The
relationship between the constructivism learning theory and the Breaking Ranks Framework is simply that
both are student centered. The
constructivism idea is that learners must take information and make it their
own by discovery and transformation (Slavin, 2015). Teachers need to make information relevant
and meaningful to students, not just give them information. Students must be given the opportunity to
discover and apply information in order to construct the knowledge in their own
minds. Students must be taught to use
their own strategies for learning and have an active role in their own
learning. Instead of teachers lecturing
and controlling the classroom, they should be guides to help students discover
their own meanings.
The Breaking Ranks Framework was developed
to help school leaders create a more student centered environment in individual
schools (Sheninger, 2014). This
framework is a guide to personalizing programs and support systems that takes
into account the needs of individual students.
The framework addresses the areas of collaborative leadership,
personalizing school environment, curriculum, instruction, and assessment to
improve student performance. The
stimulus for the school change is technology and essential skill sets.
The
public high school where I currently teach does not embrace 21st
century learning. The school has
technology available in the forms of computer labs, ipad and laptop carts, and
smartboards. But the school embraces
more of a teacher lead environment instead of a student centered
environment. If I were to become a
leader at my present high school I could make recommendations based on the Breaking Ranks Framework. This school needs to improve from an adult
focused, activity oriented school environment to a student and learning focused
culture.
First,
collaborative leadership is absolutely necessary for school improvement. Every teacher and school leader must believe
that each and every student can achieve high levels (NASSP). Everyone must be on board with school change
for the change to be successful.
Teachers and staff who will not cooperate with school improvement doom
the proposed changes to failure and ultimately the school to fail the
students. School leaders need to help
teachers develop a growth mind set which is a belief that success is the result
of time, work, and deliberate practice (NASSP).
School staff must share the beliefs that work and effort create
ability. With a growth mind set,
teachers and ultimately students become resilient learners who view problems as
opportunities to learn.
Next,
leaders need to personalize the school environment. This requires knowledge of the diversity of
students, staff, and the culture of the community. With this knowledge, leaders can create a
culture that fosters change and challenges and educates each student. This may require a dramatic shift in
direction and require new ways of thinking and acting. Also, leaders must fully understand and
address the support system.
Finally,
leaders must address curriculum, instruction, and assessment to improve student
performance. Guiding students into 21st
century learning has to include technology.
Using technology to allow students to discover ideas and knowledge and
take ownership of their learning is paramount.
Teachers have to utilize the technology tools in their content areas
which may require personalized professional development to aid teachers to move
into student centered learning.
Schools
must first ask how they are meeting the needs of each student. A school may have to make a dramatic change
in school environment and teaching and learning. But, a school can only change if all stakeholders
believe in that change.
References
National
Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) (n.d.). The breaking ranks framework: An overview. Retrieved from https://www.principalsmonth.org/igx_temp/nassp_leading_success/M8R4_BRframework_pp1-6.pdf
Sheninger, E. (2014). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin
Slavin,
R.E. (2015). Educational psychology:
Theory and practice (11th ed.).
New York, NY: Pearson.
Hi Ruth and thank you for the great post! I think using the Breaking Ranks Framework is necessary in today’s classrooms. You mention how it is similar to constructivism by allowing students to build on prior knowledge while constructing their own meaning through project based learning. Breaking Ranks Framework differs because it focuses the student centered constructivist activity around technology. Technology is a resource we all incorporate in solving our problems. Technology offers so many specific instruments that people in the 21st century use. I used technology today to solve a problem involving my garden. Problem solving in the schools needs to be done the same way. You eluded to that fact and acknowledge that your school does not properly send that message to the staff. This is a perfect time for you to be that educational leader we talk about. Change does not always need to come from administration. You can be the change you want to see in your school. Sheninger (2014) discusses the importance of being proficient in technology if you want others to learn it. This is the old “don’t throw stones if you live in a glass house” mentality. Given you are in this course and learning ways to use technology; you can be that driving force. Use the iPads and laptop carts in creative ways and display your student’s successes. Then, use that as a collaborative piece with your peers showing data on how your students improve. Before you know it, you have cultivated that growth mindset you mention. It sounds like a difficult road, but you can do it! You have all the tools at your disposal. The Breaking Ranks Framework can be used at the forefront in your lessons with technology. Do not be afraid to take chances! It is better than sitting back and waiting for change to come from administration. Thanks for sharing!
ReplyDeleteDear Ruth,
ReplyDeleteYour post reminds me of the simplistic, yet meaningful notion that instructors ought to teach and build up their students. Not just relay information to them that they are meant to retain or not retain. You stated that students ought to be learning to use their own learning styles, correct? I concur with that statement for various reasons. If a student is labelled without understanding their own strengths and weaknesses, then they will begin to think that they are limited in their capability to learn the content within the classroom. I also agree that teachers have the moral, professional, and spiritual responsibility to provide a constructive classroom environment.
After looking through Sheninger’s explanation of the Breaking Ranks Framework, it became evident that there are various layers of responsibility of their teachers within a school. It is my honest opinion that teachers can only do so much, but one thing I do know is that instructors can be consistent in what they are doing. Every student must be accounted for in the school, and all students should be approached from an equitable standpoint. Regardless of their labels, exceptionality, socioeconomic background, or spiritual preference, students ought to receive a formatted educational plan that echoes the desire for their success.
You make another valid point, Ruth. It is inevitable that schools fail because the instructors and leadership do not see past their own capabilities. We must draw the line somewhere, and give our students the educational environment they deserve. I understand funds are often low, people are tired and burned out, but we must deliver of ourselves the consistency in our own belief that the students can progress beyond their comprehension. I concur with the standpoint that instructors must first keep themselves accountable for the success or failure of a school’s progress. Change cannot occur, unless everyone is on board with the forward progression of schools. Thank you!
In Christ Alone,
Marcus Bradley
I enjoyed your reflective and insightful post Ruthie. I can relate to being in a school that does not embrace 21st century learning practices, it is very frustrating to try to move ahead in a culture like that. I found that the information in your post closely parallels the experience in our school the past few years. I am fortunate that God has led me from a situation such as that to a school that has been working hard under new leadership to embrace technology and 21st century learning in an old building. The progress has been hard, but the results are adding up. As you mentioned, this has indeed “require[d] a dramatic shift in direction and require[d] new ways of thinking and acting” for all involved.
ReplyDeleteThis process did, in fact, need to start with collaborative leadership. In our case, the faculty believed in the students’ ability to achieve high levels but were reluctant to adopt new technology without examples and support. Building a collaborative team of edtech leaders and supporting them with the resources needed to begin implementing new technology use, then sharing the successes and supporting others, quickly led to whole faculty buy in after the first year. Seeing how students embraced the technology and discovery in pursuing learning was a great motivator for all involved and the project snowballed in the second year.
This process brought all stakeholders on board as results were seen and shared because it did create a belief in the change. Now, instead of leading a class through a daily regiment of lectures, teachers are spending much more time guiding independent learning and coaching students in discovery. The faculty is now looking to the future and how student collaboration and creativity can be increased through the use of technology as well. This certainly does fit the constructivist idea of taking knowledge and making it their own through discovery and transformation.