Moving from Student centred to Ako centred learning.

Its all about Ako

In te ao Māori, the concept of ako means both to teach and to learn. It recognises the knowledge that both teachers and learners bring to learning interactions, and it acknowledges the way that new knowledge and understandings can grow out of shared learning experiences. This powerful concept has been supported by educational research showing that when teachers facilitate reciprocal teaching and learning roles in their classrooms, students’ achievement improves (Alton-Lee, 2003).

Practicing 21st century learning is requiring paradigm shifts in every level of education. Recently I've found myself thinking more and more about the transformation of a school from 20th century learning systems to 21st century systems. I'm naturally curious about this because I've worked both in a kura that was purposely designed for modern learning practices and also currently work in a school that is committed towards transforming itself from the conventional model into a modern 21st century school. 

What does it take for staff to embrace new pedagogies and commit towards not stepping back into the model that they have used for their entire professional career? How does the motivation move from being extrinsic into intrinsic?

I don't really know the answer to this but I was interested in an idea that has been floating around in my head for a while. When we talk about  leadership strategies used by effective senior management towards teachers, these practices are similar to strategies used by effective teachers towards the learner. Initially it appears to be not really related to the above question, but bear with me.

Micheal Fullan recently spoke at #Ulearn16, (this is an educational conference held in NZ annually.) He referred to a blog about 10 surefire ways to fail when using deep learning.  Number one is pasted below; 

1. If you haven't experienced deep or powerful learning yourself. This seems obvious but is frequently ignored. I remember once showing a video in a class at HGSE of a constructivist math class in which students were having a fairly animated discussion about the relationship between area and perimeter. One of the students in my class said, "Oh--that's what they were trying to show us in my school last year when we were moving towards Common Core math." One of the things I've learned in my own journey in trying to teach people about deeper learning is that the most powerful things you can do is give adults models and experiences that mirror what you are hoping they will do for students. We also call this "symmetry" in our work--that if, as a system level leader, you want teachers to teach students in a particular way, you have to give teachers opportunities to have those same kinds of learning experiences.

This reading provided a real "Aha!" moment for me. Symmetry could be an important factor to encourage teachers to embrace new pedagogies and deliver them from an intrinsic origin. 

Providing an opportunity for teachers to experience deeper learning and connect again with the attributes associated with deep learning may enable teachers to use them more effectively in the classroom. Teachers reconnecting with their own passions through curiosity, courage and empathy may result in these dispositions becoming more prevalent in their own teaching practices. 

How could we do this best? Will it require taking time out of the regular timetable to support teachers deep learning programs? Is this what they mean by personalised PD? 

Im interested to hear from any readers on this idea. 

This thought pattern also lead towards some discussions Ive had recently with peers. Some have made comments that are really concerning. Many of these teachers were sharing the same feelings, of feeling used in a system that no longer recognises their own needs. In my opinion they appear to feel subservient in a student-centred approach. I chose to explore this message further, (although in doing this I felt as if I was challenging a deeply valued stone in the foundation for my teaching philosophy.) Is student centred learning a barrier for teachers towards delivering 21st century learning experiences that fulfil the needs of our rangatahi? 

In a conversation with my wife, Cleo (who is also a relatively new teacher,) we explored this idea. What is it that we mean when we say student centred? As you're reading this what are your thoughts?

• Education is based on student interests
• Authentic contexts for learning
• Localised curriculum relevant to the learner
• Potentially Passion based determined by student voice
• Meeting individualised learning needs
• Student voice

We started talking about what was it that resulted in teachers feeling like they had become subservient in our Ed system. If we look at this from a perspective of power then we may see a reason. In the industrial based educational model teachers had a significant portion of the power in a classroom. In the 21st century model students have a much stronger share (if not then the majority) of power. This is evident in the initial bulleted list above which in my opinion is the major difference between the two models.

I begun to think perhaps the problem in itself is the term 'student-centred' learning. From a perspective of power this either accurately or inaccurately communicates where the power is and this in itself may be threatening to teachers. Perhaps its just semantics, but I'd be interested in noting peoples opinions about trying to reduce this power inferred term by replacing it with the terminology Ako centred learning. 

To me I immediately saw that this removed the emphasis on students and focused the practice on the reciprocity of learning. I saw that both the teacher and the learner shared responsibilities in this learning relationship. The learner brings their contexts (culture, community and or passion) and the teacher brings their expertise/experience (conceptual knowledge.) The power is shared in the reliance between both learner and teacher for learning to occur.

The second point is  more focused on the school that I work in Lytton High. We are currently establishing new 3 school wide values. These are Aroha (Love), Ako and Aspire. Choosing to use the term Ako centred learning matches well with these values. Especially in relation to the symbol I have developed to represent these values. (Please note: this is my personal symbol and not necessarily the one that will be adopted by Lytton High to represent the values.)

In here Ako is the target, the focal or balance point in our Lytton High learning programs. 

So in wrapping this piece up, I would really appreciate some feedback from any readers regarding these thoughts. Has symmetry become evident in your school? Is using Ako centred to describe our program risking any of the positive gains made through the student centred approach? What are any other negative connotations that the term student centred may suggest?

As I said at the beginning I am very interested in learning more about schools that have taken on the journey of transforming from the traditional 20th century model towards the 21st century model. Have you got any information about this?  I'd love to hear if you do. Thanks for taking the time to read this. Arohanui.