Inspire How practitioner-led research

enhances teaching and learning at ACS International Schools

Volume ! June 2018

2 | Developing aural literacy How does the use of alternative musical prompts improve middle and high school students’ aural literacy?

9 | Co-teaching Reading

How does the use of co-teaching strategies affect 2nd graders’ Reading achievement, engagement and enjoyment??

19 | Leading whole school sustainability How does professional development, aimed at building school leaders knowledge, and understanding of learning for sustainability, contribute to the skills and confidence needed to cultivate and embed a whole school approach?

27 | Assessing skills and dispositions How does the use of Tessera personalized feedback reports contribute to 8th graders’ development of skills and dispositions key to middle to high school transition?

36 | Assessing technology’s role How do courses that build knowledge, understanding and skills about ICT software and applications prepare 6th graders to use technology resources to curate their own learning?

42 | Engaging with EAL students’ L1 How does the use of L1 texts, alongside English language texts, improve middle school EAL students’ reading comprehension and class participation?

51 | Understanding teacher transition What are the transition experiences encountered by educators in international schools?

Contributors Tasha Arnold, Tania Asif, Simon Cook, Margaret Dean, Nancy Hernandez, Chris Hupp, Shelly McClanahan, Kristie Sheard, Research support provided by Catherine Copeland, Heather Francis, Liz Jackson, Elizabeth Osgood-Campbell Editors Ben Hren, Latifa Hassanali The Centre for Inspiring Minds Part of ACS International Schools July 2018

When the ACS International Schools Board of Directors first proposed the Centre for Inspiring Minds in 2012, they hoped that it would become a centre of innovation that would inspire both our own and the wider international school community. At our May 2018 Celebration of Learning, this year’s project leader presentations, provided compelling evidence that we are more relevant than ever when it comes to nurturing inspirational, research-informed innovation. In celebration of CIM’s sixth anniversary, we would like to share six things about the work of the Centre for Inspiring Minds that you may not know.

1. Since 2013, CIM has supported teachers investigating 46 different research questions.

2. These practitioner-led action research projects have involved more than 180 project leaders and project team members from across our four schools.

3. CIM has provided professional learning experiences for more than 1,800 workshop and course participants over the past four years.

4. Last year, CIM earned recognition from the UK-based National Foundation for Educational Research for our extended level of research engagement.

5. This year, CIM has supported three ACS-wide explorations focusing on: service learning, learning for sustainability and global language communities.

6. And in June 2018, CIM hosted its first Summer Institute. The two-day event brought together educators from across our schools for a deep dive into the theory and practice of nurturing multiple language literacies in all our classrooms.

‘At six,’ The Centre for Inspiring Minds is providing a forum, where our highly effective educators are supported in their pursuit of learning, aimed at improving student learning outcomes and advancing the school’s vision. This third edition of Inspire showcases the work of seven of our recent project teams. As you read about their work, I encourage you to think about how their professional interests and experiences are similar to yours, as well as how they are different. We hope that, like us, you too are inspired to make a difference. Ben Hren Head of Centre Latifa Hassanali Programme Manager

" " " page 1

How does the use of non-prescriptive musical prompts contribute to middle and high school student musicians’ aural literacy? Developing aural literacy Simon Cook, Project Leader

The idea for this CIM project sprang from the researcher’s personal musical journey, both as a learner and a teacher. Musicians might be roughly divided into two categories. Some are fluent readers, but struggle with playing by ear and improvisation. Others are comfortable playing by ear and improvising, but really struggle with notation and sight-reading. The traditional classical training the researcher had received as a child placed him very firmly in the first camp, with musical notation as the primary focus. He clearly remembers his first piano lesson when he was six or seven. He learned that “bricks and squiggly worms” are rests, while the “tadpoles” are notes. Over the next several years, he learned how to read music and became a voracious and fluent sight-reader. In secondary school, he achieved excellent marks on two instruments, was playing concertos with the school orchestra, knew lots of musical literature and felt pretty smug. The researcher spent his gap year studying at the Royal Academy of Music, where he was shocked out of complacency by his new keyboard harmony teacher. He was reasonably adept at harmonizing written melodies, and realizing figured bass lines, which is what he thought the keyboard harmony class was about. His new teacher began the first lesson by saying, “Play something by ear – Happy Birthday or God Save the Queen – it doesn’t

matter what.” The researcher could barely stumble through either of these tunes. Despite the thousands of hours he had spent at the piano, he had never seriously attempted to play music without notation and was quite unable to do so. He could hear the sounds in his head, but somehow his thorough classical training had never taught him the skill of actually playing simple pieces by ear. Once again, he learned the meaning of abject failure and shame. From around this time the researcher also remembers non-musician friends being surprised that he was unable to play much on the piano unless he had sheet music to read, despite supposedly being an accomplished player. It is quite strange that for many classically trained musicians, ‘the music’ has come to mean the notation, and not the sound. Music teachers aim to develop all-round musicianship, fostering both reading and aural skills. They recognize that students learn language by learning to speak before learning to read and write, but still need to learn to read and write. To say that sound should precede symbols in learning music is not to say we should do without notation. In working with large ensembles, notation is of utmost importance, but it is not indispensable. In this CIM project, the researcher investigated whether ear playing, and open-ended musical prompts such as lead sheets, might be useful ways to enhance what students learn in ensembles, and lift the music off the page.

Introduction Ethnomusicologists offer music educators a wider perspective on how music is learned across different cultures. In looking at what different musical cultures can teach educators about music education, Campbell argues for greater emphasis on “aural skills and creative musical expression.” The question of whether symbols should precede sound, or sound precede symbols, has long preoccupied music educators. McPherson and Gabrielsson (2002) write:

“One of the most contentious issues in music pedagogy concerns when and how to introduce notation to a beginning instrumentalist. Most current teaching introduces musical notation very early in the process, perhaps because many teachers believe that beginners who are taught by ear will never reach the same level of reading proficiency as children who are introduced to notation from their earliest lessons. In contrast, proponents of the sound before sign approach argue that children will have difficulty learning to read notation unless their musical knowledge is sufficiently developed for them to be able to relate the sound of what they can already play with the symbols used to represent them.”

James Mainwaring, who worked from the 1930s to the 1950s, was one of the first researchers to write about the cognition behind music learning, and to advance the importance of playing by ear. McPherson and Gabrielsson (2002) provide a useful summary of Mainwaring’s views:

“His work. . . explicitly stated that students should “proceed from sound to symbol, not from symbol to sound.” It would seem this advice runs contrary to the teaching practice of today, in which beginning instrumentalists are given elementary method books from the outset and taught to play from their pages. . . At the heart of Mainwaring’s concept of musicianship is the capacity of being able to “think in sound”, which occurs when a musician is able to produce the mentally imagined sound, whether by playing by ear, improvising, or reading from musical notation. When reading musical notation, “thinking in sound” involves an ability to inwardly hear and comprehend notation separately from the act of performance. [Mainwaring made] an important distinction between seeing the musical notation and responding mechanically to produce the notated sound (i.e., working from symbol to action to sound), in contrast to seeing the musical notation and being able to hear the notation inwardly before reproducing it on an instrument (i.e., working from symbol to sound to action). The former method Mainwaring (1951) is believed to be typical of most instrumental teaching practice. However, it was the latter way of working that he advocated as the most efficient and effective means for developing a young player’s overall musicianship.”

Priest (1989) observes that nearly all formal instrumental teaching methods rely on notation. Ear playing is undervalued, despite offering the means to achieve many of the aims of music education, such as sight-reading. He argues that playing instruments by ear need not be instead of learning to read notation.

" " " page 3

Playing from notation, however, should never happen without the consciousness of the aural image evoked by notation. So, playing by ear can be said to be the basis of all musical playing. Whether the music to be played is heard inwardly from memory or from notation, or heard externally (live or recorded), the playing is by ear. In 1975 Edwin Gordon coined the term “audiation” to refer to the inner hearing that underlies musicianship. His aphorisms include:

• “Imitation is analogous to using tracing paper to draw a picture. Audiating and singing a song are analogous to visualizing and then drawing a picture.” (Gordon, 1989).

• “Audiation is to music what thought is to language. . . Sound becomes music only though audiation, when, as with language, you translate the sounds in your mind to give them context.” (Gordon, 1999).

In recent decades, there has been a surge of scholarly interest in documenting the informal learning practices of ‘vernacular’ (i.e. folk, traditional, pop, rock, jazz and world) musicians. Bennett (1980) wrote a groundbreaking ethnography of rock music from the insider’s view, which stressed that playing rock is a learned rather than a taught skill. In Scandinavian countries researchers began to think seriously about the lessons to be learned from vernacular musicians. Lilliestam (1996) discusses strong and weak traditions of learning (i.e. formal and informal). Within orally transmitted music traditions he also distinguishes between vertical and horizontal learning:

“A typical feature of vertical teaching is that 'an older and more experienced bearer of the tradition teaches the music and the instrument' and this is common in folk music. The teaching of rock, on the other hand, is horizontal, which means that you develop together with your friends who are mostly in the same age as yourself. This means that you have to learn the form of the music at the same time as the skills are being anchored in one's fingers and body. The group has to, if it is going to work, learn to learn together.”

Björnberg (1993) discusses how time constraints caused students of popular music in higher education in Sweden to be over reliant on notated arrangements, which could prevent them learning to play ‘in the groove.’ He advocates an ideal balance between playing from notation and by ear, and concludes, “The open, informal and collective learning processes at work in the everyday practice of many popular styles differ in several respects from those of institutional education.” To what extent and how such ‘alternative’ learning processes can be used (and to what extent they are even necessary) in teaching popular music within music education institutions remains an urgent question. In Denmark, so-called ‘rhythmic improvisatory’ music academies were set up alongside the national conservatory and theatre schools, and scholars such as Straarup (1982) and Haastrup et al. (1982) considered these approaches the most appropriate pedagogical methods for teaching non-classical or vernacular music.

The research that has had the greatest impact on attitudes to informal learning and ear playing in recent years has been led by Lucy Green and her collaborators. Her seminal book “How Popular Musicians Learn” (Green, 2001) poses the following questions (summarized in the book’s abstract):

“Popular musicians acquire some or all of their skills and knowledge informally, outside school or university, and with little help from trained instrumental teachers. How do they go about this process? Despite the fact that popular music has recently entered formal music education, we have as yet a limited understanding of the learning practices adopted by its musicians. Nor do we know why so many popular musicians in the past turned away from music education, or how young popular musicians today are responding to it. Drawing on a series of interviews with musicians aged between fifteen and fifty, Lucy Green explores the nature of pop musicians' informal learning practices, attitudes and values, the extent to which these altered over the last forty years, and the experiences of the musicians in formal music education. Through a comparison of the characteristics of informal pop music learning with those of more formal music education, the book offers insights into how we might re-invigorate the musical involvement of the population. Could the creation of a teaching culture that recognizes and rewards aural imitation, improvisation and experimentation, as well as commitment and passion, encourage more people to make music?”

It is important to take a balanced view of ear playing and reading. No sensible commentator seeks to abolish notation, or deny the vital role that it plays in enabling musicians to create, preserve, access and recall vast quantities of very fine music. Despite its many shortcomings, conventional music notation is the only viable system we have. There have been many attempts to reform music notation, such as those listed in Gaare (1997). Like the vain attempts to purge English spelling of its illogicality, all attempts to introduce new systems of music notation are doomed to fail, because the system as it exists is so immovably entrenched. To read the literature review developed for this research project by Simon Cook, visit http://cim.acs-schools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Developing-aural-literacy-1.pdf Method The plan for introducing the use of lead sheets and playing by ear as teaching strategies did not involve replacing traditional music notation-based teaching strategies, but rather introducing these new strategies at points in the curriculum where they offered an opportunity to differentiate instruction and challenge and enhance students’ musical thinking and performance. Over the course of the second half of the school year, lead sheets and playing by ear were used in three sessions with the high school chamber orchestra, five sessions with the high school jazz band, and more frequently with the middle school (grades 6, 7 and 8) orchestra classes.

" " " page 5

Evaluation plan Video recordings were made of 14 middle school orchestra class sessions, and reviewed by the researcher as a reflective tool. All the middle and high school students who experienced the use of lead sheets or playing by ear teaching strategies were asked to complete a survey at the end of the school year. Twenty-seven student survey responses were recorded. Data The student survey collected self-reported data about their responses to traditional teaching strategies based on reading sheet music, and alternative teaching strategies that involved the use of lead sheets and playing by ear. For each teaching strategy, students rated the perceived level of difficulty, their enjoyment, and the quality of their performance arising from the teaching strategy. Self-reported student data regarding the level of difficulty or challenge presented by each of the teaching strategies indicate that roughly half of the respondents (51.9%) found learning music from sheet music, with each part written out, easy. The other half (48.1%) reported that they found it mostly easy. No data is available for respondents’ perceived level of difficulty when using lead sheets, but more than half (62.9%) of the respondents reported that learning to perform music by ear was difficult, while slightly more than a third (37.1%) found it easy, or mostly easy. Survey results of students’ self-reported levels of enjoyment associated with each of the teaching strategies indicate that almost all (96.3%) of the respondents enjoyed learning music from regular sheet music. Most (72.0%) of the respondents reported that learning music from lead sheets was enjoyable, but about a quarter of respondents (26.0%) did not find it enjoyable. Finally, most (66.6%) of the respondents reported that learning to perform music by ear was enjoyable, but slightly more than a third (33.3%) of respondents did not find it enjoyable. Survey respondents were also asked to rate the quality or their performance arising form each of the three teaching strategies. All respondents reported that their performance, when performing music from regular sheet music was good (62.9%) or superior (47.1%). Similarly, all respondents reported that their performance, when performing music from lead sheets was good (72.0%) or superior (28.0%). However, only two-thirds of respondents reported that their performance, when performing music by ear was good (56.2%) or superior (11.4%), while about one-third (32.4%) reported that their performance was fair or poor. Students also had the opportunity to record an open-ended response, sharing any other reactions to each teaching strategy. Respondents’ comments about learning to perform music by reading traditional sheet music suggested a certain level of comfort associated with this familiar music learning approach.

“The advantage of using regular sheet music is that you can learn your parts easily and quickly. A disadvantage is that you have to look at the music when you play, which can be distracting, unless of course you’ve learnt it by heart.”

Responses about learning to perform music by reading lead sheets noted both positive and negative aspects to this teaching strategy.

“An advantage of learning from a lead sheet is that you see all the parts everybody in the orchestra/group play. A disadvantage is that it can confuse you at times, since it’s not specifically written for you.”

Finally, respondents’ comments about learning to perform music by ear playing suggested that this less familiar approach, which shifts the focus from “reading to hearing” music, while more difficult had the potential to enhance performance.

“I really like how you have to think about the music more when you play it, instead of fingering things you read on a sheet.” “An advantage is that you’ve learnt it by heart, and you don’t have to be distracted by a sheet while performing on stage. A disadvantage is that it can be difficult to learn by ear, and very challenging.” “I think to play music by playing it by ear helps me to remember how each notes sounds and to get perfect pitch.”

Discussion Like all new teaching strategies, it takes time for students to develop familiarity with new approaches. For some students, like the researcher’s own childhood experience, the introduction of lead sheets and ear playing was bewildering and unsettling. For most who experienced initial discomfort or bewilderment, they now switch from one learning mode to another with confidence. When used in combination, these three teaching strategies can be highly complimentary, as they allow students with music learning differences to approach a new piece of music from their music learning strength. This kind of differentiation helps some students “hear the music” while helping others to better understand written notation. This is highly beneficial for ensemble playing where students have a range of performance competencies. It also reduces the need for detailed scoring for different parts and instruments, and enhances opportunities for individual musical expression and improvisation (based on hearing music, rather than reading music). As a rehearsal technique, it keeps everyone involved. Like all new unfamiliar teaching strategies, there is an initial productivity dip as some students need more time to respond to new approaches to music learning. This requires time, which is often scarce in a music programme where teaching and learning is driven by an ambitious performance schedule. Opportunities to perform for an audience are fundamental to music learning, but can challenge innovations that take time to be embedded. Conclusion The combined use of teaching strategies based on learning to perform music by reading traditional sheet music, by reading lead sheets and ear playing, offer a range of potential benefits to student learning and performance quality and experience.

" " " page 7

By introducing lead sheets alongside traditional sheet music, students with emerging music performance competencies can participate in quality ensemble playing by learning to perform a riff (ostinato) by looping, a repeating a simple chord progression, slowly at first and then with greater speed until the desired tempo is reached. This accommodates performance-based differentiation as more experienced musicians play the more complex and varied parts of the composition. For all students, these combined techniques provide a more holistic approach to music learning and ensemble playing. The appeal of lead sheets and ear playing to students who are still developing their sight reading skills cannot be underestimated, as successful ensemble playing may have the potential to enhance the persistence needed to drive a life-long passion for music learning and playing.

References

Gaare, M. 1997. Alternatives to Traditional Notation. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 83, No. 5 (Mar., 1997), pp. 17-23. Gaare, M. 1997. Alternatives to Traditional Notation. Music Educators Journal, Vol. 83, No. 5 (Mar., 1997), pp. 17-23. Gordon, Edwin E. 1989. Audiation, Imitation and Notation: Musical Thought And Thought About Music. American Music Teacher, Vol. 38, No. 5 (April/May 1989), pp. 15-17, 59. Gordon, Edwin E. 1999. All About Audiation And Music Aptitudes. Music Educators Journal 86, (2) 41-44. Green, L. 2001. How popular musicians learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. Routledge, London. Green, L. 2008. Music, Informal Learning and the School: A New Classroom Pedagogy. Routledge, London. Green, L. 2012. The Ear Playing Project: Adapting popular musicians' aural learning practices for the classical instrumental lesson: a work-in-progress report.

Green, L. 2014. Hear, Listen, Play!: How To Free Your Students' Aural, Improvisation, And Performance Skills. Oxford University Press. Haastrup, B., Hansen, I. B., Nielsen, P. C. and Simonsen, K. 1985. Rytmisk improvisatorisk musik (Rhythmic improvisatory music) (Copenhagen). Mainwaring, J. 1951. Psychological factors in the teaching of music: Part II: Applied musicianship. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 21(3), 199–123. McPherson, G., & Gabrielsson, A. 2002. From sound to sign. In R. Parncutt, & G. McPherson (Eds.), The science and psychology of musical performance: Creative strategies for music teaching and learning (pp. 99–115). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Straarup, 0. 1982. 'Popular music research: needs and uses in education', Popular Music Perspectives, ed. P. Tagg and D. Horn (Gothenburg and Exeter), pp. 246-248.

Reflection questions

! What do you think you know about this topic? " What questions do you have about this topic? # What will you do to further explore this topic?

Adapted from Think – Puzzle – Explore, a Visible Thinking Routine from Project Zero

Simon Cook is a Middle School Music Teacher at ACS Cobham International School. His project collaborators included Zoe Lees, Darryl Nel, Sue Graver and Pamela Poust

$

How does co-teaching affect grade 2 Reading achievement, engagement and enjoyment? Co-teaching Reading Margaret Dean and Nancy Hernandez, Project Co-Leaders

In April 2016, project co-leader, Nancy Hernandez attended the U.S.-based, Council for Exception Children’s Special Education Convention and Expo in St. Louis. There she attended a workshop about co-teaching. When she returned to ACS Doha International School, she presented information from the workshops to her lower school colleagues. The Grade 2 teaching team, led by the project co-leaders, recognised the potential benefits that co-teaching could offer.

Across the grade levels in the lower school, many children were receiving out-of-the-classroom support to accelerate their English language development. By providing this support in the classroom through co-teaching, the Grade 2 team hoped that students would continue to develop or even accelerate their English language development.

Introduction According to the academic literature, co-teaching is comprised of ‘two or more professionals delivering substantive instruction to a diverse, or blended group of students in a single physical space’ (Cook and Friend, 1995, p.2, as cited in Tremblay (2013) p. 251). It entails:

• two qualified teachers, often a general education teacher and a special education teacher;

• teaching that is delivered by both teachers; • a diverse group of students with a range of abilities (typically labeled “regular

education” and “special education” students); and • a shared classroom (Scruggs, Mastropieri and McDuffie, 2007).

Within the parameters of this definition, six different co-teaching models have been identified (Friend, Cook, Hurley-Chamberlain and Shamberger, 2010), each involving two teachers, one of which is typically a learning support specialist (a special education or English as an Additional Language teacher).

1 First, in support teaching or “one teach – one assist,” the general classroom teacher engages in whole classroom instruction while the learning support specialist or special education teacher acts as an assistant, tending to individual students with specific needs.

" " " page 9

2 Second, the “one teach – one observe” model entails one teacher delivering a lesson while the other collects behavioral or academic data on particular students or the class as a whole.

3 Third, during “alternative teaching,” one teacher addresses most of the group while the other teacher works with a small group of students to supplement their learning through such activities as remediation, pre-teaching, enrichment, or assessment.

4 In the fourth model of co-teaching – “parallel teaching” – the class is separated into two groups that are simultaneously taught the same material but in differentiated ways to meet the diverse needs of learners in the group and to increase student participation.

5 Fifth, during “station teaching,” students are divided into three groups and rotate through three different locations, each with a distinct curricular activity. Teachers instruct two of the stations, and students work collaboratively at the third.

6 Finally, “teaming” or “team teaching” in this context refers to whole group instruction that is shared simultaneously by co-teachers. In this scenario, team teachers may present different ways to solve a problem or opposing viewpoints in a debate.

Unfortunately, a number of studies have not documented the specific forms and frequency of co-teaching used in classrooms. To strengthen the research base on this topic, future projects can clarify which types of co-teaching are implemented and the length of time they are used (Embury & Kroeger, 2012). The effectiveness of co-teaching models is also difficult to ascertain because many studies have not measured the impact on student learning outcomes. Instead, a large number have addressed teacher perspectives on the experience, and recommendations for increasing the efficacy of co-teaching for the educators involved. When considering data that indicates improved learning outcomes, it is important to note which aspects of student achievement are being evaluated. To date, there is no standard measure of academic progress in co-teaching research. Rather, studies use a variety of assessments to evaluate academic achievement. Some reference teacher report cards while others rely on standardized test scores. Thus, co-teaching is typically associated with improvements in curriculum-based assessments, but not in standardized test scores. Limited studies, like those by Idol (2006) and Murawski (2006), reported that standardized test scores for students in co-taught elementary and secondary school classrooms did not increase. Limited evidence exists about the effect of co-teaching reading on student engagement and enjoyment. Goetz, Frenzel, Pekrun and Ludtke (2007) identify a number of emotions that typically arise in academic settings, including enjoyment, pride, anxiety, anger and boredom. These emotions are strongly connected to self-regulation and motivation, and therefore profoundly influence student engagement and achievement in school settings (Pekrum and Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2012). A combination of increased engagement and enjoyment emerged in the co-teaching research conducted by Paugh et al. (2007). Their study mentions anecdotal evidence of a

number of students who struggled with literacy and resisted any activity related to learning a language at the beginning of the school year, but who became consistently engaged with the learning processes in “Choice Time” as the year progressed. The authors also provided anecdotal evidence of some the children enjoying these literacy activities. In a similar vein, when asked about the benefits of using a literacy intervention called the “schoolwide enrichment model” in five elementary schools in the United States, more than 90% of the intervention teachers identified student enjoyment of and engagement in reading as outcomes (Reis, McCoach, Little, Muller and Kaniskan, 2011). As a side note, teachers also mentioned their own enjoyment of implementing a flexible model of differentiated instruction in their classrooms, rather than teaching standardized content the same way every day. In middle school co-taught classrooms, Rea, McLaughlin, and Walther-Thomas (2002) found less teacher-reported negative behaviors and increased attendance, which may be correlated with higher levels of student engagement with learning processes. To read the literature review, written for this research project by research consultant Elizabeth Osgood-Campbell, visit http://cim.acs-schools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Co-Teaching-Reading-FINAL.pdf Method For this action research project, the Grade 2 team (four homeroom teachers and one learning support specialist) used a co-teaching approach with two classes during the first half of the year, and with the other two classes during the second half of the year. The four Grade 2 classes were divided into two research cohorts. Both cohorts received the same number of co-taught lessons, but due to staffing limitations, co-teaching could only be used with half the students in the grade level at a time.

• Cohort 1 received co-taught, in-classroom Reading lessons, delivered by the classroom teacher and learning support specialist for an eight-week period during the first semester. The needs of students who would have typically left the class for separate instruction with the learning support specialist were addressed in the classroom through the use of co-teaching.

• Cohort 2 received co-taught, in-classroom Reading lessons, delivered by the classroom teacher and learning support specialist for an eight-week period during the second semester. As with the first cohort, the needs of students who would have typically left the class for separate instruction with the learning support specialist were addressed in the classroom through the use of co-teaching.

The limitations of this approach were recognised from the start. Specifically, it was not clear if co-teaching at the start of the year would provide a better foundation for subsequent learning, or if familiarity with the teachers and curriculum would provide a foundation for accelerated learning through co-teaching in the second part of the year. To understand when and how students were making progress, standardised Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) were administered at the start, mid-way through and at the end of the school year to all grade 2 students. This was the established testing cycle, and no additional standardised testing was used.

" " " page 11

A schedule for team meetings was established for the collaborative development of the unit plans and daily lesson plans. This included the units and lessons to be delivered by both the single classroom teacher (with the students who were not part of the co-teaching cohort) using traditional differentiation strategies, and by the co-teachers using co-teaching strategies. In addition, using formative data, the teachers also collaborated on the development of differentiated Reading lessons, which were the same for students in classrooms where co-teaching was taking place, as they were for students in classrooms led by a teacher working alone. Data collection included the following:

• For both cohorts, pre- and post-intervention data, including Measures of Academic Progress (MAP), the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT4), and Reading A-Z were used to establish reading levels and assess growth.

• In addition, student surveys and interviews were used to assess engagement and enjoyment for the intervention groups.

• Finally, teachers participating in co-teaching recorded student observation data and reflections.

Evaluation plan There were four key desired learner outcomes for this research project, and appropriate assessment methods and data collection tools were developed for each learner outcome.

• The first learner outcome was “learner engagement in literacy lessons.” This outcome was measured using qualitative observation inventories, student interviews and reflections, and teacher reflections.

• The second learner outcome was “learner enjoyment of reading.” This outcome was also measured using qualitative observation inventories, student interviews and reflections, and written teacher reflections.

• The third learner outcome was “learner challenge in literacy lessons.” Learner challenge refers to the extent to which each student, regardless of academic level or learning support need, was working at a level that offered an appropriate level of challenge. For this outcome, student interviews and reflections, review of lesson planning documents, and written teacher reflections were used.

• The fourth and final learner outcome was literacy growth and achievement. This outcome was concerned with academic growth, as well as the extent to which students achieved projected growth targets. This outcome considered discrete literacy skills, which included a number of measures assessed in a range of ways, including:

• Vocabulary acquisition and use, measured using MAP growth data and Reading A-Z assessments; and

• Word Reading and Sentence comprehension, measured using WRAT4 assessments.

Data To assess learner engagement, we used student interviews, and student and teacher reflections. From the student interviews, we learned that students were better able to identify what made them better readers, how they best learned how to read, and strategies that

proficient readers used to become fluent readers. Typical student responses reflected the perceived importance of: reading books on a daily basis, reading aloud to others, using pictures as cues, sounding out unfamiliar words, asking for help from an adult, and reading slowly to understand. Student reflections revealed that students in co-taught classes were better able to express what they learned and how they learned it. Self-reported student data suggests that 75% of the students participated in classroom discussions, and 80% reported that they asked questions during classroom discussions. The teacher reflections expressed how much easier it was to teach various concepts using the co-teaching model. They also suggested that through observing students with more purpose and focus, students were more engaged during co-taught lessons. When sharing highlights of co-taught lessons, the teachers recorded the following reflections.

“Students worked in partners to complete a Venn Diagram and focused on the similarities and differences of changes of everyday items outlined in the two different passages the partners had read. I was sure the students would not be able to hold the discussions necessary to complete the diagram, BUT I was amazed. The students blew me away! They were able to share and amalgamate the information necessary to complete the diagrams to a high standard. It was impressive to see them work together, sharing and comparing the information gathered from the non-fiction text.” “I would say the highlight of this lesson was when a more able student was paired with a less able student and the two were able to collaborate and completed the Venn diagram. This could be done only if both students understood the reading passage assigned to them.” “Seeing the students supported by the gradual release structure of the lesson was useful. They learned about the story elements and how to identify them as a whole class, working together and teaching each other in groups, and then completing the activity independently. I loved observing and overhearing the lower reading level group engaging in discussions about the different story elements in the book and teaching and helping each other complete the graphic organiser.” “Students engagement was remarkable in this lesson. When left on their own, it was so good to see that most students developed active engagement as a habit, regardless of their reading level.” “Students are beginning to apply the skills that they learned since the beginning of the co-teaching process. It is amazing to see how they have grown in terms of drawing inferences and conclusions and how they think outside the box. “

To assess learner enjoyment, we used student and teacher reflections. The students shared their thoughts about how they enjoyed reading during their lessons. Seventy-seven percent of the students reported that they enjoyed what they were doing in class.

" " " page 13

Here are some quotes from their reflections. • “I loved the way we learned.” • “I liked it so much. It was more fun than anything else we learned in my reading

lesson.” • “This was so fun and I want to do more.”

Teachers also observed that their students were enjoying the lessons being taught as well as the independent activities. The teachers believed that this increase of enjoyment was due to the student’s increased confidence.

“Most students enjoyed the activity that involved them finding their homophone partner. They also did an excellent job of using their knowledge to share the meanings of their word pairs.”

To measure whether the students were experiencing a comfortable level of challenge in their literacy activities, we looked at the various types of lessons planned and taught as well as co-teaching models used. An analysis of our lesson plans showed that over the course of 16 weeks, we taught 22 lessons that used a co-teaching model that supported differentiated instruction. Parallel teaching allowed us to use both heterogeneous ability grouping as well as homogeneous groups to help meet the specific needs of the various groups. Alternative teaching also allowed for the students to receive instruction at their level allowing for more support for our learning support students as well as extension and refinement for our higher ability students. Station teaching allowed a group of students to complete different tasks related to the same instructional objective at various stations. In every lesson, students’ engagement opportunities were planned; activities were either in groups or pairs or worked individually. Usually, reading skills are taught through direct instruction followed by guided practice and eventually, independent practice. The materials used for the individual activities were selected text from the student’s reading level or teacher-selected texts appropriate for specific reading levels. The effectiveness of the instruction was measured using student work. The teacher’s reflections on how these types of lessons supported the academic needs of the students was shared in their observations:

“In the tiered parallel teaching, it was great to see the bottom two groups able to identify elements of the short story given minimal support.” “When we split the group in two, and each read a book appropriate for their level, they were all able to make meaningful connections to the text. This helped support their understanding of change and causation.” “Lessons that are properly differentiated and taught by two teachers will likely develop reading skills, even with students who are receiving learning support services.”

“Students will experience success in their learning if provided with materials appropriate to their levels. I had worked with the low ability group, yet the majority were able to meet the expectation.”

There were a number of measures used to gather baseline data that would help determine the academic literacy growth targets and whether they were met. The WRAT (Wide Range Achievement Test) assessment was given three times during the study. It was then administered at the beginning, between cohorts and at the end of the intervention. The WRAT gave us individual student percentile rank scores in the Reading Composite, which is a combination of both Word Reading and Sentence Comprehension scores. The WRAT results showed that on average the students were functioning in the 57.5 percentile rank at the start of the year. The midterm average was 66.8 percentile rank and the final data point indicated that, on average, the students were in the 72.8 percentile. This shows a growth of 15.3 percentile points. Students in co-taught classes made remarkable growth in their percentile rank score when compared to the change of their scores when they were in solo-taught classes. Co-teaching is a practical approach to help students achieve their literacy growth targets. WRAT pre-test result showed that 37.14 % of the students were below 50th percentile while the post-test indicated that only 8.6 % are below. All Grade 2 classes had eight weeks of the co-teaching intervention when the post-test was administered. The Reading A to Z fluency assessment provided information about students’ reading levels. When determining the reading level, we not only looked at how fluently the student read, but their comprehension level as well. Looking at the number of reading levels that the students advanced during solo taught classes (in comparison to co-taught classes), we found that on average the students taught in co-taught classes advanced 2 reading levels more than those taught in solo taught classes. September running records showed that 71% of grade 2 students were reading below grade expectation, while the March running records shows that only 22.85% were below expectation. The Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Reading scores of the co-taught and solo -taught classes did not indicate any significant differences as a result of the co-teaching intervention. A general trend amongst four classes cannot be established. Reading assessment is subdivided into the following sub-tests: Literature and Informational, Language and Writing, Vocabulary Use and Function and Foundational skills. The table that follows shows that at the end of the school year, there was a decrease in the percentage of students who scored below grade level. There was an increase in the percentage of students performing both on grade level and above grade level. This shows that 80% of the students reached their growth targets although it could not be solely attributed to the co-teaching intervention.

" " " page 15

Student performance level Pre-test Post-test Below grade level 27.1% 20.0% At grade level 40.0% 45.7% Below grade level 32.9% 34.3% Discussion A number of anticipated and emergent factors contributed to the smooth implementation of the research plan. The project team’s enthusiasm for understanding how co-teaching could benefit student learning and collegial relationships was present from the start. Everyone involved was familiar with co-teaching as a concept and was open to exploring its practical applications. In addition, classroom teachers were eager to observe the teaching strategies the Learning Support Specialist used during the co-teaching sessions. For the classroom teachers and the learning support specialist, each co-taught lesson became an opportunity to observe another experienced practitioner at work (while also teaching themselves). For the Grade 2 team, this regular peer-to-peer learning opportunity offered unprecedented opportunities for peer-coaching and professional collaboration. Among the challenges faced by the research team was finding the time to collect, analyse and utilise the extensive formative data they were collecting. As a research project, the team had developed tools and strategies to collect data about desired outcomes using multiple data collection tools and methods. In cases where the team also designed the data collection methods – the student reflections and interviews, for example – the team identified the need to build in time to refine the prompts and questions in order to focus students’ responses. Collaborative lesson planning also presented significant challenges. With limited joint planning time, and an extensive list of topics to cover each week, curriculum planning fell primarily to the research project leaders, who shared plans with the other three teachers and solicited feedback. Key to successful lesson planning was the formative data that provided information about the challenge range that was needed to meet the students’ diverse learning needs in each lesson. Conclusion Based on the review of the literature about co-teaching reading in the primary grades and the experiences of the project leaders, the following are offered as possible steps that teachers may take when designing co-teaching strategies: 1. Establish administrative support in the forms of common planning time in co-teachers’ schedules as well as professional development training, when possible. 2. Select one or more co-teaching methods. Use a variety of co-teaching methods, based on the following considerations:

• the role of the classroom teacher • the role of the Learning Support Specialist or other co-teachers • the amount of time the method will be used • the fit of the method and the physical classroom environment

3. Establish and maintain balance in the teachers’ roles and responsibilities so that they function as equal partners in the classroom. 4. Determine the composition of student learning groups. To identify the range of learning needs in diverse classrooms, adapt curricula to meet those needs, and effectively deliver lessons to small groups. Co-teachers may:

• assess individual skill level through teacher-developed or standardized measures; • individualize/differentiate instruction.

Consider a combination of same skill and mixed skill groups. Heterogeneous groups offer the possibility of increased learning outcomes, as well as social skill development through peer support and mentoring activities. 5. Design and implement methods to co-assess student progress, including formative and summative evaluations. Consider the use of:

• standardized assessments of academic progress/achievement • teacher-developed assessments of academic progress • teacher-developed assessments of non-cognitive outcomes such as engagement,

enjoyment, cooperation, and a sense of belonging socially. 6. Recast literacy as a social process, with both social and learning benefits. Consider structuring mixed ability groups and using multisensory, art-based learning activities to increase student engagement and enjoyment, along with achievement in reading. As mentioned earlier, group size and composition, as well as opportunities for students to develop their own literacy strategies that involve learning together with classmates can reinforce the social benefits of learning. 7. Document the teacher experience. Plan time for teacher reflections on benefits and challenges associated with the co-teaching experiences. As the project team prepared to undertake a second cycle of action research over the next school year, extending the co-teaching to grade 3 and expanding the subject content to include Mathematics, they have revised the timetable to allow for more collaborative planning time. They will also focus their data collection on three tools – the WRAT, student reflection and teacher reflection – in addition to MAP, which is used with all Lower School students.

" " " page 17

References Cook, L. & Friend, M. (1995). Co-teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28(3), 1-16. Embury, D.C. & Kroeger, S.D. (2012). Let’s ask the kids: Consumer constructions of co-teaching. International Journal of Special Education, 27(2), 102-112. Friend, M., Cook, L., Hurley-Chamberlain, D., & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An illustration of the complexity of collaboration in special education. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 9-27. Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., Hall, N. C., & Lüdtke, O. (2007). Between- and within-domain relations of students' academic emotions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 715-733. Idol, L. (2006). Toward inclusion of special education students in general education: A program evaluation of eight schools. Remedial and Special Education, 27(2), 77–94. Murawski, W. (2006). Student outcomes in co-taught secondary English classes: How can we improve? Reading & Writing Quarterly, 22, 227–247.

Paugh, P., Carey, J., King-Jackson, V., & Russell, S. (2007). Negotiating the literacy block: Constructing spaces for critical literacy in a high-stakes setting. Language Arts, 85(1), 31-42. Pekrun R., Linnenbrink-Garcia L. (2012). Academic Emotions and Student Engagement In Christenson, S., Reschly, A., & Wylie, C. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 259-282). Boston, MA: Springer. Rea, P., McLaughlin, V. L., & Walther-Thomas, C. S. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children, 68, 203–222. Reis, S.M., McCoach, D.B., Little, C.A., Muller, L.M., & Kaniskan, R.B. (2011). The effects of differentiated instruction and enrichment pedagogy on reading achievement in five elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 462-501. Scruggs T. E., Mastropieri M. A., & McDuffie K. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73, 392–416. Tremblay, P. (2013). Comparative outcomes of two instructional models for students with learning disabilities: Inclusion with co-teaching and solo-taught special education. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 13(4), 251-258.

Reflection questions

! What did you read? " What do you think? # What will you wonder?

Adapted from See – Think – Wonder, a Visible Thinking Routine from Project Zero

Margaret Dean is a Grade 2 Teacher and Nancy Hernandez is a Lower School Learning Specialist at ACS Doha International School. Their project collaborators included Lisa Weatherhead, Cory Sadler, Jaceline McLean and David Furlow. $

How does involvement in a four-campus collaboration affect school leaders’ knowledge and understanding of whole school approaches to sustainability?

Leading whole school sustainability Chris Hupp, Project Leader

Leadership in sustainability, environmental education and interdisciplinary curriculum design form a significant part of researcher’s, professional path in education. Through this and earlier CIM projects, he has had the opportunity to pursue his interest in developing stewardship and service among students, as well as discovering ways of integrating ecological literacy and sustainability into the academic curriculum and daily life of the school. His first project with CIM grew directly out of his experience with a Grade 3 garden project and led to the development of the Outdoor Resources Advisory Committee (ORAC). This group meets regularly to plan and manage the use of the school’s ecological landscape, including both natural and cultivated areas. His next project led him to ask questions about how learning outside the classroom could be presented so that it was more accessible and attractive to classroom teachers. His work involved the development of trail maps, risk assessments, and teaching guides, which helped remove some perceived barriers to outdoor learning. It also

highlighted the need for work to embed outdoor learning in the curriculum. The following year, the researcher convinced his 3rd grade teaching team to take on a new CIM project, focusing on collaborative approaches to designing and delivering a place-based interdisciplinary unit of instruction that incorporated sustainability topics, and engaged learners with their immediate environment. His Masters research the following year helped him deepen his understanding of how to develop approaches to classroom teaching that cut-across the disciplines, that empowered students to lead their own learning, and ultimately engaged students in addressing authentic complex problems. In this most recent inquiry cycle, the researcher was interested in how staff members’ perceptions of sustainability challenges in their own practice, and their sense of self-efficacy in cultivating a sustainability culture, may provide learning opportunities for students to grow into caring contributors.

Introduction The term ‘sustainability’ has become widely used with significant variations in meaning, depending on who is using it and the context in which they are working. In this project report, it is interpreted as meaning ‘the ability for all people to live within the limits of the resources our planet can provide whilst maintaining the ability of the planet to provide for all the other organisms with which we share this planet now and into the future.’ Thus, sustainability includes both equity in access to environmental resources and social justice, as well as environmental protection and conservation. The social aspects include values,

" " " page 19

human rights and sustainable livelihoods. Sustainability is holistic, integrating all aspects of the way we live in the world and our complex interdependencies. Learning for Sustainability (LfS) encompasses both a body of knowledge and understandings and a set of skills and dispositions, which enables learners to understand the concept of sustainability and how their life choices affect the world’s sustainability in the short and long term. The teaching methods involved in LfS are numerous and highly varied. Diversity is a watchword in LfS and the greater the range of people and situations students encounter the better. Students themselves are key contributors to the learning process, having much to offer from their personal experiences and individual perspectives on the world. A central tenet of LfS is that it is life-long and offers opportunities for continuous improvement. There is no end state. There is always more to know and share and the capacity for critical thinking grows with life experience. LfS has grown out of earlier programmes of ‘education for sustainable development’ and the debates about how broad this should be, notably the work of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization – better known as UNESCO. A distinguishing feature of LfS is its reliance on systems thinking. Systems thinking is a way of looking at the world and its complex parts, their interconnections and their functions. As a systems-thinker, the first step when considering a problem or issue is to identify as many of the factors that affect it or are involved as possible, their connections and their levels of influence. This allows the approaches or solutions proposed to take into account the wider context around the apparent problem, often bringing other people, issues or factors into the process. By taking this approach, more thoughtful and useful solutions tend to be produced, and considerations that could prevent a successful outcome or catalyze a useful synergy are not overlooked. Schools that have taken a whole school approach to LfS have found this holistic integration enables a deeper, more coherent and authentic understanding of the implications of living and working sustainably. These schools have many of the attributes of other successful high performing schools.

• They are learning institutions where everyone is encouraged to learn together, including students, teachers, ancillary and support staff and the wider local community.

• Each member of the school community is respected and valued for what they bring to the school and their role in the school. Pupil voice is seen as important and is expected.

• These schools have wide networks of people and organizations that they work and share their learning with, locally, nationally and internationally. They are outward looking, seeking to collaborate with others.

• They are keen to learn from others and to share their own learning with others. This also links with their embracing of diversity; they seek the input of many voices and perspectives to enrich learning in their school (Gayford, 2010; Ofsted, 2009; Jackson, 2007).

Sustainability is not simply a passing environmental construct. Research suggests that the motivations of those working to achieve sustainability are underpinned by values that look

beyond self-interest, to valuing the lives of others and the world’s resources, both living and non-living (Crompton, 2010). Thus, learning for sustainability (LfS) is not just about transferring a body of knowledge, it concerns the development of reflective and critical learners, able to transform knowledge and values into action for change. This requires a transformative pedagogy (Sterling, 2001). When a school takes on a whole-school approach and philosophy, this includes building links and collaboration across the school and with the local community from which the students are drawn and within which the school sits (Gayford, 2009). This provides many opportunities for students to take action on issues related to sustainability. In the early stages of developing a whole-school approach, these actions can be more school-based, with students working with staff members outside the teaching body, such as the grounds staff, catering staff, and facilities managers (Gayford, 2009). As students become more confident in their understanding of sustainability issues they may choose to become active in addressing change in their local community. For example, students have sold their school grown produce in their local street markets, promoting healthy living. Others have appealed to local supermarkets to improve recycling and reduce plastic packaging. Some have spoken with local councilors about possible policy changes (Gayford, 2009; Education for Scotland: Foghlam Alba, 2014). Encouraging students to practice their skills in building a case for change, recruiting others to their cause, and negotiating with those who have the power to make the change will build their confidence in their capacity to both critique arguments and situations they disagree with and to do something about them. These are life-skills that they will be able to apply to make a difference beyond their days in the relatively protected environments of schools (Ofsted, 2009; Education for Scotland: Foghlam Alba, 2014). All of these activities can be short-lived and superficial if they are owned by a small group within the school (Ofsted, 2009). To make a real difference they need to be integrated into the taught curriculum, and more widely into the design and management of the school and its interactions with the wider community and world. School leaders committed to addressing sustainability within the context of the curriculum and school life have often employed models of leadership that focus on collaboration and teamwork. One study found that principals who employ such leadership models ensured that:

• Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) was an integral aspect of the schools’ vision statements and a highly visible characteristic of the schools and their communities

• Positive relationships with staff encouraged the staff to work as a close team to ensure that the schools’ vision was central to decision-making and action

• Leadership was distributed among classroom teachers and students, to initiate and drive ESD and build capacity

• ESD was fully integrated into the curriculum • Strong working partnerships had been developed both within the local community

and with schools abroad to introduce a global perspective

" " " page 21

• Time was provided for staff to develop and implement projects • Effective structures were in place to monitor and evaluate progress; and • Newly hired staff members were committed to the school’s vision (Pearson, 2009).

The model of leadership that seems best suited to foster sustainability is a distributed leadership model in which different work streams are led by different members of the school community. This uses the range of experience and expertise available within the school and also brings a variety of perspectives into planning and development of the school. It also helps with succession planning as it builds the leadership skills of others (Jackson, 2007). To read the literature review, written for this research project by research consultant Liz Jackson, visit http://cim.acs-schools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Leadership-and-Learning-for-Sustainability-FINAL.pdf Method The first task of the project was to develop guidance for addressing learning for sustainability across the school. Defining how the school’s commitments to environmental stewardship and global citizenship articulated in its vision, values, philosophy, and expected school-wide learning results would shape learning, school development and management, and community engagement was essential. This task was addressed through a participatory workshop, a Heads of Schools Committee consultation, and a school-wide consultation. At the first workshop, in September 2017, a group of sustainability leaders from two of the school’s UK campuses developed section headings for the draft guidelines document and recorded ideas under each section heading. The draft guidelines were shared with the members of the Heads of Schools Committee and then with the greater school community, eventually becoming a fairly polished sustainability guideline policy document (January 2018) which framed the project work that followed in the spring. In January 2018, a second participatory workshop was held to build on the guidelines. The aim of this work was to analyze current practice across our schools and work through a “problem and objective tree;’ protocols which allowed participants from each campus to set out goals and identify actions for using LfS to enhance learner outcomes and school environmental performance. The group developed six goals, which articulated the need for school leaders to empower students and teachers to engage in meaningful change. This second workshop also offered a data collection opportunity. Participant surveys were administered to the self-selected sustainability leaders who had come together for the workshop. This included teachers, facilities managers, administrators, and staff with responsibility for catering, grounds and facilities. The survey provided a baseline for understanding the knowledge and understandings, skills and dispositions of those who had stepped forward to champion sustainability at our schools. Another key aspect of this project was to enhance school leaders’ sustainability-related knowledge, understanding, skills, and dispositions so that they might become more confident and motivated to work collaboratively to manage and model sustainability practices.

To this end we engaged an external partner, Sustainability and Environmental Education (SEEd), to design and deliver bespoke training to build the capacity of our sustainability leaders to envision the change needed and engage others in the wider ACS community. In this “Future Citizens” workshop, participants explored powerful ways our organization could reinvent itself – from the taught curriculum, to developing grounds for biodiversity and science instruction, to creative and innovative activities aimed at energy use minimisation, food growing, and water harvesting. Evaluation plan Two data collection methods were used in this project.

• The first involved the design and implementation of a survey for those members of our school community with an existing interest in or experience with sustainability.

• The second took the form of semi-structured interviews with 10 potential sustainability leaders from across the ACS International Schools and Head Office.

Data An analysis of the data collected in the sustainability leader survey and semi-structured interviews reveal anecdotal evidence of general patterns of knowledge and understanding, as well as skills and dispositions needed for effective leadership of Learning for Sustainability. The data collected through both the survey and interviews of sustainability champions provided an informative snapshot of sustainability leadership across the ACS organization. These findings, while neither comprehensive nor conclusive, offer a general sense of progress toward Learning for Sustainability at ACS International Schools. When considering the issue of “knowledge and understandings,” we found that the respondents felt confident in their own awareness of sustainability issues within their own roles. These roles can be separated into three types: facilities, teaching, and education leadership.

• In most cases, leaders working in a facilities capacity expressed knowledge and understanding of issues related to “greening” and improving environmental performance such as recycling and waste minimisation, sustainable procurement, and energy and water conservation.

• While teaching staff often referred to “greening” initiatives, they tended primarily to consider opportunities to engage learners in educational aspects of sustainability. This has the added dimension of making connections across the curriculum as well as providing children with opportunities to increasingly expand their awareness of sustainability issues to broader and more meaningful contexts.

• Those in education leadership roles often referred to the importance of embedding sustainability into the curriculum and thinking about the relationship between sustainability and the broader vision of the school.

There were three themes that emerged from the responses of these different roles. The first of these centred around the importance of building a common thread or unifying model at ACS International Schools that might help to create a coherent, systematic approach to Learning for Sustainability. Several respondents noted that in such a large organization, clear commitment to sustainability and a defined leadership role would help to hold parts of the system together and give a unified vision of what the school wants to achieve.

" " " page 23

Closely related to this, the second common theme was that of the importance of sharing information and having clarity about the direction of the school in terms of sustainability. Several respondents mentioned the importance of transparency and sharing data about our environmental performance – activities like recycling rates and energy use – with students, parents and the wider community. The third theme focused on the importance of providing training and professional development to deepen school leaders’ and decision-makers’ knowledge and understanding of learning for sustainability. Throughout the responses there were some implications of systems thinking approaches to sustainability, though this was rarely spoken of overtly. The data did not reveal any clear patterns related to the social and economic implications of sustainability, though these were mentioned to varying degrees by a few respondents. The collected data also gave us a glimpse of the “skills and dispositions” of our sustainability leaders. There appeared to be varying degrees of skills necessary for developing sustainability at ACS International Schools, and these again seemed related to each respondent’s role or area of expertise.

• Facilities leaders felt confident in their ability to manage greening or resource conservation approaches.

• Teachers and educators expressed confidence in their skills for putting sustainability into practice in their own roles.

However, there were mixed responses in terms of how effectively they felt their roles would influence the larger organization. Most respondents felt supported in their roles to lead sustainability, although many noted that a lack of time and commitment to sustainability, and lack of empowerment or accountability of individuals in their roles, limited to opportunities to put skills into practice in meaningful ways. Interestingly, nearly all respondents felt supported by the organization in their sustainability leadership. More data is needed to understand why sustainability leaders may feel supported yet do not feel empowered to make changes or do not feel that sustainability is a priority across the organization. Evidence of necessary dispositions amongst sustainability leaders’ highlights the importance of individual passion for or interest in sustainability. Nearly all respondents reported a sense of personal agency or urgency around sustainable practices in their roles and/or their personal lives. To that end, many participants expressed that they felt that some kind of purposeful culture shift (change of world view or mindset, paradigm shift, perspective taking) amongst teachers, students, and staff was needed. Several respondents reported that they felt that students were the most apt or willing to take on this level of change, and that the classroom was the most important space for ensuring that this change happens. The responses did not reveal anything significant related to a culture of continuous improvement, although this seems to be implied by comments about developing and reflecting on the taught curriculum.

There were some suggestions that building relationships with partner schools outside organizations would be a significant element of sustainability leadership, though this also appeared to be less significant factor for sustainability leadership amongst respondents. Discussion This action research project was ambitious and optimistic in its approach to mobilising sustainability leaders from across the four ACS International Schools, in the hope that they would be inclined to establish a sustainability practitioner’s network. Participants responded with interest and enthusiasm, and the introduction of sustainability enthusiasts from other schools at two of the workshops stimulated unexpected conversations about the challenge of connectivity and systems thinking both within and across our schools. Our sustainability enthusiasts could all see how they could advance Learning for Sustainability within their roles, but recognised the challenges of working in a more joined-up way, even with colleagues on their same campus. The ongoing challenge identified my almost all participants was building a more holistic understanding of sustainability – even among educators. Just as in other schools, ACS International Schools benefits from teacher champions who focus on greening initiatives, addressing complex environmental topics in the curriculum, and outdoor learning. But connections among wide-ranging topics like economics, human psychology, social justice, consumer behaviour, global citizenship, and others, are often overlooked in the subject-based curriculum. In addition, like all other efforts to innovate in education, the time required to develop, assess and share new teaching strategies and practice is in short supply. This has been a major factor in the isolated development of sustainability practices, and one reason why successful teaching strategies have not been shared or scaled up. Conclusion It may feel from the preceding account that major changes are being asked of the school staff in taking on a whole-school approach to Learning for Sustainability. Rest assured that many education leaders and teachers are already working and thinking in ways that are sympathetic to this change. Teachers are delivering lessons using a wide range of resources and experiences. They often work in a facilitative, student-centered manner and make skillful use of questioning techniques to explore new ideas. The senior management are already working towards a distributed approach to the leadership of the whole school approach to Learning for Sustainability, with many members of the school leading aspects of the implementation of LfS throughout the school. Thus, the recommendations that follow are a reflection of key issues emerging from the literature. From their analysis of the experiences reported across 18 countries, Laurie et al (2016) identified three key requirements for successful LfS:

• Learning for sustainability needs to be transdisciplinary and delivered as a vertically integrated continuum from primary through secondary schooling [and into further and higher education]

• Professional development for teachers and school leaders needs to address both the broad body of knowledge needed to engage in systems thinking and complex

" " " page 25

problem-solving, and new ways of working together to maximize knowledge and skills available across the school; and

• School leaders need to be fully engaged to ensure that the school lives LfS holistically in all its school development, management, and procurement decision-making and action, and in its interactions with the wider school community and beyond.

References Crompton T., (2010) Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Cultural Values. Godalming, WWF-UK. Education for Scotland: Foghlam Alba, (2014) Conversations about learning for sustainability: Case studies of Scottish schools and early years centres to mark the conclusion of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014) Glasgow, Education for Scotland: Foghlam Alba. Gayford C., (2010) Learning for Sustainability in schools: Effective Pedagogy. Godalming: WWF-UK. Gayford C., (2009) Learning for Sustainability: From the pupils’ perspectives. Godalming: WWF-UK. Jackson E., (2007) Leading sustainable schools: what the research tells us. Nottingham: NCSL.

Laurie R., Nonoyama-Tarumi Y., McKeown R. and Hopkins C., (2016) Contributions of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) to Quality Education: A Synthesis of Research, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development 10:2 (2016): 226–242. OFSTED (2009) Education for Sustainable Development: improving schools improving lives. London: OFSTED. Pearson D., (2009) Effective Leadership of Whole-School Approaches to Education for Sustainability Development (ESD) in Secondary Schools in the United Kingdom and Germany Premier’s Energy. Australia Environmental Education Scholarship. Sterling S., (2011) Transformative Learning and Sustainability: sketching the conceptual ground Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, Issue 5, 2010-11.

Reflection questions

! What do you observe about the approach the research has taken? " What are the strengths or weaknesses of the research? # How might you research a similar question?

Chris Hupp is a Grade 3 Teacher and the Outdoor Learning Coordinator at ACS Cobham International School. His collaborators included Susan Nicoll, David Munro, Lilian Campos Vieira, Leslie Taylor, Malcolm Purnell, Anne Hollyfield, Patricia Shea, Suzanne McCluskey, and Michael Kent. $

How can the use of Tessera personalized feedback reports contribute to grade 8 students’ development of skills and dispositions key to middle to high school transition? Assessing skills and dispositions Kristie Sheard, Project Leader

As a teacher and Middle School leader, the researcher was aware of the work that our ACS Doha International School teachers were doing with standardized assessments of success skills, similar to those defined in the recently developed (June 2016) ACS International Schools expected school-wide learning results. When a new standardised assessment, called “Tessera,” was introduced in 2016, the researcher recognized that it had the potential

to provide a very different kind of formative student progress data. Grade 8 students, who are transitioning to high school, need feedback on their development of the skills they will rely on to be successful in high school and in life, and the decision was made to investigate the extent to which the standardised Tessera assessment could help provide formative data students could use to inform personal goals and plans for skill development.

Introduction This introduction is an edited excerpt from Roberts, Martin and Olaru (2015). Rosetta Stone for Non-cognitive Skills. Asia Society and ProExam, U.S.A.

A commitment to developing character, social and emotional skills, and 21st century competencies can be found in the mission statements of many schools across the globe (Stemler & Bebell, 2012), and in national policy statements worldwide (Torrente, Alimchandani, & Aber, 2015). In addition to delivering academic learning, schools proclaim their commitment to developing students to become life-long learners, skilful collaborators, moral individuals, confident and persistent problem-solvers, organized and conscientious leaders, innovative thinkers, and much more. These types of outcomes, however, are rarely intentionally inculcated through primary and secondary education teaching and learning. As a result, such skills are often fostered through informal means – as a by-product of good teaching or good parenting – or through non-formal programs, including extracurricular activities and programs organized by community-based organizations. This means that some students benefit from the opportunity to develop these skills, while others do not. In fact, they are as important predictors of success in school and careers as academic abilities, and thus essential for all students.

" " " page 27

At the same time, policymakers and employers around the world are realizing the mismatch between the outcomes promoted by their education systems and the skills required for work and life in the 21st century. Recognizing that more careful attention needs to be given to their place in primary and secondary educational practice, various organizations have identified as essential many of these types of skills in recent years. Work ethic, teamwork, oral communication, leadership, creativity, and life-long learning topped the list of items most sought after by employers in the US in a report commissioned by a consortium that included the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, Conference Board, Society for Human Resources, and Corporate Voices for Working Families (Casner-Lotto & Barrington, 2006). While also valued, cognitive skills ran a distant second. More alarmingly perhaps, the report also noted that non-cognitive skills were precisely the skills most often found lacking in new employees joining the workforce. The conclusion of research over the past two decades is clear and compelling: these traits matter. Research has shown that several of these traits are as important for academic performance as cognitive ability is, and that these traits positively predict performance, behaviour, and satisfaction in work life. Where once social and emotional learning appeared problematic, or at best, only relevant to early childhood and primary education, there now appears a solid evidentiary base showing it is not only plausible, but also credible, through secondary and even post-secondary education. In the context of fairly recent studies showing that personality can change over the lifespan, research suggests that non-cognitive factors could and should play a more pivotal role in educational policy and practice than hitherto realized. At the turn of the millennium, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21) launched its work with a long list of the skills that are now required for success in the 21st century. Then, recognizing the value of simplicity, P21 decided to put their focus on four, which they call the 4 C’s: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity (though “self-regulation” is something of an honorary fifth in their publications). Others have attempted to distil the essence of character, social and emotional skills, and 21st century competencies into a manageable few. For example, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) selected five “competency clusters”: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making. Tony Wagner’s (2010) bestseller, The Global Achievement Gap, highlights seven “Survival Skills”: problem- solving and critical thinking, collaboration across networks and leading by influence, agility and adaptability, initiative and entrepreneurship, e effective written and oral communication, accessing and analyzing information, and curiosity and imagination. Another bestseller, Paul Tough’s (2013) How Children Succeed champions grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character in its subtitle. Indeed, many, many different terms have been used by educators, practitioners, policy makers, and researchers.

It is no simple task for educators to narrow down [and] prioritize what is most important, and develop these skills in young people. A different approach is offered here. Rather than creating a new and original taxonomy, and instead of looking for something alliterative (the 4C’s, the Seven Survival Skills), our approach instead draws upon an already well-established taxonomy of personality traits, called the Big Five personality factors, from which can be drawn the set of non-cognitive attributes most significant for life and work. The Big Five factors [are a] set of constructs that are strongly differentiated, non-overlapping, and predictive of valued societal outcomes across domains of school, work, and leisure (Kyllonen, Lipnevich, Burrus, & Roberts, 2014; MacCann, Duckworth, & Roberts, 2009; Poropat, 2009; Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). They also have the benefit of being already demonstrated as universal across the lifespan (Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000; Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006) and relatively consistent across cultures (De Raad & Perugini, 2002; McCrae & Terracciano, 2005; Schmitt, Allik, McCrae, & Benet-Martinez, 2007). Scientific evidence documents that the Big Five factors are reliable when measured in a wide variety of ways and in differing contexts (Jackson, Wood, Bogg, Walton, Harms, & Roberts, 2010; Lipnevich, MacCann, & Roberts, 2013; McCrae & Terracciano, 2005; Schmitt et al., 2007). The Big Five factors, were not “invented” by researchers combing society, the economy, and citizenship to determine which traits are most important, and then determining how they might be best labelled and differentiated. Rather they were in effect “discovered” through the identification and analysis of 4,500 words, found in Webster’s New International Dictionary, that describe stable personal traits. These analyses consistently yielded five factors that were labelled: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism/emotional stability, and intellect (which was later relabelled openness).

• Extraversion describes a person’s likelihood to engage in social interaction, but also a propensity towards sensation seeking. Less extraverted persons are more reserved and less socially dominant.

• Like extraversion, agreeableness is a trait primarily influencing interaction with others. A very agreeable person may be described as friendly, helpful, and empathic. A person with low agreeableness is considered to be cold and unfriendly, but certainly not naive.

• Conscientiousness primarily describes achievement-related traits. A person high in conscientiousness can be described as very organized and diligent.

• Emotional stability, which is often referred to by its opposite pole neuroticism, describes a person’s capability to cope with stressful situations and emotions. Low emotional stability (i.e., neuroticism) is often accompanied by feeling depressed, stressed, anxious, or worried. Highly emotional stable persons, however, also tend to be less cautious.

• Openness is somewhat related to cognitive ability (Ackerman & Heggestad, 1997) and can best be described as a person’s interest in, and acceptance of, “new” cultures, ideas, values, artistic endeavours, and even feelings. The opposite pole of openness is thought to comprise conservatism.

" " " page 29

In contrast to centuries of personality research and models, the Big Five emerged from a statistical analysis of natural language, instead of theoretical assumptions or causal explanations. Even though they were first discovered in the English language, replication studies, either involving the full psycholexical approach (De Raad, 2000), or applying translations of established Big Five personality inventories, resulted in the same five factors (McCrae & Terracciano, 2005; Schmitt et al., 2007). Indeed, this research has proven the Big Five’s universality in the vast majority of countries, cultures, and languages across the world. In short, the Big Five plays an important role in human nature, independent of the environment writ large. There is another aspect of the Big Five model that should not go unnoticed by educators. Until recently it was thought that personality was “set in stone” (McCrae & Costa, 1994). More recently, two meta-analyses have questioned this assertion and suggest instead that personality develops over a lifespan. In the rest of these studies, Roberts and Del Vecchio (2000) examined 152 longitudinal studies to show that the rank-order consistency of personality was fairly moderate: .31 in childhood, .54 in college, .64 by age 30, and .74 by ages 50-70 (values much closer to one would have supported the idea of personality being immutable). In a follow- up study, Roberts et al. (2006) examined mean-level change in personality over a lifespan. They found that individuals became more socially dominant (i.e., extraverted), conscientious, agreeable, and emotionally stable throughout a lifespan, particularly in adolescence and early adulthood. The effects were not slight: Change over a lifespan was up to a full standard deviation. There are two important corollaries related to this rather compelling research showing that personality can change. The first is that it frees up the potential for educational interventions: Where once social and emotional learning appeared problematic, or at best, only relevant to early childhood and primary education, there now appears a solid evidentiary base showing it is not only plausible, but also credible through secondary and even post-secondary education. Coupled with their high valuation by educators and employers alike, this research suggests that non-cognitive factors could and should play a more pivotal role in educational policy and practice than hitherto realized. Put simply, there is a very high potential payoff from investment in the development of non-cognitive skills. Summarizing the results of over seventy- five studies, and especially those afterschool programs where social and emotional skills are inculcated, Durlak, Weissberg, and Pachan (2010) note that these non-formal learning programs had an overall positive and statistically significant impact on the youth who participated. These changes did not occur in all domains, but rather in three main areas: feelings and attitudes, indicators of behavioural adjustment, and school performance. In particular, there were significant increases in youths’ self-perceptions, bonding to school, positive social behaviours, school grades, and achievement test scores. Even if our focus is exclusively upon academic achievement, supporting the development of a student’s conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability, openness, and extraversion is of enormous importance.

To read this paper in its entirety, visit https://asiasociety.org/files/A_Rosetta_Stone_for_Noncognitive_Skills.pdf Method This project involved the introduction and use of a new, computer-based standardised assessment for measuring Grade 8 students’ non-cognitive development of six skills associated with development of stable personality traits and linked with academic and workplace success. The assessment was used with all Grade 8 students across the four ACS International Schools and this required the development of formal briefing resources for teachers, Grade 8 students and their parents. The materials were used to deliver information sessions to teachers and students at all four schools, and to inform parental consent for anonymised student data to be used in publications and presentations arising from this work.. Following the information session, a pre-intervention survey was administered to Grade 8 teachers and grade 8 students. The purpose of the survey was to better understand the extent to which everyone understood the six skills. For students, we were also interested in their self-perceived current level of performance. For teachers, we were interested in the extent to which they understood how to teach and assess the skills and the extent to which they had the resources to do this. Although an early autumn testing period was desired, Tessera was administered just prior to the December break, following the late completion of MAP testing (Measures of Academic Progress) at the schools. The late testing window resulted in a delay in results distribution, which took place when students returned to school in January. Students received their results during a session in which they received instruction in how to read and interpret their individual results, and how to use the information to set individual goals. Parents at one school were asked to complete a questionnaire to help understand the extent to which they understood the six skills and to also understand the extent to which parents provided opportunities for their children to practice these skills outside school, through extra-curricular or family activities. Along with individual student reports, middle school teachers received copies of the ACT Tessera Teacher Playbook (2017), which features ideas and directions more than 50 activities that can be used to discuss and develop the six skills. Teachers were encouraged to familiarise themselves with the results of the students in their advisory groups and to consider the use of activities that could help their group further develop the six skills, but there was no requirement for this. The plan was to administer Tessera to the Grade 8 students at the end of the year, and to repeat the use of the student and teacher surveys. However, as ACT worked to achieve compliance with the newly introduced EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the U.S.-based company was not able to provide the test for students in the EU. This meant that end-of-year testing and summative data collection was not possible.

" " " page 31

ACT expect to be in full GDPR compliance by September 2018, and use of Tessera with the rising Grade 9 students, as well as the new cohort of Grade 8 students is planned for the next school year. Evaluation plan Four data collection tools were used to develop a rich picture of performance and practice related to the development of the six Tessera skills: composure skills and resilience, curiosity skills and ingenuity, leadership skills and communication, organization skills and responsibility, teamwork skills and cooperation, and tenacity skills and grit. The first data collection tool was the use of the Tessera standardized assessment. Tessera was administered to 275 Grade 8 students across the four ACS International Schools, in November and December 2017. The Tessera results included a raw score for each of the six skills, which we turned into a percentage for data interpretation, and a “star rating.” The star ratings ranged from 1 – 3 and indicated whether the student was below average in the skill (bottom 16%), about average (similar to students in the 17th through 83rd percentile), or above average (top 16%), compared to all other students in the test sample of the same age. The second data collection tool was a pre-Tessera student survey, which was completed by 226 Grade 8 students (82%) across the four schools, prior to completing the Tessera assessment. The survey asked students to self-asses both their understanding and performance of the six Tessera skills. The data used in this analysis focused on the percentage of students who self-rated their current level of performance of each of the six skills as “good” or “very good.” The third data collection tool was a pre-Tessera teacher survey, which was completed by 48 Grade 8 teachers from across the four schools prior to the use of the Tessera assessment with their students. The survey asked teachers to self-assess their understanding of how to teach and assess each of the six skills, and the extent to which they had the resources to do this. The data used in the analysis focused on the percentage of teachers who self-reported that they had the understandings and resources they needed to address the six skills in their Grade 8 classes or extra-curricular activities. The fourth data collection tool was a parent survey, which was completed by 43 of our parents at one of the schools, following discussions with their child about their Tessera results. The survey asked parents to self-report the frequency of opportunities their children had to practice the six Tessera skills outside school. The data used in the analysis focused on the percentage of parents who reported that their children had “frequent” or “occasional” opportunities to practice the skills. All these data sources were either formative or diagnostic. The intention was to use the data arising from these sources to inform the content and activities in the Grade 8 advisory programme. As there was no directive or requirement for this, no data was collected to provide information about the nature and frequency of teaching that occurred, that was informed by this data.

Although originally planned, there was also no post-intervention data collected for the project, as the Tessera assessment was not available for reasons already noted. The use of Tessera by the current Grade 8 students at the start of Grade 9 will provide the growth measure that had been planned for this research cycle. That data was not available at the time of this report. Data The table below highlights data from each of the four data sources described in the preceding section. For each data source, the average percentage or percent responses for each of the six Tessera skills is displayed. In addition, the data points from each data source have been ranked, suggesting skills that are “most developed” (darkest tan) and those skills that offer the “most opportunity for development” (lightest tan).

Teamwork skills and

cooperation

Leadership skills and

communication

Organization skills and

responsibility

Tenacity skills and

grit

Composure skills and resilience

Curiosity skills and ingenuity

Average Tessera

student score

Rank

77.4%

1

72.2%

2

69.9%

3

68.9%

4

67.9%

5

65.7%

6 Student survey (good or very

good self-rating) Rank

92.1%

1

80.5%

3

79.3%

5

83.5%

2

75.2%

6

79.9%

4 Teacher survey

(understand how to teach

and have access

resources) Rank

78.5%

2

76.4%

3

82.0%

1

63.7%

5

52.8%

6

70.0%

4 Parent survey

(provide frequent or occasional

opportunities outside school)

Rank

88.4%

1.5

83.7%

3

88.4%

1.5

69.8%

6

74.5%

4

72.1%

5

Color key

Most developed (by rank)

Most opportunity for development (by rank)

The Tessera data suggests that across the six skills, the majority of our Grade 8 students, are about average (between the 17th and 83rd percentile), compared to other students their age who also completed the Tessera assessment (mostly in U.S-based independent schools). When we compare the Tessera data to the student, teacher and parent surveys, there is a high level of consistency regarding the Tessera skills that are most developed and those that offer the most opportunity for development.

• Teamwork skills and cooperation, leadership skills and communication, and organization skills and responsibility are most developed.

" " " page 33

• Tenacity skills and grit, composure skills and resilience, and curiosity skills and ingenuity offer the most opportunity for development.

These results resonate with wider school discussions that have been informed by anecdotal and additional student survey data about the need to improve our efforts to support student’s social, emotional and physical well-being. Discussion Most of the activities associated with the beginning stages of this project went very well. All the schools provided time in division-level meetings for teacher briefings, and the materials developed for both teacher and student briefings worked well. As a research project, parents were briefed through an information sheet that accompanied the parental consent forms. Administration of the pre-Tessera student and teacher surveys was facilitated by the use of Goggle forms and the opportunity for students and teachers to compete the surveys using a range of devices (including iPads and laptops). Administration of the Tessera assessment was also successful, with students using unique individual log-ins provided by Tessera. Students were able to complete the assessment in multiple sittings in school or at home. Individual student result reports were provided by ACT within two weeks, following the closing of the test window by the project leader. Advisory teachers successfully used the materials developed by the project team to explain to students how to read and interpret their individual Tessera results and how to use this information to set individual development goals for each of the six Tessera skills. As noted earlier, the late start of this project meant that the formative assessment and goal setting planned for the start of the year did not take place until mid-year. The subsequent withdraw of the Tessera assessment from its European Union market, coinciding with the activation of the GDPR, meant that the planned summative data collection, planned for the end of the current school year, had to be deferred to the start of the next school year. While this was initially perceived as a problem, an annual use of Tessera may provide adequate information for planning data-informed interventions and understanding student growth, Conclusion The introduction of the Tessera assessment stimulated productive conversations among Grade 8 students, their teachers and their parents regarding the development of these skills, linked to success at school and in life. The formative, baseline data provided by this year-long research project, along with data from September 2018’s use of the Tessera assessment with the Grade 8 and Grade 9 students should be used to inform the Grade 8 and Grade 9 advisory programmes. This data collection will also provide a growth measure for returning Grade 8 students.

References Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. New York, NY: e Conference Board. De Raad, B. (2000). The Big Five Personality Factors: The psycholexical approach to personality. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers. De Raad, B., & Perugini, M. (Eds). (2002). Big five assessment. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of After-School Programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 294-309. Jackson, J. J., Wood, D., Bogg, T., Walton, K. E., Harms, P. D., & Roberts, B. W. (2010). What do conscientious people do? Development and validation of the Behavioural Indicators of Conscientiousness (BIC). Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 501-511. Kyllonen, P. C., Lipnevich, A. A., Burrus, J., & Roberts, R. D. (2014). Personality, motivation, and college readiness: A prospectus for assessment and development. Educational Testing Service Research Report No: RR-13- 14. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Lipnevich, A. A., MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (2013). Assessing non-cognitive constructs in education: A review of traditional and innovative approaches. In D. H. Saklofske, C. B. Reynolds, & V. L. Schwean (Eds.), Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment. (pp. 750-772). Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press. MacCann, C., Duckworth, A., & Roberts, R. D. (2009). Identifying the major facets of Conscientiousness in high school students and their relationships with valued educational outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 451-458. McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer’s perspective: data

from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 547. National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322-338. Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3-25. Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1-25. Schmitt, D., Allik, J., McCrae, R. R., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2007). The geographic distribution of Big Five personality traits: Patterns and pro les of human self–description across 56 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 173-212. Stemler, S. E., & Bebell, D. (2012). The school mission statement: Values, goals, and identities in American education. New York: Taylor and Francis. Torrente, C., Alimchandani, A., & Aber, L. (Forthcoming 2015). International perspectives on social-emotional learning. In J. Durlak, C. Domitrovich, R. Weissberg, & T. Gullotta (Eds.), Handbook of Social Emotional Learning. New York: e Guilford Press. Tough, P. (2013). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Wagner, T. (2010). The Global Achievement Gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival skills our children need–and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books.

Reflection questions

! Before reading about this research, what did you think about this topic? " What do you think about this topic now?

Adapted from I used to think, but now I think, a Visible Thinking Routine from Project Zero

Kristis Sheard is the Assistant Middle School Principal at ACS Cobham International School. Her collaborators included Emilie Claviere-Kiss, Elhussein Elsharif, David Kinsella, Peter Hosier, Randi Burns and David Furlow.

$

" " " page 35

How do ICT courses prepare 6th graders to use technology to curate, self-direct and self-assess their own learning? Assessing technology impact Tania Asif, Project Leader

As an Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) teacher, the researcher used a range of technology tools and resources in her lessons. In her role, she also collaborated with classroom teachers to better understand and support the ways they use technology in their teaching. As students become more familiar with and skilled at using technology to support their own learning, subject teachers, who are not ICT specialists, have greater confidence integrating technologies into learning experiences. Based on class observations, the researcher identified the need for learners to build new technology skills in ways that prepared them to use these skills in their own self-directed inquiry. ACS International Schools has embraced emerging computer-based information and communication technologies since they first became available to schools. The school has made significant investments in hardware, software, system development and maintenance, and in teacher training.

Programmatically, ACS International Schools address technology both as a subject (learning about ICT) and as a tool to support learning across the curriculum (learning with ICT). It is the relationship between these two that provided the focus for this action research project based in the ACS Cobham Middle School. At what point does learning about ICT – how to use a range of devices, software packages and applications in teacher-directed or teacher-guided activities – prepare students to self-direct their own use of ICT to curate and support their learning, while also doing this in a way that is safe and ethical? This question is shared by educators around the world who are committed to helping all learners build the knowledge, understandings, skills and dispositions they need to thrive in a rapidly changing world. Technology is perhaps one of the most visible manifestations of the pace of change. Understanding how it can be harnessed to ignite creativity and innovation and support the learning students need to be an active player in the change process lies at the heart of our commitment to better understanding its role in education.

Introduction The promise of technology to support self-directed learning has emerged in the field of education over the last two decades. Historically, schools have relied on the use of technology to support a multitude of efforts in teaching and learning. Rapid innovations in the technology sector have replaced the personal computer as the dominant technology fixture in classrooms, with wider and more affordable access to laptops, tablets, and smart phones. Coupled with widespread broadband internet access, the advent of the use of these devices in classrooms has given teachers more flexibility in how they support their learners.

Researchers have looked to advances in technology to address the variability learners bring to the classroom, and support all learners in more autonomous, self-directed learning (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon 2014). However, they have learned that access alone to technology is not sufficient to support these efforts (Rose & Meyer, 2002). As teachers work to support more self-directed learning in the classroom, they should consider both their knowledge of learner variability and the use of technology as a tool that can support more autonomous, or self-directed learning. Knowles (1975) describes self-directed learning as an individual’s ability to take initiative, set a learning goal, determine learning needs, identify materials needed to support learning, and monitor progress toward a goal (as cited in Scott, 2006). Tough (1979) defines self-directed learning as, “learners taking responsibility in planning and managing their own learning process” (as cited in Kücüker and Selvi, 2016). Essentially, self-directed learning is an approach to learning that puts learners in the driver’s seat. In this approach, the learners decide the why, the what, the how, and the where of their learning. A growing body of research is surfacing about elementary and middle school students’ self-directed learning. One study examined the epistemological beliefs, or personal beliefs about knowledge and learning, of middle school students in relation to their inclinations toward self-directed learning (Choi & Park, 2013). Choi and Park (2013) found that self-directed learners in the study were more likely to believe in the “certainty of knowledge,” and valued “learning effort and process” as they actively created knowledge. Yet, for more self-directed learning to be possible, learners need a degree of autonomy or agency over their learning experience. With influence from research on motivation (Dickinson, 1995), self- efficacy (Lane & Lane, 2001; Parjares & Miller, 1994; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002), and independence (Moore, 1973), the learner autonomy research is closely related to constructs important to successful self-directed learning. For more autonomous learning to be possible in the classroom, teachers need certain knowledge, values, and dispositions that align with more student-centered inclinations toward learning. For example, Watkins (2009) discusses a large gap between current classroom practice and teachers’ values related to promoting learners’ autonomy. He reminds readers that while there is no magic bullet, educators can take steps to support learner autonomy in the classroom. These steps include identifying the way ahead, recognizing tensions for teachers, reviewing plans, and recognizing teachers’ reservations (Watkins, 2009). Said another way, teachers need to value more student-centered approaches and have adequate support before they may value, and eventually enact, more autonomous learning in the classroom. Now that we have considered the knowledge, skills, and dispositions students and teachers may need to engage in autonomous, self-directed learning opportunities, we will explore how the movement toward 21st Century skills may influence this work. Digital literacy is a core skill that students will need to be successful in the 21st Century.

" " " page 37

“Digital literacy refers to the skills, attitudes and knowledge required by educators to support learning in a digitally-rich world. To be digitally literate, educators must be able to utilize technology to enhance and transform classroom practices, and to enrich their own professional development and identity. The digitally literate educator will be able to think critically about why, how and when technology supplements learning and teaching.” (Hall, Atkins, & Fraser, 2014)

Importantly, this definition moves beyond the idea that technological skills alone are sufficient to support teachers in infusing these 21st Century skills into learning environments. Rather, this frame emphasis that “skills, attitudes, and knowledge” are critical to support learning in the digital age. Researchers are beginning to study how these areas of knowledge and beliefs interact with technology integration. One study aimed to investigate the perceptions of students regarding the main uses, benefits, and challenges involved in daily use of the iPad in class (Karsenti & Fievez, 2013). Researchers partnered with 18 schools across Quebec, Canada to design and implement a protocol to better understand the uses, benefits, and challenges of iPads in schools. As a result, researchers found several positive effects. The benefits of iPad use in the classroom included: increased student motivation, greater access to information, portability of the device, ease of making notes on PDF documents, ease of organizing work, quality of students' presentations, greater collaboration among students and between students and teachers, more creativity, variety of resources used, students being able to work at their own pace, and development of student information technology skills (Karsenti and Fievez, 2013). Another example of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that support technological literacy is the emphasis on the role of student autonomy in successful technology implementation. Clarke and Svanaes (2014) presented an updated overview of the literature related to the use of tablets in education. Several themes emerged from the literature, including that one-to-one tablet programs allowed students to personalize their learning. This personalization further supported learner autonomy and metacognitive skills. Similarly, the increased portability of tablets facilitated improved communication and collaboration among students. Additional benefits included increased student independence, engagement, and motivation (Clarke & Svanaes, 2014). As schools begin to integrate technology, they also aim to evaluate the effectiveness of these efforts. Similarly, some researchers have begun to think about how best to evaluate students’ digital literacy. One way that teachers evaluate students’ use of technology to support self-directed learning is through the use of formative measures, such as by providing mastery-oriented feedback. Mastery-oriented feedback emphasizes students’ effort and practice as they develop new skills (Dweck, 2012). Using mastery-oriented feedback supports students as they become more autonomous learners and engage in self-directed tasks involving technology (Dweck, 2012; Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014).

By using technology to facilitate student-directed learning, teachers are helping students to develop 21st Century skills. To read the literature review developed for this research project by Heather Francis, visit http://cim.acs-schools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/The-role-of-technology-in-self-directed-learning-FINAL.pdf Method The Grade 6 ICT course is a half-year course, taught to half the 6th graders in the first half of the year, and the other half of the students in the second part of the year. The same teacher develops and delivers the course to both cohorts. This research project began by using a student survey to collect baseline data for the first group of Grade 6 students. The baseline survey was designed to collect information about students’ self-reported levels of expertise regarding the use of software and applications identified by Middle School teachers as important tools for learning within the context of the Middle School curriculum. The baseline data from the survey was used to refine and deliver the curricular unit plan. During the brief period after the first course finished, and as the second course was getting started, the same survey was administered to all Grade 6 students. For the first group, the student survey provided post-intervention data. For the new students, it provided baseline data. Again, the baseline data, as well as teacher reflections from the earlier delivery of the course were used to refine and deliver the course. Evaluation plan This research project used survey and interview measures to collect data for two learner outcomes. The first learner outcome was concerned with the extent to which students self-rated their mastery of technology systems and tools, including hardware, software and applications, from a range of teacher-selected options. Students’ self-reported knowledge, understanding and skills were measured using student pre- and post-surveys and structured student interviews. The second learner outcome was concerned with the extent to which students self-rated their use of technology tools, including hardware, software and applications, from a range of teacher-selected options, to learn new content or reinforce skills. Similarly, students’ self-reported use of technology tools for learning was measured using student pre- and post-surveys and structured student interviews. Data Student surveys were used at three stages of the research process:

• Stage 1: when none of the students had taken Digital Skills • Stage 2: when half of the students had taken Digital Skills • Stage 3: when all students had taken Digital Skills.

" " " page 39

This Stage 1 student survey showed that students were able to use technology, but not necessarily at an expert level. They had access to various forms of technology at home – iPads being the most popular. However, students preferred using their smartphones at home over iPads. The survey also revealed that students used their iPads mostly for research in school, which was confirmed in student interviews. The various software we questioned them about showed that most of them were able to use the software, but not at a level they considered “expert.” The Stage 2 student survey showed similar findings. One difference was that after the unit on using iPad applications, students self-rated their level of expertise in various software systems more highly. In informal interviews, students mentioned that learning the applications or software systems in the Digital Skills class allowed them to experiment with the various tools in the application rather than focusing on just the content. The Stage 3 student survey was used with students who had taken Digital Skills during the second half of the school year, which was half of the students in Grade 6. The results were again similar to earlier student surveys. In student interviews, while students said that learning to use the new applications was useful, they noted that most of the opportunities to use ICT in Middle School were limited to research and word processing using iPads. Discussion In this research project, short, online student surveys proved to be an efficient tool for collecting student self-reported data about IT knowledge, understandings, skills and learning. This data typically was reinforced by responses from a small number of structured student interviews. By repeating the study twice with the Semester 1 and Semester 2 cohorts of this half year course, refinement of the teaching strategies used to help students develop new IT knowledge, understandings and skills was data-informed. While the researcher was able to use staff members from the Centre for Inspiring Minds to improve several aspects of process validity, involvement of other ICT subject teachers may have benefited the critical reflection and teaching strategy selection processes. In this case, this was not possible because there was only one teacher teaching this subject. The design of the learning experiences and the assessment of the student learning may have benefited from a mastery sequence for the key standards-based understandings and skills. This would be especially important for teaching ICT skills to older students, who may have a wider range of competencies arising from earlier learning at our school, at another school or outside school. Conclusion This research suggests a structured learning environment, with high levels of teacher-directed learning can be beneficial when it comes to helping students learn how to use ICT applications and software that they will be expected to use independently to curate their own learning in the future. A subsequent research cycle could investigate how these same students perform when presented with subject-based or transdisciplinary topics that challenge them to curate their learning using their ICT knowledge, understandings and skills.

References Choi, J. & Park, E.A. (2013). Epistemological beliefs and self-directedness in learning of South Korean middle school students. Asia-Pacific Education Research, 22(4), 541–548. Clarke, B. & Svanaes, S. (2014). Tablets for Schools: An updated literature review on the use of tablets in education. UK: Family Kids & Youth. Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation a literature review. System, 23(2), 165–174. Dweck, C. (2012). Mindset. London: Robinson. Hall, R., Atkins, L., & Fraser, J. (2014). Defining a self-evaluation digital literacy framework for education: The DigiLit Leicester project. Research in Learning Technology, 22(1). Karsenti, T. & Fievez, A. (2013). The iPad in education: uses, benefits, and challenges – A survey of 6,057 students and 302 teachers in Quebec, Canada. Montreal, QC: CRIFPE. Küçüker, G.F. & Selvi, K. (2016). A proposal of teacher-supported model for developing primary school students’ self-directed learning skills. TED EĞİTİM VE BİLİM. 41. Lane, J. & Lane, A. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 29, 687-694.

Meyer, A., Rose, D.H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing. Moore, M.G. (1973). Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching. The Journal of Higher Education, 44(9), 661–679. Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.2.193 Pintrich, P.R., and Schunk, D.H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Merrill. Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision & Curriculum Development. Scott, K. W. (2006). Self-directed learners’ concept of self as learner: CongruousAutonomy. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning. 3(2). 1-13. Watkins, C. (2009). Learners in the driving seat. School Leadership Today: Leading Learning, 1(2), 28–31.

Reflection questions

! In what ways is this researcher’s experience similar to yours? " In what ways is this researcher’s experience different from yours? # What questions does this raise for your professional practice?

Adapted from Connect – Extend – Challenge, a Visible Thinking Routine from Project Zero

Tania Asif is a Middle School ICT Teacher School Teachers at ACS Cobham International School. Her collaborators included Ben Beeharry, Owen Funnell, Heather Martin, Monica Alvarado, Luke Wither, Lenelle Davis, Husnara Ahmed and Carmen Georgescu-Spiers

$

" " " page 41

How does the use of L1 texts alongside English language texts of the same works improve Middle School EAL students’ reading comprehension and class participation? Engaging with EAL students’ L1 Shelly McClanahan, Project Leader

For many students learning English while also studying new subjects in English, their native language is a potential tool that is often unused. For these students, participating in and contributing to class discussions about works of literature can be daunting. Like all languages, understanding the deeper meaning of English language texts requires higher-level reading comprehension skills. These students may benefit from opportunities to bridge this skills gap by reading works side-by-side in both English and their native language. The purpose of this action research project was to improve the reading experiences of English as an Additional Language (EAL) students in inquiry-driven learning

environments where class discussion is critical to understanding and language development, and in situations where it is crucial for students to understand a text in order to participate in class discussions.

This problem of practice was grounded in emerging linguistic and language development models and theories that emphasize the maintenance of native langauges as a foundation for English language learning and as an important contributing factor in sustaining cultural and linguistic identity as a route to well-being. In the context of this research project, there was no data to suggest that EAL students had been disadvantaged in the past by not having access to works of literature, studied in English, in their native language (L1).

Introduction Throughout the research on bilingualism and multilingualism, many terms are used to describe the students’strongest language such as: native language, identity language, mother tongue, heritage language, first language, primary language, national language and home language etc., which can create some confusion. This review will refer to ‘L1’as the student’s strongest language for literacy learning. Influences such as globalisation, a rise in migration and the internationalisation of economic and business spheres have brought about the demand for students to learn in languages other than their L1. Due to international schools being at the forefront of these changes, international educators have been working with, and developing new approaches for second language learning, as well as trying out new strategies. There are many different kinds of international schools, and it would be unwise to generalize. However, there are many educators and researchers of note addressing big questions related to second

language learning in both international and national schools, due to the steady increase of EAL learners. The literature on EAL and bilingual education in the 20th century was largely focused on language acquisition as taking a next step, adding onto a monolingual existence, or as two sequential, separate language acquisition processes. The 21st century has brought about a pivot as plurilingual societies continue to grow and multilingualism becomes more of a norm, thus bringing about a necessary transformation in language policies and practice. Plurilingual and intercultural competence is defined in Europe as:

“the ability to use a plural repertoire of linguistic and cultural resources to meet communication needs or interact with people from other backgrounds and contexts, and enrich that repertoire while doing so. Plurilingual competence refers to the repertoire of resources that individual learners acquire in all the languages they know or have learned, and which also relate to the cultures associated with those languages”(Council of Europe, Language Policy Division, 2010).

In tackling the topic of teaching strategies for L1 to L2 literacy learning in middle school, a number of overlapping areas of research come into play: linguistics, literature and language teaching (e.g. Carter, 2007), ELL/EFL/ESL/EAL pedagogy (e.g. Carroli, 2011; Grabe, 2009; Paran and Sercu, 2010) and stylistics (e.g. Burke et al., 2012). Literacy and language learning in varying EAL contexts covers so many aspects that it would be impossible to provide one theory or practice to address all the issues that arise. However, in trying to look at dual-language text use, we can draw from some of the theoretical assumptions that have arisen from these different fields. Jiménez and associates (1996), explain that successful readers use “a variety of techniques to construct working definitions of unknown vocabulary, such as using context, invoking relevant prior knowledge, questioning, making inferences, searching for cognates, and translating.” Bolos (2012) reminds us that middle school teachers should not distress as students’ L1 reading skills are transferrable. Their L1 provides a base of concepts and skills for further learning that have an underlying commonality (Cummins, 1979). Therefore, if a teacher can increase the reading skills in the student’s L1, their English reading skills will also improve. Using L1 literature and linking to English instruction provides the student with the ability to demonstrate what they know before they have fully perfected their English. “With the conceptual foundations established via the native language, English language instruction can begin to draw students’attention to more salient aspects of second language acquisition, including syntactic, semantic, and morphological development.”(Brisk & Proctor, 2013). As there are multiple approaches to using literature for L2 language learning, such as narrative inquiry, translation, stylistics, narrow and extensive reading and other methods of exploring texts, in order to look at the benefits and challenges of using dual language texts, it would be prudent to also look at the growing use of literature in the EAL classroom.

" " " page 43

As Hall (Hall 2005) states: “Those of us who advocate the use of literature in foreign or second language classrooms point to its potential to engage the feelings and minds of readers in meaningful communication, as well as the importance of carefully selected uses of language, patterned and played upon, to learners who need to focus on form as well as meaning. Literature, broadly understood, ideally meets both needs of language learning.”

The Council of Europe, in its Common European Framework (2001), has emphasized the importance of literature and culture in language. Similarly, in the United States, the ADFL (Association of Departments of Foreign Languages) Guidelines of the MLA (Modern Language Association) and the ACTFL (American Council on Teaching of Foreign Languages) Standards emphasize the importance of literature and culture in language. This demonstrates the growing interest in and support for language acquisition approaches around the world, and the deepening of studies that look at second language literature reading as a separate field. Back in 2005, Jim Cummins was already promoting L1 learning, or in this case “heritage language,’when he stated:

“However, more immediate impact might be achieved by working with communities and educators in local contexts to implement instructional practices that will strengthen students' heritage language proficiency and their desire to maintain and develop it. In addition to promoting the heritage language itself, these initiatives could be designed to develop students' academic abilities in English by means of bilingual instructional strategies that teach explicitly for two-way cross-language transfer (L1 to English, English to L1). In other words, students' heritage language proficiency can become a resource for learning English rather than being viewed as either irrelevant or an impediment.”

This led to the idea that the fields of EAL and bilingual language learning are beginning to learn from each other’s research. There was mounting evidence that dual-language bilingualism, where students switch from one language to another frequently, is providing cognitive and social benefits (Bialystok & Craik, 2010). Interest is these programs may be explained by a greater number of non-English speakers in classrooms and by the understanding that bilingualism provides benefits such as improved working memory, better selective attention, and better executive control (Bialystok & Craik, 2010). We can look to some of these instructional practices to identify what would work in EAL classes. Many researchers and educators view two-way dual language immersion programs as one of the most promising interventions to close the achievement gap for English learners. In 2010 the Council of Europe defined the important key of cross-curricular linking between languages and subject content when they wrote:

“Crossover links between “languages as subjects”are the central element in plurilingual and intercultural education and depend on: specific aims defined at least partially on the basis of identical categories or comparable activities (e.g. strategies for understanding written texts, strategies for improvising non-interactive oral texts,

reflective observation and analysis of linguistic phenomena); transferable intercultural competences; activities or tasks, particularly comparison activities, which involve using other languages”(Council of Europe, 2010).

In Europe, the CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) movement is one response to changes of globalization and our students living in a digital world, which is changing the ways in which we engage language and how younger students relate to each other. CLIL (often called CBI or ‘content based instruction’in the United States) is an approach to facilitate both content learning and language learning in different contexts. It drives these two areas of learning through instructional planning and process as a method. CLIL strategies can be useful in many language-learning contexts, but also in international school contexts where students have limited proficiency in English (Genesee & Hayman, 2016). They argue that it is crucial for teachers to become competent using CLIL strategies to plan effective additional language learning for their students. It is a significant challenge for international schools, where there are a high variety of L1s, to provide high levels of bilingualism and to teach academic content through all subjects. However, attempts to support, use and promote L1 in the learning process should be useful. Genesee and Hayman (2016) state:

“In any school context with students who do not speak the language of instruction, the school should take steps to make sure the student’s home language is visible in the curriculum, and throughout the school, even if no formal instruction is provided in and through that language. Providing students with opportunities to make cross-linguistic connections is one way of doing this.”

Carefully planned translanguaging strategies are useful and encourage language transfer and scaffolding. Using these strategies, the translation of vocabulary and the comparison of text and structures can be studied. The research supports learning through the study of cognate relationships by drawing attention to the students’existing lexical database for similar meanings. Of course, this is easier with some languages than others, but it is a valuable exercise (Cummins, 2005). Cummins states:

“The case can be made that bilingual instructional strategies have a place in the mainstream English-medium classroom. These strategies tap into students' preexisting knowledge and enable them to engage with literacy much more quickly and more effectively than strategies that ignore what students bring into the classroom.”

Burke (2012) suggests that in order to foster deeper learning in students, he asks students to consider the underlying conceptual metaphors in literature by helping them to unpack them, look at their characteristics in their home language, and then in English. This will lead to better cognitive encoding and recall and achieves a deeper level of learning. One area of issue related to this idea of implementing CLIL strategies is professional development of content teachers. Many teachers don’t see themselves as language teachers and lack confidence and literacy understanding. The education of teachers needs

" " " page 45

to address the strategies and understanding of text structure and language learning needed to teach CLIL lessons (Kong, 2015). Kong states:

“With a focus on knowledge as relationships of ideas, the knowledge structures support the learning of more complex content, which is required at the secondary level. The text structures provide students with a scaffold for language use at an extended text level that enables them to represent content meaning at the same level of complexity”.

Collaboration and planning are key elements for successful CLIL learning between content teachers and EAL teachers. Using a common planning tool for collaborative teaching can be highly effective (Genessee & Hayman, 2016). Another issue may be the challenge of finding home language translations of books studied. Gathering a library of resources is a good way to start collecting the necessary materials. It is recommended to check the quality of the materials to ensure they meet the criteria of the programme (Genessee & Hayman, 2016). In conclusion, creating a learning environment where the students’L1 and their L2 (and/or L3, L4 etc.) are recognized and supported alongside each other promotes biliteracy or multiliteracy, student identity, confidence, positive attitudes, conceptual development and language proficiency. Focusing on academic language instruction as well as content areas is the designated way forward. However, it takes sophisticated alignment and pedagogical understanding to work towards these ideals. To read the literature review, written for this research project by research consultant Catherine Copeland, visit http://cim.acs-schools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Engaging-with-Identity-Languages-a-literature-review.pdf Method Because the use of L1 texts alongside English language texts of the same works in English literature classes is a new practice, this project began be developing and delivering briefings for Language and Literature teachers and for EAL and Native Language Enrichment teachers. The study involved 10 Middle School EAL students whose L1s were Spanish, Dutch, Hungarian, Turkish. Chinese and German. The intervention involved providing students with an L1 text version of the literary works that had been assigned in their English Language and Literature class. The intention behind providing this scaffold was to help English language learners understand the deeper meanings within the text, as they would have the cultural knowledge in their L1 to grasp those meanings. In addition, the scaffolding was provided to help the students make language transfers, as they would be writing and having class discussions in English. Ultimately, with greater understanding of the text, the scaffolding was intended to help make students feel more confident when taking part in class discussions because they would

have had the same experience their native English-speaking classmates had – that of reading a text in their L1. The intervention took place over a period of four months, and students were allowed to choose for themselves how they would use the L1 text versions of the assigned novels. Some students read both the English and L1 versions. Some read the L1 version and used the English version in class for work and discussions, and some read the English version and used the L1 version only for chapters or passages that they found difficult to understand. During class time, they participated in discussions in English, and all assigned work was completed in English. Evaluation plan This project had two desired learner outcomes:

1. EAL students demonstrate confidence in classes where there are opportunities to use their L1 to support learning

2. EAL students participate fully in class discussions about literature read in English, in classes where there are opportunities to use their L1 to support learning

For both outcomes, data was collected through the use of teacher surveys and student interviews. Data In the student interviews, conducted at the end of the intervention, students talked about both the benefits and the challenges of reading in their L1. One challenge noted was difficulty in identifying literary techniques, because what appears as a metaphor or alliteration in English may not be translated as such in another language. A sixth-grade student said:

"The thing I found a bit bad about reading in Spanish only, was when we were working on one of those writing techniques; in Spanish these words are different. For example, the teacher would say ‘when the author uses a metaphor in Ch. 8…’ and I was like what metaphor? Because it’s the same, but they say it differently."

Other students made similar comments. Students also noted it was difficult to find quotes to support their points when writing or discussing a text. A ninth-grade student said:

“When we were preparing for the IOC it was much harder to collect quotes because you couldn't say it in Hungarian.”

However, in the end there were more positive comments mentioned than challenges. Comments included:

• “I felt like I was reading English cause everyone knew the same things from the book cause when we talked about it in class it was all the same.” Sixth grader

• “I had to understand it, so you gave me the book in German and I could do my work.” Seventh grader

" " " page 47

• “When I read my book in English, I understand what every sentence means. But when I finish the book I don't know what the book was talking about. When I read in Chinese I know the meaning of the book.” Seventh grader

Students also talked about the ease of reading in their L1 versus English.

• “When I forgot my German book I read it in English and I had to read a sentence like two or three times.” Seventh grader

• “When I read the book in English I sometimes had to read the whole page again because sometimes things didn’t make sense.” Sixth grader

Looking specifically at the two targeted learner outcomes, the following examples characterise the responses gathered through the student interviews and teacher surveys. Regarding the extent to which EAL students demonstrated confidence in classes when there were opportunities to use their L1 to support learning, responses included:

• “I am fluent in my home language, so I understand every word I read.” Student response

• “Now, I think I would rather read the book in English because I can better understand what the other students are talking about in class.” Student response

• “For students, it meant that they were able to understand the plot and other basics so that they could engage with the text in a more analytical manner. . . [I]t simply gave them a safety net and some confidence.” Teacher response

Regarding the extent to which EAL students actively participated in class discussions about literature read in English, in classes where there were opportunities to use their L1 to support learning, responses included:

• “Next time I would read the book in my home language first and then read it in English because it will help me answer questions about the book in English.” Student response

• “It was successful in helping them understand the plot. If they have no idea what the text is about, how can they possibly participate?” Teacher response

Discussion The Language and Literature teachers have shown enthusiasm for this project and have provided student support as needed. Teachers reported that they needed no additional time in class to accommodate EAL students reading the texts in English and their L1. Students who have read texts in their L1 have been happy to read the books, and have demonstrated their keenness to read them. Students who have read texts in their L1 have been more confident in answering questions when the books have been discussed in their Language and Literature class. One of the greatest challenges of this project was finding the texts in the other languages. Not all the works studied in the class are available in the different L1s of the students, and those that were weren’t easy to find or purchase. More effective co-planning between subject teachers and learning support specialists may have benefited students reading the books in two languages. It could also have enriched

class discussions, which could have included discussions about how the works selected may be interpreted differently by people reading them in different languages (where literary devices may be interpreted differently). Conclusion Although the students felt this helped them, many of them said that next year they would prefer to read in English only as they believe their skills have advanced enough to allow them to do that. The insight gained from this project is that when English language learners are able to make their own choices, and have the option to use their L1 to enhance their understanding of English language texts, student confidence and participation can be enhanced. In the future, this type of intervention could benefit from being managed in a more planned way. For example, certain chapters that would need more direct instruction could be the focus of instruction or learning support. Similarly, a more individualised approach to vocabulary development could help learners make better use of dual language texts. In closing, Catherine Copeland, writing in the literature review, reinforces the experience of the researcher.

“Research points to the social benefits of teachers and peers using a students’ L1. Providing value to the students’ L1 through novel study in their mother tongue, along with giving them some confidence to achieve is perhaps one of the strongest arguments for implementing dual language texts in literacy learning and other content based classes.”

" " " page 49

References Bialystok, E. & Craik, F. (2010). Cognitive and linguistic processing in the bilingual mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 12–23. Bolos, N. (2012) Successful strategies for teaching reading to middle grades English language learners, Middle School Journal, November 2012, Vol. 44 Issue 2, p14-20. Brisk, M., & Proctor, P. Challenges and Supports for English Language Learners in Bilingual Programs, Stanford University.( http://ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/academic-papers/11-Brisk%20Bilingual%20Programs%20FINAL_0.pdf) Burke, M., Csábi, S., Week, L. and Zerkowitz, J. (eds.) (2012) Pedagogical Stylistics: Current Trends in Language, Literature, and ELT. London: Continuum. Carroli, P. (2011) Literature in Second Language Education: Enhancing the Role of Texts in Learning. London: Continuum. Carter R. A. (2007) ‘Literature and Language Teaching 1986–2006: A Review.’ International Journal of Applied Linguistics 17 (1): 3–13. Council of Europe, Language Policy Division (2010) Guide for the development and implementation of curricula for plurilingual and intercultural education, Directorate of Education and Language, DGIV, Strasbourg, www.coe.int/lang

Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Educational Research, 49: 222–251. Cummins, J. (2005). A proposal for action: Strategies for recognizing heritage language competence as a learning resource within the mainstream classroom. Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 585-592. Genesee, F. & Hayman, E. (2016) CLIL in Context, Practical Guide for Educators. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press Grabe, W. (2009) Reading in a Second Language: Moving from Theory to Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jimenez, R., Russeel, G. & Rivera, A. (1996) Conversations with a Chicana Teacher: Supporting Students Transition from Native to English Language Instruction. The Elementary School Journal, Volume 96, Number 3, The University of Chicago. Kong, S. (2015) Designing Content-Language Integrated Learning Materials for Late Immersion Students - Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Education TESOL Journal, Vol.6 (2), p.302-332. Paran, A. and Sercu, L. (eds.) (2010) Testing the Untestable in Language Education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Reflection questions

! Before reading about this research, what did you think about this topic? " What do you think about this topic now?

Adapted from I used to think, but now I think, a Visible Thinking Routine from Project Zero

Shelly McClanahan is a Middle School EAL Specialist at ACS Egham International School. Her collaborators included Fay Gregory, Maddie Osborn, Cara Ritchie, Karen Axam and Denisse Lie-Nielsen.

$

What are the transition experiences, encountered by educators, in an international school? Understanding teacher transition Tasha Arnold, Project Leader

The researcher’s inspiration for her research project is her personal experience transitioning to an international school in a new country, and the stories shared by her colleagues from around the world with regards to transition experiences at international schools. As an educator, transitioning from one working environment to another is difficult as each school’s host country culture, school culture and ways of working differ. The researcher was originally schooled, trained and taught in the Midwest of the United States, and for the past seven years she worked as a learning specialist at ACS Cobham International School. As a learning specialist, she was expected on arrival to have a full understanding of the American High School curriculum, Advanced Placement (AP) programme and the International Baccalaureate (IB). Her unfamiliarity with the IB programme, the challenges associated with adjusting to a new

location and culture, the diverse student population, higher student turnover rates, an unfamiliarity with staff cultural norms and leadership styles, and the difference in parental expectations meant that navigating through the complexities of an international school proved more challenging than she had anticipated. She found that she did not have the cultural specific skills she needed to communicate with the diverse students, parents and staff she was working with and this affected her sense of identity and professional readiness. Her position as a teacher at the school felt paradoxical, as she was qualified and trained to teach, but in a different environment. There were tensions and feelings she was expected to manage with little assistance. This struggle felt unnecessary and left her with questions about the extent to which other international school educators had similar experiences, and how this transition could be better managed by teachers themselves and the schools that had hired them.

Introduction As the demand for international schools worldwide continues to increase, there is a necessity to learn from educators’ experiences and to recognize their perceived needs with regards to teacher transition. This will help to identify and integrate beneficial practices, which have the potential to support smooth transitions for teachers in these environments (De Cieri, Hutchings and McNulty, 2013). There is some research that supports the idea that the quality of educators’ transition experiences correlates to the quality of experience students receive from those teachers (Hayden and Thompson, 2000; Rice, 2010; Hayden and Thompson, 2016). In 2009,

" " " page 51

Professor John Hattie, at the University of Melbourne, published the largest evidence-based research project, Visible Learning, which looked at 52,637 different published studies to determine what actually improves learning in schools (Hattie, 2012). This study suggests that the single greatest negative impact on a student’s learning is moving. Yet, we know that mobility and integrating across cultures can also provide meaningful learning experiences and opportunities for personal growth. Therefore, managing the challenges of mobility and transition should be a high priority in international schools – for both students and staff members. While much has been much written concerning the relationship between international schools and their students (Ezra, 2003; Hayden, 2006; Hill, 2006; Brummitt, 2007), there is not the same quality and quantity of research available regarding the educational practitioners’ in these international settings (Black, Harvey, Hayden and Thompson, 1994; Armstrong and Black, 1995; Nagrath, 2011). While teacher turnover in international schools has not been fully documented, teacher mobility is often a common characteristic of international schools. Research, worldwide, suggests that most educators tend to leave a school and the profession for the same reasons: heavy workload, testing pressures, low wages and benefits, poor school leadership and lack of professional development or advancement opportunities (Aslami, 2013; Kalai and Peter, 2016). These factors coupled with pressures unique to educators in international schools, particularly the lack of support educators receive during the transition process, likely contribute to the high turnover rates often seen in international schools. Studies have shown that there are benefits from induction activities and mentoring programmes for teachers new to a school (Strong, 2009) and that incorporating these activities positively relates to reduced teacher attrition (Ladd, 2009). A study conducted by Roskell (2013) suggests that work transition experiences influences a teacher’s decision to continue their employment. This is important for employers to note, as this suggests employers have some control over retaining employees when they provide a strong support system, both at the start and throughout their employment. By implementing a proactive system that supports educator transition in an international school, school leaders may benefit by saving time and money with recruitment, and by increasing staff retention (Thomas and Wise, 1999; Lee, 2005; Odland and Ruzika, 2008). The theoretical perspectives and interpretations proposed for use in this research project reflect socio-cultural and psychological perspectives because they are influenced by international educators’ transition experiences. These two perspectives also lend themselves to the use of narrative enquiry methods that can be used to investigate how culture, one’s surroundings and social factors affect transition experiences for educators in international schools. Kennedy, Kojima, Okura and Ward (1998) noted that the psychological and sociological aspects of transition or “adjustment” as they refer to it, should be studied separately. “Socio-cultural” refers to learning that occurs through interactions with others and within a cultural framework. This psychological perspective adopts a holistic approach to human existence by looking at human actions and characteristics. The socio-cultural transition

evaluates the adjustment of the educator in their new work environment, where the individual tries to understand and adopt appropriate social skills, modify their behavior and navigate the social landscape in ways that help them ‘fit in’ (Kennedy and Ward, 1999). While all teachers go through an adjustment and transition period when starting at a new school or a new position, teachers who work in international schools appear to encounter additional challenges (Alexander and Daresh, 2016). Teachers in international schools are required to do more than transition; they must ‘cross-over’. While the term ‘crossing-over’ is not widely used, there are various terms such as transition, acclimatisation, assimilation and enculturation, educators and researchers use to describe the process teachers experience when they are new to an international school (Brown, Burton, Dashwood and Lawrence, 2010). ‘Crossing-over’ for teachers in international schools can include adjusting to a physical location change and/or navigating through aligning previous pedagogical practices, philosophies and teaching perspectives with new institutional expectations and strategic direction (Brown, Burton, Dashwood and Lawrence, 2010). This definition of ‘crossing-over’ is particularly useful as it identifies and illustrates the need for educators in international schools to adapt and navigate through ideological, pedagogical and cultural barriers in order to successfully integrate into their work environment. To read the literature review developed for this research project, visit http://cim.acs-schools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Teacher-transition-in-international-schools.pdf Method This research project used the following steps: • Develop questions for semi-structured interviews with teachers who have moved from

one school to another school in a different country and/or culture over the course of their professional practice.

• Conduct and transcribe Round 1 of interviews with 10 participants currently employed in international schools in the United Kingdom and Qatar.

• Allow participants to review the transcripts and provide any clarifications and/or adjustments needed to accurately reflect their experience and their responses to the questions.

• Conduct thematic analysis of the interviews to reveal the similarities and differences in participants’ responses

• Conduct and transcribe Round 2 interviews with same 10 participants. • As with the start-of-year interviews, allow participants to review the transcripts and

provide any clarifications and/or adjustments needed to accurately reflect their experience and their responses to the questions.

• Conduct thematic analysis of the interviews to reveal the similarities and differences in participants’ responses

• Analyse and summarise the qualitative narrative response data Evaluation plan A narrative response to an open-ended question and responses to follow-up questioning were recorded and transcribed for each participant during two rounds of interviews. Round

" " " page 53

1 interviews were conducted in January and February 2018 and Round 2 interviews were conducted in March and April 2018. The questions were as follows:

• Round 1 - What happened when you transitioned to your current international school?

• Round 2 - What has happened regarding your transition experience since our earlier meeting?

The narratives collected during the interviews were from an experience-centred and culturally orientated perspective, where narratives are stories of experiences. The experience-centred approach assumes narratives are sequential, that all stories have meaning, that the stories told provide insight into how participants make sense of events and the world they are a part of, that no story is told the same way twice and that narratives represent personal changes and themes in one’s life. The purpose of the data analysis is to identify patterns and relationships and to make summative observations about the phenomena being researched. After each interview, the individual narratives were transcribed. Then, text data was coded and categorised based on themes and meanings represented in the narratives, in order to establish a theory about the data. To begin the data analysis process, all transcripts were browsed and general notes were recorded about ‘first impressions’ in order to think about the ‘storyline.’ Next, each transcript was read more closely, several times, and initial descriptive codes were created. A software application called MAXQDA was used to aid initial coding. In the next stage of data analysis, the data was conceptualized, and summative codes were created by bringing several codes together. Data Ten participants were interviewed for this study. Five were from international schools in Doha, Qatar, and five were from international schools in London, UK. Six had transitioned to new schools in August 2017, two had been in their current school for two years, and two had been in the same school for five or more years. They were a mix of single, married, and married with children. The qualitative data was first sorted by responses related to professional life and responses related to personal life. Within each of these two categories, data was further coded based on five chronological themes: honeymoon (experiences associated with the period leading up to and immediately following arrival at a new international school), culture shock (negative social, emotional and physical reactions to change following arrival), recovery (strategies and techniques for addressing change after arrival), acceptance and integration (positive social, emotional and physical responses to change after arrival), and departure (experiences associated with the period preceding a move to anew international school) Indicative types of responses for the coding categories and themes are presented in the table that follows.

Coding theme Indicative types of responses related to

professional experience

Indicative types of responses related to personal experience

Honeymoon • Level of professional excitement and adventure

• Level of hospitality and quality of welcome

• Level of personal excitement and adventure

• Level of support from family and friends

Culture shock • Qualities of induction and orientation

• Familiarity with school or national culture

• Professional growth expectation and comfort zone

• Capacity to navigate a new culture, new systems (banking, health care, housing, etc.) or new environment/climate

• Capacity to stay connected to family and friends

Recovery • Capacity for self-efficacy • Level of resilience

• Capacity to rebound • Capacity to find new ways to

address unfamiliar challenges (technology, etc.)

Acceptance/Integration • Level of empowerment • Level and location of support

• Capacity to make and sustain new friendships

Departure • Level of inclusion in year-end activities and events

• Readiness to adapt again

• Turnover rates and their effects on expectations for friendships

• Readiness to return to “home”

• Capacity to “fit in” versus “belong”

Discussion This research project used narrative inquiry methods, which use in-depth interviews as their primary data collection method. The teacher interviews were conducted in London and Doha, which required international travel, and more complex logistics than most school-based research. The practical aspects of organising interviews and travel were easier than anticipated, with generous support from school administrators, who provided permission for the interviews to take place mostly during school hours. Some of the participants found the open-ended questions quite challenging, having experienced this type of personal questioning mostly in confidential conversations with friends. Some participants were concerned about being identified through their distinctive views or experiences. The many variables that emerged over the course of the project were indicative of the wide range of factors that shape faculty and school culture. When interpreting the interview results, it was important to consider how these affect teacher transition as well as faculty turn-over. Conclusion In order to meet the needs of students in international schools, teachers need early assistance upon entry and ongoing support throughout their employment. Providing meaningful opportunities that meet educators where they are emotionally, psychologically

" " " page 55

and socially need to be considered by all school and education leaders. Understanding the process and the impact transition experiences have on educators can only improve student learning, staff retention and enhance the school climate. This transition proess is ongoing and requires the participation and collaboration of administrators, board members, parents, students, counsellors, teachers, staff members, Human Resources managers and Admissions directors. Among the recommendations arising from this work are the following:

1. Develop an understanding of individuals’ transition needs as a key function of the induction process and provide individualised ongoing support as and when needed. This may include, but is not limited to:

• Providing self-managed professional development days • Assigning mentors who provide support as part of their paid professional job

role • Providing opportunities for building connections to the wider school

community 2. Develop an extended teacher transition programme that goes beyond induction and short-term orientation. This may include, but is not limited to:

• Offering up to two years of transition support • Designing bespoke induction and orientation programmes for late joiners or

individuals who transition from part-time or substitute teaching to full-time roles

This project was undertaken as part of a PhD dissertation. A more detailed data section, discussion and concision will be available when this Doctoral-level thesis is published by Kingston University in 2019.

Reflection questions

! What did you read? " What do you think? # What will you wonder?

Adapted from See – Think – Wonder, a Visible Thinking Routine from Project Zero

References Alexander, L and Daresh, J. (2016) Beginning the Principalship: A Practical Guide for New School Leaders. United States of America: Corwin. Armstrong, P. and Black, D. (1995) ‘Some aspects of staff development in international schools’, International Journal of Educational Management, 9(4), pp. 27-33. Aslami, H. (2013) ‘Teacher attrition: Why secondary school teachers leave the profession in Afghanistan’ Centre for International Education. Masters Capstone Projects Paper 23. Black, D., Harvey, T., Hayden, M., and Thompson, J. (1994) ‘Professional development for teachers’, International Journal of Educational Management, 8(2), pp. 27-32. Brown, A., Burton, L., Dashwood, A. and Lawrence, J. (2010) ‘Crossing over: strategies for supporting the training and development of international teachers’, The International Journal of Learning, 17(4), pp. 321-333. Brummitt, N. (2007) ‘International schools: exponential growth and future implications’, International Schools Journal, 27(2), pp. 35-40. De Cieri, H., Hutchings, K. and McNulty, Y. (2013) ‘Expatriate return on investment in Asia Pacific: An empirical study of individual ROI versus corporate ROI’, Journal of World Business, 48(2), pp. 209-221. Ezra, R. (2003) ‘Culture, language and personality in the context of the internationally mobile child’, Journal of Research in International Education, 2, pp. 123-149. Hattie, J. (2012) Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing the impact on learning. London; New York: Routledge. Hayden, M. (2006) International education. London: SAGE Publications. Hayden, M. and Thompson, J. (2000) International schools & international education: Improving teaching, management and quality. London: Kogan Page. Hayden, M. and Thompson, J. (2016) International schools: Current issues and future prospects. London: Symposium Books. Hill, I. (2006) ‘Student types, school types and their combined influence on the development of intercultural understanding’, Journal Research in International Education, 5, pp. 5-33.

Kalai, J. and Peter, D. (2016) ‘Influence of principals’ transformative corporate leadership style on teachers’ job commitment in public secondary schools in Athi river sub county, Machakos county, Kenya’, African Journal of education and Practice, 1(1), pp. 77-100. Kennedy, A., Kojima, T., Okura, Y. and Ward, C. (1998) ‘The U-curve on trial: a longitudinal study of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transition’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(3), pp. 277-291. Kennedy, A. and Ward, C. (1999) ‘The measurement of socio-cultural adaptation’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4), pp.659-677. Laad, H. (2009) ‘Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of policy-relevant outcomes, National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational Research Working Paper No.33). Washington, DC: Calder. Lee, D. (2005) ‘Hiring the best teachers: Gaining a competitive edge in the teacher recruitment process’, Public Personnel Management, 34, pp. 263-270. Nagrath, C. (2011) What makes A school international. [online] TIE Online. Available at: http://www.tieonline.com/view_article.cfm?ArticleID=87. [Accessed: 14th Sep. 2016]. Odland, G. and Ruzika, M. (2008) An investigation into teacher turnover in international schools. EdD. Seton Hall University. Rice, J. (2010) ‘The impact of teacher experience examining the evidence and policy implications’, National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational Research, 10, pp. 1-6. Roskell, D. (2013) ‘Cross-cultural transition: International teachers’ experience of ‘culture shock’, Journal of Research in International Education, 12(2), pp. 155-172. Strong, M. Effective teacher induction and mentoring: Assessing the evidence. New York, NY: Teacher College Press. Thomas, K. and Wise, P. (1999) ‘Organizational attractiveness and individual differences: Are diverse applicants attracted by different factors?’, Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, pp. 375-390.

Tasha Arnold is a High School Learning Support Specialist at ACS Cobham International School. Her collaborators included Susan Nicoll, Robert Cody, Dimple Chopra, Will Ryan and Ryan Hinchey.

$ " " " page 57

The Centre for Inspiring Minds ACS International Schools West Lodge Portsmouth Road Cobham, Surrey KT11 1BL Online at http://cim.acs-schools.com On Twitter @acscim