So one minute you’re planning which cheap package holiday to book for half term and the next you’re flippantly replying to a tweet about an educational research conference in Washington DC. ‘Do they want to know about Journal Clubs?’ you ask. ‘Keep going…’ comes the reply.
So Portugal turned into Washington DC, and a tour of a local church turned into a tour of the White House. There are a lot of people who have done a lot of unexpected things because of researchED, but walking round the White House is pretty epic even by rED standards. It came at the end of a fairly intense week as we decided we’d go to New York for a few days before DC and it essentially turned into 7 days straight of open-topped bus tours which is hard-core even for us. To be honest, one of the reasons it’s taken me so long to write about it is that I’ve not quite come down from the whirlwind. The downside of this is that now I’ve had more time to process it, I’ve got so much more to say.
Other people have written about some of the sessions I went to like Kate Walsh’s and Ben Riley’s, and they’ve covered Dylan Wiliam’s brilliant keynote in varying amounts of detail so I won’t repeat that, however I did love that some of his themes were picked up throughout the day and this made for a unifying thread among some challenging ideas.
My favourite session by far was Ruth Nield‘s session on ‘Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships’. One of the reasons it’s taken me so long to write about #rEDWash is the amount of time I’ve spent looking through and getting sucked into her links – there’s some brilliant stuff out there! I went to this session partly because of a project that I’ve been working on with the School of Education at the University of Nottingham around collaborations between schools and researchers and I’m always up for new ideas (‘What Matters‘ – I’ll probably write about another time), and also to hear more about the wider picture of research use in schools in America. The day before we had been hosted by The Center for Transformative Teaching and Learning at St Andrews Episcopal School for lunch and one of the questions they were asking us was about how to widen the scope of education research in American settings. I got the impression that there are lots of pockets of activity and it’s a question of how these can come together – perhaps easier with the smaller scale of the UK – but also the more limited use of social media with practitioners in the US.
Turns out there’s quite a bit of stuff going on with the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) (apologies if I get muddled with this, I wrote my notes furiously and interpreting my special shorthand a week later is proving awkward). Ruth set out the different strands of work they are doing and it sounds amazing – if the College of Teaching wants research to be at its core then they could do worse than looking at what’s going on here; the US may be behind in regards to practitioner involvement with research, but it’s all there for the taking. Their work is independent and covers a range of practical approaches, much more than just RCTs.
She started by discussing the value of education research, the disconnect between schools and researchers (something we’re all familiar with) and how their researcher-practitioner partnerships (RRP) are aiming to address this. Researchers and practitioners work together over time to co-construct agendas of work for mutual benefit. This allows them to work on research that is more relevant and hopefully more likely to inform practice; they are able to form long-term working relationships and both sides can develop professionally. To support these partnerships (which can be in cities, states, cross-state, cross-district) they have Regional Education Laboratories (REL) working with”Research Alliances” of education practitioners and policymakers. They identify areas of need and work together to analyse data and conduct research to develop and test strategies. The IES provides seed-grants of around $400,000 to develop projects for which they can go on to apply for further funding if required. Projects mentioned included one that created software to track progress and now has a national audience.
In addition to the RELs, the IES has the What Works Clearinghouse (how had I not seen this before?) which ‘reviews the existing research on different programs, products, practices, and policies in education’ and hosts intervention reports, reviews of individual studies and a series of practice guides that they are now seeing schools adapt and use for their setting. Tom Bennett came in to the session towards the end and drew similarities to the EEF in the UK; this is so much more than that; it’s sort of like a cross between the EEF Toolkit and the Literacy intervention review Tom Sherrington talked about at rED15, but it’s nicer to look at with simple infographics (including a lovely representation/summary of the setting for each intervention). You can see effectiveness, improvement, and my favourite bit – you can compare interventions. Something that really impressed me was that all their reports go through peer review before they are released (see picture for questions). Ruth was clear to point out that they aren’t just interested in the ‘gold standard’ of research – they publish a cross-section of work, summaries and of course RCTs.
On top of all this they have ERIC – the Education Resources Information Center. I did know about this one and they’ve recently changed the website to be a bit more easy to use. ERIC is a digital library of education research and other information – in their words ‘ERIC’s mission is to provide a comprehensive, easy-to-use, searchable Internet-based bibliographic and full-text database of education research and information for educators, researchers, and the general public.’. How can we not be excited about this? Perfect for Journal Clubs too…
One of the issues the IES, and research engagement in US schools generally, seems to have is with ‘reach’ and I asked how they get their message out to schools. They use social media, professional associations and each REL has a governing board with regional commissioning officers that work in their localities. I’m sure there could be more. I was already following one of the IES twitter accounts and have since followed more, but when I look at how many followers these accounts have or how many RTs/Likes the posts have they are no where near the amount that similar UK accounts have. This is a bigger issue than the IES of course; one of the things that stood out to me and others was the low number of classroom teachers at rEDWash in comparison to the UK events. I’m certain that if more teachers engaged with this work, the impact could be massive. I don’t know that I have any answers to the questions this throws up, but I’m sure researchED has a part to play.
There’s so much I’ve not written about yet, just with Ruth Nield’s session, and I’m at a ludicrous amount of words already. I’ve not talked about my session, the people we met, the pub, what’s next for me and research. This has been an amazing, crazy week and I’ve thought about researchED a lot – as always it’s about keeping up the momentum and sharing ideas. I’ll have a think and write about it more next.
WE WROTE A BOOK!
Ok, so the boys at school wrote a book, and it was through a scheme for schools to publish their work, but we have BOOKS!
As mentioned previously our school has taken part Scholastic’s ‘We Are Writers’ scheme. I’d put a flyer to one side some time ago and I suggested it again when we were thinking of ideas for the reading festival. It’s open to all schools (and I think other organisations for children), for pupils up to 18 and it’s free to take part. There are various rules and conditions (all easily met) like you have to order a minimum of 50 copies and promise, hand on heart, to display posters etc – their FAQs are here if you fancy a look. Each book costs £5.99 and schools are free to charge what they like for copies so it’s a good way to raise some money, but we decided to use some of our Year 7 catch up literacy premium money to pay for one copy for each pupil and then gave parents and carers the option to purchase extra copies at cost price if they wanted them. As with all Scholastic orders, there’s the rewards scheme (so money towards more books) and free p&p to schools. Ooh, and school gets a free copy too.
When you sign up you’re given a timeline to complete all the steps – from writing chapters and editing to proof reading and front cover design. Each piece of work is a chapter (need a min. 50 chapters, max. 880 pages). You can include stories, poems, scripts, whatever you fancy. Just text though, no pictures. You set the book up on the website and pupils create a login to add their chapter. It’s all very simple and looks like a familiar word processing form – you can paste into the box if you’ve written it elsewhere and administrators can add and edit chapters anyway so don’t worry if you’ve got a sweary pupil.
You can invite other staff members to help put it all together/ proof read etc. I don’t think anyone other than the admin can edit though. Completed chapters (and whole book) can be viewed and downloaded as a pdf so you can see what it all looks like. Even once you’ve submitted it, you get a printed copy to proof read and edit before placing your final order so it’s not too late to change it.
In addition to pupil work there is a space for a forward. Our headteacher wrote ours but it can be anyone. Every year there is an additional forward from a children’s author, this year’s is Eoin Colfer (which is lovely because I heart him a bit). The only regret I have with our forward is that we didn’t include the name of the boy who designed the front cover and we should’ve done because that’s the place you can do it.
The front cover includes your school’s name, the ‘We Are Writers’ title, and a square box for your own design. This is anything you want to upload. You could just use your school logo or, like we did, have a competition to design the image. Obviously the usual copyright issues are there. The background colour of the book can be chosen from loads of options. We went with the navy blue because we liked it but there are colours to match every school headed notepaper you can think of.
Finally, you will get a stock of customised posters to put up at school with your chosen price and a few sentences to let people know what you need them to know. Plus a stack of order forms to send home. It’s all very organised.
This is our book. It’s beautiful.
We had a lot of different stories and a couple of poems. Lots of magic 50ps, zombies, and a few dreamcatchers (rather suspect these are linked with classwork). Interesting to see how different Key Stages write – KS2 particularly descriptive and a thousand alternatives to ‘said’; KS3 with lots of short, snappy sentences to build their tension. We had a special assembly to hand them out and for the most part I think they were really quite chuffed to see their work in print. Wouldn’t be surprised if we did it again.
I can’t share the whole book but here are a few of my favourites which will give you a taste of our creative genius and an idea of the book’s layout. The Key Stage 4 one is clearly based on the WW1 poetry he’d been studying in English (pleased some of that stuck in his brain so fingers crossed for results day). The Key Stage 3 one was a tricky choice – so many to choose from and I think this was one of the ones read out in assembly. The Key Stage 2 one is written collaboratively by the group that go out for extra reading. It proves that anyone can take part in this no matter how confident they are with writing, everyone can tell a story. I love it.