Interesting development with the Digital School. Many of the important components and characteristics associated with successful education reform are mentioned including provision of equitable access to quality schooling across geographies and socio-economic status; attending to reading proficiency; preparedness and proactive responses to natural disasters and other disruptions; building and incorporating digital technologies and online content with a mixed mode blended learning approach on a scalable learning platform; co-development and localisation of resource materials; high quality teacher training and multi-faceted professional learning; and innovating for sustainability.

Worth a listen-some great points also evidenced in other research and transferable to countries beyond Pakistan. Key takeaways about effective education reform include being cognisant of the social, cultural, and political contexts; focusing on school improvement and developing quality teachers and heads with multifaceted professional learning; taking a holistic approach where all the elements of the system are aligned from policy to practice with a focus on inclusive practice; and nurturing localisation and local expertise with co-development leading to greater ownership.

There are distinct advantages for a recruiting organisation to consider this type of assessment - as long as the organisation can be honest (and not just aspirational) about the desired cultural fit. I think it’s equally important for potential candidates to do the same thing! Making such an assessment when you are not inside the organisation can prove challenging unless there are opportunities to speak with people who have worked or are working there.

Would agree with majority of teachers surveyed here who believe NAPLAN tests don’t necessarily improve student outcomes and are not a very effective diagnostic tool for teachers – and the reason is I’m not sure that’s the main purpose of any national assessment program. However, national assessment results can help systems and providers identify areas for improvement. Not sure I can support statements attributed to Mr Lawrence from Finland?

Agreed!

If for no other reason, the SDGs (goals and indicators) are important in maintaining everyone’s focus on improving learning outcomes for all children globally. This one focusing on reading and mathematics is particularly important indicator. Instead of removing indicators for lack of sufficient or good data, the international community could set up the most appropriate measurements and data points, and better systems for collection and analysis.

Never ceases to amaze and impress. In the middle of a war but focusing positively on the future for their children. Would love to help!

When teachers are at the centre of any reform and when they are driving it, we must do everything we can to support countries like this because the main beneficiaries are the children.

Following the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 proclaiming the right of every child to an education, and the World Declaration on Education for All in 1990 proclaiming universal and equitable access to education for all, the Framework for Action on Special Needs Education as part of the 1994 Salamanca Declaration (https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000098427) is stunning in its unambivalent declaration on inclusive education, that: “… schools should accommodate all children regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions [including] disabled and gifted children, street and working children, children from remote or nomadic populations, children from linguistic, ethnic or cultural minorities and children from other disadvantaged or marginalized areas or groups.” That all schools and education systems must be inclusive with “child centred pedagogy”, and that all governments ensure this is a matter of law and policy and budget priorities. With some progress over the last 30 years, globally we are still a way off achieving full inclusion in being able to meet every learner’s needs.

Could not agree more given my experience working with GEMS international schools. Replace the term British as it refers to teachers or international schools in this article with American or Indian, and so on, and the same would apply, generally with some exceptions. That is, international schools tend to be some of the highest performing schools globally with intense scrutiny, competition and accountability. Teachers in these schools tend to be put through external inspection and internal developmental processes with remarkable opportunities to further develop and grow in their teaching. They work in, and must adapt to, culturally and linguistically diverse environments; with exemplary support for students with special needs, and with opportunities for they and their students to interact with schools internationally on interesting global issues and initiatives related to civics and environmental education. The one small downside (sic) is that teachers have limited opportunities to deal with a range of disruptive class behaviours given the parents are fee-paying (along a scale), supportive of the school and there are few student behaviour issues.

Teachers have always been overworked and stressed but it feels now they are more alone in being so. As a young teacher working in disadvantaged schools the stress and the rewards were almost commensurate. But what made it bearable for our well-being were not well intentioned but mostly unhelpful well-being sessions, PD and counselling. It was the collegiality, humour and the informal (and formal) opportunities to discuss, whinge, get support, get angry and be listened to by colleagues, supportive school leaders, local networks and at that time supportive subject and school advisors and superintendents who made a point of knowing the staff in their schools. We didn’t have social media platforms but even if they existed it was those features of a nurturing supportive environment that made us feel we were not alone nor disempowered. I’m not sure those are generally available to teachers today.

These intellectual virtues which underpin deeper thinking and learning are virtuous to hold and most of us would probably not question their inherent worth. But what does it mean for teachers to be able to, as stated, “cultivate”, “foster”, “nurture” and “lean into” these virtues. That the values be modelled, taught, assessed or just referenced, promoted and organically infused as part of classroom culture and instruction? Either way, would we agree that teachers themselves should and do demonstrate these virtues, and have the knowledge and skills to help young people in their care do the same. They are the critical (and ambitious) starting points for this to work and for a school, system, organisation to move beyond the rhetoric.

Regarding teachers, I don’t begrudge their right to disconnect outside of work hours. For teachers, work out of school hours in marking and planning is an expected part of their duties. The online environment and technology have both assisted in creating efficiencies but also created some unreasonable expectations about teachers’ after-hours availability. The question is how to reconcile the right to disconnect with the fact that many schools/teachers now rightly engage with students and their parents using online secure platforms – for example, teachers posting tasks, activities, feedback, and correspondence; students posting completed work for marking or engaging in synchronous discussion with other students and their teachers; and parents viewing their children’s work and progress, correspondence from teachers and posing questions to teachers. Much of this activity is not typically done during classroom time but later in the day when students are studying and completing work, and parents are home to catch up on the day’s activities. The way to address this is for teachers to use their discretion and be clear about the expectations and the window available for their availability after-hours.

Education fads debated by academics and the latest pendulum swing adopted by education departments, with teachers and schools bearing the brunt of another reform. Most of these strategies and approaches to teaching and learning are not oppositional. They are complementary and part of good teaching practice to best meet the needs of the learner and the teaching context.  

Many classrooms have students with learning difficulties, intellectual or physical disabilities, or who are gifted. How all students can be best supported in school to meet or exceed their potential is the ongoing challenge for teachers, schools, and systems. As with all areas, there are specific complexities associated with gifted education and that require system support for teachers, students, and parents. For example: What types of student assessments/diagnoses are available? Who makes these assessments, when and how? In relation to what domains of learning and what specific skills, competencies, and dispositions? Will an instructional focus on the relevant domain(s) result in greater student engagement or achievement across the board? Are teachers adequately trained and resourced to support variously gifted students? Are there opportunities for students with gifts in similar domains to flourish outside mainstream classes? When in mainstream classes are their gifts acknowledged and respected, and can teachers provide personalised opportunities as expected for students with other learning needs?

Some great points. In my experience, providing teachers with direct classroom observation and support including an action learning component, can be highly effective and impactful – much more so than the traditional professional learning training model. As mentioned here there are different approaches to “instructional coaching” but with any approach taken, the four elements of “feedback, modelling, reflection and deliberate practice” are of paramount importance! And whoever the coaches are, external or internal to the school, they need to be highly credible and trained educators. I like the “reciprocal and group-based” model with teams of teachers within the school, or as per my experience, teams of teachers across a cluster of schools.

Whether with teachers, students or in workplaces generally, fostering individual self-efficacy and creating conditions minimising constraints on that, positively impacts performance. This is not so new but knowing how and when to tailor that for each person with their particular background, experience and need, is the real skill. The three examples provided are interesting case studies.

Whether they do it out of fear, for political leverage, or misguided cultural grounds, banning secondary education for girls is unjustified and an abhorrent practice. #LetAfghanGirlsLearn

There are many factors that contribute to teachers leaving the profession. Ones requiring immediate attention are those within the control of government, providers, and education leadership. They specifically relate to the workplace and nature of the work and being proactive in supporting teachers with a focus on well-being; empathetic and supportive leadership; coaching and mentoring opportunities; access to collegial learning communities; effective transition from pre-service training to continuous on-the-job training; and provision of high-quality resources and collaborative time.

An important point or two of reflection here for countries hoping to successfully reform education practice (supported by other research on high performing systems). First, teachers need to be active participants, if not drivers of the reform initiative, where they reflect on what they are doing and how it could be done differently. Second there needs to be a high degree of alignment across policy frameworks, stakeholders and partners working together as a system towards a shared goal for their context.

Apart from the Finnish education example elaborated here, can you think of any other new and newer education reforms (“edu-crazes”) we enthusiastically embraced only to be ultimately disappointed? Maybe one, or two…or three…Some interesting observations here about what I too believe has been “education’s susceptibility to faddishness”.

As a teacher a key challenge ensuring minimal disruptions to the teaching and learning program including distractions from a range of student misbehaviours. Four approaches mentioned here are helpful. For me the critical element for each follows the “BUT” and that is where some teachers may need further support in the form of training, modelling or coaching. Clear expectations should be set BUT need to be communicated, reinforced and modelled. A well thought out learning environment needs to be prepared BUT also maintained and in a way which is dynamic to meet the needs of the students and the learning. Student-teacher relationships need to be built BUT as positive, nurturing relationships and interactions with mutual trust. There needs to be appropriate responses to behaviour BUT positive behaviours need to be reinforced and disruptive behaviours require assertive, confident, fair, consistent and transparent responses.

Some of the challenge even represented here is the reference to STEM subjects or STEM as a subject. There are a number of subjects in the fields of science, technology, engineering and maths that collectively are referred to as STEM in broader conversations around education skills and career paths. STEM can also be a subject with an interdisciplinary approach across these four fields of study where connections are forged and where real-world problems are examined drawing on knowledge and skills across the four fields. I think generally it is the latter that causes more consternation for learners and teachers as they try to navigate the multi-disciplinary nature of the subject looking to integrate in some balanced way the content, assessment and pedagogy across the somewhat related disciplines.

Interesting international school-based perspective about the impact and implications of AI in classrooms. I like the points about need to integrate cross curricula skills and competencies into the curriculum; and the input from outside school and classroom for more relevant localised teaching and learning programs.

We’re currently experiencing the fad replacement theory (just made that up) in areas like teaching of reading where one long-standing approach to teaching is replaced by a different and purportedly more evidenced based approach. All approaches or philosophies one time or another were backed by some form of self-selecting research. Here, one approach to teaching is derided because there is no evidence to show it improves student achievement in maths. If we as educators believe a straight line can be drawn from a single teaching approach to improved outcomes, then what chance do politicians or community members have? No one approach, no one “fad” alone can do this - it needs a combination of variables and approaches. Teaching and learning is a complex nuanced process responsive to context, student home backgrounds and starting points; dependent on student engagement and motivation; reliant on teachers subject knowledge and high impact pedagogical strategies; and application of cross-subject skills and competencies, amongst other things. This approach to maths teaching researched in classrooms over many years, seems like good teaching to develop thinking skills. You would think in concert with other instructional strategies it’s not a bad start.