Ethical dilema - Idea sharing and authorative sources

Understanding constructive use of authoritative sources.

I teach Art History online with a wide range of learners, through NetNZ. My learners are diverse. They come from a range of schools (special character, area school, urban, rural etc), deciles (there is a wide range), locations and are guided by a range of different values. With such diversity, there is a huge range of learning and life experiences.

What we do in our class is framed around community and knowledge building (2017). We are guided by knowledge building principles such as idea diversity, community construction of knowledge, community ownership of ideas, and constructive use of authoritative sources. This is a mindset shift for students whose experience of learning has been individual and internal. 

The concept of communal knowledge can be confusing for students and needs to handled very carefully. The idea is that once an idea has been shared with the community, it can be developed and improved by the entire community. The skill is developing a mindset of asking explanation driven questions and critical thinking. A Knowledge Building Community should enhance depth, originality and idea advancement (Lai and Pullar, 2014) when it is functioning really well.

However not all students understand academic etiquette, therefore we need to directly address the constructive use of authoritative sources, intellectual property and general good academic practice. 

An ethical dilemma I have previously encountered was a student who didn't have a good handle on this and had plagiarised a section of a text word for word in a part of their assignment, without acknowledgement that they had done so. This presented a problem. How to best support the student, whilst maintaining professional integrity.  Hall's ethical problem solving mode (2001) offers guidance for navigating ethical problems. He asks teachers to consider what their professional obligations (above personal values) are and to consider what we owe students and the wider community when weighing up contentious issues. So what would be lost if plagiarism and theft of intellectual property were not addressed and what are the possible impacts for students when addressing plagiarism.

There is clear and supportive guidance to navigate this issue. At a national level the Education Council Code of Practice is underpinned by the value of Pono. "showing integrity by acting in ways that are fair, honest, ethical and just."  Further to this intellectual dishonesty is in disharmony with the principles of knowledge building (Scardamalia, 2002), which ask for "respect and understanding of authoritative sources, combined with a critical stance toward them. " To respect the knowledge building process, students need to acknowledge sources and develop a critical position. To wholesale present a sources' ideas as ones own is profoundly lacking in respect. 

It was not an option to ignore the intellectual dishonesty. This would have lacked integrity and a disservice to my students and to the art history community.

The ethical and just action was to address the plagiarism. The dilemma then became how to address it. As I saw it there were a range of options. Option a would be to inform the student and their eDean that I was failing them outright for plagiarism with no reassessment opportunities. Option b would be to inform the student that they did not achieve due to plagiarism and that they would need to address and rewrite the  plagiarised section of their assignment before it could be resubmitted. Option c would be to do as I would in option b, but to also examine as a class how constructive and respectful use of sources can enhance our critical understanding of an idea. I was guided here by institutional policy. NetNZ requires that we assess work according to NZQA requirements and that receiver (home) schools assist with ensuring authenticity of work "this may include helping investigate any situation where authenticity of student work is brought into question" (NetNZ ,2017).This led me to examine NZQA's conditions of assessment for level 3 art history. "Authenticity of student evidence needs to be assured regardless of the method of collecting evidence ... Any texts used must be acknowledged or referenced ...Where manageable, one further assessment opportunity may be made available for all students " (NZQA, conditions of assessement, n.d.)

This provided clarity for the situation. I absolutely needed to highlight to the student and the receiving school that plagiarism had occurred. I was not obligated to offer a reassessment opportunity. However failing the student with no further assessment opportunities was an avenue that I was reluctant to pursue as an eTeacher as I only saw my students once a week (and even then online). If I were to deny them an opportunity to rectify the situation there would be a high risk of the student disengaging entirely from the course. The course of action I took was option b, to offer the student a chance to resubmit work that was their own and to remark the work. If I were to be in this situation again I would proceed with option c to address gaps in understanding how to critically engage with authoritative sources. This situation was a learning experience for me. It became really apparent that knowledge building principles need to be embedded and well understood within our classroom practice. This wasn't just going to 'happen'. "If a KBC is to be effectively set up in a class then a good understanding of the knowledge building principles is essential." (Lai, 2014) Orientating students towards Knowledge Building principles and academic best practice has become a part of our course.

Reference List:
Hall, A. (2001). What ought I to do, all things considered? An approach to the exploration of ethical problems by teachers. Paper presented at the IIPE Conference, Brisbane. Retrieved from http://www.educationalleaders.govt.nz/Culture/Developing-leaders/What-Ought-I-to-Do-All-Things-Considered-An-Approach-to-the-Exploration-of-Ethical-Problems-by-Teachers

Knowledge Building Gallery. (n.d.). Introduction. Retrieved from http://thelearningexchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/KB-Gallery-0-Introduction-Accessible.pdf

Lai, Kwok-Wing, & Pullar, Ken. (2014). Designing knowledge building communities in secondary schools.

NetNZ. (2017). NetNZ Memorandum of Understanding. Retrieved October 27, 2017, from https://docs.google.com/document/d/16TJsi60eavaipoJ-dB_FD2hKbxlbjQaKTehuZdeZ0MY/edit

NZQA. (2016). NCEA level 3 art history, Conditions of assessment. Retrieved from NZQA website: https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=ncea.tki.org.nz/content/download/3380/10837/file/arthist_CoA_L3_jan16.doc

Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court.

Culturally responsive classroom - being at home at school

After reading about culturally responsive teaching, the idea that stuck with me was power-sharing (Cowie et al, 2011, p. 3, tuākana teina in action). Within ako, and the concept of tuākana-teina there is a valuing of cultural knowledge and the expertise that rangatahi bring to  the classroom. This is a massive mindset shift for some teachers, yet is completely in line with 21st century pedagogies such as knowledge construction within Knowledge Building Communities. (Student centred learning, authentic contexts, diversity of ideas, valuing of student knowledge and expertise) Another concept that resonated was valuing and drawing upon community knowledge. "The teachers used an ensemble of strategies to welcome and highlight the value of community and student funds of knowledge" (Cowie et al, 2011, p. 3, para 4) . Akonga are more likely to engage with learning that reflects them and values them.

Milne (2013) critiques mainstream education in NZ,  'Colouring in the White Spaces' referring to the pervasive hegemony of Pakeha culture in education. Her case studies all designed learning environments that reflected their community and their values. This ranged from the physical design to values. Students felt valued, felt empowered and felt at home at school. Milne's recent blog post ('Why not whiteboy's writing, October 15 2017) powerfully critiqued the pervasive deficit thinking in our schools around Māori achievement. If we believe that our learners are able and we actually work at engaging with te ao māori and connecting with learners, connecting learning to their worlds, then maybe we'll see a shift. " the knowledge we value—and measure—is also White and it, therefore, benefits the children whose values match, and whose values are embedded in and reproduced by our schools ... We need to learn to read the world of our Māori children and craft our pedagogy around that world." (Milne, 15 Oct 2017) As teachers, we need to look at where our locus of control is and that starts with us and our pedagogy.

I will critique communication methods and learning activities within my school, against the Mauri model (Potahu, 2011). Communication is how a school connects with akonga and the broader community, through the said and the unsaid.  Learning design inevitably has values behind it.  As a school we have some work to do around these areas. A recent ERO report identified that Māori students felt confident in their learning within te reo and kapahaka, however, this is not translating to the broader school. This suggests that our learners are in a state of mauri moe (withdrawn). As a school, we need to look at our practices and ask 'why'. To move into Mauri Oho (proactive), we need to recenter our learning design to enhance Mahana (warmth) and relationships in learning. This involves taking time to connect with our learners and to really be present, connecting with their values and more than that, designing an environment where student values inform their learning.  

So, as a digital immersion school  with 1/3 Māori learners how do we design a space (physical and virtual) that is authentically Māori, and affirms Māori learners?  The symbolic levels of communication (what is valued, what is celebrated, the kind of language we use to describe ourselves in a public space) speak volumes to our Māori community.

Bishop's An indigenous approach to creating knowledge (1998) is useful here. He refers to a 'whanau of interest', describing the metaphorical whanau as a place for constructing shared meanings guided by mutually understood protocols.  "it is the concerns, interests and preferences of the whanau that guide and drive the research processes". There is much to be learnt from Bishop. How powerful would it be if teachers were to define their classes as 'whanau of interest' and value the ideas and ambitions of their learners?   

Reference list:

Bishop, R. (1998). Freeing ourselves from neo-colonial domination in research: A Maori approach to creating knowledge. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(2), 199–219.

Cowie, B., Otrel-Cass, K., Glynn, T., & Kara, H., with Anderson, M., Doyle, J., Parkinson, A., & Te Kiri, C. (2011). Culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment in primary science classrooms: Whakamana tamariki. Summary Report Wellington: Teaching Learning Research Initiative. (PDF - 76.84 KB)

Knowledge Building Gallery. (n.d.). Introduction. Retrieved from http://thelearningexchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/KB-Gallery-0-Introduction-Accessible.pdf

Milne, A. (2013). Colouring in the white spaces : reclaiming cultural Identity in whitestream Schools (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10289/7868

Milne, A. (2017, October 14). Why not White Boys' Writing? [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.annmilne.co.nz/my-blog/2017/10/14/why-not-white-boys-writing-1

Potahu, T. W. (2011). Mauri - Rethinking Human Wellbeing. MAI Review, 3, 1-12.

'A tribe learning to survive'

"Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour: a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression" (Wenger-Trayner 2015) This really resonated with me as I was processing what defined a community of practice. Who is my tribe and what is the 'problem' we are solving in our world?

As teachers, we have many communities of practice. I know that my communities of practice are a broad network. 

(CC https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5117/7001475448_69bbdb8503_b.jpg)

Wenger (2000) defines the three modes of belonging in a community of practice as engagement, imagination and belonging. That is, what we do together, how we orientate ourselves toward an identity, and how we mutually align ourselves together to work towards a common goal.

The visual art teaching community exemplifies this beautifully for me. From my first moments as a beginning teacher the art teaching community has been a generous broad and accepting 'church', united in achieving the best outcomes for learners. I really value the flexible and organic nature of the Visual Arts community. As a sole charge art teacher, I actively engage with the community as much as possible. The VisArtsNet email forum has enabled me to be a learner and an expert. It challenges me to look at best practice and reflect on my practice.

Reflecting on a very recent week of PD with a community of art teachers, this is just as true today. The whole community's expertise was valued and as a community of educators, we were stronger for it. Though we were a diverse bunch who came from far and wide, we were united in working together to support the best outcomes for students.

I saw many parallels with the principles of Knowledge Building Communities (democratising of knowledge, idea diversity, collective responsibility). 

https://vimeo.com/16930878

There was a  culture of 'progressive problem solving' (Lai, n.d.). Conversation in our breakroom at the PD centred around sharing innovative practice and solving authentic problems that the group really cared about. (Lai, 2014)

It was invaluable to have the time and space to have such focused conversations and to be able to connect 'kanohi ki te kanohi'. This leaves me thinking how can we connect more as a community. Yes, VisArtsNet is a valuable tool, but the email format often facilitates one-way traffic and it is far too easy to simply lurk as a bystander. As a teacher working in my silo of a department in my silo of a school, I wonder how we can facilitate more connection, shared practice and collaboration? What say you, teachers? Are there any creative solutions out there?

Reference list:

Lai,K.(n.d.).Building.knowledge..Retrieved.from http://www.otago.ac.nz/sciences/study/postgraduate/profiles/otago065938.html

Otago UniversityLai, Kwok-Wing, & Pullar, Ken. (2014). Designing knowledge building communities in secondary schools.

Knowledge Building Gallery. (n.d.). Introduction. Retrieved from http://thelearningexchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/KB-Gallery-0-Introduction-Accessible.pdf

Wenger, E.(2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization,7(2), 225-246.

Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Introduction to communities of practice | Wenger-Trayner. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/

knowledge creators and engagement

I am interested in how knowledge building communities can enhance engagement (social and cognitive). But the question is how do you measure engagement? A recent literature review has prompted more questions that answers.

What does engagement look like?
Is it the number of times that students contribute to the discussion? The depth of the contribution? The amount of times an idea is revisited and revised? Or is it something altogether more holistic, such as a reflective thinking portfolio? (Lee, Chan and Aalst, 2006)

Knowledge building teachers, if we think knowledge building enhances engagement in classes, how can identify it.
I would love to hear your ideas and experiences.

Reimagining teaching and learning - self effiacy

http://ikit.org/fulltext/2002AERAAnn.pdf

So I've been thinking about the learner's role in knowledge building. It's quite a different dynamic to traditional, more transactional modes of learning where the teacher is the conduit and all learning flows from them.

Knowledge Building which I have been tinkering with in one of my classes for a few years, puts the student at the center of their learning - they are agents in it and as legitimate knowledge creators in our learning community. It is really scary for some students as they haven't known anything other than direct instruction. But the rewards are huge for when they get it.

I guess the question is how to empower students to see themselves as being capable of inquiry ... and also how to scaffold them so we're not throwing them in the deep end before they've learned to swim!

So in my inquiry, I'm thinking about 'learning how to learn'. How can I give my students the skills that they need to create knowledge? How can I give them the tools that they need to reflect on their learning and be empowered as epistemic agents?

For those of you who have been working with knowledge building and collaboration for a while, how do you support metacognition in your students? Are there particular resources or tools that are really effective?

My inquiry hunch is that knowledge building will improve self-efficacy over time.
To identify a shift I will need to gather qualitative data over time. I was thinking of using the Learning Dispositions survey that we often use with NetNZ students. Teachers, can you think of any other good ways of getting a picture of students as learners? The main thing really is that I'm collecting student voice about their learning as self-efficacy is defined by the learners' beliefs about their abilities.

Please share your thoughts, ideas, and feedback with me.

Thoughts about teachers as knowledge creators

" ... the teacher has to play a key role in modeling knowledge building through being creative and innovative in pedagogical practices. Professional learning and development will best be supported when teachers can share, create, and improve new knowledge on teaching, learning, and assessment as a KBC." (Lai, 2014, p18)

This is a thread of interest that has emerged following a huge amount of reading into constructivist pedagogy. This thought echoes a problem in day to day teaching. We're encouraging our students to follow Learn-Create-Share  in their learning, doing innovative things in our classrooms but we forget to share as teachers. Too often, we're too shy, too busy, too much in our classroom siloes.

As a teacher, I live in a bit of silo. I am the only visual art teacher at my school, the nearest colleague being 35 km up the road. It can be quite isolating.

I have been really lucky to have had the generous support of colleagues as I've explored what knowledge building looks like with my art history class.

I wonder though how we can make the innovations in our practice more visible and accessible to our community?

 

Lai, Kwok-Wing, & Pullar, Ken. (2014). Designing knowledge building communities in secondary schools.

Community and belonging

Having finally completed a literature review into how knowledge building communities might enhance engagement and self-efficacy, I have been wrestling with some emerging questions about the community aspect of knowledge building communities. Establishing a culture of collaboration is fundamental. The problem is, how can trust and connections between community members be developed?

How can an authentic community be developed in the online environment?

I would love to hear from teachers who have been tinkering with knowledge building communities. What makes a difference in establishing a culture of knowledge sharing?

Also in general, NZ teachers what does whanaungatanga look like in your class?