Preface For an educator the development of conscious values
relating to environment, transaction and dimension is fundamental to
maintaining quality control in the classroom. Processes of curriculum
conceptualisation, implementation and review must also be applied within
the context of a student body encouraged to develop their own conscious
values. Working with these attributes, students themselves can support
quality control in the classroom. Without them however, a teacher is
constrained to repetitive re-analysis and enormous effort to secure
student motivation; all without the benefit of the input of the people
these processes are designed to assist. This essay approaches quality
control in the classroom from the perspective that the process is one
that educators and students share. In discussing quality control in the classroom we are
talking more of the maintenance of quality experience in the classroom
than of maintaining efficient 'control' in the classroom, although there
are of course aspects that are related. Quality control in the classroom
is the process of relevant values applied with consistency and
flexibility, within both implementation and self-review processes.
Ideally, classroom education is a rich and deep experience for students
wherein meaningful understanding of relationships, within and between
the social and physical environments, referenced to both community and
individual can be developed. The 'classroom' however is rooted in
remnants of the liberal-humanist tradition and provides a particularly
complex pedagogical arena. As Tait suggests, the classroom sometimes
serves "…(as) a clumsy coercive mechanism…(where) teachers
'expertise' acts as…(the) regulator… for government at a distance' (Tait
[Ed], p 7, 2000). If this is so, then how does one address 'quality control (of experience) in the
classroom'? The answers lie less in the historical heritage of
educational pedagogy and than in analysing the pedagogical modalities
available to the modern educator. This essay therefore focuses on an investigation the 'values', which Educators bring to the education environment and seek to develop within students. Less emphasis in this essay is given to the environmental dimension than is given to either the substantive dimension or the behavioural dimension. Additionally, transactions and inclusivity are given more emphasis than antecedent conditions. This approach reflects my belief that consciousness of the interpersonal transactions between students and between students and Teachers form the core of any 'quality' that may be controlled. Conscious Values As an educator I encourage student and peer exploration of
both subjective and 'raw' data through interpretative, comparative and
analytical approaches in order to develop 'conscious' values. I use the
word 'raw' here, rather than 'objective', because to me the word
'objective' expresses an idea or ideal, rather than a definite reality,
just as words such as 'love' or 'truth' express ideals. The term 'raw'
does not pretend to be 'objective' but still manages to suggest 'less
processed'. Rather than being pedantic analysis of semantics, these
definitions are central to 'conscious' educating. As an example of the centrality of values to educational
pedagogy, the SOSE curriculum provides an interesting case-in-point in
that it states that Studies of Society and Environment "…(involves) the
development of optimistic future visions." (QSCC Draft, p4, 1999).
Should the SOSE curriculum have said instead, "…development
of 'realistic' or 'reasonable' future visions'"? It would not
matter if it did, because again, these are value-laden words. What is
reasonable to one person is optimistic or pessimistic to two others. Therefore, my own focus in
my practice as an educator is to bring to the classroom the notion of
'conscious-values'. Quality
control in this regard requires peer and Teacher supported higher-order
metacognitive processes wherein students develop awareness of their own
values and expand their consciousness of others different values. It
also requires a willingness from Educators to maintain their own
self-awareness. These attributes provide a first step in ensuring
quality control in the classroom. As an educator I have a
further focus, which is to facilitate 'critical-exploration'. "What
is it in us that lies, murders and steals?" asked the German
playwright Georg Büchner in 1835… and then (without waiting for an
answer)… "I do not want to pursue the question any further".
(Gay, 1993, p3) In a sense this attitude is still sometimes reflected in
the education system, but is masked by assessment and review practice,
when it relates to the acceptance and consumption of current ideology.
Specifically, exploration is confused with the consumption of models of
economic imperatives and other politicized ideals. In Understanding
Education, Meadmore suggests this when he comments,
"…globalisation…(and)… the adoption of certain economic
theories by Australian Governments…(has)…had a significant input
into the nature and direction of schooling in Australia".
Therefore, I approach classroom exploration with the 'value' that such exploration must be conducted in a fashion that supports 'criticism'. I use the phrase 'critical-exploration' in order to differentiate between an exploration that uncritically develops more value-laden ideology statements, compared with an exploration that digs, questions, dissects, critically-analyses and undertakes a meaningful inspection. When critical exploration is combined with conscious values, an environment can begin to develop where students and educators cooperatively seek to maintain and control quality in the classroom. Without this combination of attributes students are hard pressed to engage proactively in the creation of their own quality environment, yet with it, students themselves have the basic tools necessary to cooperatively engage in quality control (and other) determinations. Professional accountability is then satisfied through direction of vision or effort based on conscious decision-making in which students may actively. Critical exploration both by students and educators is the second value that I consider important to secure and maintain quality control in the classroom. Imagine… All
teachers thought deeply about the interconnections between their
decisions and the way the world functioned and all students were
similarly encouraged to think about the interconnections in the way the
world functioned. Can
such a web of relationships be understood? Possibly. Certainly some
familiarity with exploration of the web of interconnections of life can
be developed, so that students may recognise complexity, without feeling
powerless, and that students may achieve a positive approach when
differentiating the components of that complexity. I will call this
'positivism'. * *I
must differentiate this from the liberal-humanist tradition of the 18th
century of the same name by observing that in my use of the word I do
not mean the veneration of the rational mind and the machine, but simply
refer to a state where complexity may be addressed without feeling
overwhelmed and the world considered critically without generating
despair. Why
encourage positivism and what has it to do with quality control in the
classroom? The answer to these questions largely lie in my belief that
positivism is a necessary component for the development of conscious
values and in particular, needed to facilitate involvement in creating
change. This is a subjective belief rather than empirical knowledge, but
nonetheless I feel compelled to include positivism as a vital component
of quality control in the classroom. To explain the importance of
positivism I turn to allegory, comparing the relationship between
positivism and quality control in the classroom to the processes
involved in Homeopathic therapy. Normally
a single substance, a homeopathic compound is subjected to procedure
that brings out the medicinal properties of the original substance.
However the substance is diluted before prescription so much so that,
from a statistical point of view, there may be none of the actual
original element left in the homeopathic compound. Yet, homeopathy can
have a profound effect, which is referred to as 'like curing like'. Relating
this to my vision of quality control in the classroom,
critical-exploration can be paralleled to the ' homeopathic procedure'.
'Conscious-values' replacing 'unconscious-values' can then be compared
to the homeopathic principle of 'like cures like'. Maintaining this
allegory, the element of positivism can be compared to the dilution
process applied to the homeopathic substance. Like the results of the
dilution process in homeopathy it is vital, but difficult to measure.
While positivism may have no easily measurable value, it does
nonetheless appear to still have an influence. In my experience
positivism supports depth of enquiry and maturity of decision by can
mitigate feelings of powerlessness. It allows and encourages student
personal and metacognitive exploration and thus I include it as a third
and vital component in achieving quality control in the classroom. My
argument so far has been that quality control in the classroom is
fostered by the development of a positive environment in which
critical-exploration skills are encouraged and the development of
conscious-values is facilitated. Pedagogical concerns such flexible
teaching practice and flexible learning processes are supported through
this emphasis. Quality control can be maintained through implementation
of curriculum modules designed to support students on both personal and
systemic levels to develop skills of critical-exploration so that
development of conscious-values is enhanced. Review processes should
ideally be structured so that students are encouraged to become informed
by the process. This requires review research paradigms that assist
both an educator and students to reconceptualise their own learning
strategies and review their own learning outcomes. In order to
facilitate quality control of these aims, students should be supported
to explore broadly within units that allow for multiple paths and
multiple outcomes and processes of mutual review must be applied to any
analysis of effectiveness. The behavioural dimension of the classroom is not an individual quest. It is a group climate for the students and this suggests to me that it is a group climate for the educators concerned. The Framework project conceptualisations possibly include recognition of this, when Luke states that there is a need to, "… shift towards community accountability …for delivering improved student outcomes". (http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/#) Schools
that experiment with or develop vertical timetabling, with multiple
teachers in the one classroom (or out of the classroom), are engaging in
an approach that has the potential to recognise diversity and provide an
approach manifesting allowance for difference. Structural processes for
analysis and quality control need to be designed to accept and
incorporate this diversity. Parameters for effective process in this
regard are considered in the following concluding section of this essay. Visualisations for Quality Control In this
essay I have explored core theoretic and philosophic frameworks for
approaches to education that maintain or facilitate quality control in
the classroom. These have included critical exploration, conscious
values, positivism, supportive environments for individual realisation
on both personal and systemic levels, encouragement of diversity through
acceptance of multiple outcomes and finally, consideration of group
climate. These considerations are based on the conceptualisation that
one of the most positive paths towards quality control in the classroom
is through facilitating students' participation in the quality control
of experience in the classroom. However
I would be remiss if I did not include some conceptual models for
practical implementation of strategies that can assist achieve these
core philosophic aims. I will conclude this writing therefore by briefly
outlining a central tenant to Teacher involvement in this. The quality
of classroom experience is controlled by how the curriculum is conceived
and planned, by the quality of the processes of implementation and is
measurable by the quality of the outcomes, both planned and unplanned.
In turn these three areas of focus can be considered within the terms
established Michael Eraut who suggests that three dimensions are
involved in teacher professional accountability. These are the on-going
review of what a teacher is doing with and for individual students;
personal and collaborative self-evaluation and collective review; and
continuing self-development. (Eraut, 1993) There
is an educational or pedagogic cycle visible here, where curriculum
conception, planning and implementation, provide a basis for review and
collaborative self-evaluation, and in turn form the core of the student
experience and therefore outcomes.
In a sense this cycle of values, implementation, and review is
described by Smith and Lovat when they talk about Action Research, which
is described as, "… a process of change aimed at the improvement
of an individual’s, or group’s, own practice…
a process entered into by us because we wish to improve our own
practice, and understand in a more critical manner the reasons and basis
for such practice…" (Smith & Lovat, p 185, 1991). As Teachers we manage quality control in the classroom by proceeding through a series of steps stemming from an identified problem or area of concern and plan very specifically how to investigate that. Once we undertake the investigation so that specific information or data is gathered we can then examine what has been found, interpret it and draw conclusions. Reflection on the significance of this allows us to decide what kind of change to make, considering what we have found… then beginning another "cycle", with the appropriate steps… and so forth. The quality of what the teacher is doing is continually being examined and adjusted. Perhaps not surprisingly, in order to maintain quality control in the classroom, educators must engage in the same processes that they would encourage in their students: critically explore, develop conscious values and move towards desired outcome with positivism. Hmmm…. what is good for the goose is good for the gander, in the case of quality control in the classroom. __________________________________________ References: Ed Queensland Framework Project
http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/
Visited 10.04.2000 Gay, P., The Cultivation of Hatred, p3, The
Bourgeois Experience Victoria to Freud, Harper Collins Publishers,
London, 1993 Grove, R., Green Imperialism, Colonial Expansion, p
16, Tropical Island Edens and the Origins of Environmentalism 1600-1860,
Cambridge University Press, UK, 1997 http://www.fed.qut.edu.au/thomas/prb349/Quality Control in the Classroom-Overview.html
(Eurat, 1993 cited) Meadmore, D., Tait, G., Burnett, B. (Ed) Practising
Education, Social and Cultural Perspectives, p 7, Prentice Hall,
Australia, 2000 Meadmore, D., Burnett, B., O'Brien, P. (Ed) Understanding
Education, Contexts and Agendas for the New Millennium, p 91,
Prentice Hall, Australia, 1999 Smith,
D.L. & Lovat, T.J. Curriculum: Action on Reflection, p 185,
Rev.ed. Wentworth Falls, NSW: Social Science Press, 1991. Queensland School Curriculum Council Draft Years 1
to 10 Studies of Society and Environment Syllabus 1999, p4, q:\kla_sose\syllabus\drafts\5
august1999.doc 3
http://www.qscc.qld.edu.au/kla/sose/pdf/syllabus_rationale.pdf
|
