What Twitter Means to Me.

Was asked recently what Twitter meant for me. Here is what I said:
For me, Twitter is many things. It is a Personal Learning Network that has put me in touch with educators from around the world. I have learned from some of the soundest minds in learning ranging from classroom teachers to academics – and more.
Through Twitter I am linked with teachers, journalists, politicians, trade unionists, writers, pundits and professors, old friends and the President of the United States of America.
Many of the teachers I follow blog about their teaching and the learning in their classes. Others have roles in leadership or management. Twitter is the conduit to them through the links shared.
Have a question about a teaching strategy, a resource or an article? A simple request in a tweet can in moments spread around the world with many people offering solutions, links and support.
It offers a connection with ideas and with people. Though that connection has at times been camaraderie of pain, more often it has been one of hope. Twitter shares success and things that inspire. Teachers also share: the things that have gone wrong; the things that worry them or the things that stand in the way of doing their best for their pupils.
Teachers can take a more active role in pursuing support to improve what they do and the impact that it has on their pupils. Twitter facilitates this via the links made, shared and sent and through the #Teachmeets and #pedagoo events that have sprung out from them. These bring the virtual links into the real world and make them even stronger.
If anything, the problem that people face is one of curating the best and most relevant links, blogs and articles. Twitter links to an almost limitless online library.
For organisations, Twitter is to me something that they must embrace. If people are spending increasing amounts of their time online, it is into this space that organisations have to move. Failing to do so may mean failing to maintain relevance.
The energy shown by many recent popular movements are inspiring. Long-standing organisations can use twitter to similarly inform, involve and inspire their own members.
Still, we have to respect that in many democratic organisations participation requires turning up to meetings and events. New forms of organising will take time to blend with and enhance the old.
We must remain vigilant to some of the destructive and harmful behaviours to which twitter has led. Cyberbullying is real. People are clearer on how to capture and report hostile or abusive messages but employers need to protect their staff from abuse.
Yes an individual teacher may contravene their employers’ code of conduct with a shared picture or comment, but managers cannot and must not over-react. In my own local authority, we are developing support for the victims of online abuse and those to whom it is reported. We need to get the balance right.
I’m a Twitter optimist. The opportunities for help, support and learning that it gives far outweigh any disadvantages.

Solidarity With Those Fighting the Privatisation of Basic Education

Remarks in Support of Motion M
SSTA Congress May 2014

Congress notes with alarm the increasing trend towards the privatisation of the provision of basic education in some countries
 Congress pledges the solidarity and support of the SSTA to Education International and those others resisting such changes.

Fife District

As I am sure Congress will be aware. 3 weeks ago over in the Nigeria, Boko Haram abducted over 200 school girls.
But you may not know that since 2009 the Nigeria Union of Teachers has seen 171 of its members killed by the same group.
You may also not know that in central Nigeria, primary teachers are currently on an indefinite strike.
Their demand: a promised but undelivered minimum wage of only $112 – per month.
They have been on strike since last October.
From Wednesday to yesterday, Nigeria’s schools and government offices were closed.
Closed to enable a high level of protection but not for school girls or their teachers.
But for visiting foreign dignitaries attending a meeting of the World Economic Forum in Abuja, the capital city.
The Forum featured sessions on how education systems in Africa can ‘benefit’ from the role of the Private Sector.
Session include ‘How …innovative public-private co-operation models [are] accelerating investment in crucial services.’
Featured speakers include think tanks dedicated to the privatisation of public education systems in the US and agencies that only this week agreed a deal that will see the privatisation of Nigeria’s power sector.
The session was facilitated by one Gordon Brown – he of Public Private Partnership fame.
This commoditisation of public assets is not unique to Nigeria, nor indeed the power sector.
In 2013 Education International reported on trends in freedom of association and in collective bargaining in the education sector since 2008.
In those countries affected by the current crisis, there has been a marked reduction in education budgets with crisis used to justify pro-market reforms.
There has also been a marked increase in the casualisation of the teacher workforce and a reduction in collective bargaining.
In  Senegal the government is recruiting huge numbers of volunteer and contract teachers. Undermining both the quality of education provided and the representativity of trade unions.
In Poland it has become easier for local authorities to save money by handing over the running of small schools to private providers.
Similar moves have been seen in Hungary.
In Spain, huge budget pressures have seen: Cuts in staffing levels, increases in class sizes and further privatisation.
In the USA there has been a drive for some time in many states to reduce or remove collective bargaining from teachers.
In some states it is now illegal for a trade union fee to be deducted from pay checks. In others, collective bargaining is limited to negotiating a wage rise up to the rate of inflation.
There has been a drive towards linking teachers’ pay to standardised test scores and the ending of teacher tenure, and the creation of privately run but publicly funded Charter schools’.
The prospects seem bleak and could get far worse.
Currently, the EU and the USA are negotiating over what is called the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. 
It’s a free trade agreement negotiated behind closed doors with no democratic accountability.
It’s intended to make foreign investment less ‘risky’ for multinational corporations.
This would be done through ending tariffs on trade, opening up markets and much else.
We should be concerned over much of this but especially at the introduction of investor-protection.
As this would allow private companies to sue governments they perceive as threatening their investment.
We already have a taste of this.
The German government decided to phase out nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster.
Swedish Energy Group Vattenfall is suing them for €3.7 billion due to potential lost profits!
A Canadian firm is threatening to sue Romania for $4billion in damages. 
Because Romania’s parliament voted against allowing them to create an open-cast gold and silver mine in the country.
Such attacks are not solely reserved for far-off continents and countries.
In England free schools are publicly funded but:
do not have to employ qualified teachers;
do not have to follow the National Curriculum;
can set their own pay and conditions for teachers.
Already some companies are seeking permission to set-up and run such schools on a for-profit basis.
There is also an increasing involvement of the private sector throughout Higher education. 
This potentially opens the door to multinational involvement in education.
If so, are we to see governments sued for preventing profiteering?
The question for us is are we immune?
Education is devolved and may give some protection.
For now but waiting is not good enough.
But I suggest to you that we have a role to play to promote a different vision of public education.
A vision that puts pupils before profits.
A vision that rejects public education as a for-profit venture subject to the whims of corporations.
A vision of properly resourced schools, with qualified teachers. Teachers that benefit from collective bargaining.
I ask that we spread that vision and extend our solidarity to those around the world who share it.

I started off by talking about the girls kidnapped and the teachers killed in Nigeria.
Neither they nor the education they seek should be a commodity to be bought and sold.
Please support the motion.

End Child Poverty

Remarks in Moving Motion L

SSTA Congress May 2014

In welcoming the publication by the Scottish Government of the 2014 revision of the Child Poverty Strategy with its emphasis on reducing the attainment gap affecting pupils from the poorest backgrounds, Congress notes that simply amending institutional practice or seeking change without accounting for the impact on those delivering public services of recent and continuing cutbacks will fail to see the goals of the Strategy achieved.
Congress therefore calls upon both the Scottish and UK Governments to make ending child poverty a reality together with resourcing public services with the necessary tools to end the attainment gap for the poorest pupils.

Fife District

President, Congress.
We live in a country that is rich in natural resources, rich in its history and rich in its internationalism.
We claim for ourselves a character based upon education, tolerance and looking after the Common Weal.
But there is a stain on that character.
That stain is the fact that so many of Scotland’s children, too many of Scotland’s children – 1 in 5 – grow up in poverty.
In some streets and schemes in Scotland, it’s one hundred percent of the families that are living below the breadline.
This poverty is a crucial factor in leading to a continuing attainment gap between the richest and the poorest in our society.
Just this week, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation published research that quantified this gap.
By aged 3 there’s already a clear gap in both vocabulary and problem solving. Between the richest and the poorest.
By aged 5 this is a 13-month gap in vocabulary development and a 10-month gap in problem solving.
This gap continues throughout school.
Researchers point to the data from surveys of both literacy and numeracy, showing that in literacy: 
‘Overall, there was a 17, 14 and 16 percentage point difference between children from the least and most deprived backgrounds at P4, P7 and S2 .
‘In numeracy the gap widens throughout primary schooling to leave a pupil from the most deprived backgrounds to be only half as likely to be performing well or very well than those from least deprived backgrounds.
Finally, whilst attainment at the end of S4 has risen overall… a significant and persistent gap remains. 
What therefore is does the government propose to do about it?
Earlier this year, the Scottish government updated its Child Poverty Strategy. 
In it there are number of key steps in the period ahead:
Firstly to reduce income poverty and material deprivation.
Secondly, to break inter-generational cycles of poverty, inequality and deprivation.
Third, to address area-based factors which currently exacerbate the effects of individual poverty.
Congress, I do not believe that any of these things are in any way disagreeable.
But are they achievable? 
At the heart of the strategy is of course, education.
So what are the big agendas for education in making progress in this area?
As we might expect the list is as follows:
CFE, reforms to Initial Teacher Education, the new Scottish College for Educational Leadership, the Insight benchmarking tool, GIRFEC…and a plethora of schemes, initiatives, committees and reports.
The authors of the Joseph Rowntree report have called for some immediate action:
First, Government should provide guidance for schools on how to use the policies and freedoms they have to make a difference to poorer children.
Second to start talking to schools about the data they need, and how they must use it.
Third, Give teachers and head teachers robust knowledge about what has worked, or what is likely to work to reduce the attainment gap.
These are all important suggestions.
But if the result is more assessment and testing to generate more data it may not work.
Even if there is to be better data or advice – where will the time come from to analyse and incorporate this?
As budgets are cut, and pressure increases – when will we be able to link up with partners to plan better outcomes for pupils?
If there are learning and teaching approaches better at reducing the attainment gap – where is the time to develop and adopt them?
Like most people here today, I have a job,
A good standard of living,
And no problems meeting many of my wants.
But the parents of many of our pupils, have no job,
A very low standard of living,
And real problems in meeting their needs.
There is hardly a person in this room,
nor any teacher in Scotland,
who wouldn’t want to do all that they can to reduce the attainment gap.
But, if it is just another target to be set amongst dozens,
if it’s just yet another priority in an endless list,
it will never happen.
We cannot reduce the attainment gap for pupils by increasing the development gap for teachers.
But there are other challenges we face.
As both you, President and Aamar Anwar said yesterday, we have massive inequality in wealth.
The richest 20% of the population have 60% of the wealth – 100 times more than the bottom 20%.
The richest 1% have as much wealth as 60% of the population.
This is simply immoral – and requires government to act and act now.
And if the government wishes to see the attainment gap close then it must resource and equip us to play our part in doing so.
The Scottish Government in their strategy and in their Independence White Paper say that they are limited by what devolution only allows them to do.
But it doesn’t matter if we have a devolved Scotland or an independent Scotland what we need is a more equal Scotland.
It’s not Westminster that has failed to support teachers in cfe or new national qualifications.
And yes it is Westminster that has given us austerity but it’s Holyrood that’s given us a council tax freeze – and a consequent funded gap for local councils.
And in relation to Child poverty.
It doesn’t matter who is the monkey and who is the organ grinder, we need action from all levels of government that puts ending child poverty at the centre – at the centre of what is does.
And it must put public services and their staff into a position to best achieve that goal.
Only then can we ensure teachers and schools support all children, all children to grow up in dignity and with the chance to fulfil their potential.
Please support the motion.

The Need for Collegiate Decisions on Delaying new NQ Higher

Remarks in support of Motion E at SSTA Congress

May 2014

Congress believes that the philosophy underpinning Scotland’s curriculum is one of respecting the professional judgment of teachers and calls upon all local authority and school managers to ensure that decisions on implementing new Higher qualifications in 2014/15 or 2015/16 are taken in a genuinely collegiate manner at school and departmental level.

Education Committee 


This motion came out of the Education committee’s concern.

Concern in believing the ministerial announcement on any delay implementing the new Higher.
Concern that a sound business case for delay at department level would face a block either at local authority or at school level.
Because frankly, the minister can say what he wants.
He is not in charge of presentation policy in your school, my school or any school.
To test our concern we submitted a Freedom of Information request to each local authority that asked the following:
How many secondary schools do you manage?
Will any secondary schools under your management present S5 candidates for the ‘old’ higher in session 2014-15?

Where the answer to 2 is yes:
3. How many schools will continue to offer old compared with the new Higher?
4. In which subjects?
We have still to receive a small number of responses but I can share with you what we have so far been able to reveal.
First all local authorities were able to answer question 1. Most even did so correctly.
There were a mixed bag of responses with some giving a subject by subject, school by school breakdown.

Others were more vague.
There are clearly some subjects which show a fairly consistent pattern across the country of delaying.
Amongst these but not exclusively are: Computing, the 3 sciences and Geography.

Indeed it seems as though the subjects showing the most change are the ones that are more likely to be delayed in the coming year.
Congress, if a wee FOI request from the SSTA can reveal this information –  one has to ask why no one else seems to be gathering it – let alone acting on it?
Mind you there was one local authority who I will not name and whilst they could tell us how many schools they had, they didn’t have the information on the other questions.

In other words they have no idea which school is doing what let alone which department.
Some councils responded to us that yes they’d be pushing ahead with the new Higher.

But would be doing so through working with Principal Teachers to see what support was needed.
Others are bringing subject groups together to look at what they need and what they collectively can support one another in doing. 

In some cases, an initial desire to press ahead is being reviewed in the light of teacher and school concerns over:

SQA issues, departmental capability and what is best for pupils.

But Congress, we cannot have a postcode lottery of delay or support yet this is exactly what seems to be happening.

Even if our information from local authorities as accurate, we cannot tell if such flexibility is a reality in schools.

Because not all schools have the sort of collegiate discussions to ensure that the best decisions are made.
Congress, the ministerial announcement did not and could not promise a veto over the new higher for teachers alone.

It is right that an appropriate case is made by departments to either move ahead with the new higher or continue with the old.
But Congress, when such a case is made in needs to be listened to – and acted upon.

It is in nobody’s interest that out of ignorance nor vanity nor dogma or some other reason that a decision is made.
Of course, a major reason for delay and worries over implementation is an anger at the SQA.

But just as we should be angry at the SQA for what they have done to us, we should be angry at Education Scotland for what they’ve failed to do for us.

The SQA had to come up with a qualifications system that followed on from a broad general education. 

Education Scotland were to support teachers to ensure a Broad General education was in place and that the preparation for the new qualifications was too.
In these tasks Education Scotland have not just been found wanting they have been virtually invisible.
Whilst some have accused the SQA of incompetence, Education Scotland can rightly be accused of negligence.
In our survey relating to preparedness for implementation, it is worthwhile to note many things.
One being that as well as SQA being the subject of members’  criticism, Education Scotland were not that far behind.
With 93% of respondents indicating that support from Education Scotland was inadequate.
In response there will be steps taken by SQA, by Education Scotland and by others to ensure that lessons are learned from how National 4 and 5 have been implemented.

But with new timetables barely a few weeks away, action is needed urgently to provide support for the future and not just an evaluation of the past.

Congress the reality is that we are all implementing new Higher if not this year then next.

We need a collegiate discussion and decision on this in each and every school – 

and support for departments whatever decision is made.

This requires the input and a commitment to a collegiate discussion and agreement from all.

And we urge all agents involved in such decisions to ensure that the right decision is made for the right reasons.

Please support the motion.

Investigating the gender imbalance in the teaching profession.

Remarks to SSTA Congress in moving the following motion:

Congress, in noting the current gender imbalance within the teacher profession, calls upon the Scottish Government, together with the General Teaching Council for Scotland, to commission such research as is necessary to investigate and identify the causal factors of this research, and to recommend specific steps that might be taken so that the gap might be reduced.

Over my teaching career we have seen a significant change in the gender makeup of the teacher workforce.

When I was at Jordanhill in 1996, the secondary teacher workforce reflected the gender make up of Scottish society – 49% male. 51% female.
Since then, the proportion of male teachers has seen a steady decline with the census in 2012 showing the gender split as 38% male and 62% female.
SSTA membership reflects this too with current membership data showing that the gender split is 36% male and 64% female.
If we add in the figures for primary teachers the picture is even more stark –
in 2012 the overall proportion of teachers who were male was only 23% 
8% in primary and 4 per cent in the pre-school sector.
However, simply looking at the overall figures for men and women, masks important variation between subjects:
In 2006 over 95% of Home Economics teachers were female and almost 90% of Technical Education teachers were male and whilst the proportion of female Technical teachers by 2012 had almost doubled to 19% the number of male Home Economics teachers had halved to 2.5 %
In my own subject modern studies where in 2006 there was virtual gender parity – women now make up 57%.
Some of these changes can partially be accounted for through the retirement of older teachers a majority of whom were men – at the same time as in increasing proportion of new entrants to the profession were younger women.  
Why is this a potential issue anyway? 
Congress, it is my view that a heavily gendered teaching profession potentially forms a barrier to achieving gender equality.
Wether it is in the case of visible role models or the more hidden messages received by pupils.
But, the focus of the motion is not to get bogged down in the potential effects of these trends it is to seek to establish the causes of them.
There are myriad potential factors playing out that research has thrown up:
Differing views that men and women have about the job of a teacher, the conditions attached or the pay and prospects.
Males may be less likely to have voluntary teaching experience and this could impact on their chances of admission to teacher training;
Some suggest that teaching – even in the secondary sector is increasingly being seen as a caring role as the care and welfare expectations of staff increase.
These are before we even consider the negative press that all-too-often our profession receives from the media.
Congress, recent events may make the gender gap accelerate.
Hardly a week goes by it seems without a previously popular male light entertainment figure being arrested, charged, jailed or bailed
for alleged sexual offences against children and young people.
Indeed I know of some small-scale research carried out in New Zealand amongst male pre-school teachers that found that firstly, there were only 4 in the town and secondly all had at some point in their careers had faced accusations of inappropriate touching of children in their care.
The challenge in restoring a more representative balance in the make up of the profession may be in the process of becoming even harder.
Recently a study from Strathclyde University into the experience of male teachers in primary schools was reported in TESS as finding: 
“…a gender divide in primary teaching: explicitly and implicitly, men and women are often expected to perform different roles and bring different qualities to the job.”
The question for us, is wether or not we as secondary teachers perpetuate a similar gender divide.
The same TESS report notes that this research echoes GTCS commissioned research from 2005
This analysed the extent to which the teaching profession was drawn from and mirrored the whole community that it serves.
This research found significant differences between the composition of the profession and the people of Scotland in relation not only to gender but also social class, ethnicity, disability and sexuality amongst others.
The report called for a number of actions to be taken including taking into account the  ‘total gender regime of schools and teacher education institutions.’ avoiding over-simplification of the issue and developing strong anti-bias education and non-discriminatory practice. 
But what happened?
Not much.
The situation was raised in late 2010 in ‘Teaching Scotland’s Future by Donaldson who noted the gender imbalance but only said that along with wider challenges of recruitment: “Future policies need to address these challenges.”
However, in the National Partnership Group response to Donaldson the word gender is not not even mentioned, far less the challenge being addressed.
The Scottish Government and GTCS should go back to that 2005 research and re-examine the issue as things stand now.
Congress, I believe it’s time to attempt to get to the heart of the gender imbalance in our profession in order to establish genuine not perceived causal factors.
Only then can we move beyond stereotypes, and seek to ensure that our profession reflects our society and that gender equality is a possibility.

A GLOW that can command the respect and support of teachers.

Remarks in moving the following motion successfully at SSTA Congress:

Congress notes the report from the ICT in Education Group set up by the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning and its recommendations regarding the future of GLOW and related ICT issues in schools.  Congress notes the failure of GLOW to achieve its potential and the resultant frustration for many teachers and pupils.
Congress calls upon the Cabinet Secretary to commission a successor to GLOW that can command the respect and, support of all Scotland’s teachers.

At Congress last year I argued that within the wider context of ICT in schools that:

“Unless and until schools can have IT ‘solutions’ that allow staff and pupils to immerse themselves in the task they are seeking to perform rather than… in the frustration of hardware and software…we will never see a genuine IT revolution.
It never fails to amaze me that the people who seem to dictate IT – are people who simply do not understand it.”
GLOW was conceived in and designed for a previous era in IT – where top down decision making trumped end-user experience.
It’s easy and understandable to take pot-shots at GLOW but GLOW’s failure was neither technological, nor software related but a failure of project management, implementation and communication.
As such it shares much of the same misfortune as CFE.
Following the withdrawal from Google from the tendering process for GLOW’s renewal, the Cabinet Secretary Mike Russell announced not only that the current GLOW contract would be extended until the end of this year but also that a group would be brought together to consider GLOW’s long term user-centred future.
Unlike nearly every such panel that relates to education or schools, a significant proportion of the group would be made up of – wait for it – practicing teachers! With the involvement of two pupils also facilitated.
The Group, was led by the Chief Scientific Adviser Professor Muffy Calder. It spent 5 months visiting schools across Scotland to look at the experience of using ICT for learning.
The report – published in January of this year, made a wide number of recommendations ranging from how the system is set up and supported, how it looks on screen to how it actually works.
Now the fundamental questions that any future GLOW must answer are simple:
Firstly, why use it?
Why put the effort in to change our teaching practice to incorporate the tools that GLOW offers?
How can it ensure that learning and teaching are the better because of it?
How can we ensure quality of and equality in access to GLOW – when 32 local authorities with disparate policies, priorities and resources have to lead the way?
An example of this is the issue of web filtering.
32 different filters meaning what is available to some is blocked to others.
At one point this year my school’s own website was blocked by the council filter.
The reason given was that I might be exposed to dangerous content!
Maybe the staff photo?
On this, the ICT Excellence group report suggests a simple solution – national filtering, linked to your GLOW account and avoiding stupid blocks put in place by non-educators.
At the heart of the new GLOW is in the words of Jaye Richards Hill, one of the ICT Excellence Group members:
“A secure authentication service providing access to different levels of tools and services. 
Some are core, like productivity tools and some national provided content. Others are integrated and supported by authentication.
There’s room for users to bring in their own tools and services in to one learning space. It’s responsive and user driven.
“Leveraging social network elements to share activity turns the online Glow into a thriving community, with a strong emphasis on sharing and communication between all users. 
Asking questions, discussing class work, with peers and teachers via the platform will really build a community for anytime anyplace learning.”
She refers to GLOW – as a potential school in the cloud.
That’s the vision – we need to now turn this vision into a reality.
Part of that will require better project management and leadership from the Scottish Government and Education Scotland.
It requires the direction of travel to be set by teachers rather than civil servants or corporate interests.
It also requires pressure from us – the end users.
We need to regard a digital learning environment as a right for ourselves and our pupils.
The ambition of GLOW will fail – if we are still stuck with internet connections slower than carrier pigeons, or computers that you seem to have to shovel coal into the back of to make them work.
On that note – I hope that GLOW isn’t one of Alex Salmond’s ‘shovel-ready’ capital projects.
Congress, the SSTA should support the ongoing efforts to take GLOW from its past failures to future success.
We should be vigilant to ensure that we do not have a successor to GLOW that commands the frustration and criticism of the profession – rather than its respect and support.

The Observer

With my current S3 Modern Studies class I have been working on enabling them in shaping what we do. Last term through using a detailed survey on what goes on in class, sharing it with them and inviting them to analyse the results (in part this was also about developing their skills in analysing complex information).
In school we are trying to improve through the vast majority of staff taking part in a Teacher Learning Community related to AIFL – but one of the persistent challenges is making/finding the time to visit one another’s classes and give some feedback on what we are doing. We are also seeking to create templates that allow for a consistent approach when observing one another. It is a tick box sheet which runs the risk of foisting mechanistically similar lessons on us all and I’ve felt that it needs to be trialled before any roll-out.
These things all coalesced recently when I asked one of my S3 pupils to take the tick-box sheet and observe my lesson. It would be a challenge for both of us – for her, to metaphorically step outside of the class and what they were doing and try to take in the range of learning and teaching activities that were going on – and do so whilst trying to make sense of a bit of paper referring to QIs! For me – encouraging a pupil to take a warts and all look at learning and teaching in our class (without the possibility of sugar-coating that a colleague might add).
I gave her no prism, no advice and no conditions – it would be entirely up to her what she wrote.
In the lesson itself I did nothing differently to what I would normally do – there’s simply no point to any evaluation if it is of a false single impression!
A brief chat at the end of the lesson was followed up a couple of days later with a much more detailed dialogue as she explained her choices and comments and detailed her reasoning. I also explained and talked her through what those pesky QIs were referring to.
What struck me was firstly, the pupil’s remark that in thinking that the noise level was greater as pupils entered the room – may simply have been down to the fact that she was observing it – noticing it whilst not being part of it. That there were clearly things that ordinarily she would not see/hear or in any way notice – as she would be focussed on what she would be learning.
Some things were left off of the ticks – as the concepts/jargon were not clear but following our discussion, a second observation would be able to address these things too.
In any case, the tick boxes were almost an utter irrelevance to the quality dialogue about lesson organisation, assessment, behaviour management, pupil motivation and much else besides. I was given more feedback and insight into my lesson than from most if not all observations I have ever had.
As someone who has supported and encouraged pupil voice throughout my career, it has been a powerful reminder that there is a huge and continually untapped resource for improving learning and teaching within each of our own classrooms. It is also clear that there is nothing to fear from seeking out and listening to the views of our pupils – and plenty to gain.
The next stage will be to share some of the dialogue and outcomes with the rest of the class – and to work on what we’ve agreed are areas for me to improve upon. As well as this, I’ll be keenly sharing what I’ve done with colleagues and encouraging them to do likewise.

Protecting Teachers Online

At the present time the UK government, so alarmed at the dangers coming from the online world are planning on sweeping snooping powers that would allow the state to capture and monitor every email, text message and website use as part of a scheme that they cannot even say what benefits it would bring nor provide any reasons for it.

These proposals are an extreme over-reaction to many existing problems but what is needed is better safety online for people – not the end of freedom of thought or expression online.

Such networks are used by many to keep in touch, to get in touch and to share life events, movies, images and as I mentioned previously – as a huge opportunity for learning.

Regrettably, as Elish Angiolini said yesterday, they can also be used for hatred.

However, where we draw the line online is becoming an evermore nuanced question. For social networking undoubtedly played a significant part in the Arab Spring – helping people to educate, agitate and organise in the name of democracy yet, to many teachers and schools it has been a major bone of contention.

Though, it seems to have slowly died a death – can folks remember the famed ‘Rate my Teacher’ website? Where pupils after having been on the receiving end of a ‘telling’ could anonymously log on and then berate the adult who had the audacity to want to teach them maths. That site has fallen in popularity as people not just the young have access to an array of social networks including:

facebook, twitter, google plus, pinterest, twitpic, ping, BBM, youtube, digg…the list goes on and on…as do the possibilities for staff in schools to be abused.

Such cases are increasingly becoming part our work in defending and protecting members.

In a recent interview for the BBC’s Newsbeat a teacher claimed to have been forced to quit her first teaching job due to cyberbullying by pupils who made up allegations and spread stories about her online.

Recently also, a school rep approached me for advice when pupils had been caught taking images of teachers and using them to superimpose the teacher’s face on another and much more inappropriate image.

In this case, the culprits were caught the images deleted and parents informed. But congress, I’m not so sure that in all schools or in all local authorities there is sufficient support and protection for staff that are treated in this way.

Mostly, as far as I can tell the focus of councils has been to prevent staff from utilising the online world to criticise their employer – not responding to cyberbullying. This motion seeks to redress that and calls on all councils to ensure that staff are protected from abuse – from preventing it occurring and in dealing with it when it does.

Now Facebook and other social networks have made many changes that allow people to immediately flag up inappropriate content. This has been due to governmental pressure and pressure from groups concerned at the potential for abuse of children. However, there is much deeper concern with regard to facebook and others.

If you are not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold.

Facebook is about to launch itself onto the stock market in what may be the fourth biggest stock flotation in history with estimates valuing the company at $100 billion dollars.

It, along with google makes its money through targeting adverts at you based upon data it gathers about you. It needs therefore to have its users share as much as possible about themselves to draw more advertising revenue.

Of particular concern is the routine changing of privacy settings on websites that render what was once private – more open and available to onlookers.

The GTCS guidelines seek to help staff protect themselves from online abuse, from breaking their employers policies and potentially facing discipline through sensible advice and sensible precautions because increasingly here teachers (and others) have come a cropper by posting items online that they thought were just being seen by friends but in actual fact were available to all.

The GTCS are to be commended for being realistic – there is no point bolting the stable door on social networking – it’s too late. The reason why facebook is ‘worth $100bn – is that it has almost 900 million users – with a huge proportion of them being the pupils in our schools.

This issue affects not only teachers but pupils too and it’s a fundamental reason why blocking social media is not the answer.
Blocking hides away the potential for educating responsible usage


We must ensure that our members are protected from abuse online and the only way that will be done is by promoting responsible online behaviour that respects people even if they disagree with them. Since this noble idea is but an ideal, in the meantime, our employers must protect us from abuse when it does occur and must advise staff on how to stay safe.

Safety online doesn’t mean censorship online, nor does it mean tracking every email, facebook message or tweet. It doesn’t mean closing off the internet because to be safe online we don’t need to regulate the internet, we require to regulate our children or rather their parents.

As the Guardian’s technology editor Charles Arthur recently wrote:

“Frankly, I’m amazed by the tales of parents who let their children have TVs or computers in their bedroom. First of all, it’s like telling them not to socialise with you; and it’s by socialisation that we work out what we do and don’t accept as sensual, and sexual, and pornographic (and where the line lies). Watching TV together means you can discuss what you’re watching. Having computers in shared spaces (effectively banning solitary use), using the filtering systems that they have built in – these are solutions that work. They don’t need legislation; they don’t need complicated filters that will be routed around in a flash… they just need to be part of the family. You can’t turn off the internet, nor make its denizens respectable. You can, however, turn off the computer, or explain respectability to your child.”

Congress, It falls to us, as an association to protect our members and therefore it makes sense for to create user-friendly guidance for them on how to behave online and be protected too.

Please support the motion.

Changing the SSTA view on Tech

President, Congress

The area of IT is one where this audience, like the society it reflects, have mixed experience and expertise.

Regardless of this, there are some things that are very clear indeed.

First, the social media genie is out of the bottle and it isn’t going back in.

Second, we are now living in what amounts to a post-PC world with computing increasingly mobile and based on apps on smartphone and tablets rather than clunky old style boxes that sit on our desks.

With this [holding up an iPhone] I can call someone; email them; message them. I can search the web, shop, read a book and watch a film.

I tracked the development of my, as yet unborn baby and now record her growth as a child and then stream the videos to the net or the TV.

She is 6 months old and is growing up in an evermore connected world – and is learning to use devices that were once the stuff of science fiction.

Such devices have brought about a radical change in how people, especially the young communicate with each other.

Where we as adults view private space as being in our own home, many of our children view their private space as online.

Yet, there are many who view such technologies as a threat to the young, a threat to morality – and a threat to society as a whole.

Now, each time that there is a paradigm shift in communications technology there is an inevitable moral panic about what threat it poses to ourselves and our children.

As it was with the printed press, the radio and TV; so it is with the internet.

The connected and wireless internet known as Web 2.0 offers to us connection limited only by our imagination;

that is except when it is filtered or blocked or censored from being so.

By and large there are two kinds of places where mobiles aren’t allowed – Taliban controlled Afghanistan and your local school.

That learning and teaching are seemingly threatened by pupils and their mobile phones is an attitude typified by the head of OFSTED Michael Wilshaw who would rather see all such mobile devices banned.

In response to this, Steve Wheeler, Associate Professor in Learning Technology at Plymouth University blogged:

“The fact is, many schools are already harnessing the creative potential of mobile phones to inspire and engage students, both inside and outside the classroom. It’s also a fact that in schools where mobile phones are banned, many students continue to use them, and often for disruptive purposes.

Where schools do allow mobiles as a part of their daily learning activities, the devices come out into the open, are no longer illicit, and can then be better controlled and used purposefully as a part of lessons. Which ever way we examine this issue, mobile phones are now a ubiquitous part in society, and are already playing a huge role in the culture of modern living.

Simply attempting to ban them from a place young people regularly gather is an impossible task. Schools should instead consider ways that mobile devices can be used to enhance and enrich learning, for in so doing, we prepare our children for the future, instead of rooting them in the practices of the past.”


Teachers are finding the benefits of that connected world too.

Many teachers now blog about their work in order to share successes and failures and benefit from the exchange of ideas that then follows.

Twitter is used to swap links to web resources ranging from a news article to a whole course.

In the era of cutbacks and lack of support, teachers are forming their own personal learning networks and supporting one another.

One such example is Pedagoo – a blog borne out of a desire to have teachers exchange ideas to the benefit of their pupils.

Every Friday, teachers share a strategy or an idea in a lesson that went well that week and share it online – with any teacher able to join in.

TeachMeets where teachers have organised their own CPD sessions – coming together to share snapshots of their practice to support and learn from one another – whilst many more people follow the sessions online via videolink or via twitter.

Or BeerMeets – where the virtual staffroom retreats to the pub.

There are many, many more examples that could be said to be revolutionary.

But there’s another use of social media that we have to pay attention to and that is as a tool for the association enabling us to reach out to, inform and involve our members – something we HAVE been doing, and could make much more use of in future.

But Congress, it’s not all sweetness and light.

There are many barriers – artificial barriers, placed in the way of this revolution. Whether it is the attitude of the great and the good, the blocking of technologies from being used; let alone fulfilling their potential; – to a simple lack of access for a teacher to play with and learn.

Instead, we are forced to adapt to stupid IT schemes to report, track our pupils and other things made more difficult due to bad design and whilst IT isn’t a panacea in education; the wrong IT, poorly run and executed is however an undoubted disaster.

These things have to change.

Routinely I spend too much of my time waiting on flawed IT just to work, forcing me to think around it rather than involving it.

The experience is jarring and as I consider myself to be more adept with IT than the average person, I can hardly imagine what it must feel like to those who are still uncomfortable.

This is of course, before we even get to the issue of software – which too often simply makes the matter worse.

Click – hang – slow response – crash.


Contrast this with my iPad. I click on the home button and swipe-to-wake.

I then point at an icon on the screen and ‘boom!’ I am doing the thing that I want to do and soon am immersed in it in the same way as a reader is soon immersed in the story in a book. The hardware has blended away to become simply an unnoticed conduit to the experience brought about by the interaction with the application.

This is the future – mobile, app-based technology linked to the Cloud. The days of the desktop PC in people’s lives are numbered – indeed laptops are now outselling desktops left, right and centre – with the growth in iPad sales outstripping them all.

Unless and until schools can have IT ‘solutions’ that allow staff and pupils to immerse themselves in the task they are seeking to perform,
rather than immersing themselves in the inevitable frustration of hardware and software created without any thought of the end-user-experience – we will never see a genuine IT revolution.

It never fails to amaze me that the same people who seem to dictate IT policy and procurement – are the same people who simply do not understand it.

My daughter has been born into a post – PC world however, the educators she will be taught by have not.

They need the tools and the support to be able to adapt and adopt because we simply cannot expect teachers to use 21st century learning technologies if they are still trapped by 20th century frustrations.

Please support the motion.

For Want of a Nail, the Shoe was Lost. For Want of a Shoe, the Horse was Lost…

Michael Cook, Cosla spokesman for human resources, said: “No-one would pretend … that educational outcomes are purely dependent on teacher numbers.”

It started with a cough. Then a sneeze. Then a throbbing pain in the throat and the head and the familiar signs of flu returned to the staffroom.
At risk from the forthcoming annual bout of teacher (and pupil) winter-related illness are not just the usual victims: colleagues who have to cover classes, business managers kept awake trying to fit less staff in to more empty lessons or the pupils enjoying their ‘curriculum for excellence’ from a textbook or a worksheet or a DVD.
Try telling the PTs spending day after day setting cover for classes where there is no teacher and no supply available due to ‘vacancy management’ and the pay cut for supply staff that there will be no impact on outcomes. Or, for that matter, on their health, their workload or their ‘professional development’.
This year, the pressure will be on to see if those who commissioned, signed and supported the CoSLA/EIS sell-out-agreement will be correct in their assertion that it was a success.
As schools have seen staffing numbers reduced, vacancies unfilled and supply unavailable the chances are that this winter will be the most challenging yet in our schools. An increasingly demoralised profession now coming up against the consequences of a deal struck to maintain teacher numbers at a slower rate of decline – for this year only.
On the horizon local councils are currently setting budgets that may well see overall teacher numbers kept but support services slashed, departmental and school budgets butchered and that’s just the good news, as council leaders seek to minimise the bad news this side of the local council elections. Shorn of the pressure to get re-elected what will the real post-election budgets reveal?

If (or possibly when) Scotland’s teachers say ‘enough is enough’ and start to work to their actual contract, Councillor Cook may well be proved correct because it is often the case that so many teachers go beyond their duties to ensure the best for their pupils. When CoSLA only get what they actually pay for, perhaps the good Councillor will join us in the real world.