Leon Benade

Teachers’ Critical Reflective Practice in the Context of Twenty-first Century Learning

Abstract In the twenty-first century, learning and teaching at school must prepare young people for engaging in a complex and dynamic world deeply influenced by globalisation and the revolution in digital technology. In addition to the use of digital technologies, is the development of flexible learning spaces. It is claimed that these developments demand, and lead to, enhanced reflective practice by teaching practitioners. This article is based on a project that has used multiple New Zealand case studies to engage teachers and leaders in interviews to explore their experiences at the futures–digital–reflective intersection. Critical theoretic and critical hermeneutic approaches inform the exploration of the relationships between reflective practice and twenty-first century learning by analysis and comparison of educational theoretical discourses with voices from a group of principals and ex-leaders on the one hand, and teachers, on the other hand.

Challenging the Domestication of Critical Reflection and Practitioner Reflectivity

Critical reflection and practitioner reflectivity have assumed a status in educational discourse that merits some caution. Reflective practice discourses embedded in wider educational and professional discourses are often located in close relation to the demands and imperatives of ‘21st century learning’ and demand that schools, teachers and curricula serve to ensure that students emerge from the schooling system with the competencies and values that will ensure their (economic) success in the future. This alignment has domesticated critical reflectivity to a techno-instrumentalist view of schooling and education with no intention of altering itself or its practitioners as a result of critical reflection. The idea of reflective practice stems in part from thinkers such as Freire, who claimed that because of their human nature, people are able to step back from reality and reflect on it critically by problematising reality, and in this way ‘enter into’ reality to transform it. Crucial to problematisation is the ability and disposition to see the transformative power of cultural action; that is, the world does not appear naturally but usually as a result of some other cause (Freire, 1973). Max van Manen distinguished this view of critical reflection as the ‘highest level of deliberative rationality’ (1977, p. 227), which describes practice of a particular kind. Following a Habermasian construction of critical theory, van Manen described the outcome of such critical reflective practice as ‘[u]niversal consensus, free from delusions or distortions ... that pursues worthwhile educational ends in self-determination, community, and on the basis of justice, equality, and freedom’ (1977, p. 227). In contrast, van Manen described two lesser levels of reflectivity. An interpretive level, where the inquirer’s own values, prejudices, experiences and background influences are brought under critical scrutiny, (1977, p. 226), and at the lowest level, is technical rationality, where ‘the practical refers to the technical application of educational knowledge and of basic curriculum principles for the purpose of attaining a given end’ (1977, p. 226). There is good reason for developed states to promote the high-level dialectical or dialogical, problem-posing enquiry described by van Manen and Freire. Such enquiry strives for enhanced practitioner self-knowledge, practitioner communal knowledge, and enhanced student experience of school. The reason, it may be suggested, is the growing racial, cultural and gendered diversity and heterogeneity of the student body in developed states, which continues to be taught by a teaching profession that is largely homogeneous (i.e. white, middle-class and female) (Howard, 2003). Large segments of that student body are increasingly marginalised and alienated by their schooling experience. In the New Zealand context, the reality of thriving student diversity was acknowledged by Quality Teaching for Diverse Students in Schooling (Alton-Lee, 2003), an early bs_bs_banner

The New Zealand Draft Curriculum 2006: A Policy Case Study with Specific Reference to its Understanding of Teaching as an Ethical Profession

The New Zealand Draft Curriculum was released in mid-2006 and intended for final implementation in September 2007. This draft policy document serves as a useful model for analysis employing a method of policy analysis proposed by Bell & Stevenson. Additionally, this article specifically asks to what extent the Draft Curriculum advances a concept of teaching as an ethical profession. Conceptions of the kind of profession teaching has become in New Zealand in the twenty-first century will be considered, and this article will attempt an account of what it might be to conceptualise teaching as an ‘ethical profession’. Against this conceptual backdrop, the New Zealand Draft Curriculum will be asked to provide its account of the teaching profession.

Bits, Bytes and Dinosaurs: using Levinas and Freire to address the concept of ‘twenty-first century learning’

Abstract The discourse of twenty-first century learning argues that education should prepare students for successful living in the twenty-first century workplace and society. It challenges all educators with the idea that contemporary education is unable to do so, as it is designed to replicate an industrial age model, essentially rear-focused, rather than future-focused. Future-focused preparation takes account of the startling effect on economy and society caused by rapid technological change, to the extent that the future cannot be accurately predicted. It is a discourse that effectively renders knowledge obsolete, and which relies increasingly on communication technologies and online pedagogies. This is however an education which in some respects deepens the loss of identity characteristic of contemporary times. Thus, it has negative implications for face-to-face interactions in community which underpins the development of democratic practices. This article challenges these futuristic discourses by appealing to two philosophers of the twentieth century, namely Emmanuel Levinas and Paulo Freire. It considers the Levinasian concepts of the Other and the face, and the Freirean concepts of humanisation and critical education to argue that they offer a discourse of possibility and hope. These thinkers enable the argument that, despite rapid change, there are certain attributes and dispositions that transcend time and place, which schools have not only a right, but an obligation to develop.

Shaping the Responsible, Successful and Contributing Citizen of the Future: ‘Values' in the New Zealand Curriculum and its Challenge to the Development of Ethical Teacher Professionality:

The revised New Zealand Curriculum became mandatory for use in New Zealand schools in February 2010. The ongoing reform agenda in education in New Zealand since 1989 and elsewhere internationally has had corrosive effects on teacher professionality. State-driven neo-liberal policy and education reforms are deeply damaging to the mental and moral conceptions teachers have of their work. This article contemplates one aspect of The New Zealand Curriculum – its focus on values – and the way it challenges the development of ethical teacher professionality. It also considers the prospect of reclaiming some of that lost moral ground through critical implementation of the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum, a claim that rests on an argument that this policy breaks with neo-liberal reform by its identification with third way political ideology.

Shame: Does it have a place in an education for democratic citizenship?

Abstract Shame, shame management and reintegrative shaming feature in some restorative justice literature, and may have implications for schools. Restorative justice in schools is effective when perpetrators of wrong-doing can accept and take ownership of their wrongful acts, are appropriately remorseful, and seek to make amends. Shame may be understood as an ethical matter if it is regarded to arise because of the contradiction between the wrongful act and the individual’s sense of self and self-worth. Shame management (that is, seeking reintegrative over stigmatising shaming) can be regarded to reflect a form of social responsibility as it contributes to community restoration by repairing ruptured social relationships. The notion of shaming and acknowledgement of harm thus assumes norms of acceptable community behaviour, attitudes and relationships, and is therefore also an ethical matter. Successful restorative practices in schools depend on the school-wide existence and practice of such norms, and mesh with virtues education, stimulated by the contemporary demand of many national curricula to promote so-called key competencies. Although the concepts of restorative justice and reintegrative shaming serve as a context for this article, its chief impetus was provided by an evaluative study of a group of New Zealand schools, in the course of which notions such as shame, reintegration and exclusion became evident. The chief purpose of this article is to consider and problematise shame from the perspective of the philosophy of education, and ask whether the concept of shame has a place in schools, whose important aims ought to include the development of democratic citizenship.

Is the classroom obsolete in the twenty-first century?

Abstract Lefebvre’s triadic conception of spatial practice, representations of space and representational spaces provides the theoretical framework of this article, which recognises a productive relationship between space and social relations. Its writing stems from a current and ongoing qualitative study of innovative teaching and learning practices in new technology-rich flexible learning spaces, characterised by large open spaces, permeable boundaries and diverse furnishings emphasising student comfort, health and flexibility. Schooling in the twenty-first century, certainly in the developed world, is required to ensure that children and school-leavers have appropriate life-long skills in preparation for participation in the twenty-first century knowledge economy. This world is characterised as complex and dynamic, deeply influenced by globalisation and the revolution in digital technology. Developing these skills calls into question ‘outmoded’ transmission models of teaching and requires teachers and school leaders to approach their work in radically new ways. Open school design encourages flexibility in learning and teaching, and allows collaborative, team teaching, with designers claiming significant educational benefits. This arrangement of multiple classes using innovatively designed, technology-enriched common space, facilitated by multiple teachers, working in collaborative teams, is far-reaching in its likely implications for community expectations and responses, relationship-building, assessment, student learning, teachers’ work and initial teacher education.

Knowledge and Educational Research in the Context of ‘Twenty-First Century Learning’:

Educational researchers and academics cannot ignore the ever-present call for education, and schooling in particular, to reflect the needs of the twenty-first century knowledge economy. Since the 1990s, national curricula and education systems have reflected this call in their focus on technology and shifting pedagogy to increasingly constructivist paradigms that aim at the development of competencies rather than the acquisition of knowledge. However, despite these shifts in thinking about education and the process of schooling, there remains evidence that national education systems continue to experience lingering problems of under achievement, especially of marginalised students. An underpinning question in this article is to ask what should the key questions for research in the context of ‘twenty-first century learning’ be. It suggests that these questions arise from the knowledge—competencies nexus. Does the interest in competencies devalue or undermine knowledge? Does a social constructivist paradigm necessarily dismantle disciplinary knowledge? What is the relationship between knowledge and improving the life chances for the marginalised? Against a critical background discussion of ‘twenty-first century learning’, these questions are addressed by considering and synthesising three perspectives on knowledge (‘emergentist’, ‘social realist’, and ‘futures focused’) in relation to their particular critique of education, what they say about knowledge, and the bearing this interpretation has on how they view pedagogy and curriculum. Some critical considerations point out additional questions for education research, from a critical perspective, in the coming years of the twenty-first century.

The Role of Trust in Reflective Practice.

Abstract Trust, as a philosophical concept in education, seems largely taken for granted, either because it is embedded in other discourses, or is self-evidently assumed to be one on which there is general agreement and understanding. Its associated notions, such as confidence and belief, have counters in such concepts as disappointment and betrayal. These various notions come to the fore in interpersonal relations that require openness and self-critique. Critically reflective practice in professional teaching contexts is one such example, where openness means that people involved may experience vulnerability. I will argue that the development of critically reflective practice is impossible in the absence of trust, and will take the position that trust requires the trustor to be vulnerable to betrayal. I draw on some findings of an ongoing research study in a selection of New Zealand schools, during which I have found that many participants attempt to connect reflective practice to appraisal, a move which, in light of what I present in relation to trust, I argue should be resisted.

Intro to ACCESS special issue: Modern learning environments

This Special Issue was inspired by the increasing emergence within educational institutions, such as schools and universities, of large, flexible spaces whose design is underpinned by cutting-edge principles and technologies. We, the editors, come variously from backgrounds in design (Jackson) and education (Benade), and see great potential in theorising at the intersection of building design, pedagogy and educational policy. The development of flexible learning spaces (known severally, for example, as ‘Modern Learning Environments’, ‘Innovative Learning Environments’ ‘Flexible Learning Environments’ and ‘New Generation Learning Spaces’) can be traced, we suggest, not only to design creativity, but also to the desire by governments to influence educational outcomes. The displacement of traditional classrooms by large, ergonomically furnished open spaces that encourage flexible movement and collaboration, also presuppose multifarious approaches to teaching and learning, calling on teachers to work in teams and to deprivatise their practice in spaces that are transparent and porous. Education policy-makers contend these approaches are in the service of the development of skills and dispositions suited to the unpredictability of the twenty-first century knowledge economy (Ministry of Education, 2011; Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development [OECD], 2006, 2013). Thus, governmental intent to control educational practices are evident in moves to establish modern learning environments (MLE) in schools and places of higher education. Such moves raise critical questions relating to their origin and the deeper underlying relationship between conception, design intention, spatial practice and competing discourses articulating particular ways of designing education facilities. As a provocation for this Special Issue, we called on the view of schools’ architect, Prakash Nair (2011), who proposed that the classroom is obsolete, and that standard, formal or traditional single-cell classrooms should be substituted with MLEs. Nair’s proposed design principles embody the twenty-first century worker, the self-directed, ‘critical thinker’ and collaborator who can work in a globally connected, technologically rich environment. The single-cell classroom is ‘obsolete’ precisely because it does not emulate the twenty-first century workplace, whereas the MLE does. The MLE, as defined by Nair, is an instance of what Henri Lefebvre termed ‘the representations of space’. This is ‘conceptualised space, the space of scientists, planners, urbanists, technocratic subdividers and social engineers ... all of whom identify what is lived and what is perceived with what is conceived’ (1991, p. 38). The authors of this Special Issue were asked to consider whether these non-traditional spaces facilitate the development of twenty-first century learning. Is there an implicit or explicit spatial model given in educational documents correlated with new models for pedagogy? How do we recognise relations between the discursive spaces of official documents, the institutional spaces of their agency and the lived spaces of their actualisation? What is the ideology of space, and what are the discourses it