to engage reluctant learners.

Concerns

5. “I am worried that literature will disappear from English programmes.”

Consider teaching thematically so that the range of literature offered is rich and varied and there are more opportunities for a range of texts to be offered. In particular, thematic teaching favours the integration of poetry and short stories, which have become the ‘poor relations’ of English programmes. There are many internal standards that can be used within a literature context.

Concerns

6. “Shakespeare will disappear from English programmes if it is not directly assessed.”

Shakespeare is not compulsory at the moment. Currently, many teachers are offering Shakespeare at level 3 but far fewer students answer the Shakespeare question than answer on film or extended texts. Shakespeare is also currently part of many English programmes at year 12, and students can respond to this text as an extended text if they wish. Consider incorporating Shakespeare into programmes where it can be assessed in a myriad of ways internally e.g seminars, research, thematic study, dramatic performance, visual presentation, or a collaborative project. Writing an essay about Shakespeare is not the only way to assess knowledge of, and response to Shakespeare. The NZC enables schools to reflect their values within their programmes for their students. Prescribing texts would deny schools the opportunity to construct their own curricula.

Concerns

7. “I am worried that my workload will increase.”

If schools offer the three externally assessed standards, this will amount to 12 credits. The MoE/NZQA recommend a course of 18-20 credits as appropriate for the average student. Two to three internals would be the optimum number. This is fewer than many schools are offering now. A course of 30 credits is total overload for teachers and for students and leads to minimal teaching opportunities. Students should be offered assessment opportunities when the teacher is confident that the student is ready to be assessed

Concerns

Planning a programme for lower achieving students

Will the new matrix allow for success for lower achieving students? Quick answer is yes – but perhaps in a more limited way. Alternative pathways for literacy skills will still be available even if

actual English Level 1 standards are ‘beyond’ the students i.e. New ‘Literacy’ standards Communication skills standards

Elements of good programmes designed for lower achieving students

Enable teachers & students to know each other well as people as well as knowing strengths & gaps in skills and knowledge.

Promote positive relationships and learning dispositions. Allow for flexible learning outcomes. Provide multiple opportunities to assess and develop skills. Have success not failure as their outcome. Enhance students’ strengths. Address skill/knowledge gaps in supportive way.

Elements continued…

Spend the time necessary on developing skills or knowledge – i.e. not time bound.

May focus on fewer skills or areas of the curriculum but provide learning opportunities in several different contexts and/or modes.

Provide challenge and enable students to gain the ‘best’ credits that they can.

Links to student’s own goals where possible – i.e. relevance of learning to students’ lives is encouraged in these courses.

General Approach I use:

Thematic Approach Overarching “Big Question” that drives the content and that will be developed and revisited

in multiple ways and contexts during semester. Concrete vs Abstract themes

e.g. Relationships, Childhood, Growing Up, Survival, Heroes, Friendship vs Power, Identity, Difference, Isolation, Dystopia

Multiple & Varied Texts Use several different texts and text types to develop content knowledge e.g. novel, play,

prose, non-fiction, film, oral… Student choice of text where possible

Assessment Opportunities • Plan two or three assessment opportunities (times to collect evidence) during the year.

Assess when ready (as much as possible ) rather than pushing through an assessment when majority still not ‘ready’ to do it.

Cover all aspects of the curriculum Plan a course that covers reading of written & visual/oral texts; writing; viewing; speaking

and presenting of some sort.

Approach Continued…

Collection of evidence I would give students several opportunities to work towards achieving different

standards and ‘collect the evidence’ towards achievement. Particularly for writing standards.

Sometimes evidence may be collected over more than one year. Formative assessment

Use formative assessment to decide whether or not individuals are ready to be assessed for a standard.

If it is clear students are not ready then don’t assess them. Allow for assessment using student strengths where possible

For example many of the new internal standards do not require assessment through written tests – they allow for oral or visual modes of assessment. Encourage use of these other modes if it may enhance success.

New Matrix Standards to consider using: Writing Standard(s)

• 1.5 /or 1273 and/or new literacy writing standard. Would insist on student doing writing of some sort in any programme even if this was a ‘two-year’ plan.

Reading Standard(s) 1.1 and/or 1.2 - external essay standard(s) on written and/or visual texts. Possibility for

some students. 1.8 – Explain significant connections between texts. Definite standard 1.9 – independent reading – with 4 texts only two of which must be extended written texts

this may be a possibility. Level 6 of curriculum may be a barrier to students. 25060 – new version of 2977 communication skills standard a strong possibility

Speaking Standard(s) 1.6 /or new literacy speaking standard if there is one. Most students can succeed in

constructing an oral presentation. Viewing Standards(s)

Use film/oral texts in 1.8 theme study. Also look at 1.2 or 1.11 close viewing - unlikely to be a literacy standard for viewing.

Presenting Standard(s) 1.7 – presenting visual/verbal standard- no unit standard that covers this skill and unlikely to

be a new literacy standard that did so either.

New Matrix standards continued…

Collaboration standard?• Good opportunity to get students to work together on production of a text

if it is allowed through. This may be a good standard for lower achieving students who often work better if they are able to work with someone else.

Communication Skills standards These have just been reviewed and the new versions of these standards

are now available. Many of the changes are positive and may make these more useable and/or interesting. At the moment they still count for NCEA Level 1 literacy. No exemplars for new standards yet – we may need to generate these within our English teaching community.

NB: old versions still valid until the end of 2010.

“Embracing the new curriculum - Part 2” the front half of the doc / the pedagogies

At Years 11 - 13, we shouldn’t see working with the curriculum as somehow separate or different from how we work with assessment.

At senior level implementing the curriculum effectively = working effectively with the new standards.

It means: designing programmes which treat learning and assessment in an

integrated way Keeping a focus on the front half of the curriculum and in particular on

pedagogy.

Some NZC characteristics of learning and assessment practices schools may move towards over the next few years:

New Zealand Curriculum aligned approaches with an emphasis on personalised and differentiated learning: for example by building in assessment opportunities when students

are ready, rather than a ‘one size fits all’ approach where everyone must jump through the same assessment hoops at the same time. Student learning and readiness for assessment and not an assessment calendar driving things.

students making decisions in collaboration with their teachers about their learning.

assessment practices and school systems being responsive to these approaches

What’s important / 1Knowing about the Conditions for Assessment Guidelines [CAGS]

The CAGs describe Assessment opportunities Good assessment practice Authenticity of student work for each standard in the matrix

What’s important / 2:Knowing about the Further Opportunities for Assessment Guidelines [generic guidelines across all subjects]

For example: "In some standards, it may be appropriate for the teacher to gather achievement evidence over time. In this case there is no specific assessment event. Collecting evidence over time may be appropriate when the standard assesses skills, processes or understandings that students could demonstrate:

in their normal class work over the course of the programme [such as in a folio or other work developed and produced over an extended period]

or outside the classroom in controlled contexts [such as safe practice in a workshop, public speaking, performing arts, or appropriate use of technical equipment]”

And how those guidelines could work in an English programme

The writing standards are one critical area where skills are developed over an extended period and therefore it’s appropriate that evidence is collected over time. That's the way learning and assessment works best for writing. Students should have the opportunity to revisit work with fresh eyes, then to edit and revise - that's when significant improvements occur. Students' strongest work can then be recognised for assessment.

Watch out for the NZATE ‘Good Practice in Writing’ DVD and resources…

What’s important / 3:knowing the students you teach

With an understanding of the CAGs and the assessment guidelines, what approaches and programme designs will suit the range of students in my school?

What’s important /4:Taking a hard look at the ‘how’

Best practice is about ‘how’. Much department focus can be on the ‘what’ and ‘when’:

What will we teach in our programmes? Which part of the year will we teach it?

The old curriculum didn’t explicitly focus on pedagogy.

This one does. The old curriculum didn’t advocate a focus on pedagogy - the art of

teaching - as an integral part of the document. This new curriculum does.

Effective pedagogy is central to implementing the new curriculum. How students learn determines what they learn. The curriculum calls for a participatory view of learning.

How we teach; not just what and when…

The art of teaching is - to a large extent - intuitive. It relies on making spur of the moment decisions about the appropriate strategy for that moment in your classroom. The more you can do to understand effective pedagogy and to build your teaching ‘repertoire’, the better. This applies equally in your second or thirty second year of teaching. I’m talking about professional intuition here and what we can do to enhance it.

Doing the right thing

•is being a creative teacher. Creative teachers adapt and adjust all the time. They’re creative in their use of this pedagogical repertoire, in conjunction with a sensitivity that enables them to do the right thing for the students in front of them. •means ‘split screen’ thinking: being aware of your purpose in using selected strategies as you’re teaching and being sensitive to their effectiveness with your students. [in other words, the ‘teaching as inquiry’ process operating continually as you teach]

•NZC Effective Pedagogies, P34 - 35

Doing the right thing:

Building the repertoire

Taking key pedagogies into your work with the matrix in Years 11 - 13: “Encouraging reflective thought and action” “Enhancing the relevance of new learning” “Facilitating shared learning” “Providing sufficient opportunities to learn”But this is for another time…

‘Doing the right thing’ is difficult and fraught with failure. Teaching is an inherently messy business. Put another way, the strategy you used brilliantly yesterday will be a total flop in another setting tomorrow.But it’s the creative teacher who will survive and prosper in this chaotic world; and who will engage a few more of the disengaged.

the real world - recognising that…

Why pedagogy is central:

How will we work with the Achievement Objectives [and at Years 11 - 13, the standards based on these AOs that suit your students] in order to…

• Develop competencies

• Embody principles• Encourage the

development of values

• Work to implement a vision

> ? >

You’re focusing on the single area over which you have major influence and control and is central to implementing the NZC.

Effective

> >Pedagogy

Working with the Achievement Objectives

• Developing competencies

• Embodying principles• Encouraging the

development of values

• Working to implement a vision