A Learning Community of Reflective Teachers: From Whispers to Resonance [1 ed.] 1032495103, 9781032495101

Citation preview

A Learning Community of Reflective Teachers

Teachers possess a wealth of untapped wisdom and valuable experience. Be it educational policy, curriculum development or textbook selection, rare are the instances when teachers’ views are solicited. Traditionally, teacher development has been driven by administrators of schools, and it often takes the form of a ‘mentor’ teaching the staff of a school. But what happens when teachers across different locations collaborate and learn together? This volume documents such an initiative, sparked off by the Covid-19 pandemic, which brought people together online. It showcases the power of teachers debating, discussing and learning from each other. Based on an Indian experience, this book addresses a range of issues that teachers and educators across the world face– encompassing pedagogy, classroom management, school culture and teacher development. A unique story of community building and teacher education, this book also contains key outcomes and insights, while taking us through their action research projects. It showcases a model of teacher development that can be adopted by interested readers anywhere in the world. Above all, it brings out the crying need for a teacher’s voice to be heard – for far too long, teachers have been mere implementers of decisions taken by policymakers or managements of schools. By means of networking communities such as the one described in this book, the transformation of teachers going from whispers to resonance is greatly amplified. An important intervention in the domain of teacher development, this volume will be of great interest to students, researchers, educators, teacher educators and sociologists of education. It will also be useful for teacher trainees, academicians, policymakers, schoolteachers, curriculum developers, teacher training institutes and universities offering teacher education programmes. Neeraja Raghavan is a teacher-educator and Founder-Director of Thinking Teacher, based in Bangalore, India. She is the author of several books, including Teaching Tales Learning Trails (co-authored with Vineeta Sood and Kamala Anilkumar, Notion Press 2018), The Reflective Teacher (Contributing Editor Vineeta Sood, Orient Blackswan, 2015), The Reflective Learner (Notion Press 2019) and co-editor (with Sarojini Vittachi) of Alternative Schooling in India (SAGE Publications, 2008). She enjoys music, philosophy, poetry, sketching, writing and embroidery.

A Learning Community of Reflective Teachers From Whispers to Resonance

Edited by Neeraja Raghavan

First published 2024 by Routledge 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2024 selection and editorial matter, Neeraja Raghavan; individual chapters, the contributors The right of Neeraja Raghavan to be identified as the author of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-032-49510-1 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-032-67172-7 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-032-67173-4 (ebk) DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734 Typeset in Sabon by codeMantra

Contents

List of figures vii List of tables ix List of abbreviations xi List of contributors xiii Forewordxvii Prefacexix Acknowledgementsxxv SECTION 1

From Teachers to Change Agents1   1 Teacher Development

3

NEERAJA RAGHAVAN

  2 Teachers as Change Agents

21

NEERAJA RAGHAVAN

SECTION 2

A Learning Community That Strives To Effect A Change: Compilation of Research Papers by Members of LCoRPs

47

  3 Re-designing the Learning Environment in Kindergarten through Reflection, Collaboration and Teacher Ownership

49

NANDASHREE NATARAJAN AND ANNE ISAAC

  4 Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners – A Teacher’s Action Research KRITHIKA BHARATH

69

vi Contents   5 Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision: An Action Research Study

84

VIDHYA NAGARAJ

  6 The Road Less Travelled: Developing Critical Thinking in Children from Marginalized Communities through Picture Books 102 NIVEDITA VIJAY BEDADUR AND ANITA BUTANI

  7 Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination

122

MADHUSREE DUTTA MAJUMDAR

  8 A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart

137

DEEPTHA VIVEKANAND

  9 Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners through Action Research

158

GANGA SUNDAR

10 Building an Ecosystem of Empathy between Students and Support Staff in School

174

SWATI GAUTAM

SECTION 3

A New Model of Teacher Development

195

11 A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation

197

NEERAJA RAGHAVAN

References235 Index239

Figures

0.1 Broad overview of research problems worked on by teachers in this initiative xxii 1.1 The steps that led to building a community 9 1.2 Map showing locations of participants [Map drawn by Usha Kumar] 15 1.3 MIRO Board with sample entries from participants 18 1.4 Flow Chart depicting likely sequence of events for a teacher trying to think critically 19 2.1 Model of teacher development 23 3.1 Examples of CSQ Routines conducted in class 56 3.2 Comparison of Grading Criteria in Pre-AR and Post-AR Assessment in the English language 58 3.3 A Graphical Representation of the Teachers’ Evolution based on Table 3.3 65 4.1 Reading for autonomy. Note: Since Level Three is an extension of Level Two, it includes some students of Level 72 Two. Therefore, the total number exceeds 27 4.2 Writing for autonomy 73 4.3 A child’s contribution to the ‘Book Suggestions’ event 75 4.4 A child’s understanding of the wetland study done, 75 expressed through writing 4.5 Student autonomy through wondering. Note: Since Level Three is an extension of Level Two, it includes some 77 students of Level Two. Therefore, the total number exceeds 27 4.6 A student’s wonderment, post the study on the artist Claude Monet, inspired him to recreate a scene from his garden 78 4.7 The investigation table arranged by children in their second-grade classroom 81 5.1 The four stages of Continuum of Self-Reflection (Reproduced with permission from Hall and Simeral (2008)) 87 5.2 Picture of a sportsman’s shoe (drawn by a teacher) 94 6.1 Map of Maharashtra, India, showing the locations of the children and the researcher [Map drawn by Usha Kumar] 105 6.2 Arjun summarized ‘Anand’ 111

viii Figures 6.3 Vishesh summarized the story of Rumniya 111 6.4 Vishesh describes his experience of cycling 112 6.5 Ashiyana connects to the story of Rumniya by sharing her experience112 6.6 On 30 August, Yogita compares Rumniya and Kalpana 113 6.7 On 12 November, Vishesh compares Anand and Mahagiri 113 6.8 Ashiyana and Vishesh discuss man animal conflict 114 6.9 Yogita does Claim-Support-Question 115 6.10 Arjun questions the author’s intention 115 6.11 Arjun’s dream 116 6.12 Yogita’s dream 117 6.13 The Endline Journey 119 7.1 Response from a teacher of Commerce 124 7.2 Response from a teacher of Mathematics 124 7.3 Collaborating with Art, Chemistry and History 132 8.1 Snapshot of teacher diary 151 9.1 Class average test scores of Essential skills acquisition 163 9.2 Student planner sample 163 9.3 The various stages of ‘I wonder’ project 165 9.4 Why couldn’t I do “I wonder”?-Students’ reflections 172 10.1 Letter written by a male student to a support staff member 181 10.2 Letter written by a female student to a female support staff member182 10.3 Group 1 showed the support staff working visibly outside the bio-bubble in the dining room 184 10.4 Group 2 depicted the various jobs the support staff 185 10.5 Group 3 outlined the details of all the indoor cleaning and upkeep by the support staff 185 10.6 Excerpts from articles that the students of Grade X wrote in the school magazine after the interviews 187 11.1 Configurations of meetings in LCoRPs from the start till TACA III 204 11.2 The four modes of engagement for a member of a learning community208 11.3 The role played by trust and doubt (Y-Axis) in determining the manifestation of various facets of the community 214 member who is a consumer or a contributor (X-Axis) 11.4 Three types of networks (Reproduced with permission from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM3420. html. Introduction to Distributed Communications Networks | RAND) Networks | RAND) Networks | RAND) Networks | RAND) 217 11.5a Knowledge FOR Practice: Centralized Network 225 11.5b Knowledge OF and IN Practice: Decentralized Network 225 11.5c Knowledge IN and OF Practice: Distributed Network 225

Tables

2.1 A comparison of some Action Research Problems chosen by individual Action Researchers and members of this community who worked in collaboration 24 2.2 Schedule of the three cycles of the programme titled Teachers As Change Agents (TACA) 25 3.1 Reflections on the first Staff Meeting conducted on 21 March 2021 52 3.2 Learning the art of questioning 57 3.3 Journey of the teachers in making learning process-centric 62 5.1 Some questions that teachers came up with 90 5.2 Entries from the teachers’ journals 90 5.3 The areas of learning identified by the teachers 91 6.1 Events (questions) of 6 and 7 June 2021 during LCoRPs meeting and my reflections thereafter 104 6.2 The alignment of learning outcomes and pedagogical strategies 106 6.3 Baseline checklist assessment 108 6.4 Number and levels of books read by the children from 118 June 2021 to February 2022 7.1 Collation of responses from teachers across departments on ways to bring about collaboration 129 8.1 Comparison of reflective questions 150 8.2 Reflection rubric 154 9.1 Planned stages of the AR 161 9.2 Students’ selection of ‘I wonder’ topics 164 9.3 The learning goals drawn by students vs. teacher intended learning objectives – A sample 167 9.4 Some of the students’ reflections on why they chose each of the features for their learning space 168 9.5 The student groups and their roles in creating their learning space169 9.6 Students’ reflections on student autonomy 171

x Tables 10.1 Table of strategies and expected outcomes 10.2 Analysis of students’ responses after making the poster (Grade VIII) 10.3 Action research extension plan 11.1 The principles of such a community of practice that emerged from different facets of the teacher that were seen

179 186 190 212

Abbreviations

APF AR CBSE CFG CISCE CPD CSQ IDC IDP LCoRPs LKG LO NA NEP PLC PR TACA UKG VSA

Azim Premji Foundation Action Research Central Board of Secondary Education, India Critical Friends Group Council for Indian School Certificate Examinations Continuous Professional Development Claim, Support, Question (thinking routine from Project Zero, Harvard University) Interdisciplinary Curriculum Interdisciplinary Project Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners Lower Kindergarten Learning Outcome North America National Education Policy Professional Learning Community Principal Researcher Teachers As Change Agents Upper Kindergarten Vidyashilp Academy, Bangalore

Contributors

LCoRPs MEMBER PROFILES Lalitha Bai is a committed educator, who is keenly involved in child-centric learning and looks beyond the textbook to make the classroom experience interactive and engaging. She adds a creative touch to her classroom teaching by integrating several aspects so as to make learning fun. She loves sketching, cooking and reading. Currently, Lalitha is heading Poornaprajna Education Centre in Bangalore. Nivedita Vijay Bedadur is currently engaged in designing curricula and supporting resource persons who work with marginalized children. She is a recipient of the incentive award for teachers during her career as an English teacher in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan. She has worked as a teacher-educator at Azim Premji University, Bangalore. She has authored Class VII English textbooks published by Encyclopaedia Britannica. She regularly writes on pedagogical matters and is interested in the development of critical thinking in children and teachers. Krithika Bharath is a cheerful and passionate educator-learner at The Adyar Theosophical Academy in Chennai, India. She works with children in the vibrant age group of 6–11 years and creates fun, project-based learning engagements for them in subjects like English, Science, Social Studies and Nature Studies. Her focus is on making students autonomous learners and co-creators of their learning journey. She enjoys Nature walks, reading fiction and eating cheesy pizzas! Anita Butani is a school psychologist by qualification, and counsellor by profession. She currently lives in Abu Dhabi, UAE. She enjoys hearing different perspectives on all topics under the sun. She also loves to knit and crochet, along with reading and staying updated in her own field. Madhusree Dutta Majumdar is a reflective educator who believes that knowledge should not be confined by boundaries. She loves to explore new ideas and methods to make learning experiential. Currently working as a lead

xiv Contributors educator (History & Political Science) at Vidyashilp Academy, Bangalore, she has curated projects and exhibitions engaging students to think beyond the confines of the textbook. When she is not teaching, she keeps her inquisitive mind happy with music, books and travel. Swati Gautam is working in an alternative school called The Peepal Grove School in Andhra Pradesh. She loves to be around children. She is a Hindi language teacher and also a houseparent for Grade X to XII girls. She likes to write poetry and takes great interest in Nature. She wants to nurture kindness, empathy and compassion among her students. She also wants them to become aware future citizens of the world and have lots of gratitude to Life. Anne Isaac has worked both as a teacher (of English and Biology) and as an administrator for over 24 years. She is at present a consultant with Education Mentoring India, an organization dedicated to mentoring schools. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating an excellent educational environment, with demonstrated results in student achievement and in collaborating with school communities. Vidhya Nagaraj began her career as a teacher at a low-income private school that catered to first-generation learners. Over the past two decades, she has worked in different schools and has now moved into school leadership roles. At the time of writing this book, she was the founder-principal of Delhi World Public School, Bangalore. She is passionate about curriculum development and teacher development programmes. She is a selfproclaimed bibliophile and loves traveling. Nandashree Natarajan is currently working as Headmistress of the Nursery Section at Sri Kumaran Children’s Home, Bangalore. She is a progressive educationist who has envisaged and implemented an innovative learning curriculum for pre-primary children. She runs Kathamrutha, where she conducts regular storytelling workshops. She is trained in Bharatanatyam and Indian folk dance forms. She loves gardening, hiking and traveling to new destinations. Ratna Singamsetty is a homemaker-turned-teacher at The Peepal Grove School, Andhra Pradesh, where she began her teaching career with a very successful action research study that culminated in a paper that she presented in epiSTEME 6, Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education, Mumbai. She taught middle school children science and social studies. Following her passion, she also taught needle work, handicraft and the regional language (Telugu). She loves music, drama and participating in group activities. Ganga Sundar is a volunteer educator in Isha Home School in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.  Being a part of the school-wide curriculum team, she works mainly on designing the middle school curriculum, constantly reviving it

Contributors  xv to encapsulate the context of the current world and to incorporate inclusive education. As a certified storyteller, she loves listening to classical music, trekking and running marathons. Prabha Sudarshan is a learner-educator who has worked in an educational institution for 14 years, where she helped create natural and holistic learning spaces from the Pre-Primary Section to High School. As she enjoys working in mixed-age group classes, she is currently volunteering at the local government schools. She is also presently involved in setting up a Social Emotional Learning curriculum in a government school in Bangalore, Karnataka. Deeptha Vivekanand is an educator and professional storyteller. She currently works at St Kabir Public School, Chandigarh, where she enables teachers of all grades to use storytelling effectively in the classroom. She has co-created a 5-hour online teacher-training course titled ‘Storytelling as Pedagogy’ for the Central Board of Secondary Education, aimed at skilling in-service teachers across the country.

Foreword

“From whispers to resonance”: Nurturing teachers’ voices to make learning choices “From Whispers to Resonance” – A found poem inspired by the voices of the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners Communication is the first step … Her biggest strength lay in listening, Giving teachers freedom to make learning choices, Discovering the joy of nurturing their voices. Her biggest strength lay in listening … “What do you think we need to change?” Discovering the joy of nurturing their voices, A story can be told well only when it is truly felt. “What do you think we need to change?” To open unforeseen landscapes, A story can be told well only when it is truly felt. I now believe that I can realize my dream. To open unforeseen landscapes, Giving teachers freedom to make learning choices. I now believe that I can realize my dream, Communication is the first step! A Learning Community of Reflective Teachers: From Whispers to Resonance invites us to experience a model for teacher development that can make dreams a reality by listening to and nurturing the voices of educators. This book reveals how teacher development can be rethought and revitalized as embodied and empowering action to open unexpected landscapes by inviting teachers to communicate their true feelings and what they think needs to change. In the opening and closing chapters, Neeraja Raghavan tells the heartfelt story of encouraging teachers from across India and different specialities to work together to effect positive change in and beyond classrooms and schools. The teachers tackled pressing educational and social

xviii Foreword justice issues with local and global resonance through their action research, presented in eight fascinating and in-depth chapters. As a whole, this book provides a nuanced, multi-perspective look at how supporting educators’ voices and empowering them to make choices that feel right to them can lead to future-focused professional learning to realize our dreams of pedagogies of care and transformation. Kathleen Pithouse-Morgan, Professor of Education, University of Nottingham

Preface

In the early part of 2021, a Nursery School Headmistress of a mainstream school in Bangalore decided to alter her approach to hosting staff meetings. In the past, she had followed the norms that existed in her school, viz. announcing the meeting to her team of teachers, drawing up an agenda, running through the points one by one, doing almost all of the talking, and winding up as per schedule. This time, however, she decided to ask her teachers a question: ‘What do you think we need to change for the next academic year?’ This turned around her entire approach – as it drew out of the (thus far) silent teachers a whole host of ideas, new practices and unbridled enthusiasm. That meeting left both the Headmistress as well as her teachers feeling elated. Said the Headmistress afterward: “I was worried that they were not contributing during our meetings, but I never thought that it was my approach that had to change! Also, I had noticed that teachers were more comfortable implementing ideas but not as free in articulating ideas. I now discovered that teachers had simply not been given the opportunity to present the ideas that they always had!”

*** In the three years of a Bengaluru school’s establishment, the principal had always been the one driving the teachers’ professional development. She wondered: “How can we empower teachers to take charge of their own learning?” Having read articles by Deborah Meier and Michelle Stacy, she aspired to align with teachers’ expectations of being treated respectfully, being listened to and their viewpoints being taken seriously. In particular, one idea jumped out at her: ‘Teacher-Led Professional Development – Empowering teachers as self-advocates.’ It turned the tide, so to speak. If this had to happen in her school, she decided that teachers had to be in charge of their professional development, they had to drive it and they had to feel accountable.

xx Preface She realized the need to slow down, to think further. As the pieces of her mental jigsaw fell into place, she discovered that she had unconsciously still been driving the project. Her Action Research project resulted in heretofore unknown capabilities emerging from her team of teachers.

*** It is because several such stories unfolded during a transformative journey undertaken by a group of teachers across India that I felt the need to write this book. Correction: compile this book, not write it. Because this is a compilation of the work carried out by a group of teachers, as they conferred with each other, argued, debated, questioned and floundered … in what (to the best of my knowledge) is the first such cross-country collaboration of school teachers in India.

Reading the above, one may well wonder: ‘But aren’t teachers just expected to teach? And teach in such a way that they satisfy their School Heads, students and the parents of their students?’ In fact, the demands on teachers are multiple: parents expect them to draw out the best from their children, school managements look to them for upholding the reputation of the school – and this means a whole host of things – ensuring good results in certifying examinations, helping students win trophies in inter-school competitions, engaging with parents so as to keep them up-to-date of their ward’s progress, and most importantly, stimulating the love for learning in their students. Students expect them to make learning fun and easy, examinations less intimidating and school life less burdensome, if not enjoyable. Another important aspect of the work of a teacher is the high degree of compliance that is expected of him/her. A prescribed curriculum is handed to the teacher; in most schools, even the textbook is not something that the teacher usually has any say in selecting. Assessment systems of students’ learning are also dictated by the school-leaving examinations, which percolate down to the expectations placed upon a teacher even in grades that do not call for an end-of-year Board Examination. Relying largely on the prescribed textbook, most teachers plough their way through transaction of its content so as to ‘cover the portions’ in time for the end-of-year examination. If a teacher is dissatisfied with the textbook, syllabus or the examination system, is there any way in which the teacher’s voice can be heard? And acted upon? Further, how can teachers keep alive their own love for learning? What is the commonly adopted route for teacher professional development in most schools across India today?

Preface  xxi Teacher Development: the road most travelled Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) point out that methods adopted for teacher development are driven by underlying ideas and interpretations of what teachers ‘should know’ in order to teach better. In other words, the conception of all that entails ‘teacher learning’ determines the mode that is adopted. In Cochran-Smith & Lytle’s (1999) categorization, there is knowledge for practice, of practice and in practice. Knowledge for practice is formal knowledge or theory that is usually gained by a teacher during graduation and preservice teacher training programmes. It consists mainly of content that the teacher has to master before transacting lessons in a classroom. Knowledge in practice, on the other hand, is more practical, as it is gained by observing expert teachers practising successful techniques or impactful pedagogy. However, the third category is neither theoretical nor drawn from another’s practice, but is instead generated by a teacher who investigates her own practice by using her classroom like a laboratory, with a potential for discovery. When knowledge for practice overrides the other two kinds, the underlying assumption is that a teacher who knows more (i.e. who has acquired more formal knowledge) will teach better. Inevitably, this results in a topdown approach for teacher development – unless (and worse!) even this is deemed hardly necessary, as most of the ‘required knowledge for practice’ has already been gained in the short pre-service teacher education programme. Giroux (1988) cites Zeichner’s description of a prospective teacher as “a passive recipient of this professional knowledge” who “plays little part in determining the substance and direction of his or her preparation program.” Sadly, school teachers in India are largely regarded as having equipped themselves with all that they need in their graduation years and/or the postgraduate education diploma/degree (which intends to give them the knowledge for practice). Thereafter, a new teacher simply dives into the deep end and learns on the job. In schools that do accord some importance to teacher development, a few annual workshops conducted by resource persons (mostly external) are organized for teachers. Usually, these are spread over two-tothree days in the beginning of the academic year (with attendance often being linked to increment in salary) and the themes are selected by the management. There is little or no input from the teachers themselves. If at all there is any peer-led teacher development, it happens in an informal manner. Thus, teachers inevitably look up to resource persons for guidance, and disregard their own capability to come up with ways of capacity building. This is perhaps also aligned with their own overburdened schedule, for they have to gear themselves up each year to face the daily grind – who, then, would wish to take on an additional task: that of designing the trajectory of their own development? Time is almost always experienced as a crunch, for teachers in schools. In this milieu, much of what a teacher learns on the job is lost – due to lack of articulation of it both to herself and to others. Simply ticking tasks off a loaded list is the preoccupation of a teacher working in such circumstances. That being so, it is pertinent to ask: How do teachers get that precious time

xxii Preface with themselves, when they can unwind, relax and rejuvenate their tired brains? In addition, (how) can teachers brainstorm with each other about ways of making their efforts more effective? And – if this isn’t too ambitious – can teachers across the country actually join together to bring about some change on the ground? To begin with, are there teachers who are articulating their dissatisfaction with elements of the education system and working to find ways to address them? Contained in the pages of this book you will find a true account of precisely such an effort. This is a story of connectedness, collaboration, deep exploration, sustained enquiry and unfolding of powerful insights – some of which emerged through the synergy of the group, and others as a result of the action research that members conducted. It is a unique initiative in teacher professional development in India: where teachers learn from each other, question each other, identify lacunae in their own capacities as well as the education system and set about addressing these together. The significant aspect of this initiative is that there were no expectations of any credentials (like a certificate, degree or diploma) if such an engagement was sustained. The educators who chose to stay engaged with this initiative did so purely out of their motivation and experience of palpable benefits as a consequence of staying in this group. Further, although this programme culminated in the action research that was conducted by most of the members, the model of teacher development that this narrative enquiry proposes does not necessarily have to contain action research as its core element. This is brought out clearly in the concluding chapter of this book, which lays out the essential elements of building such a community of reflective teachers, and suggests certain principles upon which the sustaining of such a community rests. For the reader who likes a bird’s eye view of the contents of the action research, Figure 0.1 is an attempt to give a succinct picture of the issues that teachers explored.

Figure 0.1  Broad overview of research problems worked on by teachers in this initiative

Preface  xxiii Section 2 contains the research papers that detail out the unfolding of the above problems. Often, teachers started without knowing how wide and deep the domain that they had stepped into truly was! Without exception, the members grew noticeably in self-confidence and gained new insights. Here are a few of them: • Most teachers work in isolation. They need to be listened to – by a supportive set of fellow teachers. • While teachers seem to be amongst the most listened to of all professionals (with a captive audience that sits and hears – perhaps even listens to! – all that they have to say), it is seldom that their opinions (on important matters in education) are sought out by more than a few. • Reading and sharing perspectives in a group enables listening and of course, widening of one’s thinking. • Writing opens up the mind. It brings clarity to one’s jumbled thoughts, and then, it even shapes one’s own thinking. • If we are to change our thinking, language offers the best entry point. A language teacher is therefore uniquely equipped to mould the thinking of her students. • When teachers are given the agency to effect changes, they willingly transfer that autonomy to their students too. • Lack of ownership in students manifests as mindlessness about their learning space and peers. Since learning is mostly teacher-driven, this robs students of agency. • The above is equally true of teachers: an absence of teacher agency (because it is all management-driven or policy-driven) and paucity of opportunities for teachers to actively create and maintain the learning space leaves them bereft of a sense of belonging. • A teacher’s bias towards a subject will definitely get transmitted to students: implicitly or explicitly. So it is important to question a teacher’s biases first. • When the Principal/Headmistress lets go of control and empowers her teachers to decide what (and how) they want to work on, it brings in a sense of ownership that can be sustained throughout the academic year. It can even have ripple effects to teachers outside the cohort. • It is possible to use a simple mobile phone to set four marginalized children in remote areas onto the path of thinking critically about issues around them. In the concluding chapter, a model of teacher development that has emerged from this work is described against the backdrop of a few existing models. The above overview may allow you, the reader, to select that portion of the book which is most appealing and start reading from there. If this book leaves you feeling hopeful about (or even inspired by) the teachers of India, it will have achieved its end. If it spurs in you an urge to form such a community

xxiv Preface of reflective practitioners yourself, it would have surpassed its intention. And if you put the book down, feeling something in between these two extremes, that, too, is a certificate of success that these teachers have elicited from you! Read on, and join them in their reflective (and often transformative) journey.

Acknowledgements

If it takes a village to raise a child, then it takes an entire community to bring out a book about a community. It is therefore self-evident that the teachers who formed LCoRPs were central to the compilation of this book. My engagement with each member of the community only served to strengthen my faith in the teaching community and left me feeling very hopeful of the future. More importantly, the entire experience gave me rich learnings about community building, even as I learned more about specific aspects of teaching and learning through their action research projects. I am indebted to Azim Premji University for remote access to their rich library. Dr Kathleen Pithouse-Morgan responded to my request to write the Foreword with her characteristic enthusiasm and grace. The entire team of teachers (whose work is compiled here) and I are very grateful to her for her valuable views. Peter Lauenstein was as enthusiastic as he always is in reading through the entire manuscript and endorsing its contents. But for Peter, I would never have made the connection to Paul Baran’s digital networks. G Gautama read the manuscript and offered valuable tips. Padmini Nagaraja gave generously of her time to read and critique the raw manuscript. But for her incisive comments (which LCoRPs member Nivedita also articulated), Chapter 11 would not have taken the shape that it finally did. At one point, I was compelled to ask her if there was anything at all that she had not read, so pertinent were the readings that she pointed me to! Nivedita went through the raw manuscript several times with her detailed eye and pushed me to think of a pictorial representation of the model of teacher development that this work proposes. “When a reader puts down this book,” she said eloquently, “they should carry a picture in their heads of the model of teacher development that we have suggested.” Anne Isaac and Nivedita spent much of their valuable time in mapping the content of this book to the suggestions made by reviewers of the Book Proposal, and this helped me address the gaps in the initial flow of the book. Special thanks also go to both of them for valuable support while preparing the manuscript for publication. Usha Kumar drew the maps with her characteristic alacrity and enjoyment, for which we owe her thanks.

xxvi Acknowledgements The title of this book had been staring in my face all along, yet it took the rewriting of Chapter 11 for this to become starkly evident. Every single member of LCoRPs contributed towards this rewritten chapter, as it evolved over numerous exchanges of text messages, emails and online discussions. Deeptha Vivekanand generously volunteered to use her computer graphic skills to fine tune several diagrams in this book. All the members of the community took time out to read each version of the manuscript and revert with their comments, despite their heavy workload during the pandemic. With all the above support, this book that advocates collaboration and community building is itself a collective effort. If it succeeds in convincing readers of this power, the credit goes to the entire community. Neeraja Raghavan March 2023 Bangalore, India

Section 1

From Teachers to Change Agents

1 Teacher Development Neeraja Raghavan

It all began with an online course titled ‘Reflective Writing for Teachers’ that I offered, during the Covid-19 pandemic. After several batches of teachers had taken this five-week course, graduates of the course were offered the chance to form a community. In response to that call, 15 teachers across India signed up to be a part of a Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). There were practising teachers, Principals, Headmistresses and even a couple of teachers who were on a hiatus from teaching after long years of being in the classroom. They came from alternative schools (Vittachi & Raghavan, 2007) as well as mainstream schools, some just a year or two into teaching with others nearing the end of their teaching career. This diverse group met online every fortnight over much of 2021–2022, as the then prevailing Covid-19 pandemic effectively ruled out face-to-face engagement. Since it was formed voluntarily, nobody felt compelled to join the group. [For once, there was no authority directing them to participate in such a venture.] As they talked and debated about issues of educational importance, their urge to effect a change in areas like the curriculum, pedagogy, teacher development, student and parent mindsets, challenges faced by teachers and so many other aspects of the education system, they embarked on a collective journey. The geographical distance between them shrank as their common goals bound them together closely. In so doing, they carved out a new model of teacher development: that of tapping into each other’s expertise. Teacher Development: What, How and Why? While there are several prevalent models of teacher development, this chapter focuses on those most commonly used in India. [For a detailed review of various methods of Teacher Development, and the positioning of the model that emerged from this work, the reader is referred to Chapter 11.] As described in the Preface, teachers in Indian schools are usually asked by their management to attend workshops conducted by experts. When teacher educators engage with teachers, their intended outcome is some specific aspect of teacher development: content knowledge enrichment, pedagogy, DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-2

4  Neeraja Raghavan classroom management, learning theories, etc. While common models of teacher development include workshops and courses, these are mostly driven by a teacher educator. An experienced mentor guides teachers to absorb the essence of learning theories, or even instructs teachers about matters that impact classroom management and pedagogy. The ambience is frequently that of a typical classroom, with the (more knowledgeable) faculty engaging with an audience of teachers. While this time-tested model has reaped benefits for many teachers, it has been a common experience that the energy fizzles out after the mentor leaves. This model of teacher development is of course not restricted to India alone. Kincheloe (2001) has noted that traditional teacher development programmes miss “the specificity of the teaching act, the uniqueness of the teaching workplace and the ambiguity of practitioner ways of knowing.” Giroux (1988) declares that even when teachers do enter a debate on educational issues, their role is reduced to that of “high-level technicians carrying out dictates and objectives decided by experts far removed from the everyday realities of classroom life.” Thus, this model unconsciously reinforces the ‘implementation mode’ that teachers constantly find themselves in, where instructions on what/how/when to teach prescribed content are issued top down – either from a Head of an Institution or a National Policy. More often than not, teachers experience enormous pressure to meet the expectations of those around them, but are seldom – if ever – asked their views on curricular content, pedagogy or modes of assessment. Ironically, if anyone can speak knowledgeably about such matters, it is, indeed, a teacher – engrossed as she is in precisely such tasks, day in and day out. Brindley and Crocco (2009) have brought out the significance of empowering the voice of the teacher, in their remarkable account of action research stories in a school. While Raghavan and Sood (2015) described a set of action research projects undertaken by school teachers in a small school in India, there has thus far not been any documented effort of building a community of reflective educators in the country. Even less so is there documented evidence of a sustained enquiry by a group of teachers, with or without a mentor. In this regard, it is worthy to note that in India, there has been far less emphasis on tapping the individual and collective wisdom of experienced as well as inexperienced teachers, whose richest learning comes from each day’s work. In my own experience, Action Research was experienced very positively by a few teachers as long as the engagement between the facilitator and teacher was sustained.1 After the facilitator stopped engaging with the teachers, no further Action Research was taken up. In order to render such an engagement more lasting, some push or motivation was needed from within the institution where the teacher was working. In the absence of this, teachers more often than not, slipped back into their busy routines with seemingly no time for reflection or research.

Teacher Development  5 How often do teachers in different institutions/locations think together about addressing the problems that they face at work? Here is a true account of many who did – and still do. When a teacher is questioned – as (s)he so often is, the question seldom triggers deep thought. That is mostly because the question comes from a location of judgment. They go more or less like this: “Why haven’t you completed the syllabus yet? The other section has!” “Why do you give so little Homework to my child? He wastes his time at home watching TV.” “Ma’am, why did you give me less than full marks in this question? After all, I answered it correctly.” And so on. Instead, the teacher can dive into a journey of deep exploration when a well-intentioned colleague asks questions like the following: What is the change that you wish to bring about? Why do you think this change hasn’t taken off yet? How will you know that this change has been effected? What is your sample of study? What is the scope of your research? It is questions like the above that the members of this group ask each other every week. And I have seen that as they get more and more comfortable with each other, they even seek out the views of the other members on their strategies: “I am not sure how to go about this. What do you suggest?” “If I try this strategy, do you think it will work?” “What if I first work with teachers in my department? And then branch out to more?” Simple as these questions seem, they are extremely rare in a busy and bustling school. Rare, not because well-meaning colleagues are absent or these questions don’t pop up in the minds of teachers, but rare because they are seldom given the time and space to be articulated. Rushed as each day of a teacher usually is, there is barely enough time to execute the assigned tasks. Pausing to seek out another’s views on what one is doing is a rare luxury, if at all it is even remotely possible. The rich rewards that can be gained through precisely such an engagement are brought out in this record of a collective journey. Giroux (1988) advocates viewing teachers as transformative intellectuals. By their very nature, intellectuals welcome debate and discussion. So, what happens when teachers discuss, debate and learn from each other? (How) Can they co-create a non-judgmental space where they freely express their fears, seek advice and share success and failure stories? Given the busy day of most teachers, where will a teacher find the time to discuss such issues with his/her colleagues?

6  Neeraja Raghavan In this compilation of journeys that some teachers voluntarily undertook – and sustained with clockwork regularity through a period of almost two years – it can be seen that what started off as merely signing up for a course in Reflective Writing gradually ripened into an organic evolution of a Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners. (The Reflective Writing course is described in detail in the next chapter.) Undeniably, these are teachers who are already motivated to begin with, as can be seen from the fact that they chose to invest the time, money and effort in doing a course that was not mandatory. However, the alacrity with which they grabbed every chance thereafter to sustain such an engagement is as remarkable as it is inspiring. One of many such accounts is encapsulated in the textbox titled A REMARKABLE SYNERGY (on the next page). It is worth noting that the designing of a new model of teacher development was not an explicit intent of mine, since the entire initiative was new for everyone concerned. While it was clear that a community of reflective practitioners would be beneficial to all concerned, there was no saying where it would all lead to. [Chapter 11 describes the model at length.] As it turned out, members of the group began to articulate their thoughts more freely than they did in their own workplaces. Fears tumbled out, assumptions surfaced and began to be questioned, ideas were solicited and often exchanged. It was this synergy that allowed a different model of teacher development to emerge. Peer-led teacher development in the same school may be hindered by the competitive dynamics that can often get established within an institution. The fact that this group comprised members of different organizations precluded such a possibility. It was far easier to share one’s ideas and seek feedback from those who did not share the same workspace. Professional rivalry that can insidiously seep into any institution was missing here. Thus, the very configuration of the group disallowed competition and enabled free and open collaboration. Another significant difference in this model of teacher development is the near-absence of externally imposed boundaries: like rigid timelines or measurable/achievable outcomes. Therefore, the pressure to solve a problem fast so as to get on with the day’s work or finish a task in time for the next staff meeting (oft-experienced pressures in a teacher’s work day) was absent. While this did become time-bound towards the end (when a manuscript was under preparation and papers had to be turned in before a deadline), the entire process blossomed slowly (over two years) and organically. Beginning with each member pondering about the questions that troubled her, or the specific areas in the current education system where she wished to effect a change, it enabled discussion of these ideas and re-examination of prior assumptions. This naturally paved the way for deeply thought-out solutions to problems, instead of quick fixes. As teachers freely questioned each other, they arrived at ways of identifying and revisiting their assumptions without feeling the need to make quick assertions or offer instant defence.

Teacher Development  7 Conspicuous by its absence was the presence of an employer (or authority figure) whose assessment of the teachers could affect their careers. The need to be politically correct, therefore, lessened considerably (though it did not ever disappear!). Since the model called for large group meetings as well as cluster meetings (where three different clusters were formed, based on common areas of interest), the only structure lay in the periodicity of meetings. The actual agenda was arrived at through consensus and often emerged from members’ own cited preferences. It became such a looked-forward-to event that even during a hiatus between cycles of the programme, some clusters chose to continue to meet every week! It is perhaps also worth noting that since this entire programme was initiated and sustained through the Covid pandemic, it often provided members with that much-needed respite from morbid news and anxious moments. Teachers who faced new challenges and unexpected struggles during online schooling were hungry for a forum like this. With each meeting, their dependence on this platform for intellectual as well as professional sustenance grew. The question that this raises – amongst many others – is: Can such a model of Teacher Development be crafted within a school? This question has been addressed in several works like that of Wald & Castlebury (2000), and will therefore not be gone into in this work. Here, the intent is more to showcase a successful effort to build and sustain such a model across locations and institutions than to prescribe an in-house approach. It is hoped that the reader will draw lessons from this narrative to seek out ways of creating a suitable model for his/her own context. A Remarkable Synergy A trained counsellor located in Abu Dhabi. A teacher for 25 years - now on a hiatus - living in Hyderabad. A Headmistress of the Nursery Section of a leading private school in Bangalore. And a retired Professor of Education and teacher of three decades, living in a tiny village called Nanij in Maharashtra. Every Tuesday, these four ladies meet online for an hour or two. They do so with unflagging enthusiasm and unbroken regularity. What brings them together? So many things! But above all, a passion for education and for bringing about a lasting change in teaching and learning that will benefit the children of today. Especially some of those in their immediate environments: Nanij and Bangalore. It has been my constant privilege to watch the recorded videos of every one of their meetings, and I write this from the inspiration that I have drawn from several such viewings.

8  Neeraja Raghavan There are many remarkable aspects to this synergy. To name a few: All four were total strangers to each other until a year ago. They first met during an online course that ran for five weeks, and then reconnected in a slightly longer online programme that went on for six weeks. It was at the end of the latter programme that their collective identification of a common area of interest (where they wished to engage in Action Research) brought them together into a cluster. Never having worked together before, and being located in places that are geographically far off from each other, the only mode of engagement during the pandemic for these educators was online. In a very short time, they forged deep bonds with each other in cyberspace. Two of the four members in this cluster are actively engaged in Action Research on problems that they identified, while the other two are playing more of a brainstorming role than actual participation in the implementation of a change. Yet, their engagement in each meeting is as critical and sought after as that of the two implementers. One member is not actively teaching today: she is a trained counsellor living in Abu Dhabi, and had taught for some years prior to joining this group. Yet, her interest and excitement in seeing the possibility of change in the teaching and learning of children located far away from her is palpable. Another educator has taken a hiatus from a long career in school teaching. Yet, her keen interest in seeing the Action Research of her cluster members to successful fruition is as intense as if it were her own research. Which, in many ways, it is!

Enabling Teachers to Look Within One who studies should never stop being curious about other people and reality. There are those who ask, those who try to find answers and those who keep on searching. Paulo Friere It was early in the year 2020. An unforgettable year: for that was the year of the Covid pandemic. When the nation went into a total lockdown in March, everyone who was fortunate enough to have a roof over their heads was housebound. Ten teachers responded to my announcement of an online course titled Reflective Writing for Teachers. When I made the call, the era of online learning had not quite set in yet. At the time, I had no idea how to conduct an online course, let alone the likely ramifications of such a course for teachers located in different parts of the country.

Teacher Development  9

Figure 1.1  The steps that led to building a community

The registrants were from different parts of India: Coimbatore, Bangalore, Chennai, Gangtok and Mumbai. For them, too, it was a new experience. As we met online every other day and read different reflective pieces together – and wrote some too – the group of teachers began to share their concerns and discover much that they had in common with their batch mates. What’s more, when they carried out peer evaluation of each other’s assignments, that exercise drew them together very quickly. But what was most striking was the way in which each one used the opportunity that the course provided to delve deep into their own minds – and consequently, articulate their views about the teaching profession, their experiences when they were in school, the typical traps that teachers slip into, their anguish, joys, and so on. To cut a long story short, this course paved the way for many more batches of teachers to take the online course in 2020. How and why did this course help teachers? And what was the role that this course played in the collaboration that followed? Figure 1.1 captures the flow of events, described in detail thereafter. From Isolation to Community Building Schon (1983) has rightly stated: “The teacher’s isolation in her classroom works against reflection-in-action.” Lortie (1975) has used the evocative metaphor of egg-crate like structures to describe the partitioning of teachers into segregated classrooms that prevent them from seeing and understanding what their colleagues do. While it may seem like teachers are always surrounded by numerous people, it is commonly experienced that most teachers work in isolation. They routinely go through their numerous tasks pretty much on their own: lesson planning, transaction, assessment planning, evaluation, report writing, etc. The rush of chores like these is interspersed with staff meetings, Parent-Teacher Meetings and School Events (like inter-school competitions and School Annual Day), all of which leave little time for a teacher to pause and reflect, let alone confer with colleagues or brainstorm about day-to-day

10  Neeraja Raghavan problems. In fact, this has become so much the norm that having ‘free time’ is viewed as a luxury by most teachers. Apart from that, another inevitable fallout is (Hargreaves 2001) that “isolated teachers get little adult feedback on their value, worth and competence” as this isolation shuts out “possible sources of praise and support.” Not surprisingly, therefore, seldom is a teacher called upon to articulate her views on matters that she holds significant – and even if she is, the typical hierarchy that prevails in many institutions precludes free expression – for fear of annoying the employer. So when the opportunity to meet other teachers every fortnight presents itself – even if it is only online – there are many teachers who welcome it. In fact, such an opportunity is like a whiff of fresh air, especially as there is no previous history with these teachers – all are strangers to each other, unless more than one teacher from the same school signs up for the course. The platform provided by the course for teachers to listen to multiple perspectives on, for instance, an extract from John Holt’s book How Schools Fail that they read, energized them palpably. It was not uncommon to hear a teacher confess that she had been in two minds about attending this class, being tired and overworked on that particular day, but that she was so glad now for having attended it, as listening to her batch mates’ renewed her hope and energy. Listening to (and being listened to by) another achieved another end: it helped teachers feel validated. Validation Ironically, many teachers acknowledged that this was one of those rare occasions when they felt they were being listened to – in a non-judgmental space. One would think that a teacher is listened to every day, more than any other professional – by a class of 30 or more students. But this is not what is meant here – a teacher longs (as who doesn’t’?) to unwind about the day’s pressures and dilemmas and to be listened to by those who can resonate with these issues. As more and more of this happened during each run of the course, it was evident that a bonding was spontaneously forged between teachers located at vast physical distances from each other. As a teacher recognized a similarity with another, the isolation that had been enveloping that teacher until then began to melt away. As hesitancy waned, open expression began to flow. Slowly, some of the braver ones risked exposing their vulnerability before the others in the group. This unfailingly proved to be greatly beneficial to the teacher who dared to take such a risk, for it instantly drew the others closer to her. It inevitably helped members build bonds with each other: regardless of their physical separateness. It also encouraged the reticent to speak up – and reap similar rewards. Not surprisingly, this enhanced the self-confidence of many a diffident teacher – at least, within the group, if not also outside it. Since the interactions included discussion, sharing of resources, watching Ted talks – and sometimes, just one member reading aloud while others listened – it provided

Teacher Development  11 an opportunity for the group to discover each other’s strengths that they could tap into for their own learning. When do teachers ever sit down to explore each other’s specific areas of expertise? Do they? Why, how often do teachers in a school even settle down to read a page or two together? Reading with Other Teachers Since the course was structured such that every now and then, different extracts were read aloud and discussed, this platform gave teachers a chance to dip into rich readings and savour the joy of reading high-quality writing together – without any pressure of being accountable for ‘good results’! It was a new experience for many who spent almost all of their time on the other side of the table – now, they were all learners, and this relaxed them immeasurably. More than one teacher expressed delight at listening to extracts being read aloud with expression and resolved to employ this practice in her own class too. It calmed minds and rejuvenated spirits – a mental yoga of sorts! It also reminded many of the impact of listening to powerful readings that were read aloud with expression: some began to aspire to turn into storytellers, while others wondered if they could dabble in writing … Flexing the Writing Muscle Not many teachers write for pleasure. Many harbour a desire to do so, but they have so much writing to do as part of each day’s work, that they seldom experience the (mental) space to write for the sake of it. So the demands of this course to draw out the writer in them overwhelmed some, even as it inspired others to continue writing well after the course ended. Regardless of whether or not they continued to write, however, almost all of them experienced the way the act of writing loosened the grip of their minds on a certain perception or belief. Minnett et al. (2022) describe this aspect of reflective writing aptly: “an embrace of uncertainty and a willingness to inquire beyond one’s belief or knowledge.” The course allowed them to look at the written word and pause. And pausing, as we have noted above, is conspicuous by its absence - on most days - for a busy teacher. As Moreira (2016) says: “asking teachers to narrate vicarious experiences makes them revive it and restructure it by writing.” Further, the inevitability of repositioning the experience – as a consequence of revisiting it – is rightly pointed out by Moreira (2016). Was that really the way the incident had happened? Was this belief founded on evidence? For instance, one teacher discovered (to her utter surprise) that the act of writing about her school teachers made her realize that her school days had not been as unhappy as she had perceived them to be, until then. Her mind had been replaying a certain version of the story of her schooldays, and now – this teacher was in her forties – she suddenly realized that there was a lot of joy embedded in those days too! The lightness in her voice and the radiance on her face as she read aloud that piece of writing remains fresh

12  Neeraja Raghavan in my memory. In another instance, a School Principal became aware of a high degree of redundancy (even ambiguity) in her circulars, and revisited the way in which she drafted these notes to her staff: “I realized that when I left a line hanging (a tendency that came to light during this course) without connecting to the next idea, my colleagues would be distracted and, when I failed to recognize this, I would wonder why they were not responding pertinently. I became mindful that I employed too many long, never-ending sentences to convey instructions.” Reflection was thus inextricably woven into the fabric of the course, and it proved to be a very exciting journey for them. Reflection Dewey (1910) has defined reflective thought as: “active, persistent and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it, and the further conclusions to which it tends.” For most teachers, the course first provided a chance for them to reflect on different ­issues – like their own most impactful teacher, or the usual tangle that they would get into when a parent confronted them about their child’s performance in class – and this slowly opened many locked doors inside their own minds. One teacher confessed that she managed to forgive the ‘wrongdoer’ in a ten-year-old scrap simply by carrying out the reflective exercise called ‘Conflict Resolution’ in the course. Another wrote that he had come to see the power of reflection: This course has taught me to live in the present moment. Reflecting on my past experiences and reliving those moments have helped me to be aware and alert of the present moment. The effect of this course has been such that in the midst of daily activities, I find myself pausing for a while and distancing myself from ‘me’, so as to be aware of my feelings and present experience. I feel that this course has awakened all my senses. I feel fully alive now. I am no more floating on the surface. An exercise that called for reflecting on the essence of education, or who an educated person truly is, proved to be paradoxical in the challenge that it posed for so many educators! Most of them found it far easier to articulate what education is NOT, rather than express concisely what it is. When teachers watched Chimamanda’s inspiring Ted talk “The Danger of a Single Story,” they reflected on the way their own perceptions of others was often based on a single story that their minds replayed over and over again. An exercise which drew out letters to their most impactful teacher produced a variety of memories – some painful, others inspiring. The common factor in all of the pieces was the powerful realization of the long-lasting impact of a teacher, and consequently a greater resolve to be more mindful of one’s own ways of engaging with students henceforth. The effect of the course on some participants was felt long after they completed it. Moreira (2016) asserts that through narratives, teachers can turn into critical thinkers who question the way power can sometimes undermine

Teacher Development  13 their autonomy in their professional spaces. Long after completing the Reflective writing Course, one (usually quiet) teacher experienced some discord at school, largely because she perceived a bias in the mind of her Principal. She then mustered up the courage to approach the latter and speak her mind. In her words: “I was not at peace until I conveyed what I was feeling to Ma’am. I guess this was what I learnt in our learning community. Yes she has a bias … However, I realized that I was also over thinking how she behaved with me. After talking to her, the intensity of my reaction has reduced and I am feeling relieved. At least I am able to give my 100% to my work. I feel reflective thinking has seeped into me, or else I would not have dared sort this out in the manner that I did now.” As researchers like Moreira (2016) have reported, the power of narrative inquiry in drawing out a teacher’s voice is undeniable. While this was palpable during the five-week course, the question of sustaining such a new-found articulation naturally reared its head. Forging Ahead As the course consisted of a total of ten one-hour sessions, many teachers bemoaned the end as it drew near. Was there not going to be a second-level course, they asked? Surely they could keep this association alive for longer? And so it was that the seed of an idea was sown: that of building a Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners LCoRPs across India. I sent out an invitation to graduates of the course to participate in the next level (an extract from my diary is shown below), the unfolding of which is described thereafter. From the Diary of Neeraja Raghavan 27 November 2020  An excited, eager bunch of committed teachers who are interested in forming a Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). A nervous – though excited – facilitator who is waiting with nailbiting anxiety for registrations to roll in. A blank canvas. What should we do to kickstart this? How can I facilitate this entire process so that it is a sustained effort? What are the ways in which a community can be formed, nurtured and kept vibrant? These teachers are from different parts of the country. Some know each other, having been co-registrants in the same batch of the Reflective Writing Course. Others are total strangers to each other, being from different batches of the same course. What they have in common: They are all graduates of the Reflective Writing For Teachers (online) Course

14  Neeraja Raghavan They are all passionate about learning and teaching They all share the belief that teachers can take charge of their own growth Where they seem to differ: Geographical location – and consequently, weather, local culture, maybe even contexts Roles – a couple are not teachers (they are Principals), they teach different subjects across different grades. One is a counsellor and former teacher. 7 December 2020 It is a very encouraging sign that there are now almost 15 teachers who are willing to invest their time and money into forming such a community. There were even five ready volunteers to play the role of “catalysts”: people who nudged those that were either sitting on the fence or were hesitating to join out of fear of not being able to find the time. Two of these five catalysts sent out persuasive emails to all the teachers who had initially expressed interest and that effort bore fruit. 15 December 2020 We close registration today. Eighteen registrants in all, now!

Teachers Connecting with Teachers Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much.

Helen Keller

It was towards the end of 2020 that this effort was initiated. Eighteen participants from across India enrolled for a six-week programme titled Teacher Jottings. It was carefully designed so as to demand significantly less time from them than the online Reflective Writing course had: as the intent now was to sustain this effort for long. After all, building a community requires sustained effort and time! Since the participants were from five different batches of the Reflective Writing Course, I anticipated the need for each one to forge fresh bonds with those who had not taken the course with them. To enable this, I divided the large group of 18 into six clusters of three each, with the provision that they could always change clusters if and when they felt the need. I also added that there be a Cluster Anchor – a role that is necessary to nudge the quieter members – and this responsibility could be rotated amongst the cluster every fortnight, so that everyone got the chance to take on that responsibility. All members agreed

Teacher Development  15

Figure 1.2  Map showing locations of participants [Map drawn by Usha Kumar]

that we should meet once a week for an hour and a half and we fixed Tuesday evenings, after taking a vote. The geographic spread of the participants (see Figure 1.2) was interesting – from Noida to Kolkata, Mumbai to Hyderabad, Coimbatore, to Chennai and Bangalore – and one even from Abu Dhabi.

This must surely be one of my MERRIEST Christmases! I am slowly watching the teachers’ entries on the MIRO Board. It is almost like taking a peek into their minds, and sometimes – because the MIRO Board allows one to see who else is online at the same time – I can even see them type away! This is like seeing the thoughts pass through the minds of teachers, even as they take form! Oh, the wonders of technology! The Teachers’ Jottings were insightful, even moving. How little we know of what goes on inside a teacher’s head! What an opportunity there is to get our teachers to record their daily thoughts and feelings! Is anyone out there interested? (Extract from Neeraja Raghavan’s diary)

Designing the Programme As Facilitator of the programme, I was now faced with the challenge of designing it without over-designing it – in the sense that I was very clear that

16  Neeraja Raghavan this cycle had to be co-created, for a community is best built when there is a collective sense of ownership. As it turned out, that was about all that was clear to me – for hardly did I plan one session, than the structure of the remaining sessions organically unfolded from the teachers’ jottings. When a young teacher was disappointed when her views were not heard in her workplace, she expressed her angst over a long email to me. This formed the central issue around which teachers engaged in rich discussion during the next session. Her email is pasted below: “I am going to record every feeling, every incident in the greatest possible detail,” I decided. “All of it will serve as data for my PhD later,” I thought. But I didn’t do much note-keeping and there were many reasonable excuses. I did not worry about it that much. I liked to be in the flow of it. This did not mean that I was not reflecting. I was, very passionately. I shared, too, with whomever I could, sometimes in formal meetings and sometimes informally, to an extent where I became one of the very few members who talked the most in meetings of any kind. I could not just contain all the reflective wisdom coursing through me as I witnessed discussion about anything that related to classroom practices, student behaviour, and teacher dilemmas. My well-practiced reflective muscle came in quick and handy to respond with ease. But the silence of others was a bother, how could they be so silent on topics that should get to any teacher? When I transitioned from “the new outsider” to “a somewhat insider,” in one of the meetings, I heard one of my colleagues whisper under her breath, “We know what they are going to do about it, so why this whole fuss and waste of time?” And that is what happened. And I saw it happen every single time. Participation was encouraged as long as it proved their point and as long as it was entertaining. The moment it took a different turn it was shunned! And slowly, from then on, I stopped too. Little by little, I decreased my participation, I checked the time more often than I did check the validity, relevance or, for that matter, anything of what was being said. I made a note of what I thought; it was best not to ask why. This became the case for school-level discussions. I did not feel very bad about it. I thought, “Why keep barking my viewpoints if things move on without needing it? And, as such, at my own classroom level, there are too many things going on that I should actually shrink my locus of attention to, in order to barely have my classroom experience.” But my general indifference insidiously pervaded my own classroom experience and how I came to view it. As I continued my practice, the issues only grew graver. My students had issues differentiating letters, could hardly make sentences, never read (for whatever reasons) and English just shut them off. An indifferent resignation seemed to be the only way to cope with the shocks that I encountered every day.

Teacher Development  17 I read about strategies that improvised language instruction according to research, I tried them but inside me I knew I had resigned. The challenges are just too huge. Using the CSQ (Claim, Support, Question) thinking routine from Project Zero,2 members were asked to share their perspectives on the above narrative, in small groups. Not surprisingly, this drew out (from more than one teacher) many deeply held feelings of being ignored or not listened to. It was hard to end the small group discussion and re-join the large group! What followed was therefore even more powerful. An extract from MAKING THINKING VISIBLE, By Ron Ritchhart, Mark Church and Karin Morrison (2011) [Page 157] was read aloud, which brought out the very same feelings [of not being heard] from a student. In this narrative, the teacher concerned realized with a jolt that she had unwittingly conveyed that the thinking of her students did not matter, and she now sat up to consciously build a culture where it did. As soon as I finished reading this out, I could feel the vibrancy in the atmosphere. It was pulsating. The teachers were clearly shaken. In the pregnant silence that followed, the unspoken thought in most people’s minds was: “How easily we feel discriminated against, and how seldom we notice that we are guilty of the same!” Slowly, they began voicing their appreciation of the points being made in both pieces, as they looked at the two together. There was a distinct humbling of the atmosphere, as teachers candidly admitted that they too were often guilty of exactly the sort of suppression that they experienced. Late into that night and well into the following day, several text messages flowed into the phones of members (see textbox) as the reflections resonated across the country. My email thread titled ‘Post First Session ripples’ then elicited 23 responses, as various members shared their views on how and when a teacher feels silenced! From these emails, I could see that this subject had touched a deep chord in many of them. What’s more, this platform gave a chance to vent out those unarticulated feelings, to a group that resonated strongly with the theme as well as with each other.

“It was such a rich discussion. It is replaying in my mind. I feel like I do after attending a beautiful music concert.” “What a fantastic session it was yesterday! Some of the things that were said are still playing in my head.” “Such a relief to have this forum where we can share our issues!”

18  Neeraja Raghavan Value of Networking As teachers engaged in discussions like the above, they began to experience the immense value in networking. Isolation of a teacher no longer seemed to be inevitable. This forum proved that. Figure 1.3 shows sample responses of teachers on an online bulletin board that solicited members’ articulation of viewpoints. Another topic that this opened up was how and when a teacher should ‘cope’… And how does this unfold on various planes? This flowed organically from the above theme, where a teacher’s silent resignation was thrown open to question when members saw the possibility of the same event happening in students. I drew a possible flow chart (see Figure 1.4) and shared it with teachers in the group for their views. One teacher emailed her thoughts to the group, where she envisioned larger and larger circles of influence exerted by a teacher. Beginning with the classroom, she drew the outwardly expanding circles of influence to other classes taught by the teacher, then, to parents and the community and finally, to the management. She recommended that teachers form such networks so as to “get away from spirit breakers” and “network with spirit builders.” It made me wonder what kinds of transformations would happen if such networks started mushrooming across the country.

Figure 1.3  MIRO Board with sample entries from participants

Teacher Development  19

Figure 1.4 Flow Chart depicting likely sequence of events for a teacher trying to think critically

When a Principal texted me excitedly about a simple instructional intervention that had turned around a reluctant reader in just six days, I immediately roped her in for a presentation before the group. Another teacher emailed me about how her school management had dictated a dress code for teachers and this provoked a very animated discussion in another meeting. Alongside these weekly meetings, there was a question or two about teaching and learning that was posed every week for members to jot down their thoughts on a common board for all to see. Thus, there was no dearth of issues that these teachers brought to the table: and there was no need to prod them to co-create the sessions. It all happened organically. Oh, what a lovely week it has been! To my delight, every cluster is charged enough to schedule meetings over this interim period, so as to come up with a do-able idea and a good presentation. Every day, I have been receiving texts, emails and phone calls from excited teachers across the country, wanting to share with me their ideas and seeking my views on its clarity. If there is anyone who needs evidence that we have interested and committed teachers in our country, here it is! And mind you, this

20  Neeraja Raghavan is far from an easy time for them all. With schools opening up for the senior classes, teachers are now straddling both online as well as face-to-face classes, and residential school teachers are also having to observe quarantine, monitor bio-bubbles and ensure that their resident students stay safe. With all this on their already heaped plates, here are 15 teachers who are excitedly planning how to bring about a change in our education system! (Extract from Neeraja Raghavan’s diary)

Sowing the Seeds of Change Through this cycle of engagement, the teachers drew closer together. In sharing their own fears and vulnerabilities in this safe space, they slowly built a deep bond of trust. This allowed deep and honest reflection to flow into a realization that they could actually attempt to collectively bring about some change on the ground. As one teacher read what others had shared, she wrote about the bits that resonated with her: Many neurons are being switched on! Several exciting thought avenues are lighting up!! Currently I am particularly resonating with: “Covid lockdown was (still is?) an opportunity to rethink the education /school education system.” “We can bring (true, effective and sustainable) change (only) by being within the system.” She then mooted an idea that all the others jumped to accept: If you all are willing, I would like to echo and push forward a particular line of thought that has been coming up in several of our conversations.  Reimagine / Rethink/ Redesign education/ school system of education. Thereafter, the synergy in the group was nothing short of remarkable. Each teacher articulated the particular aspect of teaching/school education that she wished to work towards changing. Beginning with problems that revolved around classroom pedagogy, they ranged across developing a culture of reflection in a teacher body, getting children to appreciate the relevance of every subject, enabling teachers to be less outcome-driven and more processdriven and shifting the onus of teacher development to teachers themselves. All too soon, the six-week cycle came to an end – and triggered the next cycle, where each one brought to the table the Action Research Problem that she wished to work on. Notes 1 Raghavan N. (2019) How Can Action Research Sustain Systematic and Structured Thinking in Participating Teachers? In: Koul R., Verma G., NargundJoshi V. (Eds) Science Education in India. Springer, Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-13-9593-2_6 2 https://pz.harvard.edu/resources/claim-support-question

2 Teachers as Change Agents Neeraja Raghavan

One who learns from one who is learning, drinks from a running stream. The Siletz Indians While the intent to form a community of reflective teachers was brewing in my mind for years, there was never any clear outline of the path that would lead to this goal. It is only in hindsight now that a pattern is visible and therefore, a suggested model of teacher development. It all began, of course, with the online course that the pandemic sparked off. The experience of reading, reflecting and writing together (during the course titled Reflective Writing for teachers) enabled each teacher to forge a deeper connection with herself and with others. A need was felt (and articulated) by many teachers for an extension of this course, perhaps with a lower investment of time. As described in the previous chapter, the subsequent programme titled Teacher Jottings allowed members across different batches of the Reflective Writing course to engage online with each other, and bring to fore commonly experienced struggles. Brindley and Crocco (2009) cite Rosenholtz, McLaughlin and Talbert and Darling-Hammond as rightly pointing out the importance of a climate that is conducive to purposeful exchange. Now teachers began to see that they shared similar challenges and could, therefore, brainstorm together to arrive at likely solutions. This helped them form connections with each other, as they recognized the extent of commonality in their struggles and consequently, the possibility of soliciting ideas and inspiration from each other. Watching the way a busy Head of School like Lalitha developed the habit of reading for an hour every day when she was into her middle age, Nandashree shared: “Lalitha’s AR inspired me to read at least an hour in spite of my busy schedule.” As one member, Krithika, acknowledged in March 2022: “Thank you, everyone, for such an energetic meeting! There is so much learning that happens in this group every day!”

DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-3

22  Neeraja Raghavan In contrast to the usual relegation of teachers to merely technical roles (Guerrero & Ugalde 2020) whose expertise is by and large underestimated, these teachers now began to feel a strong urge to use their capabilities to bring about some change in their workplace – be it a classroom management issue, a pedagogical one or even an attitudinal change. This led to the articulation of a common impulse to act so as to effect a change which then served to bind the group together more intensely, even as they aspired to work towards different outcomes. A PLC or Professional Learning Community (Brindley & Crocco 2009) slowly began to form. Professional Learning Communities and Teacher Development Bullough (2007) quotes the definition of a PLC given by Hord (1997) as “a group of educators who “continuously seek and share learning, and act on their learning.” The concept of PLC’s is not new – according to Poekert (2012), the idea has its origins in organizational learning and productivity – there are several such communities amongst educators across the world. The critical element that is brought out by most researchers in this area is the need to develop a culture that supports continuous inquiry and improvement. Poekert (2012) made a longitudinal study to investigate whether such communities – if supported for a sustained length of time – yielded tangible benefits for both teachers as well as students. Poekert’s intent was to compensate for the sparse literature that threw light on the impact that collaborative learning communities have on teaching practice and student learning. He wisely cautions against relying solely on interviews with teachers about this impact. The methods adopted by Poekert are described in detail in the paper. It was shown that as a result of being part of a PLC, and receiving individualized feedback on their methods of teaching, teachers improved their instructional practice noticeably. They also found that students participated more actively with these teachers in the class. The Critical Friends Group1 (CFG) is a recent and rich programme that is run by the National School Reform Faculty or NSRF. In this model, “each CFG community consists of 5–12 members who commit to improving their practice through collaborative learning, the use of structured interactions (protocols), and meeting at least once a month for about two hours.” CFGs are led by a coach (not a ‘boss’ but a neutral peer-leader) who builds an atmosphere of trust and uses NSRF protocols and activities to do so. Another organization that works to spread educational innovations and also to promote peer-led teacher development is HundrED,2 where teachers in a cluster of 15–20 schools collaboratively engage towards understanding how their students learn. Teachers have testified to the power of these collaborations in making their day-to-day work more meaningful. Amongst their many groups, there are teacher collectives in India that this organization has successfully nurtured.

Teachers as Change Agents  23 However, apart from initiatives like these, such communities in the school teacher fraternity are still rare in India. By and large, the knowledge for practice model of teacher development prevails throughout the country. This is somewhat akin to the distinction drawn by Servage (2008) between reforming and transforming a school or even education. While the word ‘reform’ is like reshaping a lump of clay, to ‘transform’ it means to change it into something else altogether. And the urge to change it radically must therefore be the driving impetus. It was this intense urge to effect (however small) a change that brought together this group of educators. Thus, a model for teacher development evolved through these programmes, captured diagrammatically in Figure 2.1. Servage (2008) has asserted that “professional development is most effective when it is collaborative and collegial,” emphasizing that this collaborative work “should involve inquiry and problem solving in authentic contexts of daily teaching practice.” This was experienced palpably in this community as well, as the compilation of research papers in Section 2will show. This begs the question: can a teacher not feel the urge to bring about some change on her own? Why should there be any need to connect with others before attempting this? Research literature is full of accounts of teachers

Figure 2.1  Model of teacher development

24  Neeraja Raghavan working to bring about a change (through action research or otherwise) on an individual level. In my own experience [Bhaskar & Raghavan (2017), Reshma Kiran (2017), Gowda Suryakumar and Venkatraman (2017) and Singamsetty & Raghavan (2015)], several teachers have conducted excellent Action Research individually, with one-on-one facilitation. These teachers were consumed with a desire to address what they saw as burning issues inside their own classrooms – issues that revolved mainly around pedagogy and classroom management. One very significant difference between isolated Action Researchers (previously facilitated by me, one-on-one) and a collaborative group of such researchers emerged in the current work. This was the overarching nature of the problems chosen by them. While the synergy of collaboration has been illustrated in the previous chapter through several live examples, the problems chosen by the members of Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs) are indicative of the bird’s eye view that collaborative work can often enable. For example, problems like nurturing teacher agency, valuing the process of learning over its outcome and developing critical thinking in marginalized children were some of the issues that these teachers chose to work on. No doubt, they started off thinking contextually – as their individual descriptions of the trajectory of framing the problem will testify (see Section 2 for the research papers). Yet, the power of collaboration showed in the way that their vantage points quickly evolved to the next level. Table 2.1 gives a snapshot of some action research problems chosen by individual action researchers that I have worked with in the past, and examples of problems framed by some members of this community. In addition to the research supporting the power of PLCs cited in the preceding paragraphs, therefore, it is hoped that the reader will find ample arguments in this compilation for the power of teacher-teacher collaboration. Much of this sort of collective brainstorming and candid sharing of feedback

Table 2.1 A comparison of some Action Research Problems chosen by individual Action Researchers and members of this community who worked in collaboration S. No

Individually researched Action Research Problems by teachers

A few Action Research Problems chosen by members of this community

1

To make the learning of Chemistry exciting for my eighth graders

2

To bring about a harmonious atmosphere that is conducive to learning in my IV-V grade To enable Middle Schooners to learn Mathematics at their own pace

To enable teachers to value the process of learning over the product (outcome) To build a reading culture in my school

3

To nurture learner autonomy and a sense of ownership of the learning space in Middle Schooners

Teachers as Change Agents  25 may not have been possible without the paving of ground that the Reflective Writing Course and Teacher Jottings programme provided. No doubt, there could well be several other ways of bringing a heterogeneous group of educators together – this is just one route that is being described here. Especially since this involved the bringing together of teachers from different locations in the country – and during the difficult time of the Covid pandemic – a shared goal emerged very early in the collaboration. The synergy that was generated by the enthusiastic idea of bringing about a change was palpable to the entire community. Setting the Stage for Sustaining a Community Interestingly, the idea that this group could work towards effecting some palpable change in one or more schools came from one of the members. It was thus noteworthy that momentum was generated from within the group and this could well be one of the main reasons why this initiative sustained itself for two years. An opportunity was now available for collaborative inquiry, and a significant element of this initiative was that it was not externally imposed upon the members of the group. Aligning with the voluntary nature of enrolling oneself into the group, this absence of compulsion flowed through the weave and structure of the community. In all, the six-week Teacher Jottings programme was followed by three six-to-eight-month cycles of Teachers As Change Agents or TACA, which ran as shown in Table 2.2. It did not take long to christen the group as the LCoRPs. Having formed such a community, I was pleasantly surprised by the near-zero investment of efforts from my side to keep it alive. Scheduling regular meetings and anchoring them was all that was demanded of me. The usual cajoling, nudging and follow-up that a coordinator of any joint effort typically feels compelled to do were all conspicuous by their absence. Brindley and Crocco (2009) have quoted Hargreaves (2008) as pointing out that Professional Learning Communities are “vulnerable to the priorities of the prevailing educational policy.” In many instances, communities such as this can fizzle out after the initial enthusiasm dies down, largely due to their inevitable focus on alignment of their teaching practices to policies dictated by the decision makers.

Table 2.2 Schedule of the three cycles of the programme titled Teachers As Change Agents (TACA) TACA I TACA II TACA III

April 2021 to November 2021 July 2021 to December 2021 January 2022 to June 2022

Conducting Action Research and documenting it along the way Planning, Acting and Reflecting on Action Research, and documenting it Course on Research Paper Writing

26  Neeraja Raghavan As in most initiatives, starting was easy – but sustaining the effort was most important. What enabled this group to meet regularly for almost two years? What allowed such sustained cohesion? By its very nature, reflective writing draws out inner thoughts and feelings – and from the braver participants, even their vulnerabilities. This has as its natural consequence a ‘pulling together’ of the participants. Having peeped into some of their fellow’s struggles, they spontaneously feel some warmth and camaraderie. It is not insignificant that of the ten participants of the very first (and most intense) run of the Reflective Writing Course, four stayed on to be part of the community called LCoRPs. (The remaining members were distributed across six batches of the course, but 40% of the very first batch stayed on almost until the very end.) Perhaps the emotional bonding (that resulted from their very intense engagement immediately after the outbreak of Covid-19) served to cement their sustained participation. Since the entire initiative started during the pandemic, it gave struggling teachers a platform to share their challenges and significantly lessen their (often acute) sense of isolation. Especially during the second wave of the pandemic (April to June 2021), the severity of the outbreak and constant news of deaths and hospitalizations were daily experiences for one and all. Almost everyone knew someone who had succumbed to the dreaded disease. [Some members, too, fell prey to it and survived after following prescribed protocols and taking treatment.] Therefore, one of the sessions was turned into a Healing Session where no educational issues were discussed: instead, members unwound by listening to calming music and healing poetry. In a sense, the possibility that this opened up – of a community that shared troubling times together – served to bind the community further. Another session, titled Teacher Bios, had each one share an interesting titbit from their own life experiences. Efforts such as these served to bring the group closer, despite every meeting being held online. Almost all the members were full-time teachers and therefore, these bimonthly meetings were always held in the evenings. Since the engagement was totally virtual, the need to commute to and from a venue was absent. This could well have served to enable near-total attendance of every meeting, as members could attend them from the comfort of their homes. An informal atmosphere was nurtured, allowing members to turn off their cameras if the current conditions at their homes disallowed video. Every single (online) meeting was recorded and the recording was shared with the entire group. Whenever a member found it difficult to attend a meeting, due to some commitment at home or at the workplace, she would later watch the recording of the meeting so as to be up to date before the next session. This practice allowed members to meet other demands on their time without completely missing out on the discussions that the group had. This was an important element that enabled long-term sustenance of the group. After

Teachers as Change Agents  27 watching the recording of a meeting that she had missed, Nivedita texted the group saying: “As I listen, I am reminded of the basic issue that teachers must have clarity on: the syllabus is just a guide, your objectives are your end goal. Teachers are also excited when children are excited. I feel like putting myself in yesterday’s meeting.” Again, Krithika lamented missing another meeting after watching its recording: “Good afternoon, everyone! I finally saw the recording today and am feeling so bad that I missed such a rich session!” A Voluntary Community – Challenges and Benefits It has been my learning that a voluntary group is seemingly held by nobody – a fact that becomes patently clear when members decide to leave. When there are no rules binding a person to a group, the motivation to stay as a group is purely individual. Some have it, others don’t. This is both a challenge and a benefit: for it is only those who are committed to the sustenance of such a group (and who find it meaningful) that will stay on. On the other side, those who leave will also not feel compelled to explain or justify their exit, voluntary as their membership was. What, then, ties such a group together? What holds a person to any workplace? In any organization, the typical employer-employee equation usually brings with it certain caveats that impede free flow of candid conversation. Here, there was no such equation. While this is not meant to imply that the community had a no-holds barred engagement, the absence of a pre-existing equation between members (at their respective workplaces) lent itself to the possibility of fresh relationships. Each one came from a different place – and consequently, was regarded afresh by everyone else. The element of competition (that often creeps into a workplace, despite the best of intentions) was conspicuous by its absence – for what sense did it make to compete with an educator who was not sharing the same workspace? On the contrary, it was exciting to collaborate with a teacher at a distant location to bring about some change in school education. Expectations that a teacher usually has of her colleague were also missing here, for the only engagement was virtual and fortnightly. This allowed greater freedom in sharing of views and soliciting feedback. The fact that all this took place during the isolation of the pandemic made such a platform even more precious. Teachers looked forward to such a space, as is evident from the near-total attendance of virtual meetings over two years. Since it was expressly clear that nobody was obliged to stay on as a member of the group, there were a few members who left very early in the first cycle, due to pressing engagements at the workplace or at home. A few members left towards the end of the third cycle (when members were busy writing their research papers) as they no longer found it meaningful to stay

28  Neeraja Raghavan on. From a free-flowing discussion forum, the group had temporarily taken on the colour of a purpose-driven cohort – of writing research papers that captured the action research of each member. A pertinent observation made by one of the members of the group is relevant here: the stress of writing research papers was likened by her to the usual examination tensions experienced by students. When there was no set ‘achievement’ or targeted goal, as in the Teacher Jottings programme, members were freely exploring and dabbling in the issues that were raised. No sooner did the possibility of publishing a paper raise its head, than the concomitant requirement of maintaining a certain standard also came tumbling in, as a package deal! The familiar Damocles sword in the form of ‘results’ wielded its usual effect. This was particularly demanding of full-time teachers who had to extract time out of a busy day to try their hand at writing academic papers – a first-time experience for all! Ruefully, some reflected that this made them realize how their own students must be experiencing the demands on them to meet certain standards! It was rendered less stressful in this group, however, through the inevitable collaboration that happened during the process of carrying out action research as well as writing the research papers. Those who experienced it as being more stressful than enjoyable chose to leave the group towards the end of TACA III. Brindley and Crocco (2009) affirm: It has been our experience that committed educators may come to the table with the best of intentions but lack the facilitative processes and protocols that lead to significant results. In LCoRPs, systems were set in place right at the outset for members to collaborate with each other (described in a later section of this chapter), and also with me, so that facilitative processes were accessible – or their absence was noticed and pointed out. It was due largely to such reasons that difficulties mentioned by these researchers and also Hargreaves (2008) were not experienced here. For there was a common impetus that drew this group of motivated teachers together. In their individual environs, each one had noticed the chasm that seemed to lie between what is and what should be, and had yearned to do something to narrow that gap – and this was the thread that bound this group together. From the Workplace to LCoRPs Wald and Castleberry (2000) point out that there are oft-noted discrepancies in schools, of professed beliefs and actual practice, on a daily basis. It is not uncommon for a teacher working in a school to experience a lack of alignment of the institution’s stated vision with everyday teaching-learning practices by teaching faculty, management and students. It is far less common, however, for a teacher to feel free enough to articulate her angst over such a gap, and even rarer for the institutional management to take cognizance of it and work towards bridging it. Despite the fact that several teachers of this group were working in environments that valued free expression, they

Teachers as Change Agents  29 jumped at the chance of sharing their concerns in a neutral platform such as that provided by LCoRPs. Amongst the myriad causes of this is one important one, which I intended to focus on: teacher agency. What if a teacher could freely voice her concerns in an ambience that welcomed such articulation? What if fellows of the teaching fraternity offered their informed views on these issues and exchanged ideas? And then, what if a community of such teachers could make their voices heard in larger forums? Would this not go a long way in getting teachers’ voices to be heard by the larger community? Would this pave the way for a very real possibility, some day, of teachers participating in policy making for school education? After all, are not the practitioners of any profession best equipped to point out the specific areas that need change? It was with this intent that I initiated the formation of LCoRPs. The logo carried a tagline that said it all: “From Whispers to Resonance.” The hope that this would be the start of teachers across the country coming together to share their dreams, draw up plans of action and begin to see the seeds of change sprout was the spark that fuelled this initiative. An inevitable question that can come to the reader’s mind is: What were the guiding principles of such a Learning Community? To be honest, I did not articulate any set of principles at the outset. All that was clear was that every teacher’s voice should be heard. Further, since this was going to be a voluntary group, the demand from the workplace would always take priority. For instance, if a meeting of LCoRPs clashed with one at the school where the member was employed, there was no question of missing the meeting at school in order to attend that organized by LCoRPs. Especially as the bulk of this project was carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic, the pressure on most teachers was immense. It was therefore only reasonable that LCoRPs played a supportive role, rather than another demanding one! The only other principle which was very clear to me at the start was the value of peer instruction, which has been described so elegantly by Eric Mazur of Harvard University. As Mazur (2001) points out, ten years of implementation of Peer Instruction has shown enhanced student mastery of both conceptual reasoning as well as problem-solving skills. If this has been so robustly proven in student learning, I wondered, why can it not be as effective amongst teachers? As described in Chapter 1, the usual model of teacher development in India is that of an expert resource person transferring his/her knowledge to a group of teachers. [However, the same teachers are then expected to make learning participative for their students.] Surely there would be far more effective development if teachers learnt from each other, just as Mazur clearly showed that students could learn from each other? I found affirmation of this belief in Poekert (2012), who has cited the work of DuFour (2004), Fullan (2007) and Hord and Sommers (2008) affirming the effectiveness of teacher-teacher collaboration in solving professional dilemmas.

30  Neeraja Raghavan Both these premises were amply borne out as later sections in this book will show. With just these two basic guiding principles (teacher’s voices should be heard, teachers should freely learn from each other), LCoRPs was started. Other elements unfolded along the way. The Elements of LCoRPs As the group met every fortnight, processes began to organically evolve, based on the felt needs of members. An email from a member would often grow into a topic of discussion in the next meeting. An action research problem statement would become the trigger for a rich debate: why was this being seen as a problem? What were the researcher’s implicit assumptions? Could we now question these assumptions? Yet another door would open when a member wished to share her takeaway from a rich research paper that she had just finished reading. Often, the next meeting’s agenda would emerge from what a member had shared as a text message on the phone. In the entire two-year period, there was not a single meeting that fell short of an agenda due to lack of discussable issues. Thus, the wheel of process-development was set in motion almost unnoticeably. Interestingly, all of Brindley and Crocco’s (2009) six key characteristics of a PLC were present in LCoRPs – and, as stated above, much of this was not systematically planned or premeditated. The focus on learning, collaborative culture, collective enquiry, action orientation, continuous improvement and results orientation were elements that organically seeped into the functioning of the group, as they chose to delve into one specific area where they wished to bring about a noticeable transformation. This was even more so when it came to documenting their action research in the form of research papers. At the start, nothing more was asked of the members than to describe the desired change: nobody was expected to design the route to get there. In order to do the latter, all that I could offer was the time-tested framework of action research. Action Research as a Way Forward Having facilitated the action research of several teachers in the past, it seemed natural to me that members adopt this framework to bring about their desired change. Brindley and Crocco (2009) recommend action research as ‘a natural and seamless part of professional development’, especially when it is embedded in an ambience that is conducive to the sustaining of a respectful community. Kincheloe (2001) aptly describes action research as providing “an apparatus for the human species to look at itself.” Action Research has long been used in numerous fields including education, and Raghavan and Sood (2015) have described in detail the history of its usage across domains. Since the research papers in this compilation carry elaborations of the actual framework, only a brief summary is presented here.

Teachers as Change Agents  31 Action research is ‘change research,’ distinctly different from the sort of research that aims to understand a phenomenon in depth and stop there. Rather than adding information to an existing domain, the action researcher sets out to bring about a change or to solve an existing problem. Kurt Lewin (1952) is said to have coined the phrase ‘action research’ to describe the circle of planning, executing and reflecting on the steps undertaken to effect a desired change. After the Second World War, Stephen Corey at the Teacher’s College started a movement for Action Research in education, arguing that “action research could help reform curriculum practice when teachers applied the results of their own enquiry” (Kincheloe 2001). There was a lull not long after as the scientific validity of this method was questioned and even criticized. It was not until the eighties that Action Research revived in the field of education, when the commonly adopted practice of policy makers giving problems for teachers to explore was seen as trivializing the role of the teacher. [For a detailed trajectory of action research, the reader is referred to Kincheloe (2001)]. Costello (2011) represents this as a cycle of PLAN-ACT-OBSERVEREFLECT, a sequence that was adopted by the members of this community in conducting their individual action research projects. Inevitably, the experience of traversing this route compels the action researcher to reflect on questions like the following: why was this particular issue perceived as worthy of change, in the first place? What were the tacit assumptions at the start? During the course of action research, how do these assumptions now seem? Questions such as these allow the researcher to step back and view patterns of thought and behaviour as one would the performance of another. The consequent loosening of the grip of conditioned behaviour opens up the space for new modes of thinking and acting: what every teacher wishes to see in students, but seldom ventures to bring about in her own life! It is the ‘little things’ in a teacher’s daily life that throw open opportunities for decision-making – decisions that will affect the daily lives of students, and later turn into ‘bigger things,’ as Moreira (2016) rightly points out. Some decisions are handed down to teachers while others are hurriedly taken by them to quick-fix the issue at hand. Often, teachers unwittingly swim along with the current as they find themselves swamped with numerous responsibilities. And yet, there is almost always a niggling desire to bring about some change. Beginning as it does with the identification of a specific area of change, the entire process has as its seed some discontent that is brewing in the heart of the researcher. It is this discontent that fuels the whole drive to change. Area of Change: The Process of Articulation Identifying the specific aspects that needed change initially appeared to be easy. Schon (1983) declares: “The situation is complex and uncertain and there is a problem in finding the problem.” Emphasizing the way the

32  Neeraja Raghavan identification of a specific problem can actually result in viewing things through that lens, Dewey (1933) says: “The problem fixes the end of thought and the end controls the process of thinking.” Both these observations were reinforced during this work, as these educators went through the process of framing and reframing their action research problem. (The process is described in detail in each of their research papers.) Being a motivated set of educators, each one was brimming with ideas for bringing about a positive change. The issues that were raised by members as requiring change were varied, and yet had some overlap. While some bemoaned the lack of a reading culture in their schools, others wished to introduce a new pedagogy. Some felt that learning was happening in isolated boxes or subjects – there needed to be cross-pollination. A few members who played administrative roles wanted to empower their teachers with a greater sense of agency. Others wished to see teachers enjoy their work and not churn out prescribed tasks mechanically. And still others yearned to nurture a greater sense of ownership and empathy in their students. A closer scrutiny of the articulated issues revealed three broad categories: pedagogy, teacher development and some curricular or attitudinal change. In alignment with this, the group was sub-divided into three clusters that enabled this focus 1 Pedagogy Cluster, 2 Teacher Development Cluster and 3 Curriculum & Attitudinal Change Cluster. To begin with, the cited issues were broad and often lacked clarity. However, the fuzziness ironed itself along the way, as each member began to frame and reframe her Action Research Problem. So a problem statement which began thus: To implement a story-based language pedagogy for distance learning through audio input. Then altered into the following statement (after an initial round of brainstorming with other members): To question, reflect and change the story-based pedagogy through critical examination by colleagues This, again, later transformed into the final problem statement which ran thus: To develop critical thinking through a story-based pedagogy in marginalized children. It was found that there was an underlying similarity in the journey that each action researcher took to crystallize her specific problem statement. Almost always, the process would start with a very broad and rather ambitious goal, often jumping straight to the method that would be adopted – instead of first articulating the actual change that was aimed for. In the example

Teachers as Change Agents  33 above, this was indeed experienced when the researcher declared her intent to implement a certain pedagogy, without stating the end goal. Most often, an enthusiastic teacher who wishes to effect a certain change is so charged with that drive that there is an inevitable juxtaposition of the cart and the horse! The ‘how’ becomes more prominent in the mind of the researcher than the ‘what’ or ‘why’. It takes a more detached observer to notice this and point it out, mired as the researcher is in the throes of the problem that she wishes to solve. Collaboration proved to be very useful right from the start, as every researcher was invariably asked questions by the other members that provoked a re-examination of the initially framed problem statement. Prabha articulated this succinctly as she emailed the group saying: “Each one of us can pick up threads from others to enrich our own Action Research.” Detailed descriptions of the turnarounds that such collective probing resulted in are captured in the individual research papers compiled in this book, and will therefore not be dwelt on here in detail. The salient elements of the collaborative process are however described here. Nudging Each Other Along the Way As already mentioned, the large group was subdivided into three clusters, which met separately every month. This was in addition to the monthly large group (LCoRPs) meetings, which allowed inter-cluster interaction. Since every meeting was minuted (each one took turns to carry out this task), it enabled the mapping out of the collaborative journey of the researchers over the entire period. The journey was especially rich between July 2021 and December 2021, i.e. TACA II (Ref. Table 4.1), for the actual action research was conducted during this cycle of the programme. (The third and last cycle, TACA III consisted of a course on writing research papers that captured each one’s action research.) Members experienced many ‘firsts’ as a result of undertaking action research, and also as a consequence of being part of LCoRPs. While it began in a small way with one member helping another to design effective lesson plans, it slowly grew into deeper collaboration. Within a month of the start of this cycle, Ganga3 (an experienced teacher in an alternative school) announced excitedly that she had successfully drawn up a matrix of skills that her students would need, if they were to turn into autonomous learners (as that was her action research problem). Despite having been a teacher for more than a decade, this was her very first attempt to do this. A Primary School Principal, Lalitha (who set out to conduct action research problem on nurturing a reading culture in her school) shared that she attended her first webinar on reading, by Pratham Books (https://store.prathambooks.org/),

34  Neeraja Raghavan because of the influence of two of her cluster members who could frequently be heard talking about the books that they had read. She adopted a regular practice of reading for one hour daily, and in so doing, inspired many others to examine whether they were truly experiencing a time crunch in attending to many pending tasks. (If a School Principal in her mid-forties – a mother, wife and home-maker as well, who commutes to work daily – could begin a regular reading practice and sustain it, why couldn’t they start a new habit as well?) Madhusree (Lead Educator of History & Political Science in a reputed school) reported how her emphasis on reflection and collaboration amongst her teachers led her colleagues to address a disciplinary issue in a totally different way. They noticed that many students were keeping their cameras off during online classes, ascribing it to poor bandwidth of their Internet connections. Instead of confronting the issue head-on, the teachers made a sincere attempt to understand the root cause of this trend, and managed to solve the problem peacefully. This then drew the following question from one of her cluster members: “This begs the question – during face-to-face classes, what makes a student turn on/off the inner camera, viz. attention?” It was frequently experienced that the problem which a member had formerly regarded as peculiar to her situation was, in fact, pretty common. The familiar overloading of tasks experienced by most teachers was frequently brought to the table for discussion. Deeptha nudged the group to examine this by asking: “Why do we heap our plates with tasks? Can we examine where this is coming from?” Nandashree (a Nursery School Headmistress) had assumed that the lack of a regular reading practice was particular to her school teachers, but she realized, after listening to two other members, that it was a wider structural problem. Everybody felt that academic (and other professional) problems could be solved “if there were more groups like LCoRPs.” A member sought her cluster members’ help in setting deadlines for her own Action Research, so as to get it moving. There were times when members were so overwhelmed by the magnitude of the task they had undertaken that they felt like giving up. When Nivedita (an English teacher of three decades) saw how the tribal children that she was working with were initially not showing any interest in reading, she was naturally disheartened. But as soon as she accepted their disinterest and changed her agenda to suit their mood, the tide turned. This sort of turnaround was often enabled by the questions raised by members during cluster meetings. Slowly, members of a cluster began to feel comfortable questioning and seeking support from each other. Questioning, Responding and Questioning Further The process that was adopted was as follows: each cluster would meet online and share the recording of that meeting with me. Having watched the recording, I would send out my feedback, comments and questions to the

Teachers as Change Agents  35 cluster concerned. For instance, the Headmistress of a Nursery Section (Nandashree) carried out Action Research on drawing her teachers away from being result-oriented and more focused on the processes employed to reach the end of the journey. Although she had tried out several interventions since 2012, she had consistently experienced a flagging of interest in her teachers over time. However, with her new approach in this action research, she was confident of seeing more lasting changes – as she had worked to first bring a sense of ownership in her teachers. Within two months of starting her action research, she declared that she could see many shifts in them. I promptly asked for evidence. She began by answering that for the first time since school went online, her teachers had reported 100% attendance. She ascribed this to the numerous changes that her teachers had successfully put in place. Another observation that she made two months later was: “Teachers are realizing that they need not teach certain things.” Articulating a specific shift that had come to her attention, she added: “A teacher has admitted that she has freed herself from the belief that whatever was practised all these years should continue to be practised.” After another month, she observed that as her teachers were getting to be increasingly comfortable using the ClaimSupport-Question thinking routine from Ritchhart et al. (2011), they were now engaged in a process of teaching and learning that their earlier ‘right/ wrong answer’ approach had precluded. Noticing these shifts, her cluster member (Nivedita) pointed out the need to acknowledge the empowering environment that Nandashree had succeeded in creating, which may seem very easy now, but had surely involved a lot of effort from Nandashree’s side. When Deeptha (a storyteller and teacher educator) shared her intention of drawing out reflections from teachers who were adopting storytelling in their classes, her cluster member (Vidhya) raised pertinent questions such as the following: 1 What is the objective of the reading programme and storytelling? 2 Is the lesson plan format the same for story telling/reading and English literature? 3 Do you have different teachers for storytelling and book reading? 4 How are the stories or books selected? 5 Are the teachers trained in storytelling? Not surprisingly, questions such as these ensured a certain level of rigour in each member’s action research. Another important role played by cluster members was to keep drawing the researcher back to her original Problem Statement, as it was very natural for the researcher to begin meandering along bylanes. For instance, when Vidhya (Principal of a mainstream school) seemed to be veering away from her original intent by posing irrelevant questions to her team of teachers, members were quick to draw her attention back to her Action Research Problem statement. Just as meandering to bylanes is a common trap that

36  Neeraja Raghavan teachers fall into, so also is the unconscious habit of asking leading questions. Questioning her own tendency to ‘over-teach’, Ratna ruefully asked: “How do I avoid getting into the role of a mother? I should only facilitate – and wait for thoughts to be articulated by the students.” Often, members had to re-examine the way that they had framed some of their questions to see if they were open-ended enough so as to draw out an honest response. When Madhusree framed a question to her teachers thus: “How do you think this approach will benefit your teaching-learning?” one of her cluster members immediately countered: “If the question is framed thus, there is no room for me to say that there is no benefit!” Similarly, Deeptha pointed out to Vidhya that some of the questions which she had framed for her teachers to think over and answer seemed to be leading to predictable outcomes. “Wouldn’t this draw your focus away from the process and make it too impact-driven?” she asked. Some members had to design questionnaires in order to gather data for their action research. Ganga shared her experience of doing so, with her middle schoolers as respondents. She first shared the design assumptions from the research paper by Lee and Hannafin (2016). As she explained her interpretation of each item listed, and how she had applied the same guidelines to create a questionnaire for her students, she added that she had had a separate review session with me to refine her questionnaire. Her ultimate aim was to produce a set of open-ended questions, as she realized that her initial set of questions were too leading. Her cluster mate (Lalitha) then asked, since all the questions were open-ended ones, would the children be able to interpret and respond as Ganga expected? Admitting that she did face that challenge, Ganga acknowledged that what helped her immensely was the one-on-one conversation that she had with each student to understand their feedback and experience. Hence, the whole process happened to be a two-layered evidence collection: students answering the pre-set questionnaire followed by the individual conference with them.  Ganga shared her experience of how the individual conferences brought forth more data from them, as opposed to their brief answers to the questionnaire. Thus, members questioning each other allowed deconstruction of many premises and unpacking of their beliefs. Deeptha’s text to the group after one large group meeting captured the vibrancy: “I think today we recreated what could’ve well been an argument between scientists!” In my email to the group, I exulted over a particularly powerful question that was raised: I am very impressed by the question that you raised, Deeptha: why, in an atmosphere of freedom, the teachers feel like withdrawing and in one of coercion from the top, they quickly buckle down to work! How many of them have even worked in a free ambience until now? It must be bewildering! Once they begin to enjoy this ambience, just see the magic that will unfold! By far, however, the richest takeaway from cluster meetings for members was the treasure trove of ideas that surfaced whenever they had a discussion.

Teachers as Change Agents  37 A Crucible of Ideas The extent of support that members drew from the pool of ideas that their collaboration generated is brought out very clearly in their individual research papers. A few examples are cited here, but the reader is encouraged to read the research papers for a fuller picture. Swati (a Hindi teacher in a residential school) had undertaken to carry out action research on building bonds between the students of her (residential) school and the local community. However, with online schooling during the pandemic she was at a loss as to how to go about this. The students and the community were not in any position to physically interact with each other, let alone forge deep bonds. Yet, within a month of starting her action research and attending cluster meetings, she declared: “I have lots of ideas now! Thanks! Others can now go ahead with their questions…” Belonging to different institutions proved advantageous in more ways than one. When Madhusree noticed that Deeptha’s teachers were working to refine their lesson plans, she offered a suggestion that drew from an existing practice in her own school. At the end of the year, she suggested, teachers could review all the lesson plans and share their ideas for improvement in the next year. “This sort of brainstorming brings in a new perspective,” she declared convincingly. “Lesson plans are openly accessible for the entire department to pick and choose any. Peer review will lend itself to a process that triggers reflection and consequently, improvement.” Pretty soon, Madhusree also benefited from a practice that existed in another member’s school. In alignment with her action research to bring about inter-departmental collaboration, Madhusree shared video clips in her cluster, of some of her school teachers sharing their individual subject expertise in other classes. Promptly, one of her cluster members asked how this was proof of cross-disciplinary collaboration. “Aren’t your teachers still working in silos? Where is the evidence of each one stepping out of her subject domain?” This was followed with a suggested practice that was being followed in the questioner’s own school, of giving students the choice to conduct an ‘open project’ where they can choose a mentor who need not necessarily be a teacher in the school. It could be a parent, relative or friend. She added: “This becomes a reflective exercise for the mentor (often the teacher from another discipline) to come out of their comfort zones and engage in another discipline, appreciate students’ efforts and colleagues’ trials and tribulations in teaching a particular subject. This cross-learning helps teachers get in touch with their own fears, makes them aware of their own limitations or incompetency - which, in turn, addresses the notion of bias.” In this regard, Fraser et al. (2007) cite Bell and Gilbert (1996) who stress the importance of differentiating between ‘what it means to be a learner within a particular learning context’ and ‘what it means to be a teacher within a particular school context.’ It is only in schools where teachers feel supported by the management and their colleagues that their learning can actually be acted upon.

38  Neeraja Raghavan Being new to research, members had to grow into the rigour that characterizes it. Slowly, as they were shown ways of gathering relevant data and substantiating claims with convincing evidence, they began to offer ways of systematic data collection to each other. When Vidhya was of the view that her teachers were beginning to take ownership of their own development, her cluster members suggested that she give them a template to record their observations. This would provide greater ease of documenting and uniformity in data collection, they suggested. The ambience of a free-flowing discussion allowed realizations to surface in the mind of an (often beleaguered) action researcher. In her attempt to bring about interdisciplinary collaboration amongst the teachers of her school, Madhusree realized the criticality of a trusting atmosphere – after she was more than four months into her action research! Sometimes, ideas were shared but not implemented, even though they were seemingly well-received. Prabha (an experienced teacher in an alternative school) and Lalitha had a very fruitful collaboration, when they realized (half-way through Lalitha’s Action Research) that Lalitha seemed to be experiencing some mental block that was impeding progress. This discovery surfaced when it was seen that several ideas were being shared with Lalitha by each of her cluster members (and appreciated by her), yet she seemed to be hesitating to implement any of them. The resultant donning of the role of facilitator by Prabha, and the rich collaborative journey of Prabha and Lalitha will form a research paper that is expected to be complete after the publication of this book. By the sixth month of TACA II, most members were nudging each other to gather evidence that backed their claims of actually seeing the desired change happening. Discussions now mostly veered around ways of gathering authentic evidence. I summarised it thus in my communication to the group in August 2021: “There is a distinct shift in the nature of discussion in this cluster now. Researchers are clearly emerging from within each one of you. I love the persistent demand for scientific evidence of change, the way Nandashree is seeking suggestions from the others for the next step – this is truly a scientific community! And even though Nivedita was absent, her document was read carefully and discussed. What cohesion in this cluster! It makes no difference if a member is physically absent.” This process quickly drew out the researcher in each of the members, and segued well into the third cycle of TACA where they learned how to write a research paper. The Researcher Is Born – TACA III Since the third cycle had begun in January 2022, members had now begun reading research papers pertaining to their particular area of research. This was a wholly new experience for almost all of them. On occasion, one member would read a relevant paper and capture the gist in the form

Teachers as Change Agents  39 of a presentation that she would later share in a cluster meeting. Alternatively, some members would share their takeaways from the papers that they had read over text messages or emails. Inevitably, it was only when the research paper resonated with the researcher’s own dilemmas that the takeaway was rich. When Ganga shared the framework described by Lee and Hannafin (2016), she also explained how it was perfectly aligned with the aim of her own action research, viz. to turn her middle schoolers into autonomous learners. When the phrase ‘making the tacit explicit’ from a research paper was discussed in the Pedagogy Cluster, Nivedita made the connection that during cluster meets, she typically expected help without making it explicit. She now realized that she would have to clearly point out areas where she needed help. Ganga noted the heightened awareness that the process of action research had induced in her: If we are thinking and documenting, then we know that our Action Research is progressing. While the process is enriching, we need to note the shift in (our own) thinking process. Engaging with the AR has brought awareness. I can see the presence of components of the reflective cycle in the way I am addressing my routine work. For example, I often pause and ask myself: ‘Am I making assumptions (when addressing a situation)? In this cycle, I could see the researcher emerging from many of these educators. For instance, when Nivedita was seen tweaking her methodology, her cluster member (and later co-author) Anita (a trained counsellor) asked her if there was now a need to revisit her Action Research Problem statement. Ganga perceived the inevitable intertwining of documentation and thinking: as revealed by her note above. No longer was she viewing documentation as an isolated activity: that it shapes (and is shaped by) one’s thinking was a felt experience by her. Again, when Nandashree described the changes that she had observed in the teachers of the Upper Kindergarten, she declared that their patience was very noticeable. Anne (an experienced teacher of English) asked how Nandashree would gauge this shift. Acknowledging the need to carefully monitor this, Nandashree said that the effort put in by the teacher to make the environment easy and relaxed – so much so that the students did not feel that this was an assessment – could serve as a starting point for this kind of monitoring. In a similar vein, Nivedita did some double loop reflection (Argyris & Schon 1974) early on in the third cycle of TACA. Initially, when she began carrying out action research on developing critical thinking in marginalized children through a story-based pedagogy, she did not have many expectations of the children. She had defined “success” as being limited to children analysing a character or predicting what would happen in a story. As she proceeded with the project, however, her assumptions changed and with that, her expectations of what the children could do. The rubrics that she now designed reflected her changed expectations. (More details on this can be found in her paper – Chapter 6.)

40  Neeraja Raghavan Nandashree shared with her cluster members that the teachers in her school were now reading more than they used to. She was then questioned by them whether they had been reading earlier or this was a result of her Action Research. She answered that some teachers were readers even earlier, but they would not discuss what they had read.  During the course of her project, these teachers could be seen making connections between what they were doing and what they had read, as these connections showed up in their documentation. All of the above happened against a backdrop of numerous pandemic-related changes. Falling ill was common, and this took away a lot of time for members. In addition, the teachers that they were working with were often unwell and therefore, those who were still healthy had to share the workload of the absentees. Schools that had been running almost wholly online now began to adopt the hybrid mode, i.e. partially online and partially offline. This imposed numerous demands on teachers’ time, as they had to straddle both modes of transaction. Naturally, this resulted in time constraints in getting them to meet and discuss issues related to the action research. Since the academic year in Indian schools draws to a close in April/May, (with examinations at the end of the academic year), this compounded the already existing pressure to optimize working on the Action Research and documenting noticeable changes. It was therefore nothing short of remarkable that these educators managed to focus to the extent that they did, in carrying out their respective action research projects, and then, on visualizing ways of sustaining the observed changes. By October 2021, I observed: “The level of discussion has now shifted to sustaining the change: from merely working to bring it about or even monitoring it.” Sustaining the Change I now noticed that many members were focusing their attention on ways of sustaining the momentum. They could see that the initial burst of enthusiasm and consequent changes needed to be kept alive, if their action research was to result in something meaningful. By November 2021, Vidhya observed that her action research which aimed to get teachers to take charge of their own development was beginning to show signs of success. When asked for some indicator that substantiated such a claim, she pointed out that teachers were now beginning to have their own meetings, without the Principal’s (Vidhya’s) intervention. By January 2022, Nandashree was able to clearly perceive a change in some of her teachers – strict, unapproachable teachers were now seeing merit in empowering children to talk freely. She confessed that she was amazed at the honesty of the answers given by teachers to her questionnaire – and acknowledged that this was her greatest achievement. “Teachers now have the freedom to express their opinions!” she declared with delight. The mirroring of the freedom experienced by teachers- and then, of students - to express themselves freely cannot but be noticed here! Well after the submission of research papers, many members declared that they were seeing the fruits of their action research

Teachers as Change Agents  41 every day, in their respective schools. These are however outside the scope of this compilation. The third and last cycle of TACA was almost wholly devoted to documenting each one’s action research in the form of a research paper. Writing Research Papers The third cycle of TACA consisted of a course on research paper writing offered by me to the members of LCoRPs. Except for one or two members, none had read research papers prior to this, let alone write any. For many, their first experience of writing as educators was during the Reflective Writing Course. It was therefore a huge challenge undertaken by them (as well as by me) to convert their action research into publishable research papers. Fechoe (2003) described the journey of teachers writing as researchers aptly as “This is how it is. This is not how it is.” Likening the limitations of this engagement to the inevitable space that exists between two points – no matter how closely spaced they may be – Fechoe captures elegantly the limited picture that any educational researcher can, at best, strive to portray through the writing of a research paper. There is always more to the story than what has been told, he rightly asserts. And so it is, in every one of the papers compiled here. Bearing in mind that this limitation could never be transcended, the course was designed to achieve (to some degree) the following outcomes: • to read a few research papers that pertain to each one’s chosen area of action research • to understand the elements of a research paper • to discern the points where citing of references is needed and claims need to be backed [either by cited literature or robust evidence] • to distinguish between robust and weak evidence • to structure a paper according to the framework of Action Research and therefore, include single-loop as well as double-loop reflections (Argyris & Schon 1974) • to review each other’s papers against a list of parameters outlined in a template The Learning Trajectory Over a period of six months, the participants were led through the following stages: 1 Reading an abstract –examining several published abstracts through the lens offered by questions such as these a What does this abstract lead you to expect in the paper? b Having read this abstract, what – if it were missing in the final paper – would you be sorely disappointed about? (Essential)

42  Neeraja Raghavan c What would you like to see as concrete evidence of the proposed change? d What would be nice if it were also included in the paper? (Desirable but not essential) e What sort of questions does this abstract raise in your mind, as a reader? 2 Writing an abstract – Members began by writing an abstract of their proposed paper, after they conducted the above exercise on published abstracts. It was not surprising that in the early stages, hardly anyone could answer the above questions with regard to their proposed research paper. However, when any member felt lost while trying to envision the final form of their research paper, other members found it easier to answer these questions on their behalf! As is usually true, the critical faculty sprung into action when it was ‘another’s’ work. Given the size of the group, it was not difficult to find at least one or two members who could offer likely answers to questions such as those in Point No: 1 above. 3 Reading research papers – I shared with each member a folder containing a set of published papers that were relevant to the specific Action Research problem that the member had selected. Reading these papers was deemed mandatory, as part of the course. Discussion of the papers was left to clusters to organize at their own convenience. Co-authors were given access to the research papers of the researcher whose work they were co-authoring. For almost every member, this was a first-time experience. While some enjoyed reading papers so much that they asked for more, others faced some difficulty in the beginning, to plod through an entire paper. Momentum slowly picked up as the course proceeded. Throughout the course, I employed the already mentioned technique of getting members to ‘teach’ each other. Thus, when Krithika exulted over the research papers that she was reading and said it charged her mornings, she was invited to share what she found so energizing in the papers that she had read. 4 Examining the flow of some research papers – So also, before I could anchor a session on examining the flow of a research paper, one member, Prabha, was quick to point out what she saw as a cohesive structure to some research papers. She was therefore requested to anchor a session where she drew out of the rest of the group their own gleaning of an underlying flow and framework to the paper. This helped members see the elements of a research paper and how they were tied together. 5 Writing with clarity and brevity – A few exercises were carried out in the large group, by me, for members to scrutinize a few sample extracts from published papers for clarity and brevity. Having appreciated the author’s skill in both these aspects, the group was then asked to examine one of their own attempts at writing out the action research conducted thus far, and suggest ways of tightening the writing even as it was made clearer. The practice of following a demo with an exercise that drew from their own writing was continued often, as it helped members to stay grounded.

Teachers as Change Agents  43 6 Backing a claim with suitable evidence – By studying a few research papers, members began to see how robust evidence had to be provided for claims that were made by the researcher. Again, the above practice helped greatly in their transition from research literature to their own work. Pretty soon, (as already described) they began questioning each other during cluster meetings as to the validity of claims that were being made, and demanded convincing evidence from each other. 7 Citing references – A similar exercise was conducted for understanding where and when a reference needs to be cited. With a mix of examples from published literature, members soon grasped where, how and when a reference needs to be cited. 8 Reviewing each other’s research papers – This proved to be a very useful exercise as each member shared her completed paper with a few others and solicited their critique. A template for review was shared by me and it helped many members revisit their own paper after they rigorously reviewed another’s paper. It was indeed a struggle for everyone to convert their action research into a publishable research paper. For one, the academic requirements that came along with research paper writing was intimidating to most. Second, being full-time teachers, they were unprepared for the large investment of time that this exercise demanded. The result was that more often than not, a fragmented and highly disjointed document would result, even after hours of writing and rewriting it. Since the procedure followed was a review by me of each draft, with suggested edits and comments for enrichment of the paper, each member went through six to ten iterations before the paper was deemed complete. This naturally caused some despair and raised doubts in the minds of a few members if they could really accomplish the task. Here again, I employed the strategy of getting members to learn from each other. This time, it was done by sharing a video-recording of a conversation with Ganga, a member who articulated how she came out of the fear that had gripped her whenever she sat down to write each draft of the paper. The following questions were posed to her and her responses to them relieved many members of the stress that they were experiencing: 1 In the Background section, what were the main changes that you were asked to make? Which of these changes (if any) needed citation of references? 2 In the section on Framing the Problem, what were the points that got deleted/added during the review? What did you feel about these edits? 3 In the section on Plan/Act, what were the surprising changes that you were asked to make? Why were they surprising? 4 Which part of the PLAN-ACT section required you to cite references? 5 In the entire paper so far, what was your most challenging task? Why did you find it so challenging?

44  Neeraja Raghavan 6 What is your main takeaway from this whole exercise for paper-writing thus far? (From the very first draft until now). How can you be supported better in this process? Candidly confessing that she almost gave up on ever writing a cogent research paper, Ganga shared a very valuable insight that later helped many members whose struggle was similar to hers. She observed that she had noticed that she was trying hard to imitate the style of published researchers, and this was proving to be very stressful. The high level of language in many papers was just one of the intimidating factors, she confessed. Ganga declared: “I told myself that I am no longer going to approach this whole thing as an academic exercise of writing a research paper, with so many associated do’s and don’ts. That ‘my paper should be like this, and not like that’ was an idea that was constraining me. Thus far, I have carried out Action Research without a hitch and even enjoyed it! So I am going to regard it as a narrative of my entire journey in this Action Research.” This shift lessened her stress considerably and she was able to move on, she admitted. “Before writing Version 3, everything was all over the place – even inside my head. After three drafts that had come back with numerous suggested edits, I sat down and looked at my regular jottings. (I had regularly been noting the ideas and thoughts that were popping into my head, as I went through my Action Research.) I now circled those key ideas that clearly led to the next step. Now it became easy to use these points as sentences that would link one paragraph to the next. This method worked for me!” In the very next large group meeting, several members endorsed the insights shared by Ganga and admitted that watching the recording of that conversation had made their own stress levels drop considerably. They felt significantly relieved when they saw that one of their fellows shared their own uncertainty and trepidation – and found her way out of it, too! Nivedita felt so recharged that she wrote: I watched the video, and read through Ganga’s paper. It inspires me to work on my paper. We discussed the paper in our Pedagogy group. I want to go back to it again and again. The video also answers many of my questions, which I could not articulate. It gives me good insights on how to write. I am eager to read Madhushree’s paper. With renewed zeal, members got back to refining the drafts of their papers. However, the six-month cycle of TACA III was insufficient for total completion of research paper writing. This was not surprising, as monthly meetings were happening amidst reopening of schools, followed by abrupt closure again as soon as Covid cases began to spread. The unpredictability of schedules for teachers was never more acute than during the pandemic. Nevertheless, the bulk of paper writing was done by almost all the members during

Teachers as Change Agents  45 this trying six-month period, and it was only the tying together of loose ends that happened in the subsequent weeks. At the risk of sounding repetitive, I can only assert that nobody was more surprised than I was when the papers were near completion at the end of six months. In the next section, these research papers are compiled. Notes 1 https://nsrfharmony.org/faq-items/cfgvsplc/ 2 https://hundred.org/en/innovations/teachers-collective#d6537d3b 3 Names of LCoRPs members are used throughout this chapter. For detailed profiles of each member, please see the section AUTHOR PROFILES at the end of the book.

Section 2

A Learning Community That Strives To Effect A Change Compilation of Research Papers by Members of LCoRPs Introduction In this section, the reader will find a set of research papers that were the outcome of the action research undertaken by the members of LCoRPs. As already described, the entire journey consisted of the following steps: • Running through the stages of PLAN-ACT-OBSERVE-REFLECT by continuously discussing the action research with cluster mates as well the mentor • Revisiting assumptions, modifying strategies • Reading research papers related to the particular action research problem • Learning how to write a research paper by taking a course on the topic, in the third cycle of TACA • Editing the paper iteratively with inputs from peers as well as the mentor • Peer review of fellow members’ research papers Even richer than the process of writing papers was the depth of discussion and debate that the whole process engendered. Kincheloe (2003) has argued in favour of teachers undertaking meaningful research, so that they are both consumers as well as producers of knowledge. Kincheloe’s convincing assertion (of such an exercise resulting in teachers moving out of the top-down approach in education) was amply borne out by the educators whose papers find a place in this compilation. Much of this was linked to a letting go by the person in a role of authority. While one Headmistress saw the falsity of her prior assumptions about her teachers being better at implementing ideas than articulating them, another Principal felt the need to pull back and allow her teachers to identify their own training needs. A teacher educator and storyteller saw that when her teachers were enthused in their being about an intervention, they had little or no need of her steering it.

DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-4

48  A Learning Community That Strives To Effect A Change Discussion and debate that was sparked off in students brought in many fresh learnings for the action researchers. A Middle School teacher saw the importance of learner autonomy in her students and was amazed at the spike in motivation and breadth of studentgenerated ideas that this triggered. Another teacher of the Kindergarten overturned assumptions of such young children being incapable of a certain level of autonomy and even drew out their collaborative skills. A researcher who worked to draw out critical thinking from marginalized children was astonished by their transformation in a short period of reading stories together. The importance of examining a teacher’s bias towards a subject was brought home with great force to another teacher as she proceeded with her Action Research. A Hindi teacher who began by doubting her own ability to bring about an attitudinal change in her students – since she felt her role was restricted to simply teaching the language – slowly discovered that language (being the medium of thought) provides an entry point to transforming one’s thinking. The above is just a peep into the rich explorations that follow.

3 Re-designing the Learning Environment in Kindergarten through Reflection, Collaboration and Teacher Ownership Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac Abstract This action research project sought to empower kindergarten teachers to move from the conventional result-driven approach to a process-focused one. Interestingly, the Principal Researcher (the Headmistress of the Nursery Section) realized right away that the very road to this goal had to be process-centric. This paper not only validates the power of teacher-teacher collaboration, but also brings out that a change in mind-set and fixed beliefs can help school leaders understand teachers' perspectives. This action research project soon allowed a positive atmosphere to blossom in the classroom, where students, in turn, asked questions and voiced opinions without fear of judgment.

Introduction How can I make the classroom environment more vibrant? How can I change teachers’ focus on assessments, and their over emphasis on writing, given that their students are only in kindergarten? How can I transform the educational experiences of children and enhance their motivation? Will I really be able to make a difference? These were the thoughts that ran through the mind of the Principal Researcher1 (hereafter referred to as PR) who is the Headmistress of the Nursery Section of Sri Kumaran Children’s Home, one of the institutions of Sri Kumaran Group of Institutions, Bangalore, India. Indeed, these questions had plagued her all through the last decade. In an effort to bring about changes, she had introduced several new initiatives. She conducted various workshops and individual training sessions on applying the theory of multiple intelligences, so as to enable enjoyable learning experiences for children. Her belief that children have a natural desire for knowledge led her to transform an unused building on campus into an Activity Centre with a Sensorial Room, a Science laboratory, an Art room, a Reading Room, and a Story-telling Corner. This was later transformed into a fully equipped activity centre by the DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-5

50  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac management of the school. For the faculty, a library was set up to instil a love of reading in teachers that they could pass on to their students. All these initiatives were directives that came from her, and they were welcomed with enthusiasm by the teachers and executed to perfection. This reinforced her assumption that teachers are good at implementing ideas, not as free in articulating it. Nevertheless, she hoped that they would delve deep, reflect on the ideas and offer suggestions. The PR soon found that it was challenging for her teachers not only to reflect on the ideas, but also to sustain these initiatives, given their numerous responsibilities. She understood that a complete buy-in from teachers to any innovation was the way to ensure its sustenance. This would become possible only when the teachers truly believed that they were accomplishing something worthwhile. Now, the question arose – what exactly needed to change? The PR sensed that the teaching-learning processes followed in their classes needed to change. In her own mind, the answer was simple. The learning environment was mostly teacher-centred. An inevitable consequence of a teacher-centred classroom is constant guidance given by the teacher. This limits the scope of questioning and discovery by the child. This was largely because teachers came from a traditional mould, conditioned by curricular expectations and the achievement of good results. It was important for the PR that they put aside their total focus on learning outcomes and start examining instead the processes employed to achieve those outcomes. Now, what would help them to do that? As she pondered, she decided that the teachers needed to focus on the interests of children in order to engage and inspire them. Around this time, the pandemic was declared. Teaching moved online and, with that, came many changes to the educational system. The PR, being a member of the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners – LCoRPs,2 was introduced to the idea of Action Research. The members were encouraged by their mentor, Dr Neeraja Raghavan, to identify a topic of personal relevance on which they could conduct action research. Further, she discovered a non-judgmental space for herself in the meetings, where she could articulate her ideas without fear of ridicule. Being by nature introverted, she would initially just listen to the others talk. Slowly, she ventured to articulate her thoughts and was pleasantly surprised when they were received with interest, and even taken forward with further ideations from the group. While participating in the discussions at LCoRPs, she recognized that she had tried to adapt her ideas of change to fit her institution’s grooves. The school had already envisioned a process-centric education. But, as it so often happens, there was the inevitable gap between visualization and actualization! While she knew that it was unrealistic to expect any school to realize its vision in totality, her own engagement with educators in LCoRPs had shown her numerous ways of manifesting such a vision – in small steps. On further analysis, she realized that the curriculum essentially would come alive only when her teachers and she reflected on it and more importantly, believed in

Re-designing the Learning Environment  51 what they were doing. John Dewey’s (1933) quote came to her mind – “We do not learn from experience … we learn from reflecting on experience.” Building on this thought, she realized that when teachers begin to reflect on what, why, and how they teach, learn from others and adapt and evolve, they will become richer from the experience and, furthermore, become better teachers. Meanwhile, to allow more thorough discussions, the group of fifteen members in LCoRPs was further subdivided into three clusters. The basis of this division was the interrelated themes underlying their chosen action research projects. The PR was now part of the Pedagogy Cluster. This is how she met the co-author of this paper, who felt as passionately as she did about empowering teachers to make children’s learning process-driven, rather than outcome-driven. Together, along with other cluster members, the duo read, discussed and framed the following Action Research problem: To empower teachers to move from an outcome-driven approach to a process-driven one. A New Beginning in School It all began with a question! The PR had called for a staff meeting. It turned out to be a meeting unlike any that she had conducted before. Earlier, staff meetings were totally Headmistress-driven, in that they were scheduled (by her), time-bound, agenda-bound (with the agenda also set by her), and therefore, resulted mostly in one-way communication. This meeting was different. It was the first meeting where she relinquished the reins and began with a positive note of appreciation from a parent to the teachers and then, asked the teachers a very important question – What do you think we need to change in the next academic year: in terms of academics, instruction to children, attitudinal change, curriculum and assessment change? The ball was now in the court of the teachers. The initial silence was broken by palpable excitement in the air – there was visible engagement, where earlier there had only been acceptance. One of the teachers immediately suggested a change in the way Environmental Studies could be taught and another suggested training in the effective use of technology in the classroom. Immediately, there was an offer from a (usually very quiet) teacher to teach the others how to use certain technological applications in the classroom. This was an amazing transformation – it was like a gold mine waiting to be explored. All it had needed was a trigger! What brought about this shift in the attitude of the PR to conduct a staff meeting which was very different from those that she had conducted before? The first prompt had come from one of her cluster mates to try Dr Neeraja Raghavan’s approach in LCoRPs Meetings – where every member’s voice counts. During the LCoRPs meetings, thoughts just flowed and ideas evolved organically. Feed-forward comments, made by the members of LCoRPs, helped her gain clarity and steer her thinking in the right direction. If she

52  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac could convey her thoughts in the group without any hindrance, in an unbiased and unprejudiced environment, why could she not try and replicate this environment in her own staff meetings? Perhaps, she surmised, the same approach would work in her staff meeting. Second, in one of the cluster meetings, a suggestion that emerged was to invite teachers’ suggestions to encourage their buy-in to her Action Research problem statement. The PR had always wondered why there were no organic discussions in the staff meetings at her school. It had never occurred to her that probably her own approach had to change. The day after the staff meeting was held, one of the teachers approached the PR with tears in her eyes and thanked her for the opportunity to present ideas. She appreciated the start of a practice that would solicit (and be responsive to) feedback. To the PR, this reinforced the significance of changing her own approach. She realized that teachers were also limited by misconceptions about their creativity, as also the lack of opportunities to voice their opinions. Wasn’t it true that until now, they had been regarded as excellent implementers of her ideas? It almost felt like the prison in her own mind had been unlocked! It seemed that she and her group of teachers were embarking on an exciting new journey! The comments in Table 3.1 may sound typical of teachers praising a Headmistress, but what is to be borne in mind is that the PR had never routinely sought the opinions of her teachers! Thus far, she had been in the driver’s seat issuing directives. For her, the question that she had posed at the staff meeting was a monumental step in the direction of change!

Table 3.1  Reflections on the first Staff Meeting conducted on 21 March 2021 The meeting was conducted in a very smooth manner where you gave a chance for each teacher to speak. You gave all of us a patient hearing which will surely help in building the team and sharing information and ideas. Teacher A

“A Leader is someone who can see how things can be improved and who rallies people to move towards a better vision.” The latest Upper Kindergarten (UKG) staff meeting was an example of this when you asked us to freely suggest our ideas that need to be incorporated into the UKG curriculum. Teacher C

It was indeed very thoughtful of you, Ma’am, to have a discussion/Meeting with UKG teachers. It was like an eyeopener for all of us. Your intention of changing our attitude towards others and respecting each other’s ideas is appreciable. It’s such a nice open forum you are trying to create to put all our thoughts, opinions and suggestions. Teacher B The support, encouragement and freedom of thought that has been extended to the new teachers as well is appreciated. Teacher D

Re-designing the Learning Environment  53 The Principal Researcher’s Mindscape A very pertinent question that kept running in the PR’s mind at this point was: How should she bring about a change within herself so as to help teachers adopt a process-driven approach? Having realized the importance of questioning her own thinking, she now began to also focus on the way that she framed questions. This was a paradigm shift in her thinking. She realized that she needed to let go of control. Instead of directing teachers’ practices, she should let them explore – individually and collectively – with just as much scaffolding as required. This naturally led her to wonder just how much scaffolding was ‘appropriate,’ as too much of it could counter the very objective of her action research project. This dilemma of ‘appropriate’ level of scaffolding popped up when she felt challenged by the questions that her teachers asked, but her new thought process led her to accept questions and suggestions from her teachers. She looked forward to a ‘New Age’ where her teachers asked questions and voiced opinions, giving her a foretaste of her own personal transformation. And slowly, as she saw teachers collaborating and taking ownership of the changes (to be described later in the paper) in the classroom, she received the affirmation that she was on the right path. Since she was trying out this approach for the first time in her school, her co-author and she decided that she should start with a small sample size and therefore, the participants of the study would be the Upper Kindergarten (UKG) teachers in her school. Sample Size and Timeline Twelve teachers from the UKG Section of Sri Kumaran Group of Institutions, Bangalore, India, participated in this 12-month study. The study was divided into three phases: Phase 1: Planning and Strategizing (March–May 21); Phase 2: Implementation and Reflection Stage (June–November 21); Phase 3: Evidence Collection and Ensuring Sustainability (December– March 22). Methodology The cycle of Plan-Act-Observe-Reflect of the Action Research framework (Costello 2011) was adopted for this study. Reflections of teachers were solicited through various tools – Padlet, Google Docs, and audio/video recordings of teachers’ and parents’ interviews during the duration of this study. The entire study was conducted online. The Plan of Action Twelve UKG teachers were divided into three clusters with four teachers each. Each cluster decided on a subject to focus on – English, Mathematics and Environmental Studies. The intention of creating these subject-specific

54  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac groups was to enable each group to brainstorm, explore new methods of teaching, exchange ideas and enter the subject through a child’s perspective. Online resources and documents were configured such that every teacher in the team had easy access to teaching strategies across subjects, so as to render implementation easier. Teachers met regularly to discuss previously used strategies that could be discontinued or continued as well as new strategies that could be used to bring about the desired changes in their teaching. As ideas flowed, parameters of student achievement changed concomitantly. Achievement was no longer restricted to only literacy and numeracy skills, but also observation, critical thinking skills and articulation mattered now. The emergence of a new set of priorities in the minds of teachers was a significant shift at this stage. Teachers tapped into various perspectives that emerged from their past experiences, fresh ideas from new teachers, sharing of resources, and technological skills. While earlier, teachers worked independently, now they were working in teams! The power of collaboration that the PR experienced at the LCoRPs meetings had inspired her to replicate the same at her school. Her experiences at these meetings made her wonder if her teachers could also be craving such an experience. She realized that this could lead to a ripple effect. This strategy, in turn, would benefit children when her teachers created the same nonjudgmental space for children to collaborate and thereby trigger reflective thinking in those young minds too. Like any researcher, she also turned to the published literature for any leads on this subject. To her delight, this strategy was corroborated by a study conducted by Vangrieken et al. (2015) who reported that teachers who collaborated with each other: • • • •

were more motivated experienced decreased workload had positive morale showed greater efficiency

• communicated more effectively • showed improved technological skills • felt reduced personal isolation

Several other changes were observed by Vangrieken et  al. (2015), who noted that instructional strategies became more student-centred. Moolenaar and Sleeger (2010) as well as de Jong (2019) had reported that at the organizational level, the message that collaboration among teachers sent out was that the school climate supported innovation. They also found that with collaboration, there was a cultural shift to more equity, and the creation of a flattened power structure besides fostering a professional culture of intellectual inquiry. ACTION: The Launch of the New Campaign

The PR and her co-author referred to Bekele and Melesse’s (2010) study where the principles of learner-centred teaching are listed. The following framework was used:

Re-designing the Learning Environment  55 • Using students’ prior knowledge • Encouraging students to generate explanations and alternative interpretations • Using discussions and thought-provoking questions • Using instructional materials and activities • Providing a learning environment conducive for discussion/group work, and • Providing opportunities for learners to utilize new ideas and to process information. While the UKG teachers of Sri Kumaran Group of Institutions had been using a few of these steps, there was no cohesion in the strategies implemented to introduce a topic in class. Most of the classes were teacher-oriented and each teacher decided on the way her class had to progress. Regular weekly analysis of the action research problem with Pedagogy Cluster members of LCoRPs helped to organically evolve the required strategies. The very first step taken by the PR was to reduce the teacher-student ratio to 8:1 instead of 50:3. This was enabled by breakout rooms and staggered timings, made possible by the online teaching mode that was adopted during the pandemic. The PR and the teachers then came up with the idea of sharing their teaching practices with each other. These meetings were called IDEX meets – IDea EXchange meetings. These IDEX meetings, which were conducted at regular intervals, gave teachers the satisfaction of presenting their ideas and also of being heard by others. To bring about a change in teaching strategies used by the teachers in the present study, the framework proposed by Lee and Hannafin (2016) for students proved just as effective even for teachers. They had identified three key constructs of student-centred learning: autonomy, scaffolding and audience. Their design framework – Own It, Learn It and Share It – recommended that students • develop ownership over the process and achieve personally meaningful learning goals. • learn through conceptual, procedural and strategic scaffolding. • present the results and the learning they received to a receptive audience. Following the same constructs from the above study: • a supportive environment was provided for the teachers to explore (and experiment with) their ideas. There were multiple opportunities for teachers to express their opinions, and make choices and decisions.

56  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac An example: Claim from the teacher

Opinions of the children ● ● ● ●

He

● ● ● ●

● ●

● ●

He is a joker in a circus. He is a clown, a juggler who juggles tomatoes. It has no face, but has carrot eyes and a nose. He has a tomato ketchup mouth. He has funny cauliflower ears. He has a lemon nose, he will sneeze He has strong legs and hands made of carrots. He has cherry hands. He is filles with a cucumber stomach He has a potato flower on his hat. He wants to give tomatoes.

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Letters like – T,U,V,M,Z,C – Numbers – 0,1,2,7 T is sleeping, Mouth is like a T We can see words - GO, DO He has a long nose We can see Zig zag lines He has a superman's cape in the hair

● ● ● ● He

● ● ●

Claim: This face is drawn with the help of the letter R

He is wearing a red capsicum bag. He cannot be a racer as he is full of veggies. The cycle is not strong, it will break. Veggie man is climbing up the hill, as he is strong. He is wearing a red helmet. This cycle doesn't have a back seat. Cycle wheels are not the same. Can we also arrange veggies like this and make an artwork?

Figure 3.1  Examples of CSQ Routines conducted in class

Re-designing the Learning Environment  57 • scaffolding was initially provided in multiple ways, but the end goal was to lead teachers to function without it. • teachers presented their ideas/strategies in the IDEX and staff meetings. Drawing on the visible thinking routines advocated by Ritchhart (2011), the PR shared a ‘Claim-Support-Question’ (CSQ) routine with her teachers. This was wholeheartedly embraced by them – to the extent that they implemented open-ended questions as well as CSQ routines in their individual classrooms. Ripples in the Classroom Use of the visible thinking routine – CSQ – brought in a culture of voicing opinions in class. This, in itself, was new for teachers who had routinely focused on getting the facts right. Now, the teacher was careful not to disagree with any opinion. Children gained confidence in articulating their thoughts and learned to look for patterns in pictures or data. Since they were sharing their thinking in class, each child would add his/her thoughts to another and, as a result, the teacher was often amazed at the depth of the thoughts that emerged from the tiny tots (Figure 3.1). From the focus on a single ‘right answer’, the teacher’s openness to multiple possibilities allowed the above rich exchange. An example of the difference in the questions asked while facilitating a lesson on vegetables is shown in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2  Learning the art of questioning Questions asked prior to the action research

Questions asked during the action research

1  Where do vegetables grow? 2  Which is your favourite vegetable? 3  What is the difference between raw and cooked vegetables? 4 Which are the vegetables that can be eaten raw? 5  Name a few vegetables that grow under the soil.

1 If you would like to grow a vegetable in your house, what would that be? 2 Can you draw the things you would need to grow your favourite vegetables? 3 Why should the veggies be washed before we consume/eat? 4 What are the different ways that vegetables can be cooked? (e.g. boiled, fried, steamed, baked...) 5 If all vegetables had the same colour, which colour would it be? 6 Name the combination of vegetables that you would use as toppings to make a healthy pizza? Can you draw the same thing?

58  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac Assessments – The New Normal A natural consequence of the change in pedagogy was that assessment patterns also changed. Earlier, the focus was on what they had learned in class with respect to Math, Language and Environmental Studies. Now, the focus was on taking ‘a whole child snapshot’ focusing on their skills, and areas that they had to work on. Where children were initially graded for the final assessments according to the categories in Figure 3.2 – (Example for assessment of English), the lens of perception now became more nuanced. Teachers developed their own rubrics for student assessment, based on the new learner-centred instruction followed in the academic year. The process of creating rubrics was not easy for the teachers, as they had never done anything like this before. This was enabled by discussions and several revisions before they all agreed on a particular set of parameters. Now, with the focus being on the process, teachers planned for continuous informal assessments. Since this informal monitoring was planned at regular intervals, throughout the year, it helped in re-designing strategies and making changes in the curriculum. It was as though the eyes of the travellers which were once unswervingly focused on the destination were now pausing to note the milestones along the way! Though the final report card had the same parameters, the difference was that each child was graded (as objectively as possible) on his/her performance through the year, based on rubrics, to gauge the current stage of each child. The above table indicates the objectivity, transparency, and balance that had come into judging students’ readiness to go into the next level. Similar Prior to the action research

During action research

Figure 3.2 Comparison of Grading Criteria in Pre-AR and Post-AR Assessment in the English language

Re-designing the Learning Environment  59 rubrics were created for the other subjects. The teachers acknowledged that young children often express themselves better by talking, rather than writing, and so this parameter was built into the rubrics. The making of the rubrics was a cathartic step for the teachers and the Headmistress. Teachers had taken charge of the process of learning! Observations and Reflections Johnson and Golombek (2011) declared that ‘the transformative power of the narrative lies in its ability to ignite cognitive processes that can foster teacher professional development.’ Narrative writing was followed by both the PR as well as her teachers during the course of this research. Documentation was done at every stage of the project. Most of these were in the form of a narrative of reflections on teaching, assessment strategies and attitudinal changes. In two months, the PR began observing and documenting the changes in her teachers – like the building of interpersonal relationships, where teachers slowly became comfortable giving and receiving help. The PR had to use qualitative methods, which were descriptive and explanatory in nature, to note changes in teachers’ attitudes and instructional design (Keiler 2018). She decided on:   I Classroom observation II Personal interactions III End-of-academic-year questionnaire that gauged how far her teachers had travelled on the journey of taking ownership of making learning process-centric.   I Classroom observations were conducted every fortnight. Classroom observations were made on the following indicators: 1 Changes in teacher’s behaviour in class – She observed that teachers had stepped out of their comfort zones and were in the process of overcoming their inhibitions. More teachers were using music and movement to engage the students. Teachers had realized the power of storytelling and were using it in their classes to make lessons more interactive and enjoyable. 2 Instructional approach – She noted the use of technology to make learning easier and more enjoyable for the students. Teachers used plenty of visuals to explain and reinforce concepts. Interactive discussions were part of the new normal. For example, with the topic ‘Food’ they planned a ‘Breakfast with the Teachers’ Day and had food-related conversations. This was an unprecedented activity; earlier, curriculum completion was uppermost in the teachers’ minds.

60  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac 3 Children’s responses – Students were asking questions, putting forward their opinions. The earlier set routine of ‘teach-write-answerworksheet’ was over. There was an unpredictability as to what the teacher would do in class which was welcomed by the children. II Personal Interactions with individual teachers happened every quarter in the academic year. The PR’s one-on-one conversations with teachers helped her understand the extent of proactive collaboration that her teachers were involved in during their meetings. They were experimenting with new pedagogies, learning new skills and using technology to support their lesson plans. They were questioning the curriculum and making decisions collectively, both on content as well as instructional methods. III End of Term Questionnaire

1 Rank the following in decreasing order of your comfort level: a  Sharing ideas in a staff meeting b  Discussing with a peer c  Going to Headmistress directly with an idea. 2 What is the reason for your (first) choice? 3 The Claim-Support-Question routine was used in class to encourage students to think outside the box and be able to give reasons for their claims. What is your experience of trying CSQ routines? 4 Describe 2–3 new ideas that you have tried and tested recently in the class. What is the outcome of the trial? 5 Can you share your experiences while presenting your ideas in front of the other school teachers? 6 Give one example where you got an opportunity to exhibit your leadership skills. 7 How often did you find yourself transacting a lesson this year in exactly the same way as you did last year? 8 How does the current curriculum lend itself to/prevent the implementation of your ideas? Give instances where you have questioned the curriculum and pedagogy that you have been following 9 How well do you feel that you are heard in staff meetings and cluster meetings? (Even if your suggestion is not accepted) 10 What are the new skills that you have learnt in the past few months?

Re-designing the Learning Environment  61 Some Responses from Teachers: Teacher A CSQ routine gave an opportunity for a more participative environment where each child got a chance to express their views. There was no right or wrong answer and it was like a game for them which they thoroughly enjoyed. There was a healthy competition as each child tried to view something differently from their friends and thus came up with creative answers. Teacher B Initially we didn’t get any interesting answers though, after probing and with a few cues, children came up with a lot of interesting observations in each CSQ. This allowed the class to build on group thinking and analysing others’ perceptions. Teacher C Before the presentation, I ensured that I was prepared. Due to that, I was able to present confidently and was also open to questions from others. This is, in spite of me not having done any presentations earlier. Teacher D Technically, I am more comfortable now and can quickly use features of Zoom, PowerPoint, and Whiteboard depending on the learner’s need.

Then, based on discussions with her mentor and her co-author, she created levels of achievement where she could place her teachers (Table 3.3). Placing teachers into the levels was easier said than done. Assessing teacher beliefs is a tricky proposition, as the PR realized. Nonetheless, there was a need for robust data. In this regard, the PR found a useful resource in Richardson et al.’s (1991) study that determined the belief-practice relationship of teachers (of Grades 4, 5 and 6) teaching reading comprehension, they cite researchers who assessed teacher beliefs merely through verbal (or written) elicitation. The mixed findings of these researchers led Hoffman and

Item

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Teacher beliefs (metacognitive)

Is firmly entrenched in the traditional mind-set of valuing outcome over process Stays with those who think like her, as she is uncomfortable in environs that question her beliefs

Is loosening her grip on the old mind-set and is beginning to consider other possibilities Is able to entertain another point of view some of the time, but would rather avoid confrontation if possible Occasionally tries out new methods but does not reflect on them enough to adopt it as a way of life Expresses dissatisfaction occasionally over-tested methods which for some reason, are no longer working as effectively

Has firmly internalized the rationale for valuing process over product

Occasionally steps out of the comfort zone to introduce related content that is not necessarily prescribed Expresses her curiosity every now and then, to find out WHY something needs to be taught at the prescribed level

Uses the prescribed curriculum as a springboard to launch into an exciting adventure of new learnings each time Does not feel limited or bound by the curriculum at all. Freely questions it and looks for compatible alternatives that do not rock the boat even as they nurture true learning

Methods adopted (procedural)

Follows time-tested methods and restricts herself to those that align with familiar pedagogies Shows a mechanical – even bored – stance as the methods have been repeated over and over again. Seldom questions them

Content transacted (conceptual)

Stays firmly within the prescribed curriculum and often struggles to ‘complete the portion’ Never questions the relevance of whatever is prescribed as content to be delivered

Welcomes argument and debate over the rationale of the new approach, as she is waiting to draw more teachers into her fold Is innovating and thinking most of the time, so much so that seldom is one strategy used twice. Constantly reviews methods adopted and is willing to think on her feet whenever necessary, so as to adapt the method to the current context

62  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac

Table 3.3  Journey of the teachers in making learning process-centric

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Strategist in the teacher (strategic)

Unless guided and clearly instructed, is at a loss as to where to search for materials, how to trigger interest in children and when to conduct an activity Gets nervous if there is no clear stepwise procedure to be followed

Every now and then, gets a flash of an idea and pursues it even if it entails some struggle or floundering

Collaboration between teachers

Does not take charge of changes in planning or implementation of lessons. Occasionally interacts and shares experiences with a few colleagues. Accepts ideas based on the majority views

Reflective practice

More accepting of ideas discussed than of personal reflection

Professional learning and growth

Show passive acceptance of new ideas

Mutual interaction and sharing of experiences with colleagues to improve students’ learning and for one’s own professional improvement on an ongoing basis, but does not take a leading role. Often shares and accepts information, ideas, and resources, (from other colleagues) but is erratic Though reflections on the effectiveness of lessons are erratic, insights learned are shared proactively Occasionally shares ideas about improving teaching practice and is very supportive of new ideas proposed by others in the cluster

Is raring to go, hence, sees nothing as an obstacle – digs her way out of a trench, if required, and never compromises on making learning fun for the children Devises new methods whenever necessary, pushes ahead even in the face of opposition, and can convincingly convey the alignment of the chosen method with the desired objective, to any opponent Effectively leads peer collaboration in areas such as implementing well-structured lessons, analysing student performance, and planning appropriate interventions. Takes an active part in group discussions, is willing to share and accept information, resources, ideas, and expertise, and is working towards healthy interdependence

Is comfortable devising ways of transacting content in the absence of a clear protocol, but is not yet reflective enough to check if that method serves the objective

Regularly reflects on the effectiveness of lessons and shares with colleagues insights gained to improve practice and student learning Consistently seeks out and applies appropriate ideas for improving practice from colleagues, professional development activities and other resources

Re-designing the Learning Environment  63

Item

64  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac Kugle (1982) to doubt the validity of this “paper-and-pencil” method, and so Richardson et al. (1991) explored techniques like predicting teaching practices based on professed beliefs. They found that there was, by and large, a congruence between teaching practice and beliefs. In one case where a discord was seen between the two, they inferred that while this teacher’s beliefs were changing, her teaching practice was yet to keep pace with her changed beliefs. They finally concluded that a robust understanding of the teaching practice of teachers (as well as changes in it), requires a combination of elicitation of their beliefs with an observation of their classroom practices. The advantage the PR had was that she had worked closely with this team of teachers for eight to ten years. Therefore, she had a basic understanding about their beliefs and attitudes to teaching. However, she still had a difficult task in front of her – to check whether her classroom observation of their transactions was in congruence with their (stated) changing beliefs. For example, Teacher A was a very senior teacher in terms of experience. She held very traditional beliefs about focusing on learning outcomes and an assumption that whatever the teacher teaches, the student will learn. Nevertheless, she was good at implementing ideas. Three months into this study, she started experimenting with new methods of teaching. Though, on account of her seniority, she was more inclined to giving directions to the teachers in her team, the PR noticed that she had now slowly started accepting ideas from junior teachers. Another tangible observation was that in spite of not being tech-savvy, she now discovered the wonders of using technology in the classroom. Then, there was no stopping her! Her animated presentations created interest in her classroom as well as during staff meetings. She had taken the risk of trying something new and did not mind failing in it! Similarly, it came to the PR’s notice that Teacher B, while articulating her enthusiastic acceptance of the proposed changes in staff meetings and individual meetings, did not show this as noticeably in her sharing of information, ideas or resources – as all these remained low-key. These were individual strands that the PR took cognizance of, when she started placing teachers in the different levels. Corroboration of professed beliefs was examined through the individual interactions, classroom transactions and the responses to the end of year questionnaire. This strengthened her evidence, collated in Figure 3.3. The PR’s vision of process-centric learning had become a shared vision of learning, as shown in Figure 3.3! While there were teachers in the group who took time to learn new ideas, share, and collaborate in addition to taking leadership roles, what amazed the two authors was their swiftness in accepting and working towards the new approach, as indicated by the eventual absence of teachers in Level 1 by March 22. So also, for example, with respect to the parameter ‘metacognitive beliefs’, initially, there were six teachers who firmly valued product over the process. But as they discussed and deliberated over the topic, three of them moved on to Level 2 where they were beginning to consider the importance of a process and had firmly internalized its value

Re-designing the Learning Environment  65

Figure 3.3  A Graphical Representation of the Teachers’ Evolution based on Table 3.3

over the product! For all parameters, while the movement of teachers from one level to the other was gradual and is still ongoing, 2–3 teachers took to the process with a magical energy and made the transition from Level 1 to Level 3 quickly. This endorsed the LCoRPs strategy of individuals taking ownership of their own learning as also the power of collaboration!

66  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac Strengthening the Narrative – Teachers’ Reflections Teachers wrote about their reflections on the cluster meets and how questioning from their colleagues helped them to review and identify what was essential for an UKG child to learn by the end of the academic year. Teachers revisiting the curriculum and altering the accepted practices made the PR question her own accepted practices/beliefs. The cluster meetings played a crucial part in encouraging teachers to put forth their opinions without fear of judgment (Teacher C). Teacher D felt that each person’s ideas were listened to without prejudice and with respect – and only then would a collective decision be taken. Teacher E felt that the cluster meets brought about a change in her perception – all of them now started looking at instructional strategies from the child’s point of view. There Is No Single Story – The Parents’ Perspectives

A significant fallout of the pandemic was that one of the major stakeholders in a school – parents – started noticing the changes happening in the classroom. This was possible because teachers were functioning in an online setup with young children, where parents were almost always silent spectators! Parents noticed that classes were interactive, and teachers were listening to each child’s opinion. Earlier, in order to complete the prescribed syllabus in time, though all students were given attention, it was not possible to have individual conversations in class. Now, with a better teacher-student ratio and consequently, a sharper focus on the learning process, every child’s opinion mattered. The PR noted an observation made by a parent on a teacher – when a child expressed his inability to understand a particular concept, she searched for an appropriate video to explain it better. According to the parent, this had never happened earlier. A feeling of trust and attachment pervaded the classroom. Children sensed when a teacher was unwell and would ask her if she was unwell – even though they were not facing the teacher in a physical classroom. The new strategies used by the teacher drew appreciation from the parents. A Focus on Continuance Lower Kindergarten teachers (LKG) have been expressing interest in following the same approach as the UKG teachers (UKG). A learning session was organized for the LKG teachers on the strategies used by the UKG teachers. They were impressed with the technical expertise demonstrated by the UKG teachers as also the use of the CSQ routine. At the time of writing this paper, they are already working on the changes required in the curriculum, based on the skills required for a child upon completion of LKG. The challenges are several, the main one being to replicate the success of the online set-up in an offline one. Planning has already started, the plus point being that this time, it is the UKG teachers who have taken up the

Re-designing the Learning Environment  67 baton of both continuance as well as driving the change into the other classes! Towards the end of the academic year, with the school opening offline, the teachers continued to collaborate and work on plans to sustain the processdriven approach. The benefits far outran the challenges. One of the many lessons that the PR will carry forward into the next year is the power of synergy in teamwork. Being a part of LCoRPs, the value of the collaborative process was brought home to her in the innumerable discussions that she had, both with her Pedagogy cluster mates as well as in large group meetings. With the frequency of meetings, unexpected friendships blossomed between members. These friendships gave her the emotional support that she required during stressful times. Another important lesson was that by letting go of previously held beliefs about the role of a leader and typical expectations of teachers, she gained more acceptance from her team of teachers. Once they realized that she was earnest about their taking ownership, they became a constructive learning community that then transferred an open, questioning attitude to the students in the classroom. A month before the academic year closed in April 2022, the PR saw this ownership by the teachers moving beyond academics manifest in the daily running of the school. The school had reopened physically and there was the usual chaos at the end of the day, when hordes of parents were seen waiting to pick up their wards. Customarily, teachers would wait for instructions from the Headmistress. But, this time there was a change. Using their own initiative, UKG teachers devised a practical and efficient way to send the children out in orderly fashion. Temporary barricades with chairs mimicking classrooms were created in the basement so as to create several more exit points. What an amazing transformation! Teachers had truly moved from being good implementers to self-starters and go-getters! And to think that all of these changes emerged from one simple, straightforward question that a Headmistress posed to her teachers – ‘What do you think we need to change in the next academic year, in terms of instructional methods, bringing about an attitudinal change, curriculum, and assessment patterns?’ Notes 1 Nandashree Natarajan has been the Headmistress of the Nursery Section (includes Pre-Kindergarten, Lower Kindergarten, and Upper Kindergarten) of Sri Kumaran Group of Institutions, Bangalore, India for more than a decade. Anne Isaac is a consultant with Education Mentoring India, an organization dedicated to empowering all stakeholders in a school ecosystem. 2 The Principal Researcher is a member of the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). It is a platform created by Dr Neeraja Raghavan who is an educationist and author. The members of this group are from different educational institutions spread across India and the group has been meeting online regularly since March 2020. The inputs and support from the cohort members are an integral part of this research.

68  Nandashree Natarajan and Anne Isaac References Bekele, A. and Melesse, K. (2010) “Enactment of Student-centred Approach in Teaching Mathematics and Natural Sciences: The Case of Selected General Secondary Schools in Jimma Zone, Ethiopia.” Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 29–50. Costello, P. J. M. (2011) “Chapter 1, What is Action Research?” In: Effective Action Research: Developing Reflective Thinking and Practice, Continuum International Publishing Group, p. 8. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing de Jong, L., Meirink, J., & Admiraal, W. (2019) “School-based Teacher Collaboration: Different Learning Opportunities across Various Contexts.” Teacher and Teacher Education, Vol. 86, p. 102925. Hoffman, J.V. & Kugle, C. (1982) “A Study of Theoretical Orientation to Reading and its Relationship to Teacher Verbal Feedback during Reading Instruction.” Journal of Classroom Interaction, Vol. 18, pp. 2–7. Johnson, K. E. and Golembek, P. R. (2011) “The Transformative Power of Narrative in Second Language Teacher Education.” TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 3 (September), Narrative Research in TESOL, pp. 486–509, Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL). Keiler, L. S. (2018) “Teachers’ Roles and Identities in Student-centred Classrooms.” International Journal of STEM Education, Vol. 5, Article number: 34; https://stemeducationjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40594-018-0131-6 Lee, E. and Hannafin, M. J. (2016) “A Design Framework for Enhancing Engagement in Student-Centred Learning: Own It, Learn It, and Share It.” Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 64, No. 4 (August), pp. 707–734. Published by: Springer. Moolenaar, N.M. & Sleegers, P. (2010) Social Networks, Trust, and Innovation- How Social Relationships Support Trust and Innovative Climates in Dutch Schools. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291128682 Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D. and Lloyd, C. (1991) “The Relationship between Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices in reading Comprehension Instruction.” American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 559–586. Ritchhart, R. (2011) “Chapter 7, Routines: Supporting and Scaffolding Learning and Thinking.” In Creating Cultures of Thinking, pp. 171–196, Jossey–Bass, (the Wiley Brand), USA. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raees, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015) “Teacher Collaboration: A Systematic Review.” Educational Research Review, Vol. 15 (June), pp. 17–40.

4 Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners – A Teacher’s Action Research Krithika Bharath

Abstract In this study, an anguished first-time teacher set out to find the reason behind the intolerance and growing exclusivity in her second graders, all from affluent families. Not only was her school's vision (of celebrating diversity in togetherness for a humane future) at stake, her own principles also felt severely threatened. This paper traces a novice teacher's journey that began by questioning her dissatisfactions, reflecting on them, and finally stumbling onto the powerful revelation that her students' need for autonomy underpinned all that she aspired to change. Schools usually tackle behavioural issues very externally, in the form of preachy sermons or written content that has very little impact, perhaps due to overlooking student needs. This teacher had a different approach as she set out to achieve it through student autonomy. Children as autonomous learners and contributors were better behaved, more empathetic towards each other and responsible towards their learning space. Through this research, the teacher found deep inner satisfaction and a new value in her profession, which are captured in her reflections.

Brewing of Discontent In 2019, an enthusiastic first-time teacher started working at an alternative school named ‘Adyar Theosophical Academy’ in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. It was a long-held dream that had come true for her as she could finally traverse the path of teaching and learning from children. Making the shift from the lucrative job of a software engineer to that of a moderately paid teacher wasn’t an easy decision, but the clear vision of this particular school enabled this choice. She was drawn to their vision of transforming students (from across India and diverse backgrounds) to cultivate mutual respect and compassion by learning together, so as to later contribute meaningfully to society. This was in sync with her own ideology of creating a more accepting and inclusive society, amidst the extremely success-oriented present-day mind-sets. The school (affiliated to the Indian Council of Secondary Education) allowed teachers to have a flexible curriculum until Grade 5. DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-6

70  Krithika Bharath In her first year of school teaching, she witnessed some children of her class discriminating a boy for his dark skin tone, leaving him helpless and teary-eyed. She was deeply disturbed, but wasn’t quite sure what to do. She began to wonder how, despite coming from similar backgrounds, children still found ways of putting a fellow down. Were they imitating the adults in their lives? Were they getting influenced by our success-driven society? If so, it grieved her immensely to think about what the real essence of ‘education’ was, which eats up roughly 15 years of our lives. This then led to her questioning her own role as an educator. Was it just restricted to imparting subject-related content or was she supposed to have more meaningful engagements with her students? She wanted her students to see each other’s strengths, weaknesses and uniqueness, so that they were prepared to meet the challenges (and reap the benefits) of this increasingly diverse world that they would one day inherit. Action Research – The Way Forward

It was at this time that the teacher met a group of self-motivated educators [brought together by Dr Neeraja Raghavan] called LCoRPs (Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners). Like the others, she too was fired with enthusiasm to address perceived gaps in the Indian education system. It was here that this teacher got an opportunity to share her feelings regarding the growing exclusivity in her young children, who were going to step into Grade 2 with so much resentment. Through many rounds of discussions and questioning by the LCoRPs members, the teacher was nudged to explore what she could do in her capacity, to guide children to appreciate each other’s uniqueness. When the opportunity presented itself in the form of doing action research, she did not have to look for a problem statement, as the burning issue of the growing exclusivity was already brimming in her mind. This was not just a problem of the past but was as prevalent in her present-day classes as well. She decided to conduct action research on her 27 second graders. While brainstorming ways of bringing inclusivity in them, the silver lining came in the form of a revelation: that at the heart of this appreciation lay the simplest yet complex attitude of ‘taking ownership.’ Ownership towards one’s learning and towards the space that makes this learning possible, would let them blossom in all goodness, feel motivated to push their boundaries voluntarily and get the opportunity to positively grow in each other’s company, with respect and empathy for their fellows. Her intuitive understanding resonated with Ryan and Deci’s (2000) paper, which highlights autonomy as being essential for optimal functioning of natural propensities. This can be fostered through an appropriate environment that allows growth, integration, constructive social development and personal wellbeing of learners. This was further substantiated in the work of Chirkov (2009) and Mirtha R. Muñiz Castillo (2009), giving her a clear direction. Another very interesting study (and the first of its kind on the causal effect of autonomous pro-social

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  71 behaviour on well-being) was described by S. K. Nelson et  al. (2014). By now, it was clear to the researcher that autonomy was the key factor to promote positive human development. The teacher framed her action research problem thus: ‘To turn second graders into autonomous learners.’ She then chalked out the following areas to work on: 1 Building autonomy 2 Enabling collaboration with peers 3 Encouraging ownership of the learning space The research was conducted on 27 second graders (7–8-year olds) from affluent socio-economic backgrounds with highly educated parents. It spanned 11 months in the academic year 2021–2022, with the engagement being predominantly virtual, owing to the Covid-19 pandemic. The teacher had to plan her strategies, keeping in mind the limitations of online interaction. This proved to be challenging as children were trapped in isolation and had minimal contact with one another. The teacher decided to use the basic, yet essential academic milestone of a second grader, which is to be able to read with comprehension and write to express, as her first strategy towards achieving student autonomy through it. Her readings and discussions with LCoRPs members led her to devise the following plan. Strategy 1 – Reading and Writing for Autonomy Jessie De Naeghel et al. (2014) claims that reading aloud is a critical strategy to motivate students’ autonomous reading in the classroom. Graham et  al. (2013) emphasize that opportunities should be provided in primary years to experience writing as a tool for self-expression and communication. Against this backdrop, the teacher decided that the first step towards turning six–seven-year-olds into self-learners was to polish their reading and writing skills and nurture their love for reading. Keeping in mind the Action Research framework [Costello (2011)] of PLAN-ACT-OBSERVE-REFLECT, this strategy was crafted as below: Reading & Writing for Autonomy

PLAN - Group the class into small and large groups so as to achieve collaboration. - Encourage sharing of ideas and written work. - Expose children to a variety of genres of writing, so as to enable flexibility in writing.

ACT - 2 sessions per week, exclusively for a read-aloud of ageappropriate books. - For collaboration, children were taken through peer review of their written work. - For the poetry and story genres, templates were designed to streamline the process. Another strategy for this was to draw out daily reflections in a customized journal.

72  Krithika Bharath Observations and Reflections

During the course of her engagement with children, the teacher noticed that three categories of learners were emerging. She therefore formed a very basic rubric with three levels as mentioned below: LEVEL 1 – Unable to even read the prescribed text LEVEL 2 – Able to read the prescribed text but unwilling to go beyond the curriculum LEVEL 3 – Reading beyond the curriculum and eager to make suggestions to peers Based on this rubric, data was collected three times: 1 At the pilot stage of the action research 2 Mid-year (after six months) 3 Year end (after 11 months) Data was collected by noting: 1 Observations of children-initiated book talks in class 2 Oral discussions during the monthly book club meeting 3 Oral and written parent testimonies Results were tabulated in the form of a graph: Over the course of a year into the action research, it was seen that the number of students reading beyond the curriculum rose significantly from 3 (out of 27 students) at the pilot stage of the research, to 26 a year later (Refer Figure 4.1). This jump could, in fact, be seen within six months of 30 25

Yet to read beyond curriculum

20 15

Reading beyond curriculum voluntarily

10 5 0

Pilong AR

6 months into 1 year into AR AR

Reading beyond curriculum voluntarily and making suggesons to others

Reading for autonomy Figure 4.1 Reading for autonomy. Note: Since Level Three is an extension of Level Two, it includes some students of Level Two. Therefore, the total number exceeds 27.

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  73 implementation of this strategy. Another very evident shift was in the attitude of not only wanting to read by oneself, but inspiring peers to read more as well. Some of the children, who began to read beyond the curriculum and had, by now, developed reading as a treasured habit, started suggesting titles to their classmates during discussion time. This number increased from zero (at the pilot stage of this research) to 16 by the end of 6 months and rose to 20 by the end of a year (Refer Figure 4.1). Initial assessment in writing before piloting the action research, [by giving children topics to write on], allowed the researcher to group the students into three basic categories. These categories were again turned into a basic rubric as follows: LEVEL 1 – Do not express through writing LEVEL 2 – Write when asked LEVEL 3 – Write to express themselves voluntarily Data was again collected in the same manner as for the first strategy and the methods deployed for it were as follows: 1 Checking homework 2 Observation during sharing time in class 3 Oral parent testimonies Results were tabulated in the form of the graph below: Figure 4.2 shows the growth in writing, as a means of self-expression, through this action research. The number of children ‘not expressing through writing’ fell from nine to six in six months, and reached zero at the end of a

Writing For Autonomy 20 15 10 5 0

Pilot

6 months

Do not express through wring Write voluntarily to express themselves

Figure 4.2  Writing for autonomy

Write only when asked

1 year

74  Krithika Bharath year. The number of children who ‘wrote when asked’ rose steadily. Another valuable observation was the shift in the attitude of students, to use autonomous writing as a means of self-expression. The number rose from seven to 12 within six months and reached 18 by the end of the year. Success Stories This strategy, through the course of its implementation, triggered positive sparks among the second graders, many of whom had now become avid readers and expressive writers. They were now taking ownership of their reading and writing habits, which was contributing towards peer learning and leading to collaboration. The table below captures these success stories in a gist (Figures 4.3 and 4.4).

1

2 3

4 5

6

7

Ownership of reading habits

Ownership of writing habits

Five months into the action research, four children started an impromptu after-school book club, which continues to meet regularly even at the time of writing this paper. Six children are exchanging books with each other, outside school.

Poetry ripple effect – Children have begun to inspire one another to write poems and express themselves.

‘Book Suggestions’ – A childreninitiated event, where each child decided to bring a self-created poster of their favourite book to suggest to their peers. Two are regularly using their local library. Many have subscribed to Indian children’s magazines like ‘Magic Pot,’ ‘Tinkle’ and ‘National Geographic Kids.’ Happy parent testimonies of their children spending a lot of time reading each day. Children photographed by their parents, while they were lost in books. (Photographs not attached to protect privacy)

Children chose to demonstrate the understanding of a topic through poetry. Children voluntarily gave book suggestions to each other through self-made posters expressing through writing. Budding authors are evolving owing to this strategy. Collaborative story-writing happened autonomously. Autonomously choosing writing as a medium of expression to present their understanding on a completed project. Parent testimonies on children journaling their reflections, even on days when a writing prompt was not given.

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  75

Figure 4.3  A child’s contribution to the ‘Book Suggestions’ event

Figure 4.4 A child’s understanding of the wetland study done, expressed through writing

76  Krithika Bharath Strategy 2 – Wondering about What Is Taught The next strategy emerged from the following question in the researcher‘s mind: Wouldn’t learning that is devoid of wondering limit it to mechanical repetition – an alienating routine? Catherine L’Ecuyer (2014) suggests that wonder, which is innate in every child, is at the centre of all motivation and propels every action. In the exemplary, award-winning case study on pedagogical school renewal by Shelley Kinash et al. (2009), the authors attribute its success to allowing students to explore, embrace and celebrate their wonder. Kinash et al further claim that this key element of wonder fostered student autonomy. This inspired the researcher to encourage her second graders to channelize this wonderment into self-directed learning. She implemented this strategy in her Environmental Science classes as follows: 1 With every new topic explored, children were encouraged to record their ‘I Wonder’ questions in either their Environmental Science notebook or a KWL chart template. Oral questions were also encouraged. 2 She allotted two exclusive sessions, post the curricular engagement, to explore the ‘I wonder’ questions submitted by the children. 3 During these sessions, she used the open-ended inquiry approach to let students ponder over the questions, analyse them from different perspectives, reason out and come up with possible answers. She adopted discussion as a method of executing this approach and offered guidance whenever needed. 4 Oral interaction with the students during the ‘I wonder’ exploring sessions revealed that there were again roughly three levels of children in her class. 1 LEVEL 1 – Haven’t begun asking questions yet 2 LEVEL 2 – Wonder beyond the topics explored and ask questions for further learning 3 LEVEL 3 – Wonder beyond the topics explored, ask questions for further learning and even look for answers autonomously 5 As before, she used these levels as her rubric for assessment and collected data in three instalments. 4 At the pilot stage of the action research 5 Mid-year (after six months) 6 Year end (after 11 months) Data was collected through observations of these sessions, checking the notebook/KWL chart for their entries and oral parent testimonies. Observations and Reflections

A continuity in these sessions was maintained in order to keep students on the track of exploring and wondering. The graph below captures the growth

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  77

Student Autonomy through wondering 25

LEVEL 1

LEVEL 2

LEVEL 3

No: of Students

20 15 10 5 0

Pilong the Acon Research

Aer 6 months

Aer 11 months

Data Collecon in installments Figure 4.5 Student autonomy through wondering. Note: Since Level Three is an extension of Level Two, it includes some students of Level Two. Therefore, the total number exceeds 27.

in students’ wonderment and autonomy to find answers during these sessions (Figure 4.5). There was a good amount of evidence of student autonomy that the teacher recorded through her observations in the online classes and from parent testimonies. One such example is described here. While exploring the properties of water, a student’s wondering on why the water in a pond near his house looked greenish blue, (when it was supposedly colourless) set the stage for deeper exploration. Two children brought encyclopaedias to look for probable answers while another called her ‘scientist uncle’ to decode the mystery. Some checked with their parents and grandparents while a group approached the teacher for help. The teacher offered some guidance by assimilating prior learning, so that it led to probable answers. It was wonderful to watch children discuss, debate and reason out (breaking free from the limitations of their isolation) to make sense of their understanding. This student-led inquiry took the seven– eight-year-olds into exploring topics like Rayleigh scattering, Raman effect and eventually to making a working model of a whizzer spinner to prove the existence of seven colours in white light. The teacher would never have imagined this course for a simple second grade topic on water. The learning was immense and purely student-led. The power in the simple innate sense of wonderment shone bright through this strategy and paved the way for autonomous learning. The sense of wonderment did not stop with the Environmental Science sessions alone but seeped into other subjects like Art, English and Mathematics, seamlessly and created ripples of autonomous learning (Figure 4.6).

78  Krithika Bharath

Figure 4.6 A student’s wonderment, post the study on the artist Claude Monet, inspired him to recreate a scene from his garden

Strategy 3 – Peer Review As children were confined to their homes owing to the Covid-19 pandemic, the teacher was looking at ways to promote positive interaction among them, even though the medium of instruction was virtual. Reading supportive literature revealed that peer review has been a chosen strategy to promote collaboration and positive interaction among individuals. Yliverronen et al. (2018) claim that peer learning is a powerful approach in building collaboration. Karin Forslund Frykedal et al. (2018) state that collaboration leads to inclusion and improvement in social participation. David J. Kupfer et al. (2014) show the benefit of peer-review-led collaboration in the overall quality of work produced as well as in the congeniality of the environment. With this clarity, the teacher added a peer review segment after every creative writing assignment. In keeping with her overall intent of fostering autonomy, she allowed them to choose a partner for the review process but scaffolded it by providing guidelines for the review. These guidelines were kept simple with an emphasis on reviewing grammatical correctness, verbalization of feelings that the written piece evoked and engaging in polite feedback/feedforward. The peer review process happened several times over the period of 11 months. The teacher observed the peer review sessions in the online classes to see how children spoke to one another when grouped and the nature of these conversations (explained in the next section). For those that happened as homework, she received audio clips and oral testimonies from parents, with which she did a similar kind of analysis. Observations and Reflections The outcome of this strategy was more rewarding than anticipated. Along with being able to achieve the curricular objective of mastering grammatical syntax and sentence building structure in English, she was able to see very well-behaved and polite students, during the peer review process. Her class

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  79 was bonding better and some new friendships blossomed. A few children even surprised her by asking to be paired with classmates that they hadn’t taken the initiative to connect with earlier. She noticed that they were functioning autonomously with minimal teacher/parent intervention. The nature of the feedback was polite and uplifting. There was appreciation for the effort invested by the writer and encouragement for improvement. The writer too was polite and accepting of the feedback and could be seen making the necessary changes. The warmth in the environment showed signs of sustenance, even in the absence of the teacher and in another teacher’s class, as shared by two other teachers of the same school. The success of this strategy in bringing collaboration was truly visible on the year-end project day where these students autonomously chose to work on collaborative projects over individual ones. Further, they approached the teacher only for minimal help and displayed good teamwork. There were, of course, some disagreements and occasional displeasure but seeing them resolve their issues with dignity and respect was very reassuring for the teacher. Sam: “Sid, can you please review my story?” Sid: “Sure, Sam. You can work on something else till I finish reading.”   After reading the story Sid calls Sam and starts the conversation as follows: Sid: “Your story was good. It was actually quite an adventure. I have a few things to tell you …” A sample excerpt from a conversation between two students in class is shown above. Sid was appreciative of Sam’s efforts in writing the story and began by sharing his feelings before pointing out the errors and making suggestions. It is worth mentioning here that Sid and Sam, who interacted with each other for the first time during a peer review, became quite close afterwards. They even found topics of mutual interest and went on to voluntarily collaborate for learning origami, outside school. There were many more such exemplary conversations, highlighting the collaborative spirit imbibed by the students. Strategy 4 – Collating One’s Learning so as to Contribute to the Virtual Learning Space Two months after piloting the action research, the teacher wished to gauge their progress as autonomous learners. She allotted a 50-minute session every Friday, for students to share their learning and contribute towards peer learning. A student who desired to conduct a session, had to first sign up for it through a text message to the teacher, by explaining the ‘what, why and how’ of her/his contribution. She/he had to then create a list of requirements essential for the session, which the teacher would then send to the entire class. The sessions which were not opted for were taken up by the teacher. The number of students voluntarily signing up for such a session was taken as an indicator of children contributing to their online learning space.

80  Krithika Bharath Based on the number of students who signed up, data was collected in the following three instalments 1 Three months after the pilot stage 2 Between three and six months 3 Between 6 and 11 months The table below shows the increase in the number of new students who signed up for these sessions in each instalment. Time period

After three months

Between three and six months

Between 6 and 11 months

Number of new students who signed up

3

5

10

Observations and Reflections

These student-led sessions were very vibrant and enjoyable for all (Figure 4.7). The teacher offered two support sessions, for every student who signed up, to help plan the flow and execution of the chosen content. During these sessions, she noticed that the students were intrinsically motivated. They were passionately involved with the topic that they chose and were able to orally communicate their learnings very effectively. She sensed this enthusiasm to be different and more profound, than their engagements with curricular content. What made the difference here, as affirmed by Erika Daniel (2010), was the student’s own choice that led to the intrinsic motivation. The peers attended these sessions with concentration and self-regulation. The process of asking for (and providing) help happened organically. An attention-deficit child, who found it extremely hard to concentrate for more than five minutes during the teacher-led sessions, stayed focused through these student-led sessions and felt motivated to conduct one himself, nine months into the action research. When children returned to physical school for a short span of about a month before the academic year ended, not much could be done by the teacher with respect to this strategy as the school had planned other sorts of engagements for students, to bring back normalcy. However, she continued observing them for any signs of ownership/contribution towards their physical learning space. Here is an episode, from a few more, which confirms this: The teacher consistently encouraged her students to take walks around the school campus, so as to get to know their surroundings. It was interesting to see some of them bring back things to class that fascinated them and share these with their peers. They were beginning to collaboratively investigate their findings, like a scientist, and asking many questions to deepen their understanding. The class now had a table full of Nature’s treasures. During a class discussion, a group of students proposed the idea of calling this table -’An Investigation Table’ and wanted to add a few more things like magnifying glasses, a measuring scale and a pair of scissors to this table.

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  81

Figure 4.7 The investigation table arranged by children in their second-grade classroom

Once the idea was approved, they went about arranging this space and each time a visitor came to class, this was their favourite spot to show. Another time, a couple of students took the initiative to set up a class library, to read every day, as they had limited library periods in a week. With the help of the teacher, they borrowed some books from the library, and took turns to read them. There were a few other instances like sweeping the class voluntarily after a collaborative science project that caused a mess, winding up the sand toys each day post the sand-play time and being mindful of conserving water while washing hands, which affirmed that the seeds of taking ownership towards the learning space had also been sown in this journey of leading students towards autonomy. This motivated the teacher to work on continuing to provide her students with ample opportunities, in the future, to contribute towards their learning space and design their learning journey together. Final Thoughts

Through the course of this action research, the teacher found that her biggest strength lay in listening to her students, rather than in teaching them. She listened to their stories, what they cared about and what they needed. The quietness of mind that the listening demanded and then provided, made her reflections powerful and gave her a deeper understanding of their needs. Instead of being boxed as a ‘teacher’ and then pulling her class into their own box, this action research allowed both teacher and the taught to go beyond the curriculum and gain so much more in return. Schools usually tackle behavioural issues very externally, in the form of preachy sermons or written content that has very little impact, perhaps due to overlooking student needs. This teacher had a different approach as she set out to achieve it through student autonomy. Did she get there? Yes, she did. She observed that when their developmental needs were met and broadened, they started taking ownership of their learning. On this quest of self-learning and exploration beyond curricular needs, they turned into contributors and collaborators, which enabled a positive attitudinal shift, triggering respect for peers

82  Krithika Bharath and a motivation to continue learning. Did it stop just there? No, instead of doing the bare minimum of what is required of a second grader as academic milestones – owing to their teacher’s quest of setting up a motivating space – this bunch of self-directed and intrinsically motivated students were becoming active, critical learners in all the subjects and, in a way, designing their learning. The attitude of questioning was making thinking deeper, richer, and more diverse. Children as autonomous learners and contributors were more well-behaved, empathetic towards each other and responsible towards their learning space. Thus, this research reaffirmed that student autonomy is indeed a crucial step for positive social wellbeing and for inculcating inclusivity among students. The strategies, though selected for a virtual medium, proved effective in bringing about the necessary attitudinal shift and also had the adaptability to suit an in-person school session. This quest of seeking ways to make her second graders more inclusive and empathetic towards one another, stumbling on student autonomy as a possible gateway to reach there and watching the impact of autonomous learning inculcating acceptance and respect, has motivated this teacher to keep working towards keeping her classroom practice democratic. Works Cited Alsalhi, N. (2020). The Effects of the Use of the Know-Want-Learn Strategy (KWL) on Fourth Grade Students’ Achievement in Science at Primary Stage and Their Attitudes towards It. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 16(4): 1833. Castillo, M. R. M. (2009). Autonomy as a Foundation for Human Development: A Conceptual Model to Study Individual Autonomy. Working Paper MGSoG/2009/ WP011. Chirkov, V. I. (2009). A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Autonomy in Education: A SelfDetermination Theory Perspective. Theory and Research in Education 7: 253. Costello, P. J. M. (2011). Effective Action Research, 2nd Edition. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Daniels, E. (2010). Creating Motivating Learning Environments: What We Can Learn from Researchers and Students. The English Journal 100(1) (September): 25–29. Frykedal, K. F., & Chiriac, E. H. (2018). Student Collaboration in Group Work Inclusion as Participation. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2017.1363381. Graham, S., MacArthur, C. A., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.). (2013). Best Practices in Writing Instructions, Second Edition. The Guilford Press. Kinash, S., & Hoffman, M. (2009). Children’s Wonder-Initiated Phenomenological Research: A Rural Primary School Case Study. SLEID 6(3): 1–14. Kupfer, D. J., Murphree, A. N., Pilkonis, P. A., Cameron, J. A., Giang, R., Dodds, N. E., Godard, K. A., & Lewis, D. A. (2014). Using Peer Review to Improve Research and Promote Collaboration. Acad Psychiatry 38(1) (February): 5–10. L’Ecuyer, C. (2014). The Wonder Approach to Learning. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8, Article 764. Naeghel, J. D., Keer, H. V., & Vanderlinde, R. (2014). Strategies for Promoting Autonomous Reading Motivation: A Multiple Case Study Research in Primary Education. Frontline Learning Research 3 (2014): 83–101. ISSN 2295-3159.

Turning Second Graders into Autonomous Learners  83 Nelson, S. K., Porta, M. D. D., Bao, K. J., Lee, H. C., Choi, I., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). ‘It’s Up to You’: Experimentally Manipulated Autonomy Support for Prosocial Behaviour Improves Well-Being in Two Cultures over Six Weeks. The Journal of Positive Psychology: Dedicated to Furthering Research and Promoting Good Practice. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2014.983959. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. M. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist 55(1): 68–78. Yliverronen, V., Marjanen, P., & Hakkarainen, P. S. (2018). Peer Collaboration of Six-year olds when Undertaking a Design Task. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal 23(2): 1–3.

5 Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision An Action Research Study Vidhya Nagaraj

Abstract This paper describes an action research study undertaken by the Principal of Delhi World School, Bangalore who decided to go against the grain. She set out to change the mindset of her teachers, by having them take the initiative towards their own learning and development, and not wait to be 'sent' to a workshop. A process of collaborative inquiry, with a learning community that she was part of, paved the way for formulation of the research problem, its plan and execution. While this study elucidates the strategies that one school leader used to empower her teachers to step out of their comfort zone and take charge of their learning, it also throws light on the deeply analytical process that she was compelled to follow in order to bring about this change. A huge lesson for school leaders is the importance of stepping back, allowing teacher autonomy and decision-making by the teachers, so as to result in self-directed professionals enlivening teaching and learning.

Where It All Began Delhi World Public School, located in Peenya (adjacent to the largest industrial area in Asia), a suburb of Bengaluru, was established in 2018. It is a mainstream1 school that follows the syllabus prescribed by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) in India. The school engages with a parent community that represents diverse backgrounds and literacy levels. The first set of ten teachers (who joined the school from across India) came from heterogeneous socio-economic backgrounds and had experienced traditional methods of teacher-directed instruction. The school, therefore, had a confluence of different learning approaches that each one brought with her. Invariably, these teachers had to align with the vision and mission2 of Delhi World Public School. Wiggins and McTighe (2007) emphasize that teachers should: Have clarity of the school’s vision and the set of ‘agreed-upon’ learning principles. DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-7

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  85 Reflect where the school is and the journey that it needs to undertake to see the mission in action. Analyse the gap between the goal and existing teaching-learning practices. Against the above backdrop, this Principal saw that her teachers now had to unlearn and relearn to meet the school’s goals. However, she did not want to retain the ‘top-down’ approach of directing her teachers to build a specified set of skills. Her challenge would therefore be to find the right balance between individual teachers’ needs and those of the school. This was the trigger for the Principal to undertake Action Research to address the issue. Henceforth, the Principal is referred to as the ‘researcher’. Framing the Problem The researcher was aware of some gaps in the school’s initiatives for Continuous Professional Development (CPD). Teachers had attended various workshops (mandated by the school) on storytelling, design thinking, creative writing, use of puppets, etc. However, they were never called upon to identify any specific developmental need. It almost seemed as if CPD was the school’s need – rather than a teacher’s need! Other issues with the CPD programme were the following: 1 It was a challenge to find workshops that matched the individual needs of the teacher and the school. 2 It was not a financially viable option to send all teachers to all workshops. 3 Some of the workshop venues were far away and the school or the teacher couldn’t arrange transport. 4 A one-day workshop was not the ideal way to process, assimilate and implement new skills learned. 5 Some teachers who attended these workshops found that the practices taught to them were not feasible in the actual classroom setting. 6 The mandatory workshops nurtured a mindset that teachers were inept in certain areas and therefore had to attend the workshops. The researcher has been part of the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners3 (LCoRPs) community for two years (at the time of writing this paper) where she had had a rich experience, reflecting on teaching practice. She wanted to create a similar experience for her teachers – one that would empower them, even as it created stimulating discussions. She discussed the issue with the LCoRPs members. In addition, her reading of Meier (2009) showed that if we are to reinvent schools, it will require the reinvention of a democratic adult culture where voices are listened to, respected and taken seriously. Futrell (1994) and Stacy (2013) suggest that ‘one-size-fits-all’ programmes conducted by ‘outside experts,’ do not empower teachers and instead, undermine their abilities.

86  Vidhya Nagaraj The above perspectives and discussions with the LCoRPs members led the researcher to change her own perspective of CPD: from that of a school leader-driven approach to a teacher-driven programme. The researcher’s goals were to: 1 build an intrinsic motivation amongst the teachers to identify their collective as well as individual needs, which would then propel them to chalk out their learning trajectories. 2 design a progressive4 school, despite the school currently being seen as a mainstream school. 3 co-construct with her teachers an ecosystem that would provide an opportunity for the teachers to thrive and grow. 4 Equip teachers with skills to veer teaching-learning practices from a teacher-centred to a learner-centred practice. The Action Research problem was now framed thus: “To enable teachers to take charge of their own learning and development.” Participants Of the 14 teachers of Delhi World Public School, ten teachers have been with the school since the beginning of 2018. The teachers handle classes from Kindergarten to Secondary School.5 By the end of the academic year, four teachers left, thereby reducing the participants to 10 teachers. The self-driven professional development programme was initiated in mid-May and continued till mid-April 2022. Gaining Clarity In the early stages of action research, the researcher believed that she could: a Get the teachers’ buy-in by having them create a vision statement for the school. b Plot teachers’ learning on a graph to track their development before and after the project. These initial strategies gradually began to change when the researcher read extensively and reflected on her discussions with the LCoRPs members. She then concluded that: c Creating a graph for teachers was unnecessary and did not serve the objective of getting them to take charge of their own learning and development. d Delhi World Public School is one of the franchise schools of Delhi World Foundation, all of which have a common vision and mission. The teachers had to therefore align with an already established vision and mission.

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  87 Therefore, she now turned to relevant literature to strategize more appropriately. Having no prior experience of action research, the researcher initially grappled with the expertise required to conduct the project. However, the discussions that she had with the LCoRPs members and her mentor, Dr. Raghavan helped bring clarity. The Framework Adopted by the Researcher The Continuum of Self-Reflection (see Figure 5.1) proposed by Hall and Simeral (2008) appealed to the researcher. She envisaged the possibility of her teachers taking charge of their own learning by using this framework (Figure 5.1) – first, by enhancing their awareness of the need for change, and then, fostering in them a desire to learn. Stage 01: The Unaware Stage: The ‘Unaware Stage’ has been described as the stage where teachers are in a comfort zone, oblivious of new pedagogical innovations and strategies. They are unaware of other alternatives and therefore fail to see the need to change existing practices. With the right support, teachers can be navigated to realize the impact that they can have in transforming their school. For the researcher, the first challenge was to get the teachers to reflect and recognize the need for bringing about changes in teaching and learning. The researcher observed and learned from the teachers that: 1 Their own school-going experience was dominated by the ‘chalk and talk’ method. 2 In their experience, most schools had a very authoritarian approach towards learning and teaching. 3 Few teachers had access to CPD in schools where they had previously been employed, and even this was limited to one or two initiatives during the academic year. 4 Teachers were not familiar with practices such as the use of concept maps, story-based pedagogy, art integration, or hands-on learning instruction that leads to holistic development of learners.6

Figure 5.1 The four stages of Continuum of Self-Reflection (Reproduced with permission from Hall and Simeral (2008))

88  Vidhya Nagaraj Concomitantly, she also realized that if she had to let go of the top-down approach and become a facilitator, she would first have to acquire the expertise required for enabling her teachers to move to self-directed learning. She had to be their role model, by identifying areas where she could herself improve, either by reading relevant material or by attending workshops. In the past, the researcher had organized workshops for her teachers that were on randomly chosen subjects that she, as the Principal, felt her teachers needed. She had never tried helping them identify the need for change and experience the importance of reflection. Now, she saw the need to get her teachers to identify areas/skills where they felt the need for improvement. It was with this intent that she began to strategize for the Unaware Stage as below: 1 Picture the Graduate: She asked her teachers to envision the kind of students who would graduate from school and the skill sets that they would require to thrive in the future. 2 Interpret the vision and mission of the school: She nudged her teachers to understand the aspirations of the school and then reflect if the current academic and co-scholastic activities were in sync with the school’s vision. 3 Summer reading: She suggested summer reading (and discussion) for her teachers as follows: Badheka, G. (1989) (to visualize teaching-learning from a teacher’s perspective) and Kuroyanagi, T. (1996) (to visualize school from a student’s perspective). 4 Self-reflection & need analysis7: Finally, she had the teachers answer a questionnaire that prodded them to observe if the existing teaching-learning practices were learner-centred and actually met the school’s vision. Each teacher then had to identify areas where she felt a need for improvement The outcome of the ‘Unaware Stage’: Through discussions that followed the strategy above, teachers identified practices that were in tandem with the school’s vision. They short-listed areas that the school needed to focus on, to move closer to achieving learner-centred practices. They identified the following five areas of improvement: 1 Narrowing the gap between planning & implementation 2 Building organization skills 3 Enhancing attention to heterogeneous learners through differentiated instructional strategies 4 Focusing on learning outcomes 5 Managing time more efficiently The researcher requested the teachers to arrive at a common goal (for the group) and shortlist the most critical areas from the above list. Teachers narrowed their focus to: 1 Time management 2 Differentiated Teaching

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  89 They reasoned that all along, although they had ostensibly been planning and designing activities to hone 21st-century skills, socio-emotional skills, and experiential learning, due to paucity of time, they were unable to execute most of their plans. Thus, the entire team undertook ‘Time Management’ as a school-wide goal. At this point, the researcher had to overcome the urge to impose her views on the teachers and let go of control, to give them the non-judgmental space to choose the area that they wanted to focus on. Initially, the researcher believed that it would be better if the teachers focused on differentiated instruction, as the school had a heterogeneous group of students who were at different learning levels especially due to the pandemic. The researcher recognized that if she impelled the teachers to take up differentiated teaching, then the ownership would shift from the teachers to the Principal. The researcher realized that by letting go of the need to control, she would be able to get her teachers to take charge of their learning. This was a direct consequence of the pattern followed at LCoRPs meetings where discussions demanded reflection on one’s underlying beliefs about common practices in school education. Reflection on according autonomy and encouraging teachers to take ownership of the process came from the rich, analytical conversations that constituted LCoRPs meetings. This was one of the most important elements that she wanted to bring into her school. With their awareness of the need to change and the specific area where this change was needed, she led them to the next stage. Stage 02: The Conscious Stage This stage calls for gently guiding the teachers towards identifying existing practices as well as belief systems that may obstruct their evolution. Since ‘Time Management’ was identified as the target area of change that would enable them to take charge of their own learning, teachers were exposed to relevant research and data on this topic. Analysis of the problem of Time Management: Having learned the art of questioning and having experienced the process of being questioned by the LCoRPs members, the researcher naturally adopted the same approach with her teachers. Teachers were asked to come up with questions that would help them to reflect on why they were finding ‘time’ to be such a scarce commodity and what was coming in the way of their using it effectively and efficiently. While answering the questions listed in Table 5.1, they began to actively construct knowledge. They reorganized their understanding of various aspects of self-management. Teachers read relevant extracts from the works of Csikszentmihalyi (2000), Covey (1991), Clear (2018) and Brown (2010), in addition to watching relevant TED Talks. Thereafter, each one shared her learning and understanding with the group. Teachers then began to maintain a journal (see Table 5.2) and made observations about their everyday practices as well as any new habits that they had formed. This reflection helped the teachers to observe and recognize changes that had helped them to improve their efficiency.

90  Vidhya Nagaraj Table 5.1  Some questions that teachers8 came up with Questions

Teachers

Does lack of coordination, trust and understanding between the team members hurt time management and work efficiency? How do we know that what we are doing is truly a good use of our time? When two commitments overlap in the same time frame, how does one manage to fulfil both and also use time efficiently?

AS EA RK

Table 5.2  Entries from the teachers’ journals Teacher

I used to

Now I …

This has helped me to

ED

spend long hours searching for resources to design question papers, as I wanted my work to be perfect.

complete the question paper within a fixed time and also feel satisfied with the quality of my work.

KP

make a checklist of tasks to be completed on Post-It notes and keep them inside the diary. type the lesson plans give feedback to students after correcting their assignments

began to compile resources for making question papers, as and when I came across them, and then set time frames to complete tasks. began to keep the reminders in easily accessible places. use voice typing to type lesson plans provide ‘feed up’ before the students work on their assignments

work on lesson plans faster

KS HS

keep track of work that needs to be completed.

Help students understand the nature of the assignment & what is expected of them. In addition, I take less time to correct the books as the number of mistakes has consequently reduced.

The outcome of the strategies: The teachers began to see that by incorporating small changes and forming a few new habits, they could improve their work. The researcher was pleased to see that four (out of fourteen) teachers now began to take time out to read books. These four teachers, by their own account, had thus far not prioritized reading.

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  91 Reflection Note from Teacher KM Yesterday, I was able to do 81 Surya namskaras9 without taking a break. My trainer appreciated my stability and consistency. I felt proud of myself for doing so. This is only because I have been able to manage my time well. Reflection notes (such as the one above) indicated that teachers were bringing about subtle changes in their everyday routine. They were now moving out of their comfort zone and were increasingly open to new challenges. Now, the researcher took the teachers to the third stage, where teachers are guided at this stage to become experts on their own. In this stage, they strengthened their expertise and built on their experiences and skills. Stage 03: The Action Stage The researcher observed that teachers were slowly becoming more receptive to the idea of learning new skills. A self-reflection questionnaire10 designed by the researcher helped the teachers to observe changes in their everyday routine and habits. They were now able to see small changes in the way that they were utilizing time and felt encouraged to acquire a new skill that would further improve their teaching practice. Table 5.3 lists the new skills that each teacher decided to learn. They were asked to: 1 sign up for a course from Coursera or 2 teach and learn new skills from each other or 3 learn by watching YouTube videos. All of the above ideas took an entire academic year to implement. Table 5.3  The areas of learning identified by the teachers S. No

Name of the Teacher

Area identified to work on OR Skills learned by the teacher

Implementation of the idea

1

ED

To create crosswords using Crosslab

2

CM

To create Student Books with the Book Creator app

The teacher created crosswords and used them in question papers, worksheets, and assignment booklets The teacher received the certificate of completion and used the app to compile the Math stories written by Grade IV students. (Continued)

92  Vidhya Nagaraj Table 5.3 (Continued) S. No

Name of the Teacher

Area identified to work on OR Skills learned by the teacher

Implementation of the idea

3

KR

4

KS

5

SK, HS and KM

6

SK

7

HM

8

Math Department

9

English Department

10

EA

To learn how to make at The teacher learned to make least 10 different puppets puppets from YouTube and that can be used in used puppets for narrating teaching stories in the Kannada language class. To learn any two thinking The teacher learned and used the routines and implement ‘connect-extend-challenge,11 them in class. thinking routine for creative writing. To teach Math/Social The teachers slowly began to Science/Science research, read and choose through a story appropriate story books and extracts that would help them to teach concepts through stories. To learn how to teach The teacher attended a students to decode workshop out of her own and blend words while initiative, learned the skill reading. and started using it in her classroom teaching. To learn how to use The teacher used the app to technology. To learn create a quiz to reinforce the Quizz app to make concepts taught to students. quizzes and interactive lesson plans To use story-based The teachers explored storypedagogy to make based pedagogy to teach learning abstract Math Math. concepts fun. To nurture reading Through the immersive reading amongst students programme, teachers have through an immersive been able to nurture not only reading programme a passion for reading amongst the students but also other skills that is reflected in the multitude of activities that the students have done in the process of reading the book.12 Technology EA taught English, but she is a tech enthusiast. When the school was looking for someone to create podcasts, EA volunteered to join the course and learn how to create podcasts. She now helps the school with all the podcasts.

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  93 Looking Back at the Year Gone By – A Personal Reflection The researcher observed that during the Unaware Stage, it was unanimously declared by the teachers that time was a constraint in making teachinglearning meaningful, engaging and learner-centered. After going through the sequential steps above, teachers were able to make time to weave in new teaching-learning experiences that were in alignment with the vision of the school. Through the course of the academic year, the researcher also noted that their focus gradually began to move beyond textbook teaching (and completing the syllabus) to learner-centered teaching. Now, students could be seen engaged in carefully designed experiences that incorporated experiential learning that leads to holistic development of learners. Teachers were now able to devote time to reading, taking on additional responsibilities that went beyond prescribed classroom teaching, and learning new skills so as to become better teachers. The researcher realized the importance of ‘Reflection’, an important skill that she had learned in the LCoRPs meetings and which she carried forward to her own meetings with teachers. Below are some examples of the activities that teachers undertook when they could finally manage their time more effectively: 1 Teaching inclusivity through stories One of the important skills that the teachers made note of while doing the ‘Picture the Graduate’ activity was critical thinking. At the beginning of the next academic year, the teachers chose to attend a ten-session workshop on ‘Critical Thinking through Stories’. The researcher observed that the teachers were consistently using the learnings from this workshop in their classrooms. Inspired by a non-binary storyteller with whom they had interacted during the workshop, the English language and Social Science teachers decided to introduce themes of gender and inclusiveness through the story by Pathak (2019).13 They also took the initiative to bring a nonbinary guest to interact with their 11–14-year-old students. The engagement spilled over into the English language and Social Science classes in the form of vibrant discussions. The teachers encouraged their students to reflect on gender by getting them to create ‘Awareness posters’ as well as writing essays on the subject. One of the teachers was so moved by the story of the non-binary guest that she decided to do something about it in her capacity. She went all out to find a job14 for a non-binary individual of her own accord. This interaction has been documented in the school podcast.15 2 Mathematics Classes suddenly became interesting! The Math department took up a project to teach Math through stories. This was one of the most fulfilling home-grown projects. It was thoroughly planned. The teachers began to pick story books related to Math concepts and incorporated these stories into their lesson plans. The stories were analysed by the students and gradually, the students were led to craft

94  Vidhya Nagaraj their own Math stories. This academic year, Ms. Soumya16 (one of the Math teachers) decided to document the whole process in the form of an article. The challenge was that Ms. Soumya had never before written an article for publication. She set about the task of seeking out mentors, who guided her through the whole process. It was a moment of great pride for Soumya and the school to see the article in print featured in the magazine ‘At Right Angles,’ published by the Azim Premji Foundation.17 3 Testing Application Skills and not Just Rote Memory! SA has been teaching Math and Science for the past three years. One frequently received feedback was that her questions needed to be more creative to make the child think. This year, SA consciously worked to craft creative questions. In the past, SA would focus mainly on testing a child’s memory, because framing questions that checked understanding and application required more time. Now, with her efficient time management, she could focus on framing questions such as those below: In the science question paper: 1 Observe the picture below and explain why sportsmen use shoes with spikes. [Earlier, her form of eliciting an answer to this topic would have been – What kind of shoes do sportspersons wear?]

Figure 5.2  Picture of a sportsman’s shoe (drawn by a teacher)

4 Collaborative Reading to Foster a love for books One of the events for the academic year was an ‘Immersive bookreading session’ to nurture reading amongst middle school students. This was in addition to the supplementary book that was prescribed. Two teachers from the English department, one from the Social Science department and another from the Art department (along with two guest educators) came together to curate a five-month long book-reading programme. Weekly sessions were held after school hours, with students from different grades

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  95 reading the same book together. This was only possible because of efficient time management. The book reading led to a collaborative teaching-learning experience for both teachers and students. Earlier, teachers worked in silos and rarely collaborated. For the first time, three teachers collaborated to facilitate the book reading. This was a unique experience for them. The learning outcome of this programme was compiled in the form of a video.18 5 The Environment Week Celebration: Each year, the science department of this school plans an Environment Week. This year, the teachers decided to do things differently. Science, Social Science, English language and Art teachers collaborated for the environment week. They selected an audiobook that students had to listen to and then carry out a prescribed activity. This turned out to be one of the most fulfilling environment weeks in four years. The various learning outcomes that this resulted in were documented19 – another example of collaboration that resulted from time management! 6 Technology is not dreaded anymore! HM teaches Hindi language in the school. This teacher had no prior knowledge of computers and had never used technology in classroom teaching. She took the help of her two college-going daughters, learned to use voice-over for YouTube videos, and created quizzes on different topics using the Quizz app, in addition to making several creative presentations using ‘Canva.’ 7 Language made Colourful a A mandatory practice of the school is the compilation of worksheets in the form of Booklets, for various subjects ED had to create the ‘English Assignment booklet,’ for Grade X in grammar, writing skills and reading comprehension. This was her first experience of creating a booklet, as she had always used freely available resources from the internet – resulting in writing skills assignments that were neither challenging nor creative. This year, ED learned to take various newspaper articles, extracts from stories and graphs to design customized questions to meet grade-level requirements. b EA teaches English literature to the Primary School. This year, having attended the ‘Critical Thinking’ workshop, she incorporated strategies that she learned there. This enabled her students to analyse stories that she narrated in class, and to her delight, her students enjoyed being in the ‘hot seat’ as they came up with various perspectives and solutions to problems in the story. 8 Formal sessions of CPD – not school initiated, but teacher initiated a Two teachers – MM and PS teach Math and Science in High School. This year, when they heard of two teacher-network groups, they actively participated in those groups (after school hours) and returned

96  Vidhya Nagaraj with skills that these sessions equipped them with. This was all done on their own initiative. b So also, ED chose to attend two workshops based on her interest: The Art of Creating Stories and Folktales as well as one on Personal Finance for Women. Conclusion The researcher observed that the teachers were evolving as reflective practitioners and stepping beyond their comfort zone. They had learned to reflect on their everyday routines and habits. They took up the responsibility of bringing about changes in their own lives – and these certainly had a positive impact on their professional lives too. The researcher attributes this positive shift in the teachers to her (as the Principal) letting go of control and empowering them to decide on the focus area that they wanted to work on. This brought in a sense of ownership that sustained throughout the academic year. In addition, the researcher sees continuity in practice. At the beginning of the new academic year 2022–2023, these teachers took up the initiative to conduct in-house professional development programmes for the new teachers who joined. The modules were prepared and executed by teachers themselves. Earlier these workshops were mostly conducted by the Principal of the school. But now, teachers are visibly beginning to take charge of group learning. This year, the English and Social Science teachers (having learned the nuances of conducting an ‘immersive reading programme’ from a guest resource person) will conduct the same programme for the students of Grade V to X. This is not to say that it was a smooth transition. There were many challenges that both the researcher and teachers faced. To name a few: 1 Working from home during the pandemic was a major challenge for the teachers. The teachers (all 14 were women) had to juggle between managing home and work. They found it a challenge as the boundaries between personal and professional lives were blurred. 2 The teachers had to cope with hybrid teaching, on and off, through the three COVID waves. Some of them worked from home, while a few had to come to school. Consequently, coordinating and meeting other teachers to discuss, strategize and implement action plans became a challenge. 3 Teachers needed to prepare for online classes and also take up additional responsibilities for absentee teachers who had tested positive for COVID. It was an uphill task to manage classes, as at one point almost 50% of the teachers (or their immediate family members) tested positive. 4 Four out of fourteen teachers resigned three months before the end of the term. As a result, the researcher could not get these teachers to complete their learning initiative.

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  97 But, as Helterbran (2008) said, when educators become increasingly aware of what they can (and need) to do individually and collectively as teachers, they can transform their engagement with students and have a positive impact not just on students, but also on society. For the researcher, the entire process was an eye-opener. The success of the project is evident from the fact that more than two-thirds of her teaching team took charge of their own learning by the end of the academic year. The entire process from reflection to giving teachers the freedom to (collectively and individually) make learning choices helped in creating engaged and motivated teachers. And if this is possible with teachers, imagine a world with independent and self-directed learners in class! Acknowledgement: The author would like to thank Dr. Neeraja Raghavan, Ms. Anne Isaac, and her LCoRPs cluster members Ms. Deeptha Vivekanand and Ms. Madhushree Dutta for their valuable and constructive suggestions in writing the paper. She is grateful to her colleagues at Delhi World Public School for their wholehearted support and participation in the action research. She conveys her deepest appreciation to the management of Delhi World Foundation for granting her permission to conduct this research. Notes 1 In a mainstream school, teaching–learning processes are teacher driven and follow the traditional method of chalk-and-talk. Assessment is also heavily tilted towards recall of transferred content. 2 https://www.delhiworldpublicschool.co.in/DPWS.php 3 The researcher is a member of the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). It is a platform created by Dr. Neeraja Raghavan who is an educationist and author. The members of this group are from different educational institutions spread across India and the group has been meeting online since March 2020. The inputs and support from the cohort members are an integral part of this research. 4 In a progressive school, the teaching–learning is student-centred and the focus is on making the child an active participant of the learning. 5 According to the Central Board of Secondary Education, Grade IX and X is ‘High’ or ‘Secondary’ School, while XI and XII are considered as ‘Senior Secondary’ Schools. 6 New Education Policy 2020, Holistic Development of learners: Para 4. 4 to 4.7 7 Questionnaire attached as Appendix 1. 8 Names have been withheld to protect the privacy of the teachers. 9 Surya namaskar is a Sanskrit name for 12 asanas that are performed in a sequence as a salutation to Sun God. 10 Attached as Appendix 2 11 A teaching strategy that enables the students to think. http://www.pz.harvard.edu/ resources/connect-extend-challenge 12 https://youtube.com/watch?v=mqKvwQOq0-o&feature=share 13 https://storyweaver.org.in/stories/92168-friends-under-the-summer-sun 14 most illiterate and unskilled non-binary people in India are often forced to beg on the streets for livelihood

98  Vidhya Nagaraj 15 https://anchor.fm/storybranch/episodes/Reflection-of-the-session-with-JoyaLobo-by-Delhi-World-Public-School--Bangalore-e154rc3 16 The teacher’s name has been mentioned as she appears as the author of the published article. 17 The article titled ‘The Power of Stories in Math Class’ can be found on pages 22 to 30. https://publications.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/3355/ 18 https://youtube.com/watch?v=mqKvwQOq0-o&feature=share 19 https://dwpstumkurroad.wordpress.com/2021/08/05/environment-week-newsletter/

References Badheka, G. (1989). Divaswapna (English translation). National Book Trust, Delhi. Brown, B. (2010). The gifts of imperfection: Let go of who you think you’re supposed to be and embrace who you are. Simon and Schuster. Clear, J. (2018). Atomic Habits: the life-changing million-copy# 1 bestseller. Random House. Covey, S. R. (1991). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York: Simon & Schuster. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). The contribution of flow to positive psychology. Futrell, M. H. (1999). The challenge of the 21st century: Developing a highly qualified cadre of teachers to teach our nation’s diverse student population. Journal of Negro Education, 318–334. Hall, P., & Simeral, A. (2008). Building teachers’ capacity for success: A collaborative approach for coaches and school leaders. ASCD. Helterbran, V. R. (2008). Professionalism: Teachers taking the reins. The Clearing House: a journal of educational strategies, issues and ideas, 81(3), 123-127. https://www.education.gov.in/shikshakparv/docs/innovative%20pedagogy%20to%20 promote%20enjoyable%20and%20engaging%20learning.pdf#:~:text=NEP%20 Para%204.6%3A%20In%20all%20stages%2C%20experiential%20learning, specified%20for%20each%20subject%20of%20a%20given%20class Jürimäe, M., Kärner, A., & Tiisvelt, L. (2014). Teachers Taking Ownership of Educational Change via Participation in Professional Learning Communities. Nyhamn F. and Hopfenbeck T. (_Ed.). From Political Decisions to Change in the Classroom: Successful Implementation of Education Policy, 58-77. Kuroyanagi, T. (1996). Totto-Chan: the little girl at the window. Kodansha International. Meier, D. (2009). Educating for what? The struggle for democracy in education. Editorial Board, 20. Stacy, M. (2013). Teacher-led professional development: Empowering teachers as self-advocates. The Georgia Social Studies Journal, 3(1), 40-49. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2013). 21st-century skills, enhanced edition: Learning for life in our times. Jossey-Bass. Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement. Ascd.

Response

YES/NO Support your response with evidence Response

YES/NO Support your response with evidence

Elements Is our teaching pedagogy innovative and creative

Are children engaged and active while you are teaching?

Feedback to students is specific and constructive

Lesson plan content is connected with real life

Differentiated instruction is included in our lesson plans through Multiple Intelligence

Questioning strategy used in the class is making the students think, connect with prior knowledge, and reflect.

Classroom management (paying attention, on task, behaving appropriately and ready to work)

Students are able to transfer learning from classroom to real life issues

Critical thinking is nurtured amongst the students through my teaching, assessment, and activities.

Activities, assignments, and assessment are engaging the students and leading to deeper understanding of the subject

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  99

Appendix 1: Self-reflection & Need Analysis

100  Vidhya Nagaraj Appendix 2: Questionnaire for Teachers 1 Earlier I would procrastinate ____% of time, now I procrastinate _________% of time. 2 Earlier I did not have time for _______ (me time, self-care, walk, exercise, listening to music), but now I have time for __________. (feel free to mention anything else that is not in the option) 3 I have begun to write a checklist for myself and it has helped me to ________________. Though I have begun to write the checklist, it is not helping me with __________________ 4 Earlier I used to spend _____ hours watching entertainment on the phone or TV, but now I watch ____ hours of time on entertainment. 5 Earlier I used to be late in submitting LPs, question paper, newsletter, _______ % of time but now I am able to submit my work on time _____ % of time. 6 An old habit that I have given up____________. 7 A new habit that I have developed in recent times ________________ 8 A new ICT (information & computer) skill that I have learned and used in my work __________ that helped me teach better or work more efficiently. 9 My goal was to achieve _____ & I was able to achieve/ not achieve it, because of _________________ 10 Earlier I never planned or structured my day/week____________ but now I spend time on planning __________ and this has helped me to _________________. 11 I have started this new _________initiative with my students and this has led to _______changes in my__________ 12 Earlier I used to be dissatisfied with the quality of my work______% of time now I am ________% satisfied with the quality of work that I do. 13 I used to think that I do not have time for ________, but now I think ___ ______________________________ 14 I used to feel stressed ___________% of time, now I feel stressed _________% of time. 15 What have I done lately to relieve stress and focus on my own mental health, to ensure I remain an effective teacher? 16 I read _______________from the book ________________ and I learned____________________ 17 In what areas can I still improve professionally? 18 What is stopping me from improving in these areas? What/ Who can help me improve in these areas? How can I access that kind of support? 19 In what ways can I support my colleagues in their learning? 20 What new ideas have I tried in my classroom to stay inspired about teaching? 21 How will I work on my teaching, in order to enthuse my students more? motivate/inspire

Aligning Teacher Development and Agency with School Vision  101 2 Why did I become a teacher? 2 23 Two things that I am actually comfortable in my profession (Teaching)? 24 Two things that are currently out of your comfort zone (in teaching) and why that is so. 23 What is one thing that I can learn to do (from the list below) that may be outside my comfort zone? Circle one skill that you wish to learn.

i To learn any two thinking routines and implement it in my classroom teaching ii Teach maths or social science or science concepts through a story. iii Read a maths story book and create a worksheet based on the maths concepts. iv To learn how to calculate test marks using excel sheet for creating a report card v To learn how to decode and blend words and teach the students. vi To learn how to use GeoGebra tool and use it in maths class vii To learn how to make at least 10 different puppets that I can use in teaching viii To learn how to write case or source-based questions and make question papers. ix To learn a new app that I can use for making my lesson more interesting. x To take up any one of the modules from coursera and complete it. •  Supporting children with difficulties in reading and writing •  Create Student Books with Book Creator

6 The Road Less Travelled Developing Critical Thinking in Children from Marginalized Communities through Picture Books Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani Abstract This research paper describes the challenges and achievements of nurturing critical thinking in four children, living in remote and rural Maharashtra, India; through action research. It all began during the final year of COVID 19 lockdown, when schools had to close down for 18 months and the only means of access to children was a cell phone. The sustainability of this unusual engagement was ensured through its meticulously planned road map and workable strategies. This small engagement helps field workers and educationists to envisage that even in the most difficult of circumstances, with minimal resources it is possible to forge a path to critical thinking on the Road Less Travelled!

The Journey Begins – Introduction I shall be telling this with a sigh   Somewhere ages and ages hence   Two roads diverged in a wood, and II took the one less travelled by, And that has made all the difference. The Road Not Taken (Frost 1915) This research paper describes ‘the road less travelled,’ the journey of an action research to nurture critical thinking in four children from far flung rural areas; using just an audio call facility, during the Covid years. The children struck up an instant bond with me when I first spoke to them over the phone, in May 2021.1 I began to elaborately plan to help them think critically, while reading picture stories in English. But I was in for a shock! I soon discovered that through 2020–2021,2 the children had had no access to learning, and so, they could not even comprehend a grade level English picture book with understanding. They had forgotten their reading skills because of school DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-8

The Road Less Travelled  103 closure! Acutely aware that critical thinking builds on comprehension, I wondered if I was aiming for the sky without knowing how to fly. Shaken by Inequalities In the pandemic, schools in rural India were critically affected, especially in terms of access to books and experience of reading and consequently, critical thinking. A research study of the learning loss of children in government schools done by Azim Premji Foundation (APF), states that, ‘92% of children on an average have lost at least one specific language ability from the previous year, across all classes (APF 2021), (UNICEF 2021). Jain (2020) highlighted that in Maharashtra (India), the state government started rolling out e-learning content to students from both government and aided schools,3 for Grades I to IX. Yet most of the students belonging to economically backward families were not equipped to access (or had very poor, intermittent access) to e-content at affordable cost. Being schooled in ‘the culture of silence’, the marginalized community quietly accepted this disparity. Covid-19 had deepened the digital divide. Touched, I felt that children needed to engage in questioning, become aware of their rights and take steps to fulfil their dreams. I had studied Paolo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed and understood that, “literacy is a weapon for social change.” As a teacher of four decades, I was deeply concerned that Indian education follows a banking concept (Freire 2005, p.  70). The teacher deposits chunks of information in the students’ minds from a set syllabus. This produces a ‘culture of silence’ (Freire 2005) in both teachers and children. The pandemic further isolated rural children and teachers. My position during the Covid-19 pandemic was similar to that of the children. I was intellectually isolated in a village called Nanij in Ratnagiri District, Maharashtra, India, with poor network access and limited resources. What could teachers like me do in such a situation to break this isolation? Learning from LCoRPs: A Group of Like-Minded Professionals Fortunately for me, I joined Dr. Neeraja Raghavan’s course on Reflective Writing. This course brought a group of 15 educators together under the banner of a Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). We were united by the desire to explore burning questions in our work through action research, to effect change. We were further divided into three clusters to facilitate discussion. Our discussions followed the cycle of posing a problem, reading and reflection, questioning and doing. At first, I was confused about the focus of my action research: Should it be a story-based pedagogy or the development of critical thinking in students? My cluster colleagues at LCoRPs helped me reflect on my intentions. Finally, it was Neeraja’s question that really struck home and I realized that I took up this action research because I was shaken by the injustice that I perceived against marginalized children. LCoRPs group meetings made me come face

104  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani Table 6.1 Events (questions) of 6 and 7 June 2021 during LCoRPs meeting and my reflections thereafter My original Action Research Question before 6 June: To implement a story-based pedagogy through distance learning (audio input) for tribal children Neeraja’s Question on 6 June morning: I am missing the tribal child here. Why would he care if it was a story-based pedagogy or not? What are you pitching for in your AR, Nivedita? My Cluster mates’ questions on 6th June afternoon: What are you aiming at? Do you feel stories will help you connect with language? Will somebody else be able to take over the pedagogy? What is the purpose and goal of the venture? Neeraja’s Message on 6 June Evening: Would you rephrase this so that the desired change is evident in the way that the problem is framed? What I mean is, if you implement a story-based pedagogy and no child reads, would you be satisfied? No, of course not. So, isn’t your story-based pedagogy the road that you are taking? To reach a certain destination? What is the destination? A well-framed Action Research Question clearly shows the desired change shining through. My Reflection on 7 June morning: Am I thinking of a pedagogy which brings about a change in the last child? What is my focus? The child or the pedagogy? I changed the Action Research statement: My objective is to develop critical thinking in marginalized children through a story-based pedagogy.

to face with my belief in Freirean dialogic pedagogy (Freire 2005), because I was seeing it unfold in the group! Table 6.1 describes my journey from confusion to clarity. The Lay of the Land In May 2021, I got in touch with four students through a volunteer-based initiative named Read-a-Story:4 Vishesh from rural Talasari, Arjun from Palghar, and Ashiyana from Hatmali village in Aurangabad and Yogita from Shegaon, Pandhrewadi in Osmanabad, Maharashtra, India. This sample group (aged between 11 and 14 years, Grades VII and VIII) consisted of two girls (Yogita and Ashiyana) and two boys (Arjun and Vishesh). They live in villages with approximately 3,000 households,5 and they study in state government schools.6 Their parents (farmers or workers in small shops or factories) have studied up to Grade V or VIII. These children have two/three siblings, except for Arjun who has an older brother. All families come from low-income groups, depending on one or two daily wage earners for income. They live in mud houses with tin roofs. Their parents work for more than 12 hours a day, entrusting the care of siblings and household tasks to the children. This affects their studies. The children speak local dialects at home, but learn and speak the regional language, Marathi in school, which is the medium of instruction. They also learn English as a second language. Given on the next page (in Figure 6.1) is a map of Maharashtra, India showing the approximate location of the children and myself, the researcher.

The Road Less Travelled  105

Figure 6.1 Map of Maharashtra, India, showing the locations of the children and the researcher [Map drawn by Usha Kumar]

Gearing Up for the Action Research Where did I want to take these children? What were they expected to achieve, according to their schools? I began by chalking out the Learning Outcomes, Pedagogical Processes and Materials and Assessment Strategy. Learning Outcomes

The National Education Policy 2020 says: (4.34.) The aim of assessment in the culture of our schooling system will shift from one that is summative and primarily tests rote memorization skills to one that … promotes learning and development for our students, and tests higher-order skills, such as analysis, critical thinking, and conceptual clarity … (NEP 2020) I confirmed the Learning Outcomes of Maharashtra State and aligned them with the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Framework (Anderson and Krathwohl 2001) as the assessment framework of National Education

106  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani Table 6.2  The alignment of learning outcomes and pedagogical strategies S No.

Learning Outcomes of Maharashtra State for English Grade VII.

Learning Outcomes selected by this researcher using Bloom’s Taxonomy as reference. (LO henceforth).

Overall Pedagogical Strategies planned using selected English picture books as a trigger.

1

Reads textual, nontextual material with comprehension.

Reads and summarizes a Level I to IV picture book – Understanding Level.

2

Asks and responds to questions based on texts from books or other resources and out of curiosity.

Connects picture books to life experiences – Application Level.

3

Identifies details of character, main idea and sequence of ideas, themes, and relates them to life. Thinks critically, compares, contrasts characters, events, ideas, themes.

Compares theme, character, plot of picture books in English – Analysis Level. Thinks critically, reads and evaluates social issues in the picture books – Evaluation Level.

The teacher helps children to read, discuss and summarize a picture book: first, in the regional language and then, in English. The teacher supports children to connect picture books with life, through the Think Pair and Share Routine. (Ritchhart 2015) The teacher facilitates comparison of characters to each other and plot to life.

Refers dictionary, thesaurus, and encyclopaedia to find meanings and spellings of words while reading and writing for reference work.

Writes a creative or factual text after referring to various sources – Create Level.

4

5

The teacher facilitates children to think critically about issues through the visible thinking routines Observe Describe and Question and Claim Support and Question (Ritchhart 2015). The teacher helps children develop a framework of a story through their experience. Then she helps them to expand the framework through references.

Policy of India 2020 builds on it. I was surprised to note the similarity between the Learning Outcomes of Maharashtra State with the stages of Higher Order Thinking Skills. I carefully selected pedagogical strategies for an ‘audio only’ mode. Table 6.2 describes the selected learning outcomes (column 2) and their alignment the Maharashtra State Learning Outcomes (column 1).

The Road Less Travelled  107 Alignment of Maharashtra State Learning Outcomes with Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy and Pedagogical Strategies

The next step was the selection of materials. Since I was clear that I wanted to use picture books to nurture critical thinking, I began scrutinizing available literature. Selection of Picture Books

I selected more than 25 picture books in English, thematically suitable to critical thinking, from Pratham Story Weaver.7 I designed the pedagogical strategies for skill building of children e.g., word building strategies, phonic games, etc. based on the stories. The levels of the picture books on Pratham Story Weaver (Pratham Story Weaver 2020) are described in detail on the website. Given below is a snapshot of the word limit of each level: Level 1: 0 to250 words Level 2: 250 to 600 words, Level 3: 600 to 1500 words, Level 4: 1500+. The curated picture books were close to the children’s context, subtly opened themes of diversity, inclusion and empathy, helped them explore questions of differently abled children, threads of man-animal conflict, and issues of gender discrimination, Nature and Man – to name a few themes. Pairing the Children

Being an entirely ‘audio only’ engagement, I paired the children so that I could spend more time with them. They could work in collaboration in a safe space for sharing. Ashiyana and Vishesh were paired because they were still decoding without comprehension. I paired Yogita and Arjun as they could read with comprehension. Every few days the pairs would be mixed. Over a few Sundays, all four children got together. The children had never seen me, nor had I seen the children. We engaged in reading, discussing and learning only on an audio call! Pedagogical Process and Assessment

Every week I spoke to the children on the phone, and sent them a picture book. We began the conversation by exchanging home news. The children would read the story and I would listen. This was followed by discussion, questions and retelling of the story. Over the week, the children wrote a response to the story adding to their assessment portfolio. Having organized my strategies as above, I started by assessing the initial level of the four children. The Baseline Test

The Action Research was conducted from June 2021 to March 2022. I conducted a short reading and critical thinking test in June–July 2021 using Levels I, II and III picture books as given below. Given in Table 6.3 is a checklist of the baseline assessment.

S. No.

Learning Outcomes (LO)

Arjun

Yogita

Ashiana

Vishesh

1

Reads and summarizes a stage Level (I to IV) English picture book – Understanding, Connects picture books to life experiences – Application Level. Makes Comparisons Compares theme, character, and plot of stories in English – Analysis Level. The student reads and evaluates social issues in the stories – Evaluation Level.

Reads and summarizes a Level II picture book in Marathi.

Reads and summarizes a Level II picture book in Marathi.

Reads and partially summarizes a Level I picture book in Marathi.

Needs help to draw connections with self. Cannot compare without help. Compares in Marathi though.

Needs help to draw connections with self. No. Compares in Marathi though.

Needs help to draw connections with self. No

Reads and partially summarizes a Level I picture book in Marathi with a lot of help. Needs help to draw connections with self. No

Locates a social issue or theme from a Level I or II text but responded negatively e.g., bullying – says it does not exist in his school. Can write a factual text but does not know how to refer to the internet for more sources.

Cannot locate a social issue, misses out on detail in the picture book.

Locates a social issue and gives a well taught traditionally prescribed moral.

Cannot locate social issues in texts.

Can write a short factual text but does not know how to refer to internet sources.

Cannot write a factual text on her own. Needs me to translate her thoughts into English. She cannot surf the net.

Cannot write a factual text on his own. Can write with some help. He cannot surf the net.

2 3

4

5

Writes a creative or factual text after referring to various sources.

108  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani

Table 6.3  Baseline checklist assessment

The Road Less Travelled  109 Challenges and Findings

The collection of baseline data was immensely difficult as the children were suffering from the fallout of the pandemic. Since we met only on an audio call, I was never sure what the children were doing or thinking. When I heard low voices, I wondered whether it was due to ill health or lack of understanding! It therefore took me a long time to build rapport with the children. During the baseline reading of Levels 1, 2 and 3 picture stories, the children responded with traditional ideas about the roles of boys and girls or inclusion. For instance, when we read, ‘The Weightlifting Princess Level 3,’ (the story of a girl who struggles to become the champion, but is stopped short by her father who wants her to marry the second-place holder) the significance of the last lines of the story quoted below, was lost on the children: Now you’re worthy of being a champion’s wife,” says the King proudly. Princess Nila smiles. “No,” she says. “Now, I am the champion. (Rajendran & Dasgupta 2018) Again, after reading the story ‘Anand – Level 1’ (Eipe 2018) (the heartwarming story of a trash collector), when we talked about the work of safai karamcharis (street cleaners) during the Covid pandemic, the children’s first reaction was that Anand should leave his job. Ashiyana said that the moral of the story was that we should not litter. The children were thinking, but instead of expressing their own thoughts, they merely echoing the voices of the elders around them! I then moved to examining their written responses to stories. First Written Responses to Picture Books

In July 2021, while connecting the story ‘My Friends – Level 2 (Banerji et al. 2006), with their own lives, Arjun simply wrote a long list of the names of his friends. Ashiyana and Vishesh wrote in points. They responded only when I asked them a series of questions. They were accustomed to the classroom culture of teachers asking questions and children answering them. Vishesh’s writing was almost unreadable. He was making inventive spellings. I seriously wondered whether he could read and make meaning! He spelt girl in three different ways: ‘grl’, gral and finally garl. He was writing on the basis of ‘how the word sounded to him’, in seventh Grade! Usually, a child does this till Grade 2 or 3 in case of a second language (Lutz 2022). Yogita wrote about her school in response to the story ‘Rani’s First Day at School – Level 1’ (Rao 2015). She rambled on from one thought to another. I helped the children build their vocabulary and phonics by playing word games with them. They worked in collaboration, sharing their responses with each other and me.

110  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani The Road Less Travelled

From June 2021 to March 2022, I made audio calls to each pair, twice a week, for an hour on weekdays. The children read an English picture book from the selection of PDFs that I sent them a few days earlier. Each story was followed by a discussion (in Marathi) on the theme, characters and social issues. Then they asked each other questions and answered them in broken English. Initially, all four children were hesitant. In the span of two months, they began writing in English. Their sentences were half-formed, and they struggled to find a suitable word, as their concepts were coded in Marathi. I had to step in many times to help them with vocabulary. The thoughts however, were always their own. In four months, the children progressed from reading haltingly and answering a few comprehension questions, to summarizing a story in the regional language and progressively, to asking questions, e.g., Ashiyana asked, “Why do women have to take up all the responsibility of home?” Vishesh asked, “Isn’t it the duty of older people to take care of children and grandchildren?” Arjun asked me questions about a career in science and Yogita asserted her rights by calling me up to ask when I was free whenever she missed class. Surprisingly, by November–December 2021, Yogita and Ashiyana had begun to look up Google translator, an online dictionary and references. We progressed from Level I picture stories in July and August to Level II in September and October, Levels III and IV from November to March. This journey seems sequential, but from the beginning, we read a more challenging book almost every month. The tasks became more and more challenging and were progressively owned by the children. I was now in a position to look at their progress over the ten months. Learning Journey from Understanding to Questioning

Given below are some snapshots of the children’s learning journey. Snapshot 1: LO1. Reads and summarizes a Level I or II text. Pedagogical strategy: Summarizing. On 17 August 2021, Arjun described ‘Anand’ (Eipe 2018) the character in a Level 1 story, in an elaborate manner but understandably, as seen in Figure 6.2, his thoughts were not organized. On 25 August 2021, Vishesh and Ashiyana summarized the story, ‘Rumniya Level 2’ (Banerji & Henu 2007) as shown in Figure 6.3 he still made spelling mistakes but was more detailed and had learnt to write a paragraph. Yogita summarized the story, ‘Rumniya’ starting suddenly with ‘a one beautiful girl’ (sic) as if she was describing a picture. It was apparent that she had understood the story more through pictures than through the words. Between June and August, children had begun to recognize my Marathi and English accent. In turn, I had begun to understand words of their local dialect and even sense their moods! The children were slowly teaching me to listen not only to their voices but also to pay attention to the silences in between and nudge and question them.

The Road Less Travelled  111

Figure 6.2  Arjun summarized ‘Anand’

Figure 6.3  Vishesh summarized the story of Rumniya

Throughout June, July and August the children were summarizing in Marathi and seeking help to write in English, but as they started connecting text to life, sharing ideas and words with each other, reading to each other and writing down their thoughts almost every day, they began to look at their world differently and use English with increasing ease! Snapshot 2: LO 2 Connects text with life experiences. Pedagogical Strategy: Think Pair and Share. By 22 July, Vishesh had begun to connect stories with his own experience. However, his thoughts were still running haywire. Here, he connected Kalpana’s struggles (Kalpana’s Cycle- Level 2) (Rajendran & Amin 2017) while learning to ride a bicycle with his own rather pleasant experience (please see Figure 6.4). By December, Ashiyana wrote a letter that connected the story of Rumniya (Level 2) (Banerji 2007) (who was lost at a wedding) with her own experience of losing her younger sister at a party. She was still writing invented spellings and run-on lines, yet the letter in Figure 6.5 shows her growth in terms of cohesion, organization and expression. On 31 August 2021, Yogita described her family. She wrote that there were 14 people in her family of farmers. One cannot help

112  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani

Figure 6.4  Vishesh describes his experience of cycling

Ashiyana On Rumniya Hatmali Dist Aurangabad

Address

Post Narghvah Date 30.12.2021 Dear Vidhya How are you I am written to you that my small sister was lost in a big Birthday Party on Monday. We went to the Birthday Party. We dance there were 1000 people in the crowd my little sister was lost. I was very nervous and crying. I called mother she sed (sic) do not worried your sister is very wiser. Now I was feeling betar (sic). I surch (sic) for her and found her playing with the birthday girl’s sister. Your friend

Ashiyana

Figure 6.5  Ashiyana connects to the story of Rumniya by sharing her experience

wondering how fourteen people managed to hold on through the pandemic! As they began to express their voices in their writing, I sensed that they were ready for more challenging tasks. Snapshot 3: LO 3 Compares theme, character and plot of stories. On 30 August, Yogita and Arjun compared the journey of two characters in two very different books (as shown in Figure 6.6). Meanwhile, Vishesh and Ashiyana as seen in Figure 6.7 compared the same stories in writing only by November. By August, Yogita and Arjun were writing in greater detail.

The Road Less Travelled  113

Figure 6.6  On 30 August, Yogita compares Rumniya and Kalpana

Figure 6.7  On 12 November, Vishesh compares Anand and Mahagiri

But Vishesh and Ashiyana were still struggling to compare characters. They had begun predicting the meaning of words, but whenever they wrote, they wanted me to provide them with sentence beginnings. Between September and November, children had begun to suggest ways in which they wanted to learn: Ashiyana loved writing key words while Arjun and Yogita loved to make a number of questions. This was also the time when Yogita was ill almost every week. She was repeatedly hospitalized. The hospital experience stayed with her. Yet whenever she was present, she would be as good as new. My doubts and assumptions that I may not be able to reach my goal slowly disappeared, I saw a star in the sky. Snapshot 4 LO 4. Thinks critically and reads and evaluates social issues in stories – Pedagogical Strategies: Observe, Describe and Question and Claim, Support, Question By November, Vishesh and Ashiyana had started exploring the nuances of issues like man-animal conflict after reading the book, ‘Mahagiri’ (Hemlata & Biswas 2016) about an elephant who faces the wrath of his

114  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani mahout while rescuing a cat trapped in a hole. Their voices were later published by Bookworm Library, Goa, India in their newsletter, ‘Bookworm Beyond Borders’8 (Bookworm 2021) in the section on Children’s Voices as showcased in Figure 6.8.

Figure 6.8  Ashiyana and Vishesh discuss man animal conflict

In June 2021, when I conducted the baseline, the children did not understand the issues of gender equality raised in the story ‘The Weightlifting Princess Level 3’ (Rajendran & Dasgupta 2018). But by January 2022, they responded differently to the same story by voicing their opinions. Ashiyana and Vishesh spoke about their mothers. They explained how their education had been interrupted due to marriage and consequent responsibilities and how this prevented them from pursuing their studies further. Ashiyana added that her mother had resumed her studies now, after a gap of 20 years! Vishesh talked about how he looked after his sisters when his mother worked for 12 hours in the factory. He understood the responsibility of a caregiver. Strategy: Claim, Support, Question: While discussing ‘The Weightlifting Princess,’ Level 3 (Rajendran & Dasgupta 2018), I played the devil’s advocate and declared that the Princess should listen to her father and get married. All the children questioned me and supported each other by advocating the right of the Princess to follow her dream. Figure 6.9 shows how well Yogita has presented her thoughts. She organized the ideas in a table with the first column mentioning the claims of the teacher (me) and the second column mentioning her own questioning of those claims. There is a clear reasoning emerging out of the writing. In January 2022 while reading the story, ‘Chuskit Goes to School’, Level 3, (Padmanabhan & Anantharajan 2007) Arjun probed the intention of the author in writing the story. (Please refer to Figure 6.10)

The Road Less Travelled  115

Figure 6.9  Yogita does Claim-Support-Question

Arjun

2.1.22

Story: Chuskit Goes to School Why do you think the author wrote the story? The writer writes Chuskit goes to school because he wants to give the message that small children also have dream and if all work do together then we can do it. Figure 6.10  Arjun questions the author’s intention

I strategized different ways to get Arjun and Vishesh to talk and engage, while trying to gently curb the enthusiasm of Ashiyana and Yogita who dominated the talk. Negotiation, owning the tasks, exchanging pairs, collaborative work were ways in which spaces were created for self-expression. Snapshot 5 LO 5. Writes a creative or factual text after referring to various sources – Pedagogical Strategy: Referencing

116  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani Just before 26 January 2022, the Republic Day of India, after reading the book, ‘North, South, East, West,’ (Salamandar & Kale 2021) a story which describes a child’s journey through the length and breadth of our country, the children wanted to write about their dream. They examined the issues around them, looked up the internet and the dictionary. As they read out what they had written, I felt my dream had come true! While they wrote about the sick, the dying, poverty, unrewarding work and lack of education in India, they also described what they would do to bring about a change. This change was not a personal dream but a dream that would make them change leaders, who were thinking of their role as citizens. Ashiyana highlighted gender disparity and said that she would like to prove that she is equal to any man, given the chance. Yogita described how the sickness and death during Covid-19 strengthened her resolve to be a doctor. Vishesh shared how he would stay back in the village and make the children aware of the opportunities that await them in the wide world. And most practical of all, Arjun wrote about how he would bring free electricity to the villages around by teaching farmers to build windmills and solar panels. These very children who lack the most basic amenities, whose life and education are in jeopardy, were dreaming of nation-building! Figures 6.11 and 6.12 show how Arjun and Yogita’s dreams were not mere personal dreams but a response to the problems around them. The Transformational Power of Storybooks- from Production to Publication: When the children’s energies were low on the call, I worried about not being able to see them face to face. I wondered how to give them a sense of achievement. I decided to push them a little further. I suggested that they write a play based on the story ‘Bravo Burli – Level 3’ (Deshmukh & Bhasi 2016) – a little girl from Kondh tribe indigenous to Odisha, who fearlessly faces a tiger, deep inside the forest. Although they had never written a play before, they were keen to learn. As Yogita and Arjun wrote each scene, they

Figure 6.11  Arjun’s dream

The Road Less Travelled  117

27.2.2022 My Dream - Yogita I want to become a doctor because I do not want people to get sick and die. To be a doctor first I will have to select science subject and after that will be MBBS… Figure 6.12  Yogita’s dream

read it out to me. What is a play without performance? I suggested that they organize a Reader’s Theatre. This was a completely new experience for marginalized children from remote rural areas, who were living miles away from each other and were connected only through audio. The play was ready and performed on 22 January 2022 and it was published in Pratham Story Weaver on 7 March 2022 (Bhillare & Bhillare 2022).9 The names and description of the process of writing was published on Pratham’s blog on the same day (Pratham 2022). Between June 2021 and January 2022 the children had progressed from being hesitant readers to published writers. What was it that made an 11-year-old girl like Yogita move from reading hesitantly to confidently transforming a story into a play only on an audio call in ten months? In June/July, Yogita was reading very slowly, she did not know the meanings of common words like wedding. She had learnt only to answer questions on text and never to ask questions! Due to her bonding with Arjun, they were modelling reading and reciprocally learning from each other. Being a vibrant girl, Yogita started reading faster by August. She responded sincerely to suggestions of learning a few new words per day. She benefited most from Google Translate and multilingual dictionaries. By September, she had begun to ask higher level questions on her own. Arjun’s challenge of not having a smart phone was used as an opportunity by the two: they listened to me read the story carefully, helped each other enhance their comprehension skills, and complemented each other in discussion. By January, Yogita had written two stories about the issues around her. Arjun and she had written a speech and a letter together. She had begun to express her learning needs to me. By March, we realized that the learning outcomes had been achieved, but the children thirsted for more! Yogita wrote a letter to me, asking me to continue teaching her. This was the time to capture their reflections on their progress.

118  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani Reflections of Children

I asked the children about changes that they saw in themselves over the ten months. Children wrote down the names of books that they had read. They categorized these books into ‘easy’ and ‘difficult’. They noticed that their reading and writing had improved. Then they analyzed the different ways in which it got better. They declared that as they progressed from Level 1 to Level 4 books, they began to comprehend complex sentences, and express complex thoughts. They said that they had begun to read and write faster. They also talked about their future learning journey with confidence and urged me to continue teaching them. The Endline Journey

By February 22, the children had read 24 books as seen in Table 6.4. In the first month, they were simply reading and discussing in Marathi. In the subsequent months, the children began reading and doing writing tasks on the books, dwelling on the themes, character and plot. By September, they began to read Level 3 books. After experiencing several Level 3 books on empathy, inclusion, and diversity they began to look at issues around them. It was only in the final months that they read Level 4 books which had very few pictures and complex language as well as themes. The endline bar chart in Figure 6.13 shows the journey from LO1 to LO5. Yogita and Arjun had achieved LO3 by the third month but Vishesh and Ashiyana took longer. Yogita had been ill, so she took longer to reach LO4, but she had managed to catch up with the others on LO 5 by the eighth month. It took only eight months for all of them to begin to think critically and find out information. My Reflections

In the space of ten months, we had created a safe space for open discussion. Children connected the stories with life around them and found that they Table 6.4 Number and levels of books read by the children from June 2021 to February 2022 Levels

Number of Books Read June

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Total

5

5 24 Books

July

August

3

1 1

3

2

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

3

2

3

2

3

2

3

2

1 1 2

1 1 2

The Road Less Travelled  119

Figure 6.13  The Endline Journey

needed inputs in many areas of reading and writing. Their responses were not perfect in terms of spelling and grammar, but their thoughts had become more organized and they had begun to question what they read! By the end of ten months, my earlier assumption that the children would just begin to understand what they are reading by the end of the term was shaken. I was struck by the power of a dialogic pedagogy to break the shackles of a culture of silence. I marvelled at how, if children connect to the world around them with the world of words, they can encode their thoughts effectively! Moreover, I had myself undergone a change. The dialogic pedagogy that LCoRPs followed had automatically replicated itself in my interactions with children! Reading with them, observing their responses, questioning the rural reality around them, I, too, began to look at the world through their eyes! As the state transport closed down, the children were isolated in many ways. I began to understand their silences when food was scarce, their energy when they were doing something exciting, their bonding as they forgot their isolation and learnt from one another. I learnt gratitude from Yogita, enthusiasm from Ashiyana, perfection from Arjun and care from Vishesh! Conclusion LCoRPs and my mentor, Dr. Neeraja Raghavan have brought about a huge transformation in my pedagogical and reflective abilities. Critical questioning

120  Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and Anita Butani by my mentor led me to uncover layers of assumptions, and question my objectives. This questioning, percolated consciously and unconsciously to the children. In the ten months of the pandemic, reaching out to far-flung and marginalized children, I have been pleasantly surprised that it has been possible to use a simple mobile phone to set them onto the path of thinking of issues around them. I have discovered the joy of nurturing their voices, to awaken their confidence to know that they count, that their dreams, ideas and lives matter to the world around them! The road less travelled had become a road well-travelled, leaving behind a trail of doable, sustainable pedagogical strategies for any brave heart to follow through! Notes 1 The principal researcher is Nivedita Vijay Bedadur and her co-author is Anita Butani. Nivedita is an educationist who has been working with marginalized children and teachers, she has designed curricula, written textbooks and taught English. Anita Butani is a school psychologist. She has supported the principal researcher to reflect and review the paper. 2 On 13 March 2020, Maharashtra Government closed down schools. On 4 October 2021, schools were given a go ahead to open after 18 months. 3 Aided schools are schools which get government sanction and aid. They are run by organizations or individuals. Government schools are funded and run by the State government or by the Central government. They are completely subsidized and also run a mid-day meal scheme. 4 Read a story is an NGO which aspires to increase the reading comprehension levels of children in remote rural areas, through a volunteer base using mobile phones. They have reached out to more than 600 students successfully in rural Maharashtra during the pandemic. Amod Joshi and Gauri Mehendale, Founders of Read a story worked incessantly with a group of volunteers like me to bring reading and learning back into the lives of rural children throughout the pandemic. 5 In Maharashtra, most villages are threatened by water scarcity and drought. Agriculture is not profitable due to climate change. Young men are migrating to cities. Leaving the poorest and most vulnerable to eke out a living, affecting the education of children in rural areas. 6 In India, the state government runs aided schools. These schools do not charge fees, distribute uniforms and books and provide mid-day meals to children up to Grade VIII. Unfortunately, these schools are accessed only by the poorer sections of society as they are regional medium schools where English is only one subject and not a medium of instruction. 7 For more on levels please click on the link given in the references. 8 Bookworm Beyond Borders is a bilingual newsletter published by Bookworm Goa, a children’s library. I attended the Library Educator’s Course conducted in 201920, and adopted the best practices of dialogic questioning while doing read-alouds with the children. It publishes ‘Children’s Voices’ where children express their critical thoughts about a story. In November ‘21, Vishesh and Ashiyana’s voices were published in the Issue 5 December 2021 of Bookworm Beyond Borders. 9 In their blog, Pratham story weaver has written the story of the researcher and the children and published the children’s play on the website mentioned in the references. The play written by children has been published in the Story Weaver application.

The Road Less Travelled  121 References Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition. New York: Longman. AzimPremji Foundation. Loss of Learning during the Pandemic. (2021) https:// azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/field-studies-in-education/loss-of-learning-during-thepandemic. Accessed on 29 May 2022. Banerji, R., & Henu. (2007) Rumniya Level 2. Mumbai: Pratham Books. Banerji, R., Verma, R., & Chaudhry, M. (2006) My Friends. Mumbai: Pratham Books. Bhillare, A., & Bhillare, Y. (2022) Bravo Burli a Play. https://storyweaver.org.in/ stories/428699-bravo-burli-a-play Bookworm. (2021) Children’s Voices. Bookworm Beyond Borders Issue 5. Panjim: Bookworm Goa. Deshmukh, N., & Bhasi, R. (2016) Bravo Burli Level 3. Mumbai: Pratham Books. Eipe, R. (2018) Anand. Mumbai: Pratham Books. Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Limited. Frost, R. (2015) 'The road not taken', in Swank, L. (ed.) An introduction to American poetry. Hemlata& Biswas, P. (2016). Mahagiri. Mumbai: Pratham Books. Jain, S. (2020) Corona Virus Crisis’ Impact on Rural India Exposes Inequality and Pitfalls in Access to Education. https://www.firstpost.com/india/coronavirus-crisisimpact-on-rural-india-exposes-inequality-and-pitfalls-in-access-to-education8341701.html. Accessed on 29 May 2022. Lutz, E. (2022, June 7) Invented Spelling and Spelling Development. Retrieved from reading rockets.org. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/invented-spelling-andspelling-development NEP. (2020) National Education Policy 2020. Delhi: Ministry of Human Resource Development. Padmanabhan, S., & Anantharajan, M. (2007) Chuskit Goes to School Level 3. Pratham, Story Weaver. https://storyweaver.org.in/. Accessed on 29 May 2022. Pratham. (2022) Building Bridges through the Power of Storybooks. Building Bridges through the Power of Storybooks. Mumbai, Maharashtra. PrathamBooks: Story Weaver. https://storyweaver.org.in/prathambooks Rajendran, S., & Amin, K. (2017) Kalpana’s Cycle Level 2. Pratham Story Weaver. https://storyweaver.org.in/. Accessed on 29 May 2022. Rajendran, S., & Dasgupta, D. (2018) The Weightlifting Princess Level 3. Pratham Story Weaver. https://storyweaver.org.in/. Accessed on 29 May 2022. Rao, C. (2015) Rani’s First Day at School. Mumbai: Pratham Books. Readastory. From readastory.org.in: https://readastory.org.in/home. Accessed on 20 May 2022. Ritchhart, R. (2015). Thinking Routines. In R. Ritchhart, Creating Cultures of Thinking (p. 196). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass A Wiley. Salamandar, C. G., & Kale, K. S. North, South, East, West Level 4. Pratham Story Weaver. https://storyweaver.org.in/. Accessed on 3 March 2022. UNICEF. (2021). Rapid Assessment of Learning during School Closure in the Context of Covid. New Delhi: UNICEF India Country; Office.

7 Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination Madhusree Dutta Majumdar

Abstract In the daily grind of any school routine, teachers seldom find the time to interact with each other. While they handhold students to achieve success, their own stories of sometimes creating miracles with their student/s are seldom brought into the limelight. This is a natural consequence of teachers working in silos, each restricted to their own subject, seldom (if at all) stepping out of their domains. The researcher was part of the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs) and the thought-provoking discussions that she had with the members there triggered her decision to create spaces for teachers in her school to collaborate across disciplines. What began as an effort to break the silos that teachers were unwittingly locked into finally blossomed into a voluntary initiative of teachers to design an Interdisciplinary Curriculum (IDC). The key takeaway from this paper is that even while working in schools with progressive mindsets, there will be issues and challenges. When opportunities are given to teachers to discover and exercise their voices, it is more likely that schools will transform into ‘live areas of engagement’.

A Perturbing Question ‘What is the point of learning history? All you have to do is just remember the dates of battles and the names of bygone kings!’ This declaration from an educator of Vidyashilp Academy (VSA) caught me by surprise one morning. The Centre-Stage

Located in the Silicon Capital of India, Bengaluru, VSA’s approach was designed to take learning beyond the confines of textbooks. The vision of the school is to ensure meaningful learning and engagement for students from the middle- and upper-middle-class sections of society. From integrating Bruner’s ‘Constructivism’, (Bruner 1960) to Gardner’s ‘Multiple-Intelligence’ (Gardner 1983) and Bloom’s ‘Taxonomy’ (Bloom et  al., 1956), the school constantly works to inculcate the 4 Cs of learning – Critical thinking, Creativity, DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-9

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  123 Communication and Collaboration – among learners at all levels. Reflective practice therefore forms an integral part of VSA’s academic culture to ensure learning outcomes are sustained. So, such a query from an educator at VSA questioning the importance of History flummoxed me. Had I heard right? It left me disconcerted for a long time after. Working in VSA for the past 16 years as the Head of the Department of History and Political Science, I have been responsible for formulating, planning and implementing a stimulating curriculum with educators from the department. Given Vidyashilp’s progressive approach to education, it has been possible to mentor teachers of the department to go beyond a mere textbook approach. I had taken pride in VSA’s reflective culture, but this statement made me probe the reasons behind that question. ‘Wasn’t she (my colleague) aware of the various innovative methodologies that the teachers of the History Department were engaged in, to enrich the subject? Or the numerous projects to make learning experiential?’ These were the thoughts that repeatedly ran through my mind. Worse, I could not help wondering: if a teacher harbours such a notion of bias towards certain subjects, what about the students? Wouldn’t this prejudice inevitably get transferred to them? Questioning My Beliefs and Those of Others Such thoughts made me question my own perception about other subjects. Do I harbour such biases, too? As I started to scratch beneath my ‘unbiased perception of self’, I was taken aback by my own thoughts! I still don’t understand the workings of subjects like Physics and Chemistry. I had ascribed my dislike of them to the boring manner that it had been taught to me by my teachers. With my new perception, the question: ‘What, if my students feel the same about History?’ now began to rattle me. What if my colleague had had a similar experience like me with her own history teacher?! These ‘What ifs’, led me to delve deeper by asking colleagues across departments (English, Commerce, Geography, Physics, Maths, EVS, Kannada, Hindi) the following questions: • What was your favourite subject/s in school? Why? • What were the subject/s that you did not like in school? Why? • Do you still harbour any biases towards the subjects that you did not like in school? Why? Figures 7.1 and 7.2 show sample responses that reaffirmed my fear that teachers might unconsciously pass on their dislike of a particular subject to students.

124  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar

Figure 7.1  Response from a teacher of Commerce

Figure 7.2  Response from a teacher of Mathematics

If this was true, it seemed to me, it was imperative that teachers rid themselves of previously held prejudices about subjects. But how could I set about achieving that? The solution that immediately came to my mind was that teachers should be exposed to the diverse teaching and learning approaches in different subjects. Within the same school, how can such spaces be created for teachers to learn from their peers, create connections with other disciplines and thereby breathe life into the various subjects? This was a thought that confounded me. Though teachers within a particular department were involved in exploring innovative ways of teaching and learning, this practice was limited only to their subject. This resulted in containment of reflective practices within the walls of a specific department. But to gain new insights and new perspectives and let go of previous assumptions, surely teachers have to go beyond that! Attending a Reflective Writing course conducted by ‘Thinking Teacher’,1 Bangalore, India led me to question my own long-held beliefs. Furthermore, enriching discussions with the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs), [a community of like-minded educators eager for change] made me realize the importance of self-observation and self-evaluation. Johnston, J. S. (2007) suggests that a reflective practitioner is one who alters her practice to achieve the deepest and fullest experiences for herself and her students. I now questioned my perception of my school’s ongoing reflective practices.

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  125 Was reflection truly happening? Should reflective practices be boxed inside a specific department? With these concerns, I set out to conduct my Action Research. Diagnosing the Problem Influenced by a chapter titled ‘The Story Behind These Stories’ in a book by Raghavan et  al. (2018), I resonated with certain questions such as the following: ‘How can a teacher seek and receive support when she needs it? Where does the teacher get the opportunity to reflect, learn afresh and feel energized?’ I began by framing my Action Research problem thus – ‘Introducing Reflective Practice Among Teachers as Part of Teacher Development Programs’. This emerged from my feeling that even though teachers in my school were jotting down their reflections, the practice was limited to a particular subject and its pedagogy. However, questions posed by my LCoRPs fellows, like, “Can you define or enumerate the areas where reflection can be done?” made me examine what exactly I was trying to solve. I was seeing my Action Research as an agenda, and not as a problem. The follow-up discussions with LCoRPs’ members and my mentor made me realize that my Action Research was too wide and I needed to be specific in stating the problem. This helped me reflect more on the existing teaching practices in my school. After several conversations with colleagues across departments, my premise that teachers were unaware about what was happening in other disciplines [which unconsciously got reflected in their interactions with others, particularly students], was confirmed. I now saw that there was an absence of convergence of ideas from teachers across departments. This realization created a ‘Eureka’ moment and in that excitement, I envisioned a new statement for my action research: ‘To Create a Space for Teacher Reflection in the School Magazine or Bulletin Board.’ In my haste, I failed to see that I had just put the cart before the horse. I had started with the ‘How’ before stating the ‘What’. Though I could sense the problem, I was unable to pin it down. Creating a space is a ‘How’, ‘What’ do you wish to achieve? A question posed by my Mentor, Dr Neeraja Raghavan,2 led me to wonder how often teachers question their own objectives. As teachers, we are expected ‘to do’ prescribed tasks i.e., execute a structured syllabus within a limited time. How many schools give the teachers the space or a platform to share their thoughts or experiences or question each other’s belief/s? Teachers’ articulation of their views are often restricted to staff meetings, and even there, are mostly dominated by faculty in the mid/senior level administrative positions. My fixation on the ‘How’ or ways to resolve the problem, prevented me from seeing that, ‘when teachers plan their lessons, they do so in isolation’ (Wilms 2003). This departmental planning in isolation is perceived as an occupational inevitability, but it also leads to a lack of understanding of other

126  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar subject disciplines, not to speak of the absence of collaboration between colleagues. This segregation has boxed teachers into compartments, prohibiting a free flow of knowledge; it has prevented teachers from drawing inspiration from each other, and concomitantly, from becoming a source of inspiration themselves. This realization helped me look at my Action Research from a different perspective as my objectives became clearer: To develop a culture of collaborating with colleagues from other disciplines. To engage teachers in sharing their experiences or reflections with their peers, across disciplines, using any medium of their choice. To enable teachers to appreciate the importance of the interconnectedness of various disciplines. To address the issue of ‘bias’ that exists in the minds of educators towards certain disciplines. To draw upon each other’s strength and expertise, learn from each other and thus, begin to see new links between the subject of their training and other disciplines. Once I was able to crystallize my objectives as above, the reframed Action Research Problem statement read: ‘Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross-Pollination.’ I now moved to the next step of Action Research, viz. planning strategies to address the issue. The Prognosis Kent, K. M. (1993) observed that when teachers work in isolation, they are more vulnerable to ignorance – isolation is a place where one will never know how you compare with another or what you might learn from them. How could I break this isolation? The Like-Minds

The LCoRPs under the mentorship of Dr Neeraja Raghavan, has been providing a platform for some teachers across India to both voice their concerns as well as to collectively arrive at solutions. This was made possible through dialogue and engaging discussions, where members communicated freely, expressed their thoughts and opinions, and were receptive to feedback from their cohorts. Knowledge in this case becomes shared, not contained and therefore fluid. The power of dialogue and discussions is that it brings people closer, makes them feel heard, respected, their thoughts validated. This has been truly evident in my association with LCoRPs. Dialogue occurs naturally as we make ourselves open to others’ ideas and actions, acknowledge their achievements and empathize with their trials and

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  127 tribulations. This helped me build Plan 1 of the strategies to address the Action Research problem. Open Dialogue – The first step was to initiate dialogue in order to understand the thoughts and inhibitions of those who are isolated (educators) and its impact on learners. I embarked on this journey with a questionnaire, probing the reasons that prevented meaningful interaction between colleagues of different departments. The questions I asked wereWhat is preventing you from reaching out to your colleagues from other disciplines? How would you like to reach out to colleagues from outside your department? The responses that I garnered through this exercise were an eye-opener: Most of the time, teachers’ days are time bound, syllabus bound. Portion completion for examination/test is the main focus. (Educator from Geography department) Curriculum completion is the only goal, in addition to disinterest in knowing or understanding another subject’s curriculum. This creates a lack of communication leading to an egoistic attitude. (Educator from Chemistry department) Having effective discussions with colleagues who would be open to sharing their awareness and information and integrating that information with a particular discipline would be welcome. Feedback to help each other (colleagues) as to what went well or wrong in the classroom is another way to improve the teaching-learning process. (Educator from Sociology department) On one hand, as they bemoaned the lack of space, time and a bias towards other disciplines, they were, at the same time, consciously aware of the means to break the silos. Voices were waiting to be heard. Isolated within their respective ‘silos’ and bereft of a receptive ear, this dialogue created an opportunity for teachers to express their desire for collaboration with colleagues outside their departments. I now wondered: ‘As teachers, how can we bring about a change? How can we create an opportunity for teachers to alter the course?’ Mahesh, S (2018) and Toward et al. (2018) highlighted the benefits of networking among teachers and teachers being ‘resource persons’ to their peers. This helped me build Plan 2 – the strategies to address the Action Research problem. So my next question was: How could opportunities be provided to teachers to share their experiences and thoughts?

128  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar Collaboration

As I was pondering over ways to create suitable opportunities, Wilkinson’s (Wilkinson 2010) suggestions to make cross-curricular links came to my mind. Being part of Social Sciences, History has always been linked with subjects like Geography, Sociology, Economics, Politics and Philosophy but never with natural sciences. However, there are opportunities to connect it to the Natural Sciences as well! If History is about the study of human society and social relationships, Science is about the study of the physical world. Aren’t the two disciplines inextricably linked? How could I bring forth this link to my students as well as my colleagues? The opportunity came when one of the members of the department shared her classroom experience in Grade 7, where students had questioned her about the reason behind the black texture and colour of Bidri artware.3 As a Social Science teacher, my colleague’s response to the students’ query was based mainly on drawing the link with geography, stating the availability of the black soil in the region. But black soil is available in other parts of India, what was the speciality of the black soil that made the artware exclusive only to Bidar? This was a question that my colleague was unable to answer. It was at this juncture that I decided to approach my colleague from the Chemistry department with our query. History and Geography are linked subjects, but the possibility of linking Chemistry with History was a novelty, (connecting chemical composition of soil with Art and History) and we decided to tap the knowledge of our faculty from Chemistry. The session was arranged in the History class and I felt like a student once again, absorbing the knowledge as my colleague from the Chemistry department went about explaining the uniqueness of soil in Bidar. Due to insufficient sunlight reaching the inside portals of the Bidar fort, lower temperatures resulted in the presence of certain microorganisms in the soil that help in oxidation. This resulted in the formation of a special soil that is used for the blackening process, which brings out the unique lustre of the artware. The interdisciplinary connections that were brought about by collaborating with a subject expert from the Chemistry department helped me to broaden my outlook and look at things from a different perspective. I always had trouble understanding chemistry, but Sir’s way of explanation by breaking complex things into simple ones and supporting it with practical examples helped me overcome my notion that chemistry is difficult. (Educator from History department) The session was very interesting as we learnt about the integration of Math, Physics and Chemistry subjects to understand a concept in History. The concept of alloy formation was made clear with Bidriware being an alloy of Cu and Zn (1:16), the heating of the alloy taught me

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  129 about thermal expansion, which is a Physics concept; ratio and proportion (1:16) is understandably a math concept) (A student’s response after the session) The teachers’ and students’ responses were equally positive as they saw how the teacher as a resource person could join the dots of two different subjects and give the topic a new perspective. The joy of new learning was palpable among students and teachers who had attended the session and the ripples were felt, when colleagues from the History department expressed their interest in forging a link with other subjects. This episode begged the question: ‘If new perspectives can be created by collaborating with one subject, what new findings could have possibly emerged, if other subjects were also included?’ Now the idea quickly transformed itself into action, as I saw teachers (History department) sharing their ‘new-found knowledge’ with colleagues across subjects. It made me realize that like our students, we as teachers are thirsty for knowledge and the joy of discovery transcends barriers! There was not enough evidence yet, however, of a commonly felt need for such interdisciplinary collaboration. To gauge the need for collaboration among teachers across subject disciplines, I created a list of probing questions and responses gathered from teachers across disciplines, like – Chemistry, Geography, Music, Art, Economics, Physics, English, Mathematics, Sociology and English. Contained in Table 7.1 is the list of questions along with corresponding findings. Table 7.1 Collation of responses from teachers across departments on ways to bring about collaboration Questions

Findings

• Did you engage in any form of collaborative teaching with peers from outside your department before? If so, kindly state your experience.

None of the teachers across departments have collaborated with teachers across disciplines. Though in their respective classroom, they had brought an interdisciplinary approach, however, cross-curricular collaboration had never taken place. All of the respondents were able to identify areas in their scheme of work which can be linked with other subjects. Most respondents were willing to collaborate with other subject disciplines provided its properly planned. Interdisciplinary project, crosscurricular collaboration, field trip.

• Can you identify places in your Programme of work where you think it would be beneficial to link with other subjects? • Are you prepared to switch around the timing of particular (related to one’s subject) enquiries to fit in with the Programme of work in other subjects? • What are the ways by which you think can promote teachers’ collaboration across subject disciplines?

130  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar Introspection The responses made me realize that when opportunities are given to teachers to discover and exercise their voices, schools will more likely to transform into ‘live areas of engagement’. It will eventually lead to school improvement as better learning experiences are provided to students, reinforcing VSA’s reflective culture of providing meaningful education for all. I listed down my thoughts in order to get a more objective perspective. I realized how some teachers resonated with me, as they saw that the absence of a common forum had created interpersonal barriers resulting in lack of trust, mutual respect and fear of being judged by other colleagues. It made me further realize that I was not the only one who was able to identify the problem: rather, most teachers felt the same. I had previously assumed that teachers would shy away from engaging in collaboration, citing lack of time and the constant pressure to complete the syllabus as valid reasons. However, their responses gave me hope. Teachers were willing to collaborate and engage in an interdisciplinaryproject or be involved in creating an interdisciplinary curriculum. Teachers were willing to explore the possibilities of including other subjects in their sphere of engagement. Such interactions with my peers from other subject disciplines helped me know my colleagues better. My colleagues’ responses gave me hope to initiate the possibilities of prioritizing group discussions and collaborative planning across departments. Forging effective links with other subjects would ensure well-planned opportunities for students to explore concepts that otherwise was not possible in a regular classroom session. Enabling Cross-Pollination Riding on the success of an interdisciplinary intervention with regards to the study of ‘Bidriware’, four colleagues from the Department of History, expressed their willingness to collaborate with colleagues from other departments. As one of my colleagues shared her views, “I would definitely request a subject matter expert to give his or her perspective knowledge on a topic or concept beyond my subject knowledge, as it helps in filling the gaps in my understanding.” This statement came from the teacher who had an assumption that the Bidri artware was coloured black, later on decorated with silver inlay on the surface. My colleague was not alone in her assumption! In fact, as teachers of the department, who were part of the session, opened up about their ignorance of the intricate details of Bidri artware, which they had been teaching for several years! Such realization propelled teachers to explore the possibilities of approaching colleagues from other departments to fill in their gap of knowledge.

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  131 The Takers

The first step was to identify colleagues across departments who had shown willingness to be part of collaborative teaching, based on the findings from my questionnaire. Out of the ten teachers across disciplines, six teachers from Geography, Physics, Chemistry, Art, Sociology and Economics, were eager to share their knowledge, devote time, flexible to modify their programme plan and were open to diverse ways of thinking. The Theme

The second step was to identify the theme. This happened through dialogue between colleagues, as they met twice a week during sports sessions (slots that are often used by teachers for class preparation or correcting assignments) to discuss the way forward with collaborative teaching. It was during one such discussion, that the Physics teacher shared her challenge to help students of grade VII understand the usage of the pinhole camera in the Indian context. The answer was found in history! As the usage of the pinhole camera techniques was used by the Vijayanagar4 temple architects. Similarly, when the Art teacher wanted to introduce plaster bases for carving 2D models for the same grade, he gave the example of how temple architects of 14th–15th century Southern India, used soapstone5 for its soft and even-textured properties like that of Plaster of Paris. A connection with geography and chemistry was brought out to determine how plate tectonic movements eventually determines the geography of an area and chemical composition of the soil. Such discussions resulted in teachers selecting the theme ‘Art and Architecture of the Vijayanagar Empire’ for grade VII. The reason for this selection was the possibilities that it offered for different disciplinary perspectives, creating multi-perspectives that are hitherto not found in popular school textbooks. The learning outcomes were envisioned keeping in mind that students would be able to draw the connectivity and establish links with other subjects, thereby getting a deeper understanding that all disciplines complement each other and cannot be perceived in ‘Silos’. Teachers as Resource Persons

The third step was to regard Teachers as Resource Persons. Mahesh, S. (2018) emphasizes the need for teachers to become resource persons to their peers and students, in order to create a meaningful teaching-learning space. Such ties with colleagues can be forged, when teachers extend their lending hand to newcomers to ease their anxiety by giving solutions to their doubts or by sharing their success stories of how they have handled or resolved student/s’ behavioural issues. As knowledge sharing is a noble cause and should be every teacher’s forte, the work of Mahesh, S. (2018) resonated

132  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar with my Action Research and reaffirmed for me the need for teacher collaboration to make learning more memorable and satisfying, both for teachers and learners, I was happy to discover such resourceful peers from a cohort that I christened ‘The Takers’: six teachers from Geography, Physics, Chemistry, Art, Sociology and Economics, were open to diverse ways of thinking, eager to share their knowledge and willing to devote time to modifying their programme plan. These were identified as ‘Resource Persons’ to execute the theme of the Interdisciplinary Project (IDP). The teachers integrated the theme of the project in their programme of work and shared available time slot/s with the group. Each week, two teaching sessions were identified across subjects like – Chemistry/ English/ History/ Physics to bring about interdisciplinary learning. Once the IDP started, classrooms became knowledge explosion centres as teachers actively engaged with each other, sharing knowledge and working closely not only with their peers but also students, thus translating ideas into a successful cross-curricular learning of the ‘Art and Architecture of the Vijayanagar Empire’ (Figure 7.3). The New Learnings Students were able to relate to a physics concept while trying to decode the architectural wonder of ‘The Inverted Shadow of the Gopuram statue of Virupaksha Temple, Hampi’. The shadow of the Gopuram statue is seen inverted in a small room located in the far North West corner of the temple. Logically, the shadow is inverted as light passes through a small hole that is made through the wall. It’s actually like a kind of pinhole camera effect created with stonework. The idea of rectilinear propagation of light was simplified by an activity of creating a pinhole camera in the classroom. (Educator from the Physics department)

Figure 7.3  Collaborating with Art, Chemistry and History

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  133 Through this exercise, they (students) got to know about the chemistry and history of Plaster of Paris, made from the gypsum powder which was available in plenty around Paris, hence the name. The Excitement Spreads!

Teachers’ collaboration across subjects is very exciting. Through this, the children were exposed to a lot more experiential learning. This triggered their thought process to the peak. It made them think beyond their textbooks. (Educator from Geography department) Most of these areas of study led us into uncharted territory, both students and teachers experienced new learning. It was challenging, as far as time was concerned. However, the project witnessed children directly involved in the learning process, there was an enthusiasm that came from within. We could see children working in small clusters and deeply absorbed in their learning. In this project, it is difficult to quantify the efficacy of learning for all students. Each of us drew a whole new learning and experience. Learning went well beyond defined curricular goals; it was worthwhile as teachers across disciplines came together to plan this for students whole-heartedly in many aspects of the study. (Educator from History department) In addition, the School Management was appreciative of this surge of collaboration and communication. Ripples That Spread to Form a River Such responses led to colleagues from various departments: English, Commerce, Chemistry, Sociology and History who had shown a keen interest to prepare an interdisciplinary curriculum (IDC) for the academic year 2022– 2023 (which runs from June till March). This was a direct consequence of the success of the IDP on the Vijayanagar Empire. The IDC group was formed and it comprised teachers who were keen to bring about changes in the curriculum, willing to devote time to the framing of the curriculum, open to diverse ways of thinking and were ready to accept others’ perspectives. Readings from Newell and Klein (1996) helped to develop ideas as the team brainstormed on ways to go about the task of integrating interdisciplinary themes into the curriculum or more specifically, of arriving at the ‘theme’ itself. These brainstorming sessions were engaging, as during the course of discussion, teachers would share their thoughts on global issues, what they wanted the students to learn and then, collectively come up with solutions. Their eagerness to discuss, share thoughts and

134  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar implement their ideas were infectious, as even teachers who were not part of the IDC group soon became ready to offer their take on the theme. More importantly, during these discussions, teachers addressed the elephant in the room – their own biases towards certain subjects. They understood how they might unconsciously or unintentionally pass on these biases to students. They realized that mindful conversations in class are important. Furthermore, many of their own prejudices had disappeared in the course of interactions with faculty members from other departments To sustain the changes, the following steps have been taken: Integrating Interdisciplinary curriculum (IDC) is part of the academic planner of the school. It has been decided that the IDC curriculum will be implemented every year, alternating from Grades 6th–9th. The IDC group will meet every fortnight a month to discuss teaching strategies like – inviting teachers as resource persons or evaluating learning outcomes of such collaborative ventures in an effort to create meaningful learning for all. Making learning outcomes of the IDC visible to the entire school in various forms – theatre, exhibitions, audio books, etc., thereby creating platforms/ spaces not just for students, but also teachers to showcase their thoughts and ideas. My Learnings so Far All along, as a teacher and a department head, I had consciously made efforts to integrate different perspectives of Social Sciences to make the teaching and learning of History meaningful and in doing so, have never integrated the Natural Sciences or Mathematics to the study of my subject. ‘How can history be related to science?’ was the general perception that prevailed among teachers like me, limited in our own assumptions and perspectives! It was only when these assumptions were challenged, that I saw the change not just in myself but in my colleagues too. Dialogues with teachers across departments made me realize the power of communication. It brought educators from different disciplines together, helped them view each other’s perspectives and created an opportunity to learn from each other. It was exhilarating to observe the power of collaboration as team work brought out the best in creativity and innovation, in addition to creating a synergy that was infectious. The study was not without its challenges. There were plenty of differences over identifying the theme of the IDC. Time was a constraint. There were times when teachers had to reschedule meetings due to unforeseen engagements within respective departments. However, what pulled the team through all these discussions was the belief that though change might be uncomfortable and time-consuming, it was necessary to make a difference.

Breaking Teacher Silos and Enabling Cross Pollination  135 The  enthusiastic responses from both teachers and students were an additional incentive. The school where I work is a modern school. It encourages reflection and actions based on proactive consideration of these reflections. Discussions with the LCoRPs community however, made me realize the importance of collaboration and communication across departments. LCoRPs had educators from different parts of the country who met regularly to discuss pertinent issues in education and took back their learnings from the meetings to their schools. The question whether I could replicate this non-judgmental space in my school can be gauged by the overwhelming eagerness of the teachers in my school to continue with the process of inter-disciplinary engagement. And so, while teachers within their respective department collaborated regularly, this action research project found two missing ingredients – communication and collaboration between a wider group of people belonging to different departments. In Conclusion What began as an effort to break the silos that teachers were unwittingly locked into had now blossomed into a voluntary initiative of teachers to design an IDC. This went far beyond my initial Action Research Statement and nobody was more surprised than I! I had learnt that communication is the key to understanding each other’s perspective, appreciate the beauty in the form of differences and acknowledge the power of similarities that exists between each subject. Lack of engagement with peers often leads to gaps in their (teachers’) understanding of holistic learning. Platforms for converging teachers’ thoughts and reflections can be created in the classrooms with students and peers becoming partners in the learning process. If such collaborations are encouraged, the new learning from such engagements will shape the way school teachers perceive pedagogy, curriculum and interactions with colleagues and students. After all, communication is the first step to build a sustainable community. Notes 1 https://thinkingteacher.in 2 Dr. Neeraja Raghavan, Founder Director, Thinking Teacher and Initiator of Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). 3 An artware native only to Bidar district of Karnataka, India. 4 Vijayanagar Empire, named after its capital city Vijayanagar (city of victory) was a dominant empire of Southern India in the 13th century. The remarkable ruins of this great empire have been declared a protected site by UNESCO. 5 Soapstone is a delicate material which lends itself well to the creation of detailed, fine carving; it is relatively soft and even-textured, ranges from deep pink to white and looks similar to marble when polished.

136  Madhusree Dutta Majumdar Works Cited Bloom, B. S. (1956), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals (1st ed.), Longman Group. Bruner, J. S. (1960), The Process of Education, Harvard University Press. Gardner, H. (1983), Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Vintage Publication. Johnston, J. S. (2007), Review of John Dewey and the Art of Teaching: Toward Reflective and Imaginative Practice, Paideusis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, (Douglas J. Simpson, Michael P. Jackson, and Judy C. Aycock), vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 69–71. Kent, K. M. (1993), ‘The Need for School-Based Teacher Reflection’, Teacher Education Quarterly, vol. 20. no. 1 (Winter). Reflective Teaching and Teacher Education (Winter 1993), pp. 83–91. Published by: Caddo Gap Press. Mahesh, S. (2018), ‘Being a 21st century Educator’, Notionpress.com. Newell, W. H. and Klein, J. T. (1996), ‘Interdisciplinary Studies into the 21st Century’, The Journal of General Education, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 152–169. Published by: Penn State University Press. Raghavan, N., Sood, V., and Anilkumar, K. (2018), ‘Teaching Tales, Learning Trails’, Notionpress.com, Teachers’ discussion, pp. 252–261. Toward, G., Henley, C. and Cope, A. (2015), ‘The Art of Being a Brilliant Teacher’, Rules of Engagement, ch. 6, pp. 113–140, (Edition, revised). Published By: Crown House Publishing. Wilkinson, A. (2010), ‘Making Cross Curricular Links in History: Some Ways Forward.’ Teaching History, no. 138 (March). Enriching History (March). pp.  4–7. Published by: Historical Association. Wilms, W.W. (2003), ‘Altering the structure and culture of American public schools’, The Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 84, no. 8 (Apr., 2003), pp. 606–615 (10 pages). Published By: Phi Delta Kappa International.

8 A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart Deeptha Vivekanand

Abstract This paper documents how a teacher-educator, in-charge of developing and monitoring the storytelling and reading program, set out to bring about an attitudinal change in a group of English teachers. Through a few initiatives conducted over four months that included building a reflective culture, creating a space for reading together, sharing of experiences and ideas, and empowering teachers to identify and solve classroom problems, she observed a seed of transformation in their attitudes. The paper describes the importance of a reflective teaching practice, practical ways of introducing and sustaining it, and empowering teachers to take charge of their development through reflection. Readers can also gain insights into the various factors that affect implementing an effective storytelling practice in a school. Further, the paper also makes the case for setting up a learning community within the precincts of a school to serve as a platform that can amplify the teacher’s voice, raise issues relating to education, and find collective solutions to problems ­pedagogical, transactional, and developmental.

The Scene of Action The story of my action research is set in St Kabir Public School, a mainstream, private school in Chandigarh (India) affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). It was set-up in 1974 out of the home of its founders and from those humble beginnings, currently has about 1,500 students (from Nursery to Class XII) in a sprawling campus. As one of the oldest schools in the city, St Kabir has always been reputed for its strong academic focus, discipline and traditional values. To move with the times, the school management has consistently made the effort to include new pedagogical approaches by bringing in specialists to enable teachers to equip students with 21st-century skills that include critical thinking, creativity, communication and collaboration. Within the Indian education landscape, it is important to note that few schools choose to regularly include innovative pedagogies in classrooms. Even if they do, it is usually limited to the Kindergarten and Primary grades. DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-10

138  Deeptha Vivekanand The norm is to stick to the prescribed textbook, where rote-learning is the default. The ultimate objective of almost every school – and by extension every parent – is to train students to secure high scores in the final exam administered by the Central and State Boards, at the end of the twelfth year of schooling. This action research focuses on the learning journey of seven teachers (by the end of the research this number came down to five, owing to exits) who were teaching English to grades I–VI. Though belonging to diverse sociocultural backgrounds, their own school and university education was dominated by a teacher-centric approach. In 2020, the CBSE released the latest National Education Policy (NEP) that envisages a complete transformation in the education system of the 21st century. It lays substantial emphasis on Art-Integrated Learning, Experiential Learning, Story-based Pedagogy, and Competency-based Learning. The intent was to send a strong message to schools to reinvent their ways of teaching, signaling a clear departure from the ‘chalk and talk’ method that has usually been employed. A Revival of Storytelling in India: While India has had a rich oral storytelling tradition both in homes and in public spaces, it lost out to radio, television, and eventually the Internet. Despite the proliferation of new media, over the last decade or so, there has been an explosion of the practice of oral storytelling in India. What began as a revival in the 1960s in the U.S. and U.K., (Sobol 1999) slowly found its way back here in the late 80s, albeit with only two or three professional storytellers in the national scene. Thanks to their pioneering work and access to information via the Internet, more and more people took to rediscovering and learning this art form through workshops and courses; many began practising it professionally too. The opening up of several performance venues, bookstores, and cafés in India’s metropolises gave storytellers spaces to tell stories to modern audiences (children and adults) who were only too willing to be entertained by an ancient art form that took them back to the days of listening to stories in the laps of their grandparents. Media coverage for storytelling events has been generous, with many storytellers now having a cult following. This naturally led to them being invited to schools to tell stories to children and deliver workshops for teachers on how to use storytelling in the classroom. The storyteller’s role, however, has mostly been that of an outsider/visitor in the school system, where they come, tell a story and/or conduct a workshop, and go back. Upon observing this trend and its pitfalls, the Management of St Kabir Public School wished to hire a specialist who could be on board full-time to conceptualize and manage the implementation of a story-based pedagogy. A Bee in My Bonnet “Why can’t teachers think more deeply about the stories they are telling and books that they are reading to their students?” This question was gnawing at

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  139 me, a Storytelling Specialist in a mainstream Indian school, every time I sat down to review a story-based lesson plan that a teacher had sent in. “Where was I going wrong?” “Are my expectations too unrealistic?” “Is it so difficult to write a ‘good’ lesson plan?” I came back from work every day, frustrated and angry at not being able to turn things around. Plagued by these thoughts that were part blame, part guilt, I took the Reflective Writing Course in the summer of 2020 to help me gain insights into the workings of my own mind. It opened my eyes to many differing perspectives. I could begin to view a situation with more equanimity and empathy. It also reinstated my love for the written word that I had lost along the way. The Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs) came together in 2020 as a virtual collective of educators located across different parts of India, under the mentorship of Dr. Neeraja Raghavan, to discuss and find solutions to problems that affect school education in India. All its members are alumni of various batches of the Reflective Writing For Teachers course conducted by Dr. Raghavan. For the purpose of facilitating the action research projects that members had taken up, the large group of 15 members was subdivided into three clusters, each focusing on one aspect of education, namely Pedagogy, Curriculum and Attitudinal Change, and Teacher Development. Regularly exchanging ideas, reading together and being questioned by my clustermates helped me shape my maiden action research project in the Teacher Development space. The Researcher Three years before the NEP mandated the inclusion of storytelling as a pedagogical tool, I joined St Kabir as a Storytelling Specialist – a rare move, for not all schools are willing to create a special position for an in-house storyteller. The Management wished to equip English Language teachers from Nursery to Grade VII (and subsequently teachers of other subjects) with oral storytelling skills and was on the lookout for a person who could take up the role full-time. The larger objective was to enable teachers to use storytelling as an approach to develop 21st-century skills in students. This would be my first time to envision a long-term storytelling capacity-building programme for teachers and mentor them throughout their careers – tasks that I did not have all the tools and strategies for. Moreover, since I was not a teacher by training (I came into school education after a career in corporate learning and development) I felt inadequate in dealing with matters related to the classroom and curriculum. Although I had read a lot (mostly Western academic literature) about including storytelling in the curriculum and conducted several teacher-training workshops on the subject, I did not have the hardcore experience of working in a school. Not Just a Storyteller: As a specialist, while I had complete freedom to draw up the programme, I had to work within the confines of the system. Teachers were accustomed to following traditional teaching methods and therefore, the storytelling approach was rather new to them. Understandably,

140  Deeptha Vivekanand many had apprehensions and so the mantra was to go slow. In the first year, I conducted an introductory storytelling workshop, followed by in-class storytelling demonstrations for teachers to observe. When they felt comfortable, they began telling stories in their classes. Through regular observations and feedback, I believed I was helping them get better at it. In the second year of my working with the teachers, I hit a roadblock. I observed that although they had taken to telling stories regularly, there was a disconnect between the story and the teller because the stories were really not ‘theirs’. Instead they were content to work with stories that I had identified for them. Further, when it came to writing and executing lesson plans based on the stories, most of them relied on overused, tried and tested ideas. There was little evidence of creativity or critical thinking in their lesson plans which, according to the school’s existing practice, was the most important indicator of a teacher’s thinking. I observed that they were not taking enough ‘beautiful risks’ (Biesta 2014) in trying out new approaches and seemed comfortable with the status quo. I wondered whether they were really thinking about what they were doing and why they were doing it (Silberman 1971, p. 11). While this was frustrating, I now realized that my task was far deeper. It was not limited to simply getting them to tell stories and write lesson plans that were aligned to learning outcomes. I had to help them to better engage with the stories that they were telling. What could I do to get them to start thinking creatively and critically about the stories that they were taking to the classroom? I resonated with Cruickshank (1986) who states that while school systems have rushed to enhance thinking and mental abilities of children, teachers have not been given enough opportunities to develop and improve those abilities in themselves. This could not be truer, for I had a team that constantly looked to me for ideas, support and guidance without realizing that their own mental development was at stake. I could see that my role was moving far beyond that of a Storytelling specialist. I was now forced to think of creating a robust Teacher Development Programme – something that had not been in my radar when I took on this role. Pandemic Woes At the time of beginning this action research, Covid-19 had struck, bringing in its wake school disruptions, the stress of conducting classes online and working from home, the loss of loved ones and health-issues. The team’s morale was at an all-time low and there was no outlet – except maybe in the form of informal conversations – for them to talk about these issues and find effective solutions. Teaching had become a mechanical task – the syllabus had to be completed, notebooks had to be corrected, and tests had to be administered. Storytelling and Reading were simply items to be checked off a ‘To-Do’ list. Over the two years that I had worked with these teachers, I

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  141 noticed that they often ended up discussing a story through tried and tested ways, rehashing old ideas, or copy-pasting activities from existing resources. There seemed to be a reluctance to try new methods, take risks and question a story deeply. I initially believed that the reason for the dry lesson plans was directly related to a teacher’s (in)ability to think critically. I echoed Cruikshank’s (1986) words about teachers being “rigorous investigators of their own thinking.” I was reminded of Sri Aurobindo’s words on Education: The first principle of true teaching is that nothing can be taught. If there is a nurturing environment, learning will take place on its own. How then, could I create that environment? I also began to question my approach as a mentor. I asked myself if my method of working was a cause for such jaded responses from the teachers. In my role of equipping teachers with storytelling skills, had I inadvertently taken off their agency? Had I failed to enable them to find a connection between the head and the heart, which is at the very core of storytelling? This led me to examine the extent of teacher agency and their ownership of the learning process. Missing the Forest for the Trees Since teachers are generally regarded as implementers of policy decisions, they are not expected to be thinkers! But how can they write higher-order learning outcomes (Bloom, 1956) if they don’t have the chance to apply critical thinking at the workplace? Can periodic interventions enable them to refine their thinking processes? Will this then lead to a more aware and reflective teacher capable of bringing out similar abilities in her students? Can this, then, contribute towards creating a society that thinks critically about everything that it consumes? These and many other questions were swimming in my mind as I attempted to zero-in on the action research problem. As a first step, I framed my problem thus: To nurture critical and reflective thinking among teachers so that they can, in turn, develop it in their students, ultimately leading to a more conscious citizenry capable of functioning effectively in a democracy. When I shared this with my teammates at LCoRPs, they asked me: • Why do teachers lean towards the ‘old wine in a new bottle’ approach? Is this because of the prescriptive nature of delegation? Effectively, what avenues are generally provided to teachers for introducing novelty? • A society like ours often throttles independent thinking in the garb of ‘respect for elders’ or ‘Indian culture dictates this and that’. Often, these are ‘safeguards’ that have been put in place by authority figures who manage to retain their grip so long as such norms are followed. How will you equip your teachers to deal with risk-taking (when they question existing practices and norms) and consequent toppling of hierarchies?

142  Deeptha Vivekanand As I pondered over these questions, I felt that if I could draw out their critical thinking skills, it would help them design well-thought-out lesson plans to engage their students. I narrowly assumed that a lesson plan could be the only evidence of a teacher’s thought process since I wanted a tangible output with which I could gauge the trajectory of her thinking. Moreover, the lesson plan was the most important yardstick that the school had long used to measure a teacher’s effectiveness. And so, I reframed my problem thus: To nurture critical and reflective thinking among teachers through regular interventions that improve the quality of the Storytelling and Reading programme lesson plans. As always, the LCoRPs cohort was quick to point out to me: • If a teacher writes an excellent lesson plan, will you have achieved your intent? What if the actual transaction falls miserably short of the plan? • I wonder about your study group size, and whether you can realistically pitch for a visible change in EVERY teacher’s approach. What do you think? • How will you motivate teachers to think critically? “After all, it is far easier to glide along with the status quo. Why should I wake from my slumber? What will it give me?” I was not considering the subtle, yet powerful social, cultural, and emotional factors that might be impacting a teacher’s thought process. And slowly, I was able to see that writing a fantastic lesson plan alone cannot be taken as evidence that a teacher’s attitude has gone through a transformation. In retrospect, it appears that I was myself falling back on a tried and tested way – the lesson plan – of gauging a teacher’s thinking, while attempting to change this very attitude in them. Had I not been asked these questions, I may well have invested all my effort into creating a new version of the lesson plan and training teachers, in futility, to write them well. Working with a group like LCoRPs empowers a teacher-educator like myself to see an issue from multiple angles, while gently coaxing them to shed their assumptions. I realized I must set the lesson plan idea aside. A conversation with our mentor revealed to me that what I really wanted was to see a spark in the eyes of a teacher before, during and after a class. I also realized that I needed to humanize the process by bringing it closer to their lives. I finally reframed the problem thus: To empower teachers to enjoy the process of teaching and learning through various interventions and reflective practices carried out through the year. The process of framing and reframing the problem led me to look at the issue from its many sides.

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  143 With this new perspective, I set out to conduct my action research over a four-month period from November 2021 to March 2022. The Game Plan At the risk of sounding frivolous, I must state that it became abundantly clear to me that my action research was about finding ways to help teachers have fun in the classroom. I did not want them to feel that Storytelling and Reading are akin to mundane household chores that simply ‘had to be done’. I wanted them to enjoy the process and naturally, the question arose as to how I could facilitate this. Talking to my LCoRPs cohort and mentor made me conclude that I had to identify the aspects that were weighing the teachers down and do away with them. I needed to create a space for coming together, free expression and reflection. I had to reorient my compass from telling teachers to ‘do it like this’ to encouraging them to think about how they might like to do it. This led me to try out the following strategies: • Make the writing of lesson plans optional • Hold teacher-led weekly meetings with sharing of reflections • Anchor a Reading Circle on alternate weeks Since I had not met with the teachers in person in a long time (owing to Covid-19 disruptions), I thought it would be best to call for a face-to-face meeting to share my thoughts on this new approach. It is important to note here that team meetings were usually functional, i.e. mainly about tasks to be carried out and instructions to be followed. I spoke to the teachers about the need for changing courses. I noted in my journal: On the day of the meeting, everyone showed up looking quite happy. After a few minutes of chit-chat, I opened the meeting formally and gave them the context. While discussing the Rose, Thorn, Bud1 activity, I could see that they were connecting to the exercise. Their responses were drawn from both classroom and personal experiences. When I said lesson plans would be optional, there was a palpable sigh of relief from everyone. Throughout the presentation, I could see they were ‘with me’; they agreed that reflection was the most neglected part of the lesson plan. They sounded excited about the Reading Circle too. The meeting ended on a positive note with all of us deciding to get together on Monday for the Reading Circle; they also agreed to the teacheranchored weekly meeting format.

144  Deeptha Vivekanand The following week, the Reading Circle began by reading Chapter 6 from Helen Keller’s biography, The Story of My Life. I had chosen this based on the profound impact that it had had on me as a teacher-educator and felt teachers would be able to relate to the methods and struggles that Anne Sullivan went through in enabling Helen to learn the language. That this was the first time teachers were getting together to read. At the end of the day, I jotted down my thoughts thus:

I could sense a loosening up. They all spoke and shared their thoughts, which made me very happy. After we watched the video (water scene from “The Miracle Worker”) I could see a further thawing of emotions. We talked some more about the relationship between Helen Keller and Anne Sullivan and drew parallels with the relationships that we share with our students. At the end of the discussion, they said that reading together was a good practice and that they would like to do more of it. I can’t help wondering why I didn’t think of doing this earlier!

A Hiccup Despite the promising meeting, in the days to come, almost no one signed up to lead the next (teacher-led) meeting. This made me examine whether I had been unclear in my explanation. After all, they had unanimously agreed to this meeting format, so why were they hesitant? I decided to address this at the next meeting, using this as a point of reflection. The conversation revealed to me that this new task came with its own set of uncertainties. Teachers’ responses were: “I was not sure what to do”; “I did not have anything to share”; “I wanted to see what the others were doing before I signed up.”; “There were too many things to do during the week…there was no time to think about this.” Further probing brought out the underlying factors behind this reluctance: • The fear of judgement stopped teachers from trying out something new. • They were seeing me as a power centre, issuing another task, despite my intention to dispel this very notion. (After all, old habits die hard!) • They were not really used to collaborating – except for minor tasks – especially across grade levels. • The absence of a clear-cut structure for the meetings made it difficult for them to understand exactly what needed to be done as they were accustomed to executing instructions. While I allayed their fears and assured them that there was no perfect time or right way to do something, it dawned on me that perhaps, in my zeal

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  145 to empower them, I had simultaneously taken away all scaffolds, leaving them to figure it all out on their own. DuFour et  al. (2008, pp.  90–91) point to the power of cultural mores and conditioning that prevent teachers from moving out of their comfort zones and look at their practice with a critical eye. They were conditioned to expect the authority figure to help them out. I now realized that this action research was becoming far more layered than I had initially imagined. Every teacher was at a different stage in her career, but what each one seemed to want was a reassurance that these meetings created a space for their voices to be heard and where they could take risks without feeling the pressure of performance. Moreover, it was going to be a slow process, in which my role would be to gently facilitate and sustain the whole process, against all odds. While I was determined to persist with these strategies for my belief in their long-term impact, it became apparent that I had to hold the reins, albeit loosely, before letting go completely. An LCoRPs colleague reminded me that that was how the Reflective Writing course had been structured – a step-by-step building up of levels – which helped us to eventually find our authentic voices as reflective writers. A Positive Development After that meeting, the slots in the sign-up sheet began to fill up slowly. Teachers brought in reflections to share with the group. A grade II English teacher was concerned that it was becoming difficult to sustain students’ interest in the post-story activity, which was to be conducted in the week following the storytelling/reading. Interestingly, everyone else agreed that they faced a similar problem too. Another teacher responded with a sense of relief: “Oh! I’m not the only one feeling this way, then!” This conversation led to a solution emerging from the group. They decided that they would conduct the activity when they had a ‘block period’ (totally 80 minutes) so that they didn’t have to wait till the following week to revisit the story. “Having to do a mandatory post-story activity bores us, too!” said another teacher. They concluded that every story did not necessarily have to be accompanied by an activity and that they must do more of what their students wanted, which was to listen to more stories and read more books for the joy of it. When it was the turn of a grade V English teacher to present her ideas at the teacher-anchored weekly meeting, she noted that she was troubled that her students resisted reading novels. When she posed this problem to the group, other teachers also observed similar issues with their students. Taking a leaf from our reading circle meetings, one teacher suggested that she try pairing students to read together. Another suggested using picture books for older grades too, thereby busting the myth that they are best reserved for younger students.

146  Deeptha Vivekanand As I watched from the side lines, only interrupting occasionally to ask a few questions that led them closer to finding the answers, it occurred to me that my own reflective practice was beginning to translate to the way that I was looking and dealing with the teachers. I was able to let go of control while still being there for them. It was wonderful to see the camaraderie with which teachers were giving ideas to each other. I sensed a great shift that day. Something magical had happened for the first time: • The space had opened up for sharing and problem-solving. • They took on the ownership of finding a solution. • One teacher’s concern had become the group’s concern. Reading and Reflecting Together A group that reads together, stays together. It was with this premise that I set out to empower teachers by nurturing the reading habit. It was apparent that although they were reading stories as part of the reading programme and also using those in the English textbooks for instruction purposes, their interest and exposure in reading had not grown over the years. While they admitted that they should be reading more often and more widely, the mad rush of their everyday routines left them with little time to sit with a book. It is indeed ironic that teachers expect their students to read without themselves being readers! Kent, K. M. (1993) opines that for teachers to feel empowered, they should be given ample opportunities to meet, share and reflect on their knowledge about discrepancies between theory, teaching practice, and curriculum content. Holding weekly reading meets, I hoped, would help me fuel in them the love for literature, while also giving them ideas to reflect upon and engage better with their students. The teachers asked me to suggest readings as they felt their knowledge about books was inadequate so I curated a list of readings – long and short, serious and fun, easy and challenging. The group came together to read short stories, articles and books that aimed to both entertain and inform their teaching practice. For instance, Henry (1906) The Green Door is a story about the call to adventure versus sticking to convention. It urges the reader to take risks, embrace uncertainty, and believe in a little bit luck. I used this story to draw parallels between the protagonist’s situation and the teachers’ own. I left them with the question: So which green door will you open in your teaching practice? After we read this story, I took them through post-reading reflective tasks that helped peel the many layers of the story. One of the tasks was to have teachers ask questions about the story, as readers. A grade IV English teacher found this exercise so useful that she tried it out in her class the very next day in the reading session. “I told the children that I was not going to ask any questions today. I said to them…you should come up with questions for me

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  147 on the story, and they were so thrilled to take up the role of questioning the teacher.” This instant, unsolicited feedback was a sign to me that teachers are moved to action in the classroom when they are moved in their being. Clearly, the teacher was charged enough to try out this exercise with her students although there was no explicit instruction from me to do so. Neither was this exercise mentioned in her lesson plan. The happiness with which she shared this anecdote was proof that small shifts were beginning to take place. I was deeply inspired by Wolf’s (2019) Reader Come Home and so I recommended that we take up this book as a group. To lighten the load of this heavy book, I divided the chapters amongst teachers so that each one could read their bit and present the summary and reflections during the meetings. During one of our subsequent meetings, all the teachers remarked about the difficult read that it was but admitted that it pointed to their own reading deficiencies, fuelled largely by what Wolf calls the digital chain hypothesis. Teachers also began to correlate reading deficiencies in their students with those mentioned in the book, largely contributed by increased screen-time in the Covid age. A grade I teacher noted that she ‘longed to put a physical book’ in her students’ hands. Creating the space for such sharing had begun to open up their thinking, just as I had hoped. The Power of Choice It soon became apparent that the pressure of aligning learning outcomes with every story that was told and every book that was read was taking its toll on teachers, and consequently, directly affecting the quality of engagement with their students. With the nudging that I got from my LCoRPs mates, I had decided to make lesson plans optional. I suggested to teachers that instead of writing detailed lesson plans, they begin recording their reflections at the end of every session. When we reviewed this strategy after a few weeks, this is what a few teachers shared: A Grade IV English Teacher confessed: “Learning Outcomes weigh me down. I’ll be very honest. I was struggling to write them each time. Now I feel relieved.”

A Grade I English teacher, who is usually the most proactive, enthusiastic about writing lesson plans said, “I always enjoyed writing the plans but now I feel like I have more independence. I can do so much more and have much more fun in class.”

A grade V teacher who had begun identifying strategies to help her students read longer texts wrote, “I discovered that interest (in reading) had to be created. I asked students to come up with ideas for their Storytelling/Reading classes. They decided to enact the story/ from the novel, in groups. I could see the excitement in their eyes about doing something different. The spark that was missing was finally visible. The preparations started, the class was given a booklist out of which they had to choose one. The students wrote the script, formulated the dialogues, and assigned roles. By the end of this exercise, students who were reluctant to read long texts had read at least 3-4 books each. Each group’s spirit behind presenting a story is worth a mention. We have to keep changing our strategies according to the age group that we are taking care of. We must include students in decision-making (wherever possible) or while planning activities.”

148  Deeptha Vivekanand These reflections showed me that giving teachers the power to choose how they wish to conduct a lesson can have a far-reaching impact on their professional development as well as their students’ abilities. Maeroff, G. I. (1988) suggests that student performance is unlikely to improve if teachers are not given the authority to set their teaching agenda. The examples above demonstrate that when given the agency to effect changes, they willingly transfer that autonomy to their students too. An Unexpected Twist and Challenged Assumptions The Board of Education (CBSE) issued a notification to schools in January 2022 asking them to conduct a ‘100 Days Reading Campaign’ spread over 14 theme-based weeks, involving students from Kindergarten to Grade VIII. As this notification came towards the end of the academic session (which runs from July to March), we were left grappling about its implementation, as it would interfere with the on-going reading programme which was in force for grades I–VI. While it was not mandatory, the school management was under pressure to align with the directives of the Board, and so the decision was made to run the Campaign. As the Storytelling and Reading Lead, I was entrusted with running it. At this point, the school was functioning in the hybrid (both online as well as offline) mode. Given the exhaustive nature of the Campaign, the Advisors felt it would be a good idea to conduct this as an after-school initiative involving all the teachers – from Nursery to Grade XII – of the school. A quick plan was drawn up at the Advisors’ meeting: • Students would be divided into small groups of 10–12, with each group assigned to a teacher-mentor for the duration of the Campaign. • Each group would meet online once a week, after school, to read together and complete the prescribed activities. But now the question arose as to how teachers of subjects other than English and Languages could facilitate a reading session without the necessary tools to do so. Sometimes, solving a problem can lead to many more unanticipated ones. Since the variables of this initiative were not entirely in my control, I took this to my team of English teachers as a situation that needed collective decision-making. I was apprehensive about how they might respond. After all, this Campaign was another addition to their long list of tasks. However, to my utter surprise and delight, they volunteered to write Session Plans to help their colleagues (who were not Language teachers) run the sessions. They decided to meet again to write a sample plan together and use that as a template for future sessions. The very ghost that the team had somewhat exorcised had come back to haunt them, but they seemed to be taking it on as a friendly ghost!

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  149 I sat up for a long time that night thinking about what had changed. My reflection read: It has dawned on me that they are seeing themselves as owners of the process. They are leading this initiative from the front. The whole school is now looking to them for direction and this is a great opportunity for them to rise to the challenge. They are not being told what to do, instead, they are the decision-makers. My earlier self would have perhaps taken a readymade action plan to them with little or no scope for alteration, leaving them to simply execute it. Through my reflective practice and with the guidance of the LCoRPs team, I was willing to let go of control whenever I needed to. For the next 14 weeks, the teachers enthusiastically went about shortlisting stories, writing the plans, and conducting the sessions. I did review the plans before finalizing them, but I noticed that I was not making too many changes – as before. It was evident that they were enjoying the process. By the end of the Campaign, they had identified a staggering 126 (14 weeks x 9 grades) stories and created Session Plans to go with each one of them. All this while, I was doling out stories to them, but now the tables had turned! To say that they pulled off the unthinkable is not an exaggeration! A Science teacher (assigned as a teacher-mentor to a group of students whom she had never taught before this Campaign), met me in the corridor and cheerfully said, “I’m having so much fun reading with these children. The plans are great! Thank you for including me.” A Computer Science teacher said, “I enjoyed reading with the children! I think I’m enjoying the books more than they are!” The experience of conducting this 14-week programme brought to the fore that this is a clear example of double-loop learning, as described by Argyris and Schön (1978). We tend to believe that teachers of other subjects do not enjoy reading but this exercise showed us that given the right environment and tools, they can joyfully indulge in it too. This has led me to think of setting up a book club for those who may be interested. The fact that I was surprised by the English teachers’ willingness to write 14 session plans challenged my assumptions that they resent demanding tasks and are in constant need of direction. Quite the opposite, actually, provided they have the safe space to try out different ideas. A School-Wide Reflective Practice Having observed positive changes in English teachers through these reflective practices, it became increasingly apparent that unless reflection became the culture of the school, it would be difficult to sustain the practice. Kent,

150  Deeptha Vivekanand K. M. (1993) argues that improvements in school systems can be brought about only when “teachers are able to reflect and exercise their voices.” Inspired by this article, I conceived a reflective thinking workshop for all the teachers of the school, along with a colleague who had also taken the Reflective Writing course. The workshop was conducted at the beginning of the academic session (April 2022) to set the tone for the rest of the year. It was an attempt to sensitize teachers about the process of reflection and what it means to be a reflective person before becoming a reflective teacher. Through a combination of stories and thought-provoking activities, the workshop showed teachers how to embark on a journey of self-discovery through reflection. Although a ‘Reflection’ section (with questions for teachers to answer) was present in the school’s existing lesson plan template, it was until now, treated as a section of little consequence; no serious follow-up action was taken based on those reflections. In keeping with the points discussed at the workshop, the team of Advisors and Mentors (including me) set about analysing teachers’ responses to questions. This exercise revealed that not only did teachers need support in building a reflective habit, but the questions also needed to be open-ended so as to elicit meaningful responses. We then arrived at an altered set of reflective questions to align with the language of a reflective practice (Table 8.1). Every year, the Management gives teachers a notebook/diary to record various teaching-related matters. When the prototype of the diary was presented to a few of us for review, I noticed that the title of the bottom section

Table 8.1  Comparison of reflective questions Before analysis

After analysis

• Roughly what percentage of students understood the concepts? • Do I need to re-teach? • What went well/What did not go well? • Did I stay within the planned time frame? • Did anything unexpected happen to deviate from the plan? • Did I do anything that went beyond the plan?

• What did I like best about my teaching of this lesson and what did I find challenging? Why? • What evidence do I have that my students are learning? • What went well/What did not go well? Did I do anything that went beyond the plan? • What new strategies can I try that might benefit a student who is struggling with this topic? • What are the common errors/misconceptions/areas of concern that students have in this topic? • If I teach this topic again, what can I do differently to help students learn better?

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  151

Figure 8.1  Snapshot of teacher diary

read, ‘My tasks for the day’. Seeing this as a great opportunity to put reflection in a teacher’s daily radar and position it as part of the school’s culture, I suggested that ‘tasks’ be replaced with ‘reflections’. This was taken positively and the result was that every teacher received a diary with a section (Figure 8.1) to record her reflections of the day. With students having returned to school after a two-year break, the energy was high. Days after the workshop, I ran into a teacher who was on the way to her class. As soon as she looked at me, she burst out, “Today, I’m going to write in the diary exactly how I feel!” On another occasion, a senior teacher said, “I’ve started writing my reflections every day. I hope I can continue.” At our last weekly meeting, a grade III teacher shared her jottings with the group: When I entered grade 3, I assumed that it would be challenging to get them to do ‘Paragraph Writing’. These students were coming to school after two years and I was certain they didn’t remember anything that I had taught them in Grade 2. I had no hope that day for my class. But, to my surprise, they remembered the ‘Paragraph Song’ that I used with them in grade 2. They all started singing as soon as I told them that we are going to write a paragraph today. I need to have faith in my teaching skills and my children too. A big lesson I learnt from a hopeless situation…to a fruitful one. That one period made my day and I realized the impact of a song and my teaching skills. I learnt to have confidence in myself before anything. While these are all promising signs, it would be naive to conclude that I have reached my goal. Despite the short duration of this action research, I have had many useful insights that will help me create a robust action plan for

152  Deeptha Vivekanand sustaining this reflective practice. There is no doubt that the practice must continue for several months, if not years, to be able to see real change on the ground. 13.  Sustaining the Practice: A Roadmap When I asked one of the teachers how her reflective practice was progressing, she admitted that although she had started writing, she was feeling ‘stuck’. Her reflections were mostly about teaching episodes, captured in a sentence or two, such as, “Need more practice for article ‘the’” and “Students were unable to answer higher-order questions.” Another teacher candidly wrote, But the question arises of HOW to do it. Every passionate teacher I think would love to improve herself and her strategies to deliver the lessons more effectively. I started this process and was enjoying it to the fullest but the crazy curriculum and the never-ending deadlines did not leave me any energy and time to do so, though I very enthusiastically started writing for each day but could not carry on for more than 8 days. I keep on thinking about what’s the easiest way to put this into practice and actually make a real change to my self-esteem. Analysing the responses above, it became obvious that while teachers had begun to record their thoughts, the quality of reflection could be tremendously improved. They have acknowledged the need for becoming more reflective, but guiding them along the continuum of reflection – from trivial to significant to potentially profound (Larrivee 2008) – is where the challenge really lies for a teacher-educator such as I. While the seeds for a reflective practice have been sown, it requires careful, deliberate and thoughtful facilitation at every stage of the process for it to be successful. Gathering strong evidence of change in teachers’ thinking and practice (so far) as a result of reflection has been a slow process and the short duration of this action research has also been a contributing factor. Teachers reported being unable to focus their thoughts on what happened in class as there was always another task that was waiting to be completed: checking notebooks, preparing the question paper for the upcoming test, correcting answer sheets, coaching students for competitions, writing the next lesson plan, responding to parents’ complaints and queries, filling up attendance sheets and reports, organizing school events, substitution duties, etc. The list is endless! So long as there is an imbalance between teaching and administrative tasks, teachers will relegate the act of reflecting to the bottom of the list. As pointed out by Reagan et  al. (2000), the process of engaging in reflection is an “ongoing commitment to growth, change, development, and

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  153 improvement.” Therefore, it is incumbent upon school authorities to provide teachers with the right balance of scaffolds and freedom in an “emotionally supportive learning climate” (Larrivee 2008) to truly become effective reflective practitioners who can in turn develop the same in their students. Based on my observations during this action research, there is no doubt that the reflective process can be made more robust. Therefore, I propose to undertake the following steps over the course of this academic year (July 2022––March 2023): • Dedicated reflection time: Set aside 15 minutes during the weekly meeting for teachers to document reflections. • Continue reading together: Having witnessed the benefits of teachers reading together, it would be a good practice to develop this into a book club for teachers. • Alternate forms of reflecting: Stevenson and Cain (2013) and Reagan et al. (2000) record the need for diversity in strategies to help teachers reflect. Journaling, audio recordings, dialogues with mentors, and reflective lesson plans should all be considered legitimate ways of reflecting. These reflections must be shared during staff meetings on a regular basis with peers, mentors and the Principal in order to understand and find solutions to the various issues that affect education. • Model reflection: Calderhead (1992) argues that reflective schools and reflective teacher-educators are the precursor to having reflective teachers. If seeing is believing, then this action research has only reiterated to me that I will have to constantly model a reflective practice to inspire and motivate my team of teachers to do the same. Since I am also a part of the team of Advisors and Mentors, who are open to new perspectives, I believe I can gently nudge them to regularly engage in reflective practices themselves, acknowledge their limitations, and let go of control when needed, failing which the aim may well be done only lip-service. • Assess reflection: Since reflection is an intangible construct, it is not easy to evaluate it owing to the several variables that affect a teacher’s ability to engage in it. Research shows that reflection develops in stages although not necessarily at the same pace and trajectory for every teacher; this necessitates the creation of rubric to both evaluate the quality of reflection of every teacher and locate their position on the continuum. I have attempted to construct a rubric (Table 8.2), informed by the work of Larrivee (2008), who put forth a framework of four levels: (1) Pre-reflection; (2) Surface reflection; (3) Pedagogical reflection; (4) Critical reflection to help analyse the levels. All forms of teacher reflection may be subjected to this rubric (through self and peer assessment) which can guide them to think and act in new ways. This will also provide teacher-educators an insight into the kind of intervention methods that may be required to move teachers and themselves to a higher level of reflection.

Criteria

Level Superficial

Expressive

Perceptive

Deep

Reflection on self

Can identify area(s) of improvement but with no evidence to support it; cannot think of strategies for improvement; takes no ownership of situations.

Reflection on classroom practices

Rarely notices classroom issues and if done cannot articulate them in detail. Little or no evidence is presented. Lacks strategies to solve problems.

Can identify area(s) of improvement Can identify area(s) of Can identify area(s) with compelling evidence improvement with strong of improvement to support it, implements evidence to support with some evidence multidimensional strategies it and implements to support it and for improvement drawn from multidimensional strategies suggests simple theory and research; always takes for improvement drawn strategies for ownership of situations; seeks from theory and research; improvement; feedback from peers, mentors, mostly takes ownership of sometimes willing professional learning networks; situations; seeks feedback to take ownership analyses the impact of it on the self from peers and mentors of situations; asks and teaching practice. regularly. for suggestions from peers. Always notices classroom issues Frequently notices classroom Sometimes notices and articulates them with strong issues with students and classroom issues evidence; suggests original/creative articulates them with strong and articulates them strategies backed by theory evidence; suggests tried and with some evidence; and research to solve problems; tested strategies backed suggests simple evaluates the long-term impact by theory and research to strategies to solve of strategies on the self, student, solve problems; asks and problems based on school, and community; takes the experience; sometimes implements suggestions from initiative to connect with peers, peers and others outside asks for suggestions mentors, and professional learning the school system; sees the from peers. networks to discuss various connection between the self pedagogical and ethical issues and teaching practice. related to classroom practices.

154  Deeptha Vivekanand

Table 8.2  Reflection rubric

Reflection on education

Level Superficial

Expressive

Perceptive

Rarely wonders or questions the role of teachers in the education system and the relationship between teachers’ actions and student learning; offers little or no opinion on issues outside the context of teaching.

Frequently wonders or Sometimes wonders questions the role of or questions the role teachers in the education of teachers in the system and the relationship education system between teachers’ actions and the relationship and student learning; between teachers’ articulates thoughts with actions and student examples drawn from learning; articulates various fields; engages in thoughts with simple discussion with peers and examples; engages in discussion with peers. mentors without hesitation; updates knowledge by actively reading journals and implementing new ideas.

Deep Always wonders and questions the role of teachers and teaching within the broader sociological, cultural, historical, and political context; articulates thoughts vividly with multidimensional perspectives; updates knowledge by actively reading journals, calls outdated ideas to question and critiques current practices while suggesting new ones.

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  155

Criteria

156  Deeptha Vivekanand Parting Thoughts Establishing a continuous reflective practice in schools is a necessary yet daunting task. The success of such a practice implies the amplification of the teacher’s voice. This can open a Pandora’s Box of issues that otherwise do not get enough airtime. While I entered the school as a Storytelling Specialist, I write this paper as someone whose role now encompasses much more. In training teachers to be storytellers and through this action research, I have come to understand the various forces that aid and prevent teachers from telling stories and teaching from the heart. It is not as simple as teaching them the basics of storytelling and expecting them to fly with it. Although I began the journey with the aim of making teachers better storytellers, I end this phase with them as reflective learners. The regular weekly meetings and reading circle have empowered them to take ownership of their learning and teaching. The big impact was that they not only improved their own teaching-learning experiences but also contributed to the learning of others by writing innovative lesson plans for them. This leads me to believe that they now have the potential of becoming advocates of storytelling in subjects that need conceptual clarity through stories. Storytelling in education has seen a revival in the past decade in India, but Storytelling Specialists do not always get to engage with the same teachers on a daily basis and so they remain ignorant of on-the-ground realities of the classroom. While schools are increasingly on the lookout for storytellers and storytelling coaches, they often miss seeing the fact that a story can be told well only when it is truly felt. Likewise with teaching. Note 1 A reflective thinking exercise in which participants are asked to share a “rose” (what’s positive in their lives), a “bud” (what they would like to improve upon), and a “thorn” (what’s going against them).

References Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective (Addison-Wesley Series on Organization Development.). Addison-Wesley. Aurobindo, S. (n.d.). Sri Aurobindo. I. The Human Mind // Early Cultural Writings (1890–1910). Early Cultural Writings. https://sri-aurobindo.in/workings/ sa/37_01/0081_e.htm Biesta, G. J. J. (2014). Beautiful Risk of Education (Interventions: Education, Philosophy, and Culture) (1st ed.). Routledge. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. David McKay Co Inc. Calderhead, J. (1992). The Role of Reflection in Learning to Teach. In L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective Teacher Education: Cases and Critiques (pp. 139–146). State University of New York Press.

A Storyteller’s Journey into the Teacher’s Mind and Heart  157 Cruickshank, D. R. (1986). Critical Thinking Skills for Teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 13(1), 82–89. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23474716 DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at Work: New Insights for Improving Schools. Solution Tree. Helen Keller Tribute Channel (2010, March 26). Helen Keller – Water Scene from “The Miracle Worker”. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= lUV65sV8nu0 Henry, O. (1906). “The Green Door”. The Four Million (Lit2Go Edition). Retrieved June 21, 2022, from https://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/131/the-four-million/2407/the-greendoor/ Kent, K. M. (1993). The Need for School-Based Teacher Reflection. Teacher Education Quarterly, 20(1), 83–91. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23475153 Larrivee, B. (2008). Development of a Tool to Assess Teachers’ Level of Reflective Practice. Reflective Practice, 9(3), 341–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940802207451 Maeroff, G. I. (1988). A Blueprint for Empowering Teachers. The Phi Delta Kappan, 69(7), 472–477. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20403682 Reagan, T. G., Case, C. W., & Brubacher, J. W. (2000). Becoming a Reflective Educator: How to Build a Culture of Inquiry in the Schools (2nd ed.). Corwin. Silberman, C. E. (1971). Crisis in the Classroom, the Remaking of American Education (1st Vintage ed.). Vintage. Sobol, J. (1999). The Storytellers’ Journey: An American Revival. University of Illinois Press. Stevenson, H. J., & Cain, K. J. (2013). Talking to Paper Doesn’t Work: Factors that Facilitate Preservice Teacher Reflection. Teacher Education Quarterly, 40(2), 75–88. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43684741 Wolf, M. (2019). Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World (Reprint ed.). Harper Paperbacks.

9 Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners through Action Research Ganga Sundar

Abstract This paper describes the transformative journey of a teacher, from an educator with endless complaints and naive dreams to a reflective facilitator through her effort to empower students to take sustained ownership of their own learning and learning space. A  paradigm shift was achieved through a meticulously planned Action Research (AR). The teacher began to create opportunities for students to assume ownership, rather than despairing over their actions. She worked towards their sustained ownership of their own learning and their learning space. Her newly-adopted approach of studentcentred instruction also redefined her own role as that of a facilitator. By ensuring that the student (and not the teacher) was in the limelight, ample avenues were created for students to explore their own academic interests, which, in turn, demanded increased responsibility for their own learning. Educators striving to operate in a democratic paradigm by assuming the role of a guide (rather than an instructor) can find ways in this paper to empower students to take ownership, so as to enable them to act from reflection.

As a teacher-cum-houseparent of the Middle School, I could not help but notice that Middle School students lacked a sense of belonging to the school. What was even more surprising was that despite this being an alternative school, they passively donned the role of consumers, always expecting the teachers to make everything available to them. This lack of ownership in a majority of the students naturally manifested as mindlessness about their learning space and peers. This discovery triggered a paradigm shift in my own attitude: I began to create opportunities for students to assume ownership, rather than despairing over their actions. Taking this up as my AR, I worked towards their sustained ownership of their own learning and their learning space. My newly adopted approach of student-centred instruction also redefined my own role as that of a facilitator. During my journey, I found that when middle school students are empowered to make autonomous decisions, they assume greater responsibility for directing their learning, and become even more vested and personally DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-11

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  159 engaged with their learning space. This attitudinal change in students can slowly transform consumers into responsible contributors. Their questions are so far-reaching that the same students who may otherwise resist meeting curricular goals now set learning goals that far surpass those set by policy makers. Isha Home School – A Home and a School Located amidst the tranquil surroundings of the Velliangiri Mountains near Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, (South) India, Isha Home School was founded in 2005 by a prominent Indian spiritual leader Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev. The (Grades III to XIII) school has children aged 7–9 years in Junior School and those aged 10–13 years in Middle School, all living and learning in the same space. This multi-age residential environment ensures a sibling-like companionship that brings together the best aspects of ‘home’ and ‘school’. As an alternative school, we adopt experiential and activity based approach to child development and education by employing varied teaching methodologies. Students transit to the regular system (same age in one grade) in Grades 8–13, known as Senior School. The School is affiliated to the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations (CISCE). I facilitate learning for middle graders whose grade level learning skills vary across a spectrum of highly skilled to moderately skilled as per the CISCE standards. Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs) – The Enabler of my Action Research (AR) Can a teacher move beyond mere intentions, endless complaints, and naive dreams? Grant Wiggins, Jay McTighe (2007). If so, what pushes a teacher to bring in this change? What does it take for a teacher to become a change agent? A cohort of motivated educators gathered under the banner called LCoRPs – Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners to find answers to such questions. Mentored by Dr. Neeraja Raghavan, each member brought distinctly different acumen and expertise to the regular group meetings (that had been taking place for more than a year at the time of writing this paper). For me, each LCoRPs meeting was priceless, as it not only added clarity to my approach toward an intended solution but also empowered me to function without the grip of my assumptions. I owe my own transformation from an educator to a reflective facilitator entirely to LCoRPS, for it gave me a nonjudgmental space to express, question deeply and explore freely. Thus, I began my AR quest to enable students to take ownership of their learning space. Anguish Turning into Action Research Like most middle school teachers, I too was increasingly frustrated over reiterating instructions to students, incessantly following up on their daily tasks,

160  Ganga Sundar perceiving them as mindless about fundamental issues, witnessing their indifference toward their learning space and watching them passively sit through ‘discussions’. Through deep observation, questioning, analysis, discussions with students and LCoRPS members, I zeroed in on the following causes: • Students lack a sense of belonging to the school. Hence, passively donning the role of consumers, they always expect the teachers to be providers, neither actively engaged in their own learning, nor in the school that facilitates it. • They lack this sense of belonging because: • Learning is mostly teacher-driven, and this robs them of agency. • Opportunities for them to participate actively in creating and maintaining their learning space are also missing. While reflecting upon these causes, I realized that middle school students need to imbibe the quality of “ownership” for them to actively engage in whatever they do. This drove me to probe the meaning of ownership for middle schoolers. What Does ‘Ownership’ Mean to Middle Schoolers? Where else could I turn to find the answer to the above question? I turned to my students. Through iterative Circle Time discussions1 and reflective class activities I arrived at the understanding that: middle schoolers, like their seniors in high school, crave a sense of autonomy. They are more comfortable in a space that allows them to make choices about what is right for them since they love a sense of agency. They are likely to participate more willingly when they feel entrusted and see value in their choices. Thus, for middle schoolers the term ownership means “Freedom to make choices and pursue their learning goals.” This new-found meaning compelled me to immediately frame my AR problem as stated below: To create an empowering environment for middle schoolers to take sustained ownership of their own learning and their learning space. Pensive Pondering – Student Autonomy as a Pivot After several rounds of discussions with my LCoRPs colleagues and delving into academic readings, the following questions [which eventually paved the way for my AR] emerged. If students are empowered to develop ownership of their own learning, will it automatically mean that they own their peers’ learning as well? If they own their peers’ learning, will that then lead to owning their learning space? And if they own their learning space, would we have achieved our purpose of purging them of their blasé attitude toward it? Ryan and Deci’s (2000) study gave me a clear answer to these questions and helped me identify student autonomy as the pivot for my AR: “When

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  161 individuals perceive autonomy, they believe their action supports their own will, choices, and self-determination.” The understanding steered me toward the complete role shift required for the teacher and the students. The students have to move from being recipients of the teacher’s instructions to the centre of the learning process. The teacher, in turn, has to don the hat of a facilitator creating ample opportunities for the students to construct their learning experiences. Keeping this in mind, I now went on to plan my AR. Sample Group and Planned Stages of Action Research Since my envisioned solution required a paradigm shift in students’ attitude, I decided to implement my AR in multiple stages in my own mixed-age class2 of 20 students of Grades V, VI and VII. I designed each stage of the AR such that it equipped the students with the necessary skills and tools for autonomy, even as it gradually expanded their scope of active engagement with their own learning and the space. Naturally, these logical stages evolved for implementation as mentioned in Table 9.1. With this clarity, the strategies mentioned below emerged as propellers to bring the intended transformation. My first milestone was to identify and equip students with necessary learning skills. Strategy 1: Learning Skills – The Leading Light

It is evident that for anyone to pursue any goal, the necessary skills should be in place. Loughran (2022) asserts: “The success of teaching strategies is dependent on students’ skills—they may or may not have these skills.” It dawned on me that my students lacked the essential skills for them to own their learning. Pursuing this line of thought, I devised my first step – To identify a comprehensive and essential learning skill set for students in Grades V, VI and VII that equips them to become autonomous learners. For this, I worked backwards as suggested by Wiggins and McTighe (2007). Since my final goal was to enable student autonomy, it was imperative for me to draw up a learning skill set as mentioned below and related assessment strategies that were aligned with the exit criteria already established in Isha Home School for Middle Schoolers entering Senior School. Table 9.1  Planned stages of the AR Stages of my AR

The intended goal

Stage 1

To scaffold the students through the process of identifying and pursuing their learning goals – student autonomy. To create ample opportunities to support their peers’ learning goals, as a first step to owning the learning space. To create uninhibited opportunities that empower students to make informed decisions and enrich their learning space.

Stage 2 Stage 3

162  Ganga Sundar Learning Skill set to facilitate student autonomy: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

How to write open-ended questions Identifying the main idea Paraphrasing Summary Awareness about plagiarism Significance of citation, bibliography and how to cite in a presentation Note taking Word study (Vocabulary building skill) How to answer questions How to write an organized paragraph Compare and Contrast Transition words, punctuation, adjectives Media literacy – How to find credible sources How to write an introduction and conclusion for oral presentations How to write a 5-paragraph informative article

Then, I designed mini self-learning modules and activities for students to acquire each of these skills. Designed either as stand-alone modules or integrated with learning units in other subjects, these helped the students to acquire the respective skills through progressive stages of learning, practising and applying. As the term progressed, I could see that their test scores in these skill-building modules’ began to develop confidence in students to move toward their learning goals. Students were independently assessed on each of the skills. Instead of depicting individual student scores, a class average score is shown in Figure 9.1. This was done so as to represent the big picture, with a changing number of students (20 when school was online, 27 after new admissions came and reopening of school allowed it to again operate offline). One of the design guidelines for student autonomy by Lee and Hannafin (2016) suggests that it is important to support students to monitor their progress. And for the students to do that, it is evident that they should acquire effective time management skills. Also, the lack of time management skill was already felt by me, since many students were not turning in their assignments on time. Hence, this became my next milestone and I focused on imparting time management skills to them. Strategy 2: Daily Planner – Record and Reflect

With the aim of developing a sense of responsibility and ownership, the next step was to bring in the practice of systematic planning and monitoring of daily academic and co-curricular assignments. As a general rule, these assignments were mostly designed by the teachers, based on grade level expectations. (The latter were drawn from the education board that the school is affiliated to.) During a discussion, students came up with the idea of a daily planner and also arrived at a common daily planner format. See Figure 9.2.

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  163

Figure 9.1  Class average test scores of Essential skills acquisition

Figure 9.2  Student planner sample

164  Ganga Sundar The main objectives of this daily planner was for the students to • Log the assignments that they chose to work on that day. • Monitor their own progress against each task. Soon, maintaining a daily planner became a routine, and eventually, this very exercise developed a new sense of ownership and responsibility. Moreover, as the students recorded and reflected their daily assignments, they were visibly motivated to complete more tasks than before. It was time for the students to own, learn and share their learning goals, which was the next major milestone to tread past. Strategy 3: ‘I Wonder’ Project – The Stepping Stone

My next major step in empowering the students was to have them execute and experience student autonomy through an independent, non-curricular selfexploration project. I deliberately made available the choice of non-curricular topics as I wanted students to explore freely, without being restrained by any grade level expectations. By then, it was becoming clear to me that when the students made choices, they were more likely to take ownership and complete the same. Also, since this strategy was designed to act as a stepping stone for them to thereafter exercise autonomy for curricular learning in later units, the non-curricular topic became a natural choice for me to excite them with. Thus, I introduced the “I wonder” project, designed to facilitate taking ownership of their own learning. Little did I know then that remarkably diverse topics excited their curiosity! See Table 9.2. Guided almost wholly by Lee and Hannafin’s (2016) design framework Own it; Learn It; Share it; (OSL), I carefully crafted this strategy to support students’ engagement and autonomous learning. The main purpose of this was to create avenues for students to • Internalize the rationale of constructing their own knowledge • Make meaningful choices for self-learning • Set their learning goals Table 9.2  Students’ selection of ‘I wonder’ topics • • • • • • • • • •

Formula 1 racing car Volcanos Indian dance forms Indian painting styles Veena – Indian musical instrument Past, Present and Future of cars The evolution of Human Beings Palaeontologists Olive Ridley Turtles The growth of Apple Inc.

• • • • • • • • • •

Airplanes Spectacles Pomegranate trees farming Shonen manga The evolution of drones Indian regional food and their cultural relevance Anime How do we see colours? The timeline of Dinosaurs The history of football

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  165 • Generate artefacts • Present their learning to an audience who actually view and critique the presentation ( authentic audience) As suggested by the aforementioned OSL design framework, I assiduously guided the students through each stage of the project (See Figure 9.3). After selecting the topic for exploration, the students were assisted to define the scope of their exploration which eventually became their learning goals. With the help of acquired skills and loads of enthusiasm, the students took their first step toward Student Autonomous learning. It took a few iterations for the students to finalize their research questions (or learning goals) for their ‘I wonder’ project (OWN IT). After choosing their learning goals, each student completed the various stages of the project to construct knowledge for themselves (LEARN IT). There was a stark difference between the way the students approached their “I wonder” project and their other (teacher-driven) assignments. My usual policing (constantly pushing them to complete their assignments) was now conspicuous by its absence – since they were actively engaged. Throughout this journey of the ‘I wonder’ project, each student was completely focused. This again reaffirmed my understanding that students are intensely involved in the engagements that they choose to do. This was the first piece of evidence for students taking ownership in my class environment. Finally, they shared their learning with an authentic audience – parents of the students as well their own peers (SHARE IT). From their testimonials (which they reflected on, after completing their ‘I wonder’ project), it became evident that all of them were constructively engaged. For the first time, the students experienced the joy of constructing their own knowledge as they were actively engaged in searching for information about their topic of interest. The students’ reflections on the ‘I wonder’ strategy (See Table 9.5) clearly indicated to me that they were now ready to exercise autonomy in their grade level curricular topics as well, thus walking toward another major milestone of my AR.

Figure 9.3  The various stages of ‘I wonder’ project

166  Ganga Sundar Strategy 4: Students Owning Their Learning – The Freedom to Fly

Thus, my final (and also key) strategy was to give the students complete autonomy to Own, Learn and Share one of their curricular topics. Their jaws dropped when I told them to make their own learning choices for one of their curricular topics – North America unit study – either as a group or independently. As soon as I hinted that they could follow the “I wonder” project approach for this module, their joy knew no bounds and they quickly started choosing topics. Christened by students as ‘NA Research Shorts’, this opportunity enabled them to think about what they genuinely wanted to learn about the continent. Once the students finalized their topic and learning goals (either in groups or independently), they filled in the planner with clear learning outcomes, sources from which they would learn, timeline and their chosen presentation format. To my surprise, most of their own NA learning goals were aligned with the curricular objectives that were planned by us (the middle school teachers) for that unit. Considering that national curricula are often formulated in India by people who need not necessarily have any school teaching experience, this brought home to me yet again the importance of practitioners being involved in policies that affect them. Seldom do teachers in India play any role in formulating national curricula – and now, my AR led me to wonder whether Middle Schoolers could participate in the creation of curricular goals – at least at the level of the school, if not at the level of national policy. See Table 9.3. As an educator, for the first time in my 12-year-long career, I witnessed something remarkable. The students walked the extra mile to construct their own knowledge with minimal teacher intervention. In addition, not a single student missed his/her deadline. Another notable change was the spontaneous integration of subjects. Some of them seamlessly integrated NA learning goals with other thematic units that were being taught in other subjects in parallel. For example, the 5th graders were exploring their Math topics through the Olympics Games and some of their learning goals were related to the context of the Olympic Games in NA. A few others defined their learning goals based on the Novel Study unit that they were doing as part of their English curriculum. This served as a clear indication to me that students can stretch beyond the teacher-defined learning boundary. Each one of the NA Research Shorts presentations was truly unique, portraying the students’ active engagement in learning, through the process of student autonomy. Now all that remained was for me to ascertain if (and how far) they had begun to take ownership of their learning space. Strategy 5: Students Owning Their Learning Space – I Am the Space That Learns; Let’s Make It Happen

It was the beginning of the academic year and during one of our usual circle time discussions, I initiated a dialogue on the practices that we should continue from the previous year. To my surprise, many of my students mentioned that taking ownership of their own learning should be continued, as it made

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  167 Table 9.3 The learning goals drawn by students vs. teacher intended learning objectives – A sample The recommended curricular themes from National curriculum standards for social studies

The learning goal intended by the teacher

The consolidated learning goals articulated by the students

Individual development and identity

How do people make an effort to understand others and their beliefs, feelings, and convictions? Learners understand how goods and services are distributed in NA and to whom?

• Rights of transgenders in NA

Production, distribution, and consumption

Power, Authority and governance

Learners study the various systems that have been developed over the centuries to allocate and employ power and authority.

Time, Continuity and change

Learners understand the skill of sequencing historical events to establish a sense of order and time, and begin to understand them.

• The most money-making industry in NA • What are the challenges of production, distribution and consumption of farm produce and goods in NA? • How has farming evolved and changed with time in NA? • No. of presidents the USA has had • The differences between the Indian and the USA governance model • How do the North American countries afford to host so many Olympic Games? • Which kingdom ruled Latin America? • What are the Aztec’s codices? • Where did the Native Americans come from? • Aztec and Inuit history? • Who were the people who crossed the Bering Strait? • Who were some notable people from the MexicanAmerican war? • What caused the MexicanAmerican war? • Why did Christopher Columbus take four separate voyages to NA? • Why and how did Spain control the most area in 1713?

168  Ganga Sundar them feel independent. I took this as a green signal to jump into the last leg of my AR journey by implementing this final strategy for empowering students to own their learning space. I facilitated a few whole class discussions in the following weeks, in which the students were able to ponder and articulate the answers to questions such as the following: What is the definition of a learning space? Who owns the learning space? What qualities/features do they wish their learning space to have?” As an educator, it was such a delight to be part of these discussions, especially when the students perceived their learning space as consisting of both the physical space (that has resources) and also the inner experience that the space can create for them. This insight led them to further discuss the importance of their roles in co-creating their desired learning space. With this intent, each student began to independently list down the elements that they aspired for in their class. The list of elements ranged from fun, entertaining, relaxing, unpredictable, expressive and friendly to explorative, empowering, creative and consciousness. It gave me a peep into students’ definition of learning. The interesting part of the above exercise was the students’ reasoning behind these chosen themes. This threw a light on their expectations from a learning space and how they perceive it. See Table 9.4. In subsequent circle time discussions on taking this initiative forward stagewise, the students brainstormed various ideas and decided to consolidate all Table 9.4 Some of the students’ reflections on why they chose each of the features for their learning space I chose fun, safe and entertaining theme. According to me, these 3 things define what a classroom space should be. – Grade 7 student. I chose creative because I want my class to get different ideas. Also, we can learn and express our creative ideas. – Grade 5 student I chose conscious because learning cannot be only through subjects. It can happen any which way like fun time, being conscious about soil, nature, water and humans etc. – Grade 6 student I chose unpredictability since that can add a lot of fun to the class. – Grade 7 student I chose creative because if something is creative, there will be a lot of thought behind it. I want my work to be wellthought out. I also chose entertaining and fun. It’s just that if the class is fun I would like it more and look forward to it.– Grade 7 student

I chose safe and expressive features because I thought they really blend in together and cause a positive change in the class. – Grade 7 student. My 3 choices were entertaining, conscious and friendly. In the past, I have felt that the class was boring. So, I chose entertaining. Since I have seen people wasting a lot of water, I chose a conscious and friendly classroom. – Grade 6 student

I chose energetic and unpredictable since I want my class to be full of surprises and energy, not laziness. – Grade 5 student I chose fun, relaxing and friendly as I feel that having fun during class time is as important as working hard in studies.

Table 9.5  The student groups and their roles in creating their learning space Entertainment, Fun and relaxing team

Safety, friendly, expressive team

Creative team

Empowering team

Conscious Team

Individual group’s roles in cocreating the space

• Conduct outdoor and indoor class games • Conduct quizzes on various topics • Conduct Monthly talent show • Music selection for work time • Relaxing exercises to break the monotone • Share current affairs daily • Facilitate board games sessions

• Create a reflective corner and post reflective questions for students to express their thoughts and concerns • Facilitate Circle time discussions based on the responses for reflective questions • Create avenues for students to share their academic and cocurricular skills and interests

• Have the black board ready with the day’s schedule and other announcements • Make creative corners available for students with necessary resources. For e.g. • Puzzle corner • Cartoon drawing • Creative Zen tangles • Dive into Doodling

• Create a Question board and encourage the students to post questions that they wish to explore. • Facilitate Bi monthly Spelling bee • Encourage interested students to conduct mini skill building or exposure workshops for their peers. • Interested students sign up to share the responsibilities of the teacher

• Energy saving – Remind people to turn off lights and fans when not in use. • Maintain the class Materials – Be mindful in using the classroom resources • Environment – manuring the grass patch and the plants in and around the class block. • Contribution – Growing • spinach and give them to the school kitchen

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  169

Group Names

170  Ganga Sundar the elements, so as to identify the similarities amongst them. This naturally led them to the formation of groups, based on similar and related features, and then to defining individual group’s roles. This spontaneously led to their drawing up a monthly schedule by assigning a responsibility to each of their group members (See Table 9.5). They jumped into action the very next day according to their schedule and started conducting games, asking for student signups for various activities, and looking for resources for creative corners, etc. My need to direct, control or steer the process was near zero. The entire class was abuzz, as they assumed new responsibilities and created activities for their peers, blurring the line between the teacher and student slowly. The more this line faded, the more involved the students became. This opened a new vista for me as I began to see their hidden talents surfacing, which otherwise would have gone totally unnoticed. The true outcome of empowering students to take ownership became strikingly apparent when eight of the older students voluntarily donned the role of ‘student teachers’ to mentor two of their peers each – in ideation, planning, sourcing information, progress monitoring and project completion – for one of the school events. This suddenly shifted the dynamics of the class that now had eight additional teachers. I have never felt so much at ease in my 12-year-long teaching career, especially when one of our school events expected my class to deliver around 130 projects in just 30 days. Nowadays, I enter my class looking forward to what the students have planned for that day, in marked contrast to their expecting me to create everything for their consumption. This strategy will continue to be an ongoing and fundamental feature of my class, as it has allowed us all to taste an enriched classroom when students co-create their learning space. Observe and Reflect – The Curated Journey toward Co-creation Not only did my giving free reign to students enable them to construct their knowledge, it equally freed me from my own assumptions of keeping them on a tight leash, to enable their learning and completion of assignments. Presently, I enter the class with an absolutely open mind to see how to support my students to help frame and achieve their own learning goals, and not (as in the past) laden with a laundry list of things for them to complete. This became a reality only when I realized the need to shift my role from being an instructor to a guide/mentor who constantly strives to empower students to exercise student autonomy. Even though this very role shift proved to be the primary enabler, the other enablers mentioned below also contributed to this significant transformation. • The AR Model • The LCoRPS community • The Own it, Learn it, Share it framework for student autonomy To start with, it was very challenging journeying with students who were at different levels of capability. Multiple iterations of learning and application,

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  171 in order to make them imbibe the skills thoroughly, took more time than anticipated. This led me to realize the importance of stepping aside and letting the students’ process take its course; if we step in too soon, we limit the value of their experience Nardone and Lee (2011). Next, the daily planner helped students to continue to stay on course and also motivated them to reflect on their own progress and do course correction, as needed. Even though it took some time (and persistent nudges from me) to hone this practice in them, it took away the burden of daily progressmonitoring from my shoulders. What was even more surprising was to hear from every single parent that this very strategy even relieved them from their daily task of following up with their children on their class assignments. While the students were slowly stepping up to become responsible for their learning, the implementation of autonomy palpably opened many doors for them to understand the joy of making their learning choices and achieving their goals. The students’ testimonials (See Table 9.6) asserted my earlier found rationale that Middle Schoolers, like their seniors in high school, desire a sense of autonomy, the premise upon which this whole AR was strategized and implemented. Table 9.6  Students’ reflections on student autonomy Assignments just give you the push and drive whereas ‘I wonder’ gives you selfhunger – Grade 7 student

I’d like to think ‘I Wonder’ is more convenient for me because, with prescribed assignments I usually rush through it to clear up our To-do lists, but with ‘I Wonder’, I feel like I respected it more, because it was something I was actually interested in. So I spent more time on it and put more thought into the process. – Grade 6 student I feel there is more freedom in our education with the ‘I wonder’ approach because we can explore our curiosities and passions as per the prescribed assignments which are needed to help us learn about something we may not have known already. – Grade 7 student

In prescribed assignments, our teacher only gives us the information we have to just do that and submit but in the ‘I wonder’ approach, we get an opportunity to explore the particular topic on our own. – Grade 5 student

In an assignment, all the info is there and we just have to read and fill out the form but with the ‘I wonder’, we had to hunt for info. It was better as we had to apply more of our minds. – Grade 6 student The difference between learning through the prescribed assignments and through ‘I wonder’ is that there is an independence in learning what we like. – Grade 7 student

I understood as well even without the teacher. When I had to present the topic, I understood more clearly so that I could make a proper presentation. – Grade 5 We got to choose everything – this is the first thing that I liked. Usually, Akka would give us the information for us to read. It was fun and informative to find it all out ourselves. – Grade 6 student With the ‘I wonder’ approach, since you are doing something you like, it doesn’t feel like you are actually doing an assignment, and you are also learning as much as you do without a pressure feeling. – Grade 6 student

172  Ganga Sundar With most of my students progressing well, I had to patiently hand hold only those in need of extra support (around 4 out of 20 students who had already been identified with some learning difficulties) by allowing them to walk at their own pace, and helping them cross one milestone at a time. Pretty soon, I discovered that these students perform better with the conventional instructional-based approach. Hence, the objectives were simplified for these four students, in order to accommodate their challenges. Another major challenge for the students was identifying the appropriate sources of information for their research. In addition, learning to extract the right amount of information kept diverting them from their core learning goals. Multiple one-on-one sessions with students, coupled with constant reiteration of the relevant skills, helped them to cross this phase. The momentous and gratifying time of my AR presented itself when I read this idea from one of the students for owning the learning space. • Environment – Manuring the grass patch and the plants in and around the class block. What can be more rewarding for educators to see precisely the change that they had envisioned? The very reason for me to embark on this AR (as stated below) now stood before me “What started as merely sensitizing middle school students not to walk on the manicured lawns of the school campus led me to delve deep into finding the root cause of their blasé attitude to their school as well as their learning.” Exceptions

Even with all the necessary help provided, two of my students who had been identified with learning difficulties could not quite grasp student autonomy. While selection of a topic and gathering required information was not so much of a challenge for these students, proper comprehension of the information so gathered was something which required help from the teacher. It gave me an insight that student autonomy may not be the best approach for students who face such difficulty (See Figure 9.4).

Figure 9.4  Why couldn’t I do “I wonder”?-Students’ reflections

Turning Passive Middle Schoolers into Self-Driven Learners  173 In summary, though students initially struggled to assume a more active role necessitated by these strategies, with student autonomy acting as its pivot, this AR process took both students and teacher on an inclusive journey to experience the joy of co-creating a learning space by completely shifting our attitude and roles. Conclusion The middle schoolers’ blasé attitude can often be (mis)interpreted by teachers as a result of the emergence of adolescence or a general lack of interest in learning. This paper outlines how to find a possible solution, by keeping the learners at the centre stage in the learning process. By constantly inviting them to participate in making autonomous decisions (both for their learning experiences and also for the space), their sense of belongingness and investment in the school is fortified. They are more likely to don the role of contributors as opposed to being mere consumers. Increased student autonomy can also open doors for educators to examine their own roles in a democratic learning ecosystem and help them realize that the shift is inevitable and beneficial to both the teacher and the taught. When students and teachers cocreate the learning space, all participants are given equal opportunities to explore and express their individual points of view. In a nutshell, creating an empowering environment for middle schoolers to take sustained ownership of their own learning and their learning space has the potential to open unforeseen landscapes for students and teachers to cherish their collaborative journey. Notes 1 Circle Time discussions: ‘Circle Time’ is an activity that takes place in many schools, the goal is for students to gather together and participate in discussions, group activities/games and read stories. These sessions are normally led by the class teacher or teaching assistant to guide the discussions. Source: www.twinkl.co.in 2 Mixed-age class: Mixed-age class, also commonly referred to as ‘vertical learning structure’ or group, refers to a group of children across a three-year age span, learning together in one class.

References Lee, E. & Hannafin, M. J. (2016). A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centred learning: own it, learn it, and share it. Educational Technology Research and Development 64 (4):707–734. Loughran, J. J. (2002). Effective reflective practice in search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education 53 (1): 33–43. Nardone, C. F. & Lee, R. G. (2011). Critical Inquiry across the Disciplines: Strategies for Student-Generated Problem Posing. College Teaching 59 (1): 13–22. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55 (1): 68. Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by Design – Mission, Action, and Achievement. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

10 Building an Ecosystem of Empathy between Students and Support Staff in School Swati Gautam

Abstract When students studying in a residential school are unwittingly callous to the people working for them, yet feel entitled to all the available privileges, are we really educating them? When they regard the school support staff as 'mere workers', and feel no need to behave respectfully with them (let alone get to know them), what is the value of their 'education'? How important is it for students to be aware of the unique situations and circumstances of those who serve them? If these students will become our future leaders, do they not need to gain a nuanced understanding of social structures and differences? How can they free themselves of the conditioned belief that poverty is the fault of the poor? These and other such questions prompted a Hindi teacher of a residential school to undertake Action Research to forge a deep bond between her students and the local community. This paper describes how students began to observe, think, reflect and better understand a group of people, otherwise disregarded (and even disrespected) by them. It may inspire educationists, teachers and parents - who are troubled by students' insouciance and disregard for the spaces and people around them. Above all, the role of a teacher – especially a teacher of language – is revisited and redefined in this paper.

Lives of great men all remind us We can make our lives sublime, And, departing, leave behind us Footprints on the sands of time; (Longfellow 1838) Context of the Action Research I am a teacher and houseparent in a residential school in South India, called ‘The Peepal Grove School’.1 We are located in an enchanting valley, surrounded by forested hills. Although the academics of the school are governed by the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination (CISCE)2 board, our educational establishment is considered as an alternative school (Vittachi and Raghavan 2007). The school campus is both a workplace and home to DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-12

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  175 130 students (7–17 years old) and 90 adults (administrative and support staff). The support staff, who live off-campus, are 60 in number and they play a very significant role that is described below. Being in a remote place, we depend on the neighbouring villages for provisions and services essential for our school community. People from these villages work as our school ‘support staff’. They maintain and preserve the nearly 30 acres of school grounds and 2 ponds. They take care of several routine housekeeping tasks to maintain hygiene and cleanliness on campus. This includes 16 buildings that are used for academics, administration, dining, recreation and lodging purposes. The support staff also run the kitchen, dining room and laundry. They also tend to the school gardens. In other words, the support staff are a key spoke in the wheel that keeps the school running smoothly. The school opens admission at the Upper Primary (Grades IV to VIII) level, and runs up to High School (IX and X) and Senior Secondary (XI and XII). Owing to the relatively high fee bracket, students come mostly from socio-economically advantaged backgrounds. They stay on the school campus, under the care and supervision of the school’s residential staff. It was this residential school environment that permitted me to observe the disturbing behaviour on the part of several students. My Heart Ached

For quite some time, there was a matter that had been troubling me. It was disquieting, to say the least! I had been a direct and indirect witness to the haughty attitudes of some of our students towards the support staff. I had noticed that students seemed oblivious to this group – fellow members of our school community! I found their lack of basic courtesy and condescending behaviour offensive. It made me enquire whether I was fulfilling my role as an educator (Krishnamurti 1955). My problem, questions and heartache found expression in a support system of fellow educators – the Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs). Although the gap between support staff and the students was hurting me so much, I had no idea how to go about addressing it. I wanted students to respect the people working for them. At the very least, to understand the value of those people. Yet, I felt that I was ‘a Hindi teacher’. How then could I bring about a change in the attitude of students? Only school authorities could address this, surely! Yet I thirsted to do something. I wondered whether we should just be consumers of the spaces we occupy in the journey of life. Shouldn’t we give something back to the world around us, make it a better place? I believed that students should understand why the workers are not like us, what keeps them economically underprivileged. Is it laziness or is it our own irresponsibility which creates differences in our country? In incubating the students with such questions, the first step was ensured by my LCoRPs group.

176  Swati Gautam My Support System – LCoRPs

I am a member of a group of teachers and educators from different parts of India (and one living in another country). We came together and evolved as a community, centred on our shared interest in school education. When members of our LCoRPs began sharing issues that we felt were keeping our schools from achieving their full potential, and becoming ‘good schools’ (Heick 2022), I too shared my burning issue. The churning that happened during these meetings made me see that I needed to give students a platform to interact with the support staff. I realized that students are very sensitive and if they are sensitized, they will become aware of the structural and social differences which need to be addressed by all of us. More importantly, I began to see that I could do something in this regard, even as a ‘mere Hindi teacher’. Yet, knowing that mind shifts need time, space and sustained engagement, I began to view my first year of action research (AR) as only a beginning in bringing about a shift in the thought process of students. Framing and Explaining the Problem Living and walking around the campus as they go about their routines, students naturally encounter the support staff through each day – the gardeners, janitors, security personnel, housekeeping staff, office boys, kitchen and dining room staff. At such times, while passing by the personnel, the students rarely, if ever, showed any signs of noticing them. This perplexed me, because they would surely have recognized the support staff – especially as they were accustomed to seeing them perform their routine tasks. I wondered why this was so. But this was not all. I still recall with shock the day that I happened to be in the dining hall, during mealtime, and saw a few students hurling their used plates into the washing area. It did not seem to bother them that the kitchen staff were right there cleaning the used utensils. That their actions had caused food morsels and water to splash on these people was totally overlooked by them! Another incident that I witnessed was students heedlessly spilling and wasting water as they indulged in playful mischief. Ours is a drought-prone area. This behaviour made me wonder whether they were even aware of how precious a commodity water was in our area. I asked them what they would do if the water got over. Unhesitatingly, they declared, ‘The workers will bring us more!’ Could students be so unmindful? And particularly, students who were being educated in an alternative school such as ours? Did they not know the effort our support staff took every single day, to fill and carry water over the long distances from its source to the storage facility? I was also the unfortunate witness to some students being rude (both in tone and words) to the support staff who served them in the dining hall.

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  177 Perceiving this general disdain in students towards the support staff, I questioned them about it. Their responses (a few of which are reproduced below) revealed their biases: ‘They work here because they have nothing else to do’ ‘...they are not doing anything extraordinary…’ ‘…they get paid for the work that they do!’ ‘...they are poor because they do not want to work…” “...why don’t they go and work?” (During Covid lockdown) “...they are sitting at home and getting salary…’ (During Covid lockdown) It was apparent to me that the root cause of students’ cynical and biased responses was their comparatively privileged backgrounds. Krishna Kumar (Kumar 1989) ascribes this key societal bias to “identifying the cause of poverty as the self-inflicted deficiency of the poor, rather than oppression.” He points out how this manifests even in students’ textbooks. Throughout their socialization, privileged students often imbibe the belief that the poor remain poor because of laziness. This was witnessed by me just before the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, and when I shared with LCoRPs members my burning desire to change this attitude in my students, all of us agreed that this needed immediate attention – Covid or no Covid. My AR question was, ‘to forge deep bonds between the students and the local community’. It was conducted during the year of the lock down, when essential services in schools could not be continued as usual. The students operated inside a bio-bubble (Weale 2021), the support staff outside it. The bio-bubble necessitated that students also share in the work. Covid-19 thus provided an opportunity for students to take up the roles of the support staff. All of a sudden, the heaviness of the milk jug was experienced by them for the first time, the difficulty in serving food, day after day was now a felt reality. It was an advantage that accrued from the restrictions of the bio-bubble. The students quickly realized how much had been done for them until now. It was fortuitous that these opportunities came their way without my intervention. However, there were Covid-induced challenges too. My objective of encouraging and nurturing students-community engagement was hampered by the restrictions imposed by Covid-19, which precluded a face-to-face engagement with the support staff. Moreover, I was the Hindi teacher – and I had to interweave my AR into the teaching of this language. Sample and Focus I therefore decided to work with a subset of the school – those students who learnt Hindi with me. This included 17 students in grade VIII and 20 students

178  Swati Gautam in grade X. As a (Hindi) language teacher, I am enthusiastic about authentic learning of the language and frequently employ the strategy of bringing the real world into the classroom (Nicolini 2008). This strategy, I now saw, was also aligned with my objective of nurturing empathy in students. I therefore began by studying the meaning of ‘empathy’. Empathy is defined as the ability to share someone’s feelings or experiences by imagining what it would be like to be in that person’s situation (Cambridge English Dictionary Online 2022). To start with, I just wanted my students to reflect on the circumstances and lives of our support staff. To understand ways of going about this, I read relevant research papers. I searched for a frame of reference for my AR. In his research on developing the skill of empathy, Thompson (1983) identifies the components of empathy development. I have selected five of these components for the purposes of this AR (as the rest of the components were related to the teaching of History): 1 2 3 4 5

Projection into the persona of someone else, Identification with other people, Understanding the conditions affecting people, Representation of other people’s reactions in various ways, Communication (by various means) of other people’s conditions and their environments.

In alignment with the AR framework, I then went on to plan suitable strategies. Planning: Four Strategies to Nurture Empathy I realized that building rapport between the support staff and students would require thoughtful and focused planning. However, the Covid-19 pandemic was raging. Students along with teachers were operating from a bio-bubble. It was not feasible to organize activities that would allow students and support staff to physically engage with each other. I had to accordingly customize my strategies to suit the situation. I present here (see Table 10.1) a snapshot of my selected strategies, aligned with the components of empathy (Thompson 1983). I also aligned the components of empathy with the aims of the CISCE curriculum. Strategy 1: Letter Writing

I first chose letter writing with the intent of initiating a connection between the students and the support staff. Writing is anyway an important part of language learning, but this act of letter writing made the exercise more purposeful. To quote Newman and Bizzari (2011): “Writing to an authentic audience makes writing meaningful to the students.” Writing letters offered an easy way for students to develop writing skills, even as they engaged with

Table 10.1  Table of strategies and expected outcomes

A

C

D

Alignment with aims of the CISCE curriculum (CISCE 2017, p. 5)

Grade/ Number of Students

Pedagogy

Outcome expected in terms of exhibiting elements of empathy (Thompson 1983)

Letters to support staff from students Posters on the role of support staff behind the scenes Interviewing the support staff

Understand and apply knowledge to real life experiences Articulate thoughts and ideas effectively … in a variety of forms and contexts Respect diversity in terms of religion, regions …)

X 20

Projection into the life of someone else.

X 20

Whole-class discussion through trigger questions – leading to the role of support staff. Eliciting students’ ideas on what would happen if support staff did not come to school Discussion with students using a few key questions.

Writing Articles about the support staff in the school magazine

Develop a sense of responsibility towards others

X 20

Discussion of the articles with students.

VIII 17

Understanding the conditions affecting people. Communication by various means of other people’s condition. (for example, through interviews, dialogue, etc.) Representing other people’s reactions in various ways.

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  179

B

Strategy

180  Swati Gautam the (thus-far ignored) support staff. Further, the process would present them with an opportunity to reflect on their earlier bias and on what was currently going on – with the Covid pandemic, in general, and specifically, our school community. Strategy 2: Designing Posters

I then thought of posters as another strategy which would give students an opportunity to peep into the lives of the support staff. In language learning, benefits from poster-making include improving communicative competence through creative collation of thoughts (Chi 2018). As this activity is also amenable to both individual and group participation, poster-making can enable active engagement, introspection and critical thinking under relaxed conditions. Further, after the poster is made, it can open-up a forum for discussion for the students through oral presentations or face-to-face interaction with audiences who may even be outside the classroom. With their textual and graphic elements, posters provided students a creative way to stimulate the flow of ideas. Posters inspire vicarious role-taking when the object is not in front of us, it needs recall of observed personality. Strategy 3: Interviewing

Yet another idea that emerged out of brainstorming with my LCoRPs cluster members was interviewing. Getting students to conduct interviews is an interesting way of enhancing their speaking and listening skills, with mindfulness. Further, conducting interviews can help foster a range of communication skills, including focusing on the topic as well as the speaker, comprehending and responding with appropriate articulation of thoughts, sensing the mood of the interviewee and thereby adapting to the ambience. At its core, the interview process requires students to be aware of what they do not know and what they wish to find out. Interviewing support staff provided a route for students to get to know and understand the support staff. It also enabled them to explore the staff’s circumstances while discovering ways to connect. Moreover, interviews can lead to stories and stories lead to an understanding of the lives of people. Strategy 4: Writing an Article

The writing of the article was a strategy that emerged out of the interview process but was not deliberated upon at the very beginning. Having implemented this strategy, it became very evident that writing draws out reflection on one’s earlier thoughts and attitude. It forces one to pause frequently and, perhaps, also to express with empathy. As demanded by the AR framework, I then went on to implement the strategies as described in the next section.

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  181 Acting on the Plan and Reflecting Letter Writing – Projection into the Lives of the Support Staff

To prepare the 20 students of grade X for the task of composing letters to the support staff, I anchored a whole-class discussion. My trigger questions included the following: How does our school operate? Who are all the people working here? When students mentioned support staff (among others), I probed further, asking: What are they doing for each of us? They responded listing the various tasks being done by the support staff. Further discussion enabled an examination of possible challenges that were being faced by support staff during the pandemic. Thereafter, the students were instructed to write down their thoughts in an informal letter to the support staff. Students completed this over three 45-minute sessions. A total of 20 letters were written to the support staff. Each student of grade X Hindi class composed an informal letter to one member of the support staff. Writing to one support staff member who maintained the kitchen and hostel, a male student acknowledged that without them, their ‘journeys’ wouldn’t have been pleasant (Figure 10.1). A female student wrote (Figure 10.2) to a female staff member conveying how she missed her akka (respectful way of addressing someone as an elder sister). The process of letter writing helped a student realize that “If you weren’t working for us nothing would have been possible.” It also showed the acknowledgment of an earlier bias: “I used to think you are worthless.” I could You work the whole day without stopping. Without you, our journey would not have been so good. From cleaning utensils in the dining hall to cleaning our hostels, you are doing lots of work every day and we all know about this. In this journey of ours, there is certainly one thing that we felt was not good– that was us staying away from you. This must have been very difficult for you too. (The child mentions the time when the bio bubble was in place and the staff was cleaning the dorms.)

Figure 10.1  Letter written by a male student to a support staff member

182  Swati Gautam I used to think that you are worthless, but the truth is that you are our complete support. With all my heart, I am waiting for that day when I will get to see you all. When everything becomes normal. We see that dorms are cleaned and food is ready on time. We would like to tell you that all this is happening only because of you. Now I am trying to remember everything which makes you ‘you’. Your beautiful face and the fragrance of flowers you put in your hair, I remember each and everything about you. You are the best. Stay strong. We will meet soon.

Figure 10.2  Letter written by a female student to a female support staff member

see that they had begun to understand the importance of the support staff in their lives. The second part of this activity involved delivering the (translated) letters to the support staff. Students from the Telugu Language class helped translate the letters so that the support staff could understand what was written to them. However, bio-bubble protocols were in place and so the letters could not be delivered physically to the support staff. Instead, the translated content was audio recorded by the students and these voice notes were sent to the support staff. Once the letters were delivered to the support staff, students were curious as to how they were received. Again, the bio-bubble system did not permit direct communication between the support staff and students. Since I was permitted to meet the staff by following the physical distancing regulations, I solicited their views on the letters that they had received. They said they were pleasantly surprised to receive the voice notes from students. One member who works in the dining hall said: “It was pleasant to receive letters, I was missing them (the students) so much. Felt so disconnected all these months, this gave me happiness that students do remember us.” However, not all were impressed. One of them also said, “The students are a little rude and disrespectful. It is ok, because they are from rich families …” Listening to his/her words made me realize the gap that exists between the two groups which, if left unattended, could manifest into something worse in future. However, the majority of the support staff were appreciative in their comments. One said: “Loved these letters, I have been around these students for so many years and it was difficult to stay away from them, we could only watch them from faraway.” During my conversations with students, they had also said that they missed the support staff. However, it was likely that these feelings were prompted by the many inconveniences that they were now facing. For instance, as already described, the students had limited access to the services of the support staff and were therefore having to do a few of the housekeeping tasks themselves. Yet these very conditions appeared to help students view how essential

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  183 services like on-time meals, maintaining cleanliness and hygiene in the living and surrounding areas were being seamlessly attended to by the Akkas and Annas. This was despite the fact that they could not be seen performing these tasks, as they were operating from outside the students’ bio-bubble. This seemed to evoke feelings of gratitude and also, empathy, in some students. A student said, “We got tired in a week cleaning our dorms and serving is so tiring, I never realized they were doing so much for us, life was so comfortable when Annas and Akkas were around us.” I now saw that the above activity had given students the opportunity to deliberate and understand the value of people contributing to the school community. Poster Making: Understanding the Conditions Affecting the Support Staff

This activity was conducted with Grade VIII students. Before Grade VIII took up the task of poster-making, a whole class discussion was conducted on similar lines as in grade X. I began by probing if students were aware how bad conditions are, outside school, due to the pandemic. I asked: “How difficult is the situation outside? Workers who commute everyday have to wait longer for an auto and buses were not plying at regular frequency. They struggle every day to come to school.” Students responded by nodding their heads and I could see that they were not interested in the discussion. One child even asked me: “Why are we having this discussion? Will this come in the exam?” I even received a few shocking responses: “They were getting paid while sitting at home, what’s the big deal? Now they have to come and work.” Seeing their flagging interest, I thought that a poster would become a more exciting medium to spread the message of empathy. Slowly, the students warmed up to the idea of making posters. By this time, they had been hearing various true accounts of lock down experiences. They had become aware of the situation in the villages around the school. This led to animated discussions. The class discussed various challenges that the support staff may be facing in accomplishing their day-to-day tasks. For instance, the fact that daily commute using public transport was not easy, (given the restrictions on movement during the pandemic) led to deliberations on what would happen if the support staff were not able to come to school. The students realized that they would probably not get their meals, nor would their hostels be clean. They shared the realization that the support staff were risking their own health and lives to be at the school even during the pandemic. This led them to wonder: ‘Why do they (support staff) do that?” ‘Why would someone risk their own safety? Lives? Students arrived at their own conclusions. “… they come here every day to work for us.”

184  Swati Gautam This led to their sharing feelings of gratitude. Students started discussing ways of reaching out to the support staff from their bio-bubbles. They first thought of making greeting cards to convey their gratitude. However, I wanted them to go beyond the surface and think deeply about the ‘why’ and ‘what’ of this burst of gratitude. I also had another purpose. I wanted to share students’ realizations and understanding with the rest of the school. Unlike greeting cards, which are a personal communication, a poster’s innate ability to attract the eye would garner a wider audience for the issue being addressed. Also, posters made by students could be displayed all over the school. Students were thus instructed to deliberate on how they could present the effort being put in by the support staff to a larger audience, using posters. For two weeks, students came to the Art Block during their rest time and worked on the poster-making activity. Seventeen students of grade VIII formed six groups because some of them were good at art, some knew the Telugu language and some were good at designing. All six posters that they made expressed gratitude and were similar in content. Figures 10.3–10.5 show samples of posters made by three groups. After the activity, the art teacher and I had a discussion with the students. He drew out their candid responses, summarized in Table 10.2.

Figure 10.3 Group 1 showed the support staff working visibly outside the bio-bubble in the dining room

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  185

Figure 10.4  Group 2 depicted the various jobs the support staff

Figure 10.5 Group 3 outlined the details of all the indoor cleaning and upkeep by the support staff

186  Swati Gautam Table 10.2  Analysis of students’ responses after making the poster (Grade VIII) Responses of students after designing the posters

Elements of Empathy (Thompson 1983) that were manifested through the students’ experience of poster-making.

I feel really nice after making the poster, I have done something good. Earlier, I would complain about things not being done properly, but now I understand how much effort it takes. I will try to do my work by myself and not expect others to do it. I will stop complaining. I was not aware that their work involved so much effort. They are sacrificing their life for us. This is the very least that we can do.

Understanding the conditions affecting people Understanding the conditions affecting people

Projection (in the role of the support staff) and identification with others Understanding of other people’s condition and environmental backgrounds.

Conducting Interviews: Communicating the Relationship with the Support Staff in Various Ways

Grade X students (who had previously participated in the letter-writing task) took up the second task of conducting interviews. Broadly, students were to ask questions that would help them get to know the interviewee’s life experiences. It was suggested that the interviews be conducted in a friendly atmosphere and students were advised to be sensitive to what the interviewees were willing to share. These interviews were informal, unstructured and conducted in Telugu, the native language of the support staff. Students who did not speak Telugu were provided translation support, by fellow students who were native Telugu speakers. Working in groups of three, students interviewed four support staff members. The duration of each interview was about 45 minutes. The preparation of these strategies did not take time away from my teaching, as they were integrated and aligned with the curricular goals. (See Table 10.1) Article Writing: Representing Lives to Nurturing Self-Reflection

Students took notes during the interviews, which they later used to write articles about the support staff member that they had interviewed. Some of these articles were published in the school magazine. I was surprised to see the empathetic way in which they were speaking after the interview. They felt so touched with the life stories of the support staff which they recounted to me. I could see that the students had developed a bond with the support staff. They were all very emotional about the staff’s ongoing struggle.

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  187 1 Projection and Identiication with others

2. Understanding the condition affecting people

“This shows how one can live without getting discouraged even

“We found this opportunity a blessing. We wouldn't have

in troubled times. She has become a close member of the

known the true struggle behind the Akkas who helped us.

Peepal Grove family; she says she won't go anywhere else, no

They sacrifice a lot for us. It gave us exposure to the real world

matter how good the salary is, because the respect she gets

and made us aware of the surrounding people. We are

here is the most valuable thing to her.”

inspired by how she overcame all the obstacles in her life by being one of the most hardworking akkas.” 4. Self Realisation and breaking of bias “Talking to the Akka gave us many realizations

3. Projection into the personal life of someone

and made us re-think about moments that we

else

shared with the Akkas before COVID-19 hit us. It opened our minds to the true lives of the

“Life has not been kind to her, she lost her

Akkas and Annas. They are the true

husband a few years ago and she raised her two children single handedly. Due to Covid, she has

Extracts from

inspirations who show how people struggle in

not met her children in the past two years.

the articles in

life, and yet they don't lose hope and move on.

When we asked her for words of wisdom, she asked us to study well and dream high. She believes that education is important for us to

the school Magazine

stand up on our own feet in the real world.”

After listening to everything she has been through, we decided to ask her what she would suggest to us to lead our lives. She said that we should always have self-conidence and willpower, and we can do anything in life. “

Figure 10.6 Excerpts from articles that the students of Grade X wrote in the school magazine after the interviews

After the discussion, I expressed my desire to have them write their reflections. They did it instantly, despite the fact that their exams were approaching. When I read the articles that they had written, I thought I should share them with the entire school by publishing them in the school magazine. [Earlier I had not told them that they were writing for the magazine.] Excerpts from the Articles

Given below (Figure 10.6) are some excerpts from the articles written by Grade X students, based on what they learnt and understood about the support staff, when they interviewed them. The subheading above each box connects to the relevant element named by Thompson (1983). The above extracts from the articles capture the emotional journey that the students went through. From ignoring, insulting and looking down on the support staff, the students began to see life from the perspective of the support staff, appreciate their courage and hard work and even step into their shoes. What is most surprising is that the students asked the support staff for suggestions and words of wisdom – a question which people usually ask only celebrities! Researcher’s Reflection on the Strategies I found many of my prior assumptions open to question as a result of this AR. I describe these below strategy-wise:

188  Swati Gautam Letter-Writing

Generally, the letter-writing activity (prescribed by the language syllabus) is perceived as a drag by senior classes, who repeatedly ask why they have to write letters when they can communicate by phone or email. But my worries were proven to be unfounded when I found them very positive while writing to the support staff. An unexpected ripple effect also emerged. I had invited Telugu students to translate the letters into Telugu (the native tongue of the support staff). To my surprise, this impacted and motivated the translators enough to make them write their own letters to the support staff. I could see that the students had moved from bias to understanding through this simple activity. This turned on its head my familiar apprehension to get reluctant students to practice letter writing. All I had to do was to make the exercise meaningful by bringing in a real, live audience! Poster-Making

I was not sure that students would come during their afternoon break (a rest hour) for this activity. In addition, this class was plagued with many issues that revolved around interpersonal dynamics. They were not getting along well, especially the boys and girls who were not communicating with each other. I was worried whether they would be able to work harmoniously in their respective groups for this activity. Yet they gave up their rest hour and engaged in animated discussions, as they collaborated to produce posters. Depicting various aspects of the work of the support staff, (which they had been observing over the year) their posters now adorn the walls of the school and students are often seen clustering near them. There is a palpable difference in their attitude. The Interview

I feel that students’ behaviour towards the support staff was much better because they had already written letters to them. So, they already had sympathy for the workers. That was probably why, when they were interviewing them, they were more cordial and understanding towards support staff. Letter-writing triggered this understanding. They agreed to do this work just before their exam wholeheartedly, there was no need to compel them to do it. Of their own volition, they interviewed them and then typed out the interviews, so as to later write articles on their lives. This reaffirmed that they were already empathetic towards the staff. Also, I was struck by some students who were able to read the body language and behaviour patterns of the support staff. One worker was not able to express herself properly so the child who was interviewing her said: “They are scared of a new situation and new people. They must have gone through so much humiliation in their lives.” It was a very unique experience for me, as a teacher, because I didn’t expect this kind of observation from these

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  189 students. The students actually projected themselves into the lives of the support staff! A far cry from flinging used plates into the washing area, indeed! One of my realizations was that when we give directions to children, they take the direction we desire. We limit the outcome by doing this. I could have been more open and let things happen organically. I did try to contain my enthusiasm but it was quite visible. I feel that the results would have been a little different if students had not been able to sense my enthusiasm. My desire for organic conversations was swamped by my obvious enthusiasm. I need to learn to step back and let things happen organically. Another fear that I had held was that this sort of activity should not become an excuse for students to get away from regular classes. But that never happened. All through this work, students worked willingly in their free time. To my relief, all my assumptions and fears were washed off when I saw students actually taking all these tasks seriously. Once they started engaging with the support staff, the overall experience was really interesting. After carrying out these strategies, I came to an understanding that I need to create space every year for students to interact and communicate with the community. Only then will it be possible to see deep changes in their attitude and to allow an evolution of a sensitive culture in the place. Sustaining the process – which was merely kick started as described in this chapter – requires detailed planning. Sustaining the Process: Extending the Reach I will first expand my AR statement as follows: To forge deep bonds between all the students, teachers and the local community. This is a long-term plan as I am quite aware that it would take efforts and time to bring about a complete change in the school culture (Table 10.3). Signs of change: I was pleasantly surprised on seeing a few signs of change in the culture of the school. This year, on 15 August, the Independence Day of India, the flag hoisting was done by the support staff. [Usually, this is a very prestigious role, and in the past it has been done by teachers or office staff.] Moreover, I can see that a few teachers have started thinking of the support staff. Now, they are personally there to help whenever the support staff need to provide documents to the administrative staff for release of funds. I have been continuously talking about equal treatment to support staff, but these visible changes have now happened spontaneously. Conclusion I was just like any other Hindi teacher in the beginning of 2020. I regarded my role as being limited to the teaching of the Hindi language, even though I wished to effect a change in some of their attitudes. Yet, by the end of this phase of my AR, I found a route to realize my dream of changing students’ attitudes, even as I continued to teach Hindi. I began to see the teaching

Doubts

Plan

Link to the language objectives/activities

Challenges

Students are quite happy to forge bonds with the support staff and community yet they do feel that they may not be able to do much alone. Since I too began with the same self-doubt, I can understand their hesitancy and feel confident of engaging with them so as to surmount it.

To inspire students, I will use true case studies of single individuals who brought about a huge transformation, e.g., Afroz Shah who cleaned the Versova beach (Frantz, 2020) and went on to win the UN’s top accolade: Champions of the Earth award in 2016 for his work. (In the past, my narration of the story during Morning Assembly had an instant and visible impact – as children were seen picking up litter on their walk back to class after Assembly.) This will make them realize the power of an individual. To inspire teachers, I will continue doing all earlier activities and regularly share in staff meetings. This will reduce the feeling among students that they are doing it alone. After sharing the results of the above intervention, it is possible that the InCharges will feel more inclined to join in a small way. The students will directly approach the InCharges to learn indigenous skills from the support staff, thus moving the locus of the circle of influence from me to other teachers. If students seek the guidance and collaboration of the in-charges they will feel included. They may then take ownership of the plan.

Curricular Objective (See Table 10.1): Understand and apply knowledge to real life experiences Activities: Case Study exploration Letter Writing

It may be difficult for me to adjust my schedule of work and meet the students whom I do not teach Hindi. I may have to win over their trust as I would be new for them. I would also have to ask for time/ space from my colleagues.

Curricular Objectives: Respect diversity in terms of religion, regions… Language Activities: Questions to talk to support staff. Gathering information and writing. Write their experience of working together.

Will I be able to let go of the driving seat and let things happen organically? This has been one of my learnings in the present phase of the action research.

It is a residential school and we have some teachers who are also In-Charges of the support staff. At present, the In-Charges are very busy with their usual teaching duties, and therefore it is not reasonable to expect them to participate in the project.

190  Swati Gautam

Table 10.3  Action research extension plan

Plan

Link to the language objectives/activities

Challenges

The support staff and their village community may feel a reluctance to interact with students. They may not be willing to be part of the collaborative process, as its purpose may be viewed with doubt.

To enlist the community’s support, we will use engaging media like theatre and street plays. We will have poster presentations, exhibits which appreciate folk art, music, festivals, food, then they will be interested. Students will work alongside the support staff. This may result in their being appreciative of the tough lives that they live. They may then realize that their poverty is not because of laziness but due to larger structural issues.

Curricular Objective: (See Table 10.1) Develop a sense of responsibility towards others. Language Activities: Poster presentations, exhibits, music and food festivals, Play and role play, Learning and singing songs. (Translated by students into Telugu, thus demanding understanding from the students)

Teachers may regard this as an ‘added task’ to their already overburdened schedules. It will be a challenge to get their buy-in.

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  191

Doubts

192  Swati Gautam and learning of language as going far beyond the textbook. Just as language can limit one’s worldview, it can also expand it. My students showed this to be true. LCoRPs played a major role in helping me realize that I, a Hindi teacher, had the agency to bring about attitudinal change through AR. It demanded much of my time and energy but I began to see the beginnings of empathy in the students. This AR records a small beginning of a bigger change that will be meticulously planned in the coming years. Through the AR, I began to deeply think about the meaning of education. The questions that rose in my mind were: 1 What is the true purpose of teaching/learning? 2 Is it restricted to transaction of prescribed content? 3 Or does it also extend to getting students to revisit their own assumptions/ conditioning about their social beliefs? 4 And against this backdrop, what is my role as a teacher of Hindi? In exploring these questions, my mind awakened to a long-held dream – to bring about an awareness in students of the world around them and to nurture in them a feeling of gratitude for so much that is usually taken for granted. Going forward, my objective in teaching language will be to help students question their belief systems and assumptions and become aware of the social structures around them. Language is the medium of communication – and of thought. If we are to change our thinking, language offers the best entry point. The curriculum is just one of the tools but a teacher’s role goes beyond exploring dead textbooks to bringing alive human connections. I now believe that I can realize my dream: we cannot just remain greedy consumers of the lands that we travel to, but should make the world that we inhabit a better place, by practicing empathy. This experience of conducting AR gave me a different perspective to the meaning of language teaching and learning, education and its impact on the world around us. In the world’s broad field of battle, In the bivouac of Life, Be not like dumb, driven cattle! Be a hero in the strife! (Longfellow 1838) Acknowledgement I want to thank My Principal Mrs. Sunanda Ali who inspired and encouraged me to take up different learning projects and also my LCoRPs cluster member Nivedita Bedadur for her great efforts and guidance to write this paper.

Building an Ecosystem of Empathy  193 Notes 1 The Peepal Grove School is a co-educational, residential and alternative school in India (affiliated to the CISCE Board) located in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh (India). 2 The Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations (CISCE) is a privately held national-level board of school education in India that conducts the Indian Certificate of Secondary Education (ICSE) Examination for Grade X and the Indian School Certificate (ISC) for Grade XII. It was established in 1958. Over 2,300 schools in India and abroad are affiliated to the CISCE. It is also recognized as a ‘Non-Governmental Board of School Education’.

References CambridgeEnglish Dictionary Online 2022” www.dictionarycambridge.org/dictionary/english/ empathy. (2022, August 4). Chi, D. N., (2018) An Giang University, Vietnam. Poster Presentations in EFL Classes for Young Adults. TESOL Working Paper Series, 16, pp. 62–80. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council-for-the-Indian-School-Certificate-Examination (n.d.). From Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination: https://www.wikipedia.org Frantz, R. (2020). https://yourstory.com/2020/03/young-mans-efforts-beach-cleanup/ amp Heick, T. (2022). Characteristics of a Good School. TeachThought. https://www. teachthought.com/education/characteristics-of-a-good-school/. Krishnamurti, J. (1955). Education and the Significance of Life. London: Gollancz. Kumar, K. (1989). The Social Character of Learning. New Delhi: Sage. Longfellow, H. W. (1838). The Psalm of Life. The Knickerbocker. New York: The New York Monthly Magazine. Newman, T. H., & Bizzarri, S. (2011). Connecting Students, Teachers and Families through Writing. The Reading Teacher 65 (4), pp. 275–280. Nicolini, M. B. (2008). Chatting with Letters: Developing Empathy and Critical Literacy through Writing Communities. English Journal, 97(5), 76–80. https://eric. ed.gov/?id=EJ793775 Peepal Grove School Website https://www.peepalgroveschool.org Thompson, F. (1983). Empathy, an Aim and a Skill to be Developed. Teaching History 37, pp. 22–26. Vittachi, S., Raghavan, N, & Raj, K. S. (2007). Alternative Schooling in India. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Weale, S. (2021, June 18). Sleeping, Eating, Studying Together- Bishop Cotton School’s Bio Bubble. From www.outlookindia.com

Section 3

A New Model of Teacher Development

11 A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation Neeraja Raghavan

“If you see a frog sitting on top of a flag pole, you know it didn’t get up there by itself.” Paul Baran (1926–2011) A five week online course led to the formation of a community of reflective practitioners. Busy teachers working full time undertook action research, documented it regularly and even wrote full-fledged research papers. A couple of heads of institutions began to notice differences in the way these teachers were engaging with their students and colleagues, and articulated this – either to the teacher concerned or to me. Long after the papers were written, more than one member spoke of seeing the effects of her Action Research manifest every other day, in her school. What were my own learnings? Over the two-year period of engaging with members of Learning Community of Reflective Practitioners (LCoRPs), I made some discoveries, examined some of my prior assumptions and, as is usual with research, ended up asking some questions. My initial intent of bringing together teachers from different parts of the country had grown into something far beyond my initial expectations. This concluding chapter is an attempt to capture the essence of this journey – from my own perspective. It also ties together the elements of the model of teacher development that emerged from this collective exploration. My journey as a teacher educator started by treading the trodden path, and so this chapter begins with a recap of the prevalent models of teacher development.

DOI: 10.4324/9781032671734-14

198  Neeraja Raghavan Continuous Professional Development of Teachers Kennedy (2005) has identified nine key models of CPD (Continuous Professional Development) and has considered a range of international literature with specific examples located in the Scottish context. These are examined through the lens of support of professional autonomy and enabling transformative practice. For a description of all nine models, the reader is referred to the paper. Only those relevant to the present work are cited here. The first is the ‘Training Model’, which is largely prevalent in India today – where an ‘expert’ trains teachers in specific content or a set of skills. [This is how I began my journey as a teacher educator.] The entire model is driven by the expert: from design to transaction. The weakness of this model in being a one-size-fits-all approach has already been described in earlier chapters and will therefore not be gone into further here. In the ‘Deficit Model’, specific areas of development are identified by senior members of a school’s administration or teaching faculty, and training programmes are designed to target growth in precisely those areas. As Kennedy rightly points out, there is considerable ambiguity in this model of whose notion of ‘competent performance of teachers’ actually drives the process. The common view that the lack of required skills/knowledge is solely the fault of the concerned teacher is one of the weaknesses of this model, as it fails to take note of the collective influence of the management, the school’s ambience and so many other factors that go into the making of a competent teacher. In the ‘Cascade Model’, teachers who attend a workshop or training programme transfer their knowledge to others who did not get to attend it. This practice is adopted in some schools in India too, especially when the school cannot afford to send all teachers to the concerned programme. Obvious weaknesses are the lack of rigorous means to ensure actual ownership by the audience of the learning that they ‘receive’ from the teachers who pass it down. Kennedy quotes Solomon and Tresman (1999) in this regard, by acknowledging that such a model mostly tends to be tilted towards skills and knowledge, but hardly ever on values. Next, a ‘Standards Based Model’ is described – which, though not in existence as quite that yet, in India, can find a parallel in teacher development models that focus on equipping teachers> to prepare their students to score well in the school-leaving Board Exams. Little needs to be said to highlight the weakness of such a model, which is wholly focused on outcomes such as these. The most obvious lacuna is the absence of respect for a teacher’s own thinking, as Kennedy asserts, with its emphasis on externally imposed forms of accountability. The ‘Coaching/Mentoring Model’ is in fact prevalent in many schools in India and it places a great deal of importance on a one-on-one relationship between a mentor and a mentee. While coaching and mentoring share this characteristic, mentoring also brings in a certain degree of friendship which need not always pervade a coaching model. Usually hierarchical, both these models could sometimes take on shades of peer

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  199 coaching/mentoring too. In any case, this model requires two teachers to work together and engage in close collaboration, reflection and discussion with each other. It is therefore limited by the quality of interpersonal relationship between the two teachers concerned. The ‘Action Research’ model needs no explanation here, but Kennedy cites its advocates as emphasizing that this model is most effective when findings are shared by the action researcher in communities of practice. In the ‘Communities of Practice’ model, the two-person dependence of earlier models like Coaching/Mentoring is done away with. It is largely the connections between individuals of the community that determines the richness of interactions, according to Boreham (2000). In drawing a comparison between the nine models, Kennedy consistently points out the possibility of a model being transformative, as against merely transmissive. When teachers are supported to contribute to educational policy and practice, the model is transformative. Whereas, when they are equipped to merely implement prescribed changes or strategies, it is transmissive. A model of teacher development that lies somewhere in between these two extremes is deemed ‘transitional’ as it can support agendas that are compatible with either of these goals. And it is in this regard that the ‘Community of Practice’ model and the ‘Action Research’ model are highlighted as holding the very real possibility of being transformative. With their increasing capacity for professional autonomy, (as compared to the other models) these two models hold far greater chances of effecting transformative changes – and at the very least, of being transitional. How did the journey described in this book trigger a transitional – and often transformative – model of continuous professional development for a learning community of teachers? The Trigger Although the entire programme was sparked off by a course titled Reflective Writing for Teachers, offered online as soon as the Covid pandemic struck, the germ of this idea had been sown during my own years of school teaching. In the several institutions that I worked as a school teacher, I seldom found more than a couple or more passionate teachers who enjoyed discussing their work. Most teachers were simply doing a job. Sincere as much of their efforts were, the significantly low enthusiasm and energy that they brought into their work was palpable. What was also very noticeable was the vibrancy of the conversations between the (few) teachers who loved their work. Whenever time permitted a rich exchange, these teachers (who were excited about their work) would share ideas, seek each other’s feedback and confer about classroom management issues. However, this did not happen often – due to both work pressure and the absence of an established structure that enabled such conversations. Staff room conversations usually consisted of blame

200  Neeraja Raghavan games, with the culprit being either the management or errant students. Rich and stimulating exchanges were extremely rare, especially within the confines of the staffroom or during staff meetings. I recall a young teacher in one of my earliest places of employment, who was as enthusiastic about teaching Science as I was. While she taught the fourth grade, I taught the third. Both of us resonated with the criticality of nurturing curiosity in the minds of our young learners. We would excitedly share ideas, even hold joint classes when our content overlapped and never miss an opportunity to keep alive the questions raised by our ‘little scientists’ (as we called them). Those were the days when letter writing was still prevalent (long before the present electronic age) and I can never forget how we would exchange letters during our vacation about the possibilities that our individual environments (depending on where we had travelled for the holidays) opened up – for teaching prescribed content! I could see that this was a result of both of us constantly engaging with questions like: how can this be taught? Why should it be learnt? What can provoke a child’s curiosity to learn this stuff? etc. [Seldom do harried teachers pause to stay with questions such as these, driven as they are with the urge to ‘finish covering the syllabus’ within the allotted time.] A lingering desire to bring about such vibrant exchanges between teachers therefore remained in my mind, even after I turned into a teacher educator. Afterwards, the camaraderie between teachers who took my course on Reflective Writing brought back my own memories of teachers gaining significantly from sharing their own experiences with each other. And when many participants of the course asked for more such platforms, the journey towards building a learning community truly began. By this time, I had facilitated the action research of several teachers and some of them1 had even published or presented their research. This led to my asking the question: why is research in India presently limited to faculty in institutions of higher education? How can Indian school teachers be enabled to research issues of concern to them? Pretty soon, it became even more desirable to start off – in however small a way – a programme for infusing the culture of research amongst school teachers. For, where school teachers are on the road to discovery and learning, can students be far behind? Discoveries Kincheloe (2001) has emphasized the need for teachers (as well as students) to become researchers especially if the needs of the 21st century are to be met. Bemoaning the quality (and degree) of research content in teacher education programmes, Kincheloe advocates the use of action research as a means for teacher development. Many of the stated merits of action research in this paper – like enabling greater understanding by the teacher of her practices,

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  201 and the appreciation of social forces that shape the school – were tangibly felt by many of the teachers whose papers are compiled in this book. While I resonated with Kincheloe’s (2001) emphasis on Action Research, I had, in the past, facilitated the action research of teachers along with cofacilitators (Raghavan and Sood, 2015) who were themselves not teachers in the school concerned. I now wanted to exploit the power of collaboration by enabling peer-facilitation among fellow teachers who were also action researchers. Having teachers co-facilitate each other’s action research along with my overseeing the process was thus a totally new path for me to foray into. I therefore began with several doubts, like the following: • Can full-time teachers make time for engaging with others in a regular and structured manner? • Even if they do find the time, how well can they facilitate each other’s action research? • Considering that they are mostly from different institutions, how will this hinder/help their collaboration? • How can the configuration of the evolving programme be designed so that they slowly disengage from their dependence on ONE mentor (in this context, me)? • What should my own role be, in such a model? • Since this is my very first attempt at bringing about such cross-country collaboration, what do I need to equip myself with – in terms of skill as well as knowledge? As the path unfolded, each of these questions began to open doorways to possible answers – and also, raise new questions. Revisiting Prior Assumptions I had begun this undertaking with the assumption that teacher development in India needs to be routed through the Principal of a school. Since decisions for investment in teacher development are usually taken by the management of the institution, it was only natural that my engagement with teachers (as a teacher educator) had invariably begun by exploring the willingness of Heads of Institutions to invest in such programmes. Often, a Principal would share with me his/her disinclination to commit to the development of teachers who could well leave the institution in the next year. Teacher turnover being what it usually is, I could empathize with Heads who refrained from using their minimal budget to fund initiatives whose dividends their own school would not reap. However, the pandemic led me to a very significant discovery. When I opened up a course for teachers and sent out the announcement directly to

202  Neeraja Raghavan teachers, I was taken completely by surprise when numerous teachers took up the offer. That so many teachers would take time out and invest their money and effort in their own development (without waiting for their Principal to sponsor them) was a refreshing discovery for me! What was more, it was so perfectly aligned with my vision of teachers taking charge of their own development! Now I began to examine my next assumption, that full-time teachers would barely find the time to attend fortnightly meetings. Both from my own memories of packed days during my school-teaching career, as well as my observation of teachers whose action research I had facilitated for a decade, I knew that time is a very precious commodity in every teacher’s day. Was it not therefore highly unlikely that they would invest the kind of time and effort that a full-fledged Action Research study demanded? By its very design as well as (what I perceived as) a great stroke of luck, it was only the already motivated teachers who opted for the Reflective Writing Course. Motivation has a way of opening up slots of time in what otherwise appears to be a day chock full of unfinished tasks. Where there is a Will, there is a Way – and Time to walk along that way. And so it was, that those teachers who continued to seek such a forum for their own development were the ones who invested in the later programmes (Teacher Jottings and Teachers As Change Agents). There was also the interesting element of teachers unwittingly inspiring each other. I am tired and overworked as we have teacher’s interviews and offline school starting tomorrow and day after… However, when I see Vidhya and Lalitha I feel that I am not the only one and move ahead. Nandashree, February 2022

One tired Headmistress, drew inspiration from a Principal in the group who steadfastly focused on her Action Research despite all her administrative duties. Another Principal who started a regular habit of reading for one hour daily inspired many members in the group to revisit their assumptions of a time crunch. In this regard, it could justifiably be said that a teacher educator’s familiar challenge of motivating unenthusiastic teachers was absent – for me! If at all a teacher missed a meeting (which was seldom), it was due to unavoidable circumstances. As described already, the use of technology allowed recording of online meetings to be watched later by those who could not make it. The fact that teachers ensured that they watched the recording of the missed meeting before they attended the next one spoke volumes of their intrinsic commitment. Therefore, my energies were not invested in following up with absentee teachers – an unpleasant task which usually falls into the unwilling lap

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  203 of many administrators. Instead, I could focus fully on designing the programme in such a way that they gradually disengaged from their dependence on a single mentor. Examining the Place of Power

As Kennedy (2005) points out, “Fundamental to successful Continuous Professional Development (CPD) within a community of practice is the issue of power.” As described already, the entire initiative was sparked off by the course that I offered, and therefore, as Course Instructor, the power to decide what was to be taught and how it was to be taught rested wholly with me. In alignment with Kennedy’s vision of a community of practice that creates its own understanding of the joint enterprise, I gradually adopted the flow shown in Figure 11.1. From the beginning, I examined possible routes to steadily flattening the structure of the programme, which began in a typical facilitator-led (or centralized) manner. I put together rich readings by pioneers in the field of education, and curated some highly reflective Ted Talks to engender vibrant discussion and deep reflection. As described in Chapter 2, for the Reflective Writing Course, I planned and executed every session, with plenty of room for interactive discussion and debate among each batch (usually consisting of not more than ten participants). In that sense, this was more of the traditional design where teachers did not have a say in choosing the content but were free to debate and discuss the questions that it provoked. When we moved to the Teacher Jottings programme, however, I slowly began to draw from the teachers’ own dilemmas to design each session. I now shifted my attention from scouting around for session-content to drawing it from the immediate concerns of the participating teachers and simply providing a platform for airing these. This led to teachers spontaneously staking their claim for speaking their minds and being listened to. For instance, as described in Chapter 1, an email from a teacher (where she expressed her angst) fuelled discussion in the next meeting. So also, another teacher who privately shared her success story with me (of getting a reluctant fifth grader to read regularly) was given the Teacher Jottings platform to describe it in detail and invite feedback from the others. Thus, individual teachers’ voices began to penetrate the content of each session, albeit with a structure that was lent by me. Six sessions in the Teacher Jottings programme that were conducted along these lines opened doors for a more participative anchoring to emerge thereafter. It was only natural therefore that when this programme culminated in each teacher voicing a specific area of concern to her, and articulating her desire to effect a change there, that the first cycle of Teachers As Change Agents took off from a launch pad of teacher-driven ideas. By the beginning of the first cycle of Teachers As Change Agents (TACA I), therefore, I no longer needed to design the content afresh for every session.

204  Neeraja Raghavan Instead, the specific areas identified by each teacher formed the base for me to search for relevant literature, highlight leads to prior research in that area and formulate discussion points for deeper probing of each Action Research problem. In this way, I began using the group’s live concerns as a launch pad for vibrant discussion. Simultaneously, the formation of the three clusters (described in Chapter 2) allowed closer interaction amongst these sub-groups. This compelled me to take on the role of one who oversees the individual Action Research of each teacher. Diverse as their themes were, this inevitably resulted in a wide variety of discussion themes in large group meetings. However, I was now keen to share the task of designing each session with members of the Community. A configuration of every alternate meeting being anchored by me, with the intervening one being anchored by one of the three clusters was therefore arrived at, in TACA II. When a cluster anchored a meeting, its entire design and transaction was left to that particular cluster. Some chose to raise questions of concern and draw in multiple views for discussion, while others shared an interesting reading or invited an expert to open up new avenues of learning. Thus, an increasing level of participation from members was now called for. The intent was to bring in a greater degree of autonomy in teachers, so that they gradually begin to chart their own paths to teacher development.

Figure 11.1  Configurations of meetings in LCoRPs from the start till TACA III

This gave cluster members a chance to collectively brainstorm on ways of capturing and sustaining the attention of their fellows, during a one-anda-half-hour session. This was, of course, in addition to their exploration of individual action research problems, during cluster meetings. Clusters met to discuss the Action Research of their members in my absence. However, I watched the recordings of each of these meetings later and emailed my detailed feedback on the discussion of each one’s Action Research. [Examples of this feedback can be found in Chapter 2.] By the time TACA III began, it became easier for members to ‘cross pollinate’ between clusters. So every alternate meeting was now anchored by

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  205 pairs of members, not necessarily from within the same cluster. Participation was therefore no longer restricted to within one’s cluster, but was now required across clusters too. [I enabled this sort of cross-pollination to pave the way for wider networking, as described in the next section.] Figure 11.1 represents this progression. Thus, while I maintained my role of mentoring each one’s Action Research, I looked for ways of empowering these teachers to conduct sessions for each other – starting with an entire cluster anchoring a meeting (in TACA II), to doing so in pairs (in TACA III). Teachers began exercising their autonomy in this way, as they brainstormed on the best way to stimulate rich discussions amongst the large group. While the trajectory of planning is depicted in Figure 11.1, the writing of research papers by members in TACA III necessitated a sharper shift in my role again, to that of a Course Instructor. Consequently, power dynamics began to (almost unnoticeably) shift back to the way they were at the start, when decisions about the content of the course and the standards that had to be met were made by the Course Instructor. From sharing readings and discussing matters of educational importance (which had allowed each one to be heard and did not require specific standards to be met), there was now a classroom atmosphere – which had been conspicuous by its absence for almost a year now. The pressure of writing a research paper – especially when it is a totally new experience – along with looming deadlines brought with it tension, time crunch and sometimes, a degree of (implicit and explicit) comparison too. As each one wrote their papers according to their writing skill (and therefore required varying levels of support from me), an element of competition crept into some. Not everyone was in alignment with my style of mentoring their writing of research papers. The importance of robust systemic processes that allow for the authentic expression of feelings in an ambience that does not victimize the person who feels uncomfortable – rather, appreciates their honesty and helps them see their way out of discomfort – now became starkly evident. This became especially obvious when distinctions between ‘assessment’ and ‘judgment’ got blurred in a few minds. The common human tendency of easily spotting another’s error but resisting accepting it in oneself was the inevitable experience of some. The same researcher, for instance, who could be cognizant of reducing subjectivity as she placed her subjects of study in a rubric now began to feel ‘judged’ when her own writing skill was assessed. Compounded with this was the familiar reticence that many people exhibit, especially when it comes to expressing uncomfortable feelings. When a few members began to leave the community – rarely citing reasons like their losing trust in the community or feeling judged – but quoting polite personal restrictions instead, the explicit factoring in of such processes became starkly clear to those who stayed on. This brought home to the group the important realization that a community can easily become complacent about the (seemingly) non-judgmental ambience

206  Neeraja Raghavan that has been established. It is therefore a gift that dropouts give to a complacent community for they force members to sit up and take note of what was missing in their processes. As Hargreaves (2001) says so accurately: “conflict is a necessary part of change.” The need to revisit the power dynamics and examine ways of truly sharing decision-making led to LCoRPs exploring a new design, which is currently underway as this book is being written. [In this phase, the community is cocreating its own understanding of the joint enterprise, with me as one of its members.] Our experience in LCoRPs enabled the following articulation of central principles that underpin building and sustaining such a community. Central Principles Central to the sustaining of any community is communication. While that may seem obvious, I would not be exaggerating to say that unless the community member is committed to communicating authentically, there is not much chance of that member sustaining her engagement with the community. Although time is often cited as the reason for leaving such a group, it seldom holds water precisely because, as Hargreaves (2001) points out so well “time is both a perception and a property.” When time could be taken out of a busy schedule to remain in the group, it stands to reason that it was a priority because it meant something significant to the member. When engaging with a group ceases to be meaningful to anyone, that member leaves. If the member’s intent is largely to gain certain specific benefits that she is seeking in the form of learning or exposure – like that of a consumer – then it is inevitable that she will stay as long as those expectations are fulfilled and leave thereafter. It seems almost trite to state that nobody will stay on in any engagement unless there proves to be some valuable take away from it. Who can this not be true of? It is worthwhile here to examine the usage of a term like ‘consumer’ in the context of education, when it is more familiar in the field of commerce and industry. It may seem odd – and even distasteful – to describe those receiving an education (and here, even educators!) as consumers. While the present context does describe an initial transaction of teachers who wished to acquire a certain skill (of reflective writing) through a course that charged a fee, in broader terms, there is a consumerist attitude that percolates many domains today. Education is no exception to this. Educational institutions employ advertising and marketing campaigns to ‘sell’ their services to parents of children who need to go to school. While it may seem obvious that parents (who pay fees for their children to receive an education) are ‘consumers’, the payment of a fee need not always determine who a consumer is. It is not uncommon to find a consumerist attitude in teachers too, who are in fact getting paid for their services. When a teacher works with such an attitude, she is increasingly focused on what the institution can give her, and less on what

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  207 she can offer to the workplace. A consumerist attitude is what we are referring to here: where the focus is heavily tilted towards what one can get out of the engagement with the community, instead of also shifting to what one can give back to it. Such an attitude goes against the very grain of a community. This is in sharp contrast to the approach of one who slowly turns into a participating contributor. This is not to imply that a contributor does not value whatever she receives. [In this entire programme, as already stated, every single member started their journey as a consumer, by taking the Reflective Writing course for a certain fee.] However, by moving into the location of a participating contributor, the member is cognizant of the value of staying in the community precisely because of its two-way process: she sees that the gains that can be reaped through giving to the community are in fact, more long lasting and often far deeper. There is also (an often unarticulated) commitment to the idea of a community in such a member, and it is this commitment that holds the member in the community, even if and when trust in one or more members fluctuates. However, human dynamics being what it is, both a consumer as well as a contributor can feel judged or undervalued and worse, choose not to express that at all. Simmering with discontent, such a member will also quietly drop out because the fundamental (and cardinal) principle of communication has been ignored. Communication, in turn, rests on feeling trusted and being able to trust others. Trust plays a key role in any person staying on in the community, whether the person starts off as a consumer or as a participating contributor. Often, the central issue is the level of trust that the member has towards the perceived leader of the community. If this trust breaks, it is very hard for the distrusting member to stay on. It is for this very reason that the effort to flatten the structure of the community (so as to have a wider base of decisionmakers) needs to begin very early on in the building of the community. The distribution of trust in more than one person allows for a greater possibility of any member staying on in the community. If there is a single leader, that person is in the precarious position of being responsible for maintaining trust levels in the group, with absolutely no guarantee that doubts will ever be expressed. Indeed, they seldom are expressed of their own – they have to be drawn out. It is for this reason that robust systems (like circle time, or other routines that are designed to draw out human emotions in a non-judgmental ambience) are vital for sustaining any community. Wald & Castlebury (2000) offer several effective activities for bringing this about. [Here, it is important to note that since this entire engagement was wholly online, the obvious advantages that face-to-face interactions offer were missing and could well have impeded or slowed down the building of trust.] In the quicksands of human dynamics, however, a member can frequently shift her location from that of a consumer to a contributor, and back again, depending upon that member’s moment-to-moment experience of being trusted and her ability to trust others in the community. From communicating, the

208  Neeraja Raghavan member can slowly begin to be a participating contributor, by way of sharing insights, readings, pedagogies or any matter that is likely to be of interest to others in the community. In fact, a contributor could even bring to the community some teaching practice of value in her own workspace, for members to take back into their schools. What, one may ask, is the difference between contributing and communicating? After all, even articulation of one’s views can be regarded as a contribution, in some sense. In this learning community, the articulation of views, thoughts and perspectives is regarded as communication, while enabling a new learning (or enabling its possibility) is regarded as a contribution. Both these – communication and contribution – can be done individually. They need not require a partner. It is only when a member collaborates with another that a community begins to form. Hargreaves (2001) rightly bemoans the “conceptual woolliness of collaboration,” and so an explanation of how the term is being used here is necessary. Here, collaboration could be of any form: oral presentation, book discussion, triggering a debate, etc. – it is only important that the effort is joint, not that of only one individual. As Hargreaves (2001) stresses, it is important that collaboration is not taken over and manipulated by administrators (here, the leader of the community), for it then becomes a mandate. Finally, the collaboration could even blossom into co-creation of some new knowledge or community-building practice. In order to continue to be a member of a professional learning community, it is vital that a member practises at least three of these four modes of engagement. Restricting oneself to communicating and contributing is insufficient to forge links with others in the community. Figure 11.2 is an attempt to capture this set of four modes of engagement. [Allan (2008) has a more detailed representation of the framework for knowledge creation within a community of practice.]

Figure 11.2  The four modes of engagement for a member of a learning community

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  209 Against this backdrop, a more detailed scrutiny of the changing dynamics of such a community are examined in the next section. In the following attempt to describe the unfolding of the current model of teacher professional development, the reader may please bear in mind that there is bound to be a degree of subjectivity in any such narration. The LCoRPs Model of Teacher Development From teachers who experienced isolation (with some even near burnout during the pandemic), this group turned into a set of energized and insightful teacher-researchers that formed LCoRPs. On more than one occasion, I received testimonials from Principals of the schools where some of the teachers in this community worked, confirming the shift that they had seen in the teacher concerned, as a result of her engaging with this community. [“I don’t know exactly what you are all doing,” said one, “but please continue doing it. It is producing noticeable results.”] Beginning by tapping into the urge to learn something new, (viz. Reflective Writing), the programme first brought together teachers who shared an interest in their own development. [It necessarily excluded those who did not look beyond the directives of their own management for professional development.] Thus, the thread that bound all members at the start was their shared intent to learn Reflective Writing from the Course Instructor, and therefore, as in any fee-paying transaction, the initial location of every member was that of a consumer. The natural route traversed by any consumer is payment of the requisite fee in expectation of delivery of the paid-for service. Depending upon the degree of satisfaction experienced by the consumer with the service received, the relationship with the service provider will sustain or break. Illich (2009) uses the term ‘consumer’ in a way that brings out the manner in which the tool that is used by the consumer often enslaves him/her. When machines became more and more powerful, he declares that the role of persons veers increasingly towards that of ‘a mere consumer’. Defining conviviality as “individual freedom realized in personal interdependence” Illich advocates a distributive and participatory justice where convivial tools allow each person to “enrich the environment with the fruits of his or her own vision.” While examples of tools in the realm that Illich’s work is positioned vary from factories to cars, brooms to building elements, he goes on to include decisions also under the bracket of tools. Decisions that are distributive and participatory are therefore convivial tools too. When is a tool deemed to be convivial? When it can be easily used by anybody and its purpose of use can be chosen by the user. An example of such a tool in LCoRPs could be the facility of watching a video recording of a session if one had to miss it for unavoidable reasons. The intent behind making such a provision was to draw out participation from the absentee even if it was after the meeting: by way of sharing of views, seeking clarity or even offering ideas. However, as Illich (2009) points out, any tool can soon

210  Neeraja Raghavan turn destructive if it defeats the very purpose for which it was made. Here, if a member finds that her engagement with the community has ceased to be meaningful but is firmly ensconced in the position of a consumer (and therefore, still seeks gains from the missed discussion), her resultant practice of consistently missing meetings so as to watch recordings later totally defeats the original intent. For one, the tool has enslaved this consumer with her total dependence on the recording alone. For another, this privilege cannot be simultaneously extended to everyone, and therefore it is not a distributive form of justice, and neither is it participatory – for obvious reasons. This is an example of the means turning into ends, and resulting in a practice that can become a deterrent to community building. Thus, a member of the group who is solely focused on receiving whatever it is that she set out to gain, has located herself firmly in the position of a consumer. This is perfectly reasonable, as a fee was paid in expectation of a specific deliverable. However, for a learning community to evolve – as it did – a shift from this location to that of a contributor was necessary, and it happened, as the research papers in the previous section testify. In Illich’s words, they began to “enrich the environment with the fruits of his or her own vision.” From learning how to write reflectively, the members began to contribute significantly to each other’s growth in many ways – like suggesting appropriate resources or strategies, questioning the way another had framed her Action Research problem (thus compelling the researcher concerned to think more deeply), spotting assumptions that were unwittingly being made by the researcher, and so on. [That such a two-way engagement was rendered easier in a non-competitive environment where everyone worked in a different school has already been pointed out in an earlier chapter.] Both collaboration and co-creation found expression in LCoRPs. The action research conducted by members of this group resulted in the papers that you found in the previous section. The turbulence resulting from a few members leaving the community energized a few to step in and try to design ways of sustaining the community. From their initial location of a consumer who joins purely for certain expectations to be met, these members moved to revisiting their own expectations, analysing what was probably missing in the community as a whole and jointly working to address these gaps. As part of their self-selected mandate, they also began to explore how a consumer mindset (that sees no role for herself in addressing such gaps) could be supported to shift into that of a contributor – and perhaps, even that of a co-creator. Again, aligning with Illich (2009), the tools of conviviality in the present context would be robust systems that allow members to freely express their dissatisfaction or sense of inadequacy – if any – with the prevalent forms of justice. Systems and structures need to be set up that allow for a deeper understanding by all members of distributive and participatory justice. Without such processes, a distributive and participatory form of justice will remain

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  211 a pipe dream. As such processes begin to be put in place, there are higher chances of consumers slowly metamorphosing into contributors. In LCoRPs, this process of moving from being a consumer (who expects to receive) to a participating contributor (who receives as well as gives) unfolded through the emergence of various aspects of each teacher in the group. What were the different facets of the teachers that emerged through this engagement? The Multiple Facets of a Teacher’s Persona Having joined the course, the participants were led through a trajectory that has already been described in terms of content, but will now be mapped with reference to outcomes. [In order to align the description with a pictorial depiction that is to follow, certain key terms are being highlighted.] The course began by compelling teachers to be articulate about their views and voice their thoughts – something that is seldom possible in the day-today rush of a school where the teacher works. While teachers seem to be amongst the most listened-to of all professionals (with a captive audience that sits and hears – perhaps even listens to! – all that they have to say), it is seldom that their opinions (on important matters in education) are sought out by more than a few. Thus, the articulate teacher began to be heard. The reluctance to risk being shot down by louder voices in the teaching staff is often the root cause for a teacher’s reticence in her own school. Having joined such a community voluntarily, there was a whole different purpose for being present here, and therefore, this risk was minimal (if not absent) for most members. Slowly, as one member voiced her concerns about, for instance, the way staff meetings were held in her school, another shared ways in which they were conducted in her institution. Often, the true intent of education was examined through rich debate and discussion, which demanded articulation from members. Many found that fellow educators were eager to hear their views and so the listening teacher as well as the listened-to teacher emerged. It was refreshing for most to discover a platform that allowed them to voice their views on matters that affected their daily working lives and also to listen to what fellow educators had to say on the same issues. Within the same institution, subtle power play often prevents the ‘senior’ or ‘more experienced’ teacher from listening with full attention to the views of a new teacher. It was found here that that sort of impediment could be more easily circumvented. Listening with trust to a less experienced teacher can often turn around many assumptions in the mind of a veteran teacher. Slowly, as assignments had to be turned in after doing the prescribed readings each week, or as research papers had to be read as part of the literature search for writing a paper, the teacher who reads for the joy of it came to the fore, as did the teacher who writes to express her thoughts and discoveries. Sad though true, many teachers are usually so caught up with reading the prescribed content while they prepare their lessons, that they catch up on

212  Neeraja Raghavan their reading for pleasure (if at all) only during vacations. Writing is normally confined to writing out student reports and designing worksheets or tests. Writing to express one’s thoughts and then to shape one’s thinking is something that many teachers (re)discovered during the Reflective Writing course and some even sustained thereafter. Sharing of assignments and work-in-progress of Action Research during online sessions opened up the minds of many to varied perspectives, even as it often validated their own. The loneliness of fighting individual battles lessened when each one resonated with the struggles and challenges of another. Now that there was a forum that demanded listening to others and to oneself, the valued teacher surfaced. It was reassuring to find that one’s contributions were not only acknowledged but also valued. Especially during the pandemic, the (now increasingly) isolated teacher felt herself breaking free of the shackles of isolation. Slowly, with the programmes titled Teacher Jottings and Teachers As Change Agents, the discussant, the debater, the thinking teacher, the explorer and finally, the researcher started finding a space for expression. Many of the research papers in the previous section testify to the power of engaged discussion and honest critiquing that the platform offered. In a few cases, the member was so convinced of the purpose and impact of the processes that she experienced in LCoRPs, that she began to try some of them out in her own workplace. This brought out the purposeful teacher who then turned into a convinced teacher. Finally, a few teachers who valued a professional community so highly that they themselves began to aspire to be community builders also emerged. Table 11.1 is an attempt to map the specific facet of a teacher that surfaced to the emergent principles. No doubt the common intent that sparked off this cohesion was each teacher’s own motivation to grow. None of this would have been possible, however, without a certain level of trust that was shared between participants. This is not to suggest that the trust did not vary in time or across participants, but a sustainable threshold level was absolutely necessary if a teacher had to sustain her engagement with the group. Table 11.1 The principles of such a community of practice that emerged from different facets of the teacher that were seen Facet that emerged

Implied principle

Articulate teacher

A platform to solicit personal views and opinions is necessary, if free expression from teachers is desired. A safe space where teachers can listen to each other lessens their sense of isolation, increases self-confidence, and draws out even the introverted teacher. Feeling listened to by colleagues, increases the chances of the teacher listening to others as well.

Listening teacher Listened-to teacher

(Continued)

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  213 Table 11.1 (Continued) Facet that emerged

Implied principle

Validated teacher

Knowing that one’s views are respected and valued deepens the sense of purpose for one who is almost always in the implementation mode. (Mostly implementing what others decide as necessary.) Reading for the joy of it becomes even more pleasurable when it is shared with fellows.

Teacher who reads (for pleasure and discusses the reading with fellow teachers) Teacher who writes (and reflects on her reading) Vulnerable/uncertain teachers Reflective teachers Valued teacher

Questioning teachers Engaged teachers Purposeful teacher Convinced teacher Insightful teacher Teacher who values a professional community Teacher as researcher Teacher as reviewer The judged teacher The teacher who silently wants to get away from the group

Writing declutters the mind. Writing shapes thought. A platform that allows free sharing of uncertainties and vulnerabilities nurtures self-confidence. The experience of reflecting together as teachers opens up possibilities that were formerly not visible to a teacher. Being listened to and appreciated by fellow teachers strengthens each teacher’s own perception of the value that she adds to her workspace. Normally expected to meet certain standards, and judged if not meeting them, this is a refreshing change. The urge to identify and question assumptions, existing practices and beliefs opens up when there is a supportive space. A voluntary forum that draws out each teacher’s opinions nurtures engaged teachers. The very real possibility of effecting a change opens up. This brings in a new sense of purpose. When a teacher experiences the value of a process in the group, she feels compelled to try it out in her own space as well. New insights slowly start burgeoning as the teacher soaks in such an ambience. The absence of such a forum within a teacher’s workspace now becomes more starkly evident, and therefore, such a forum is seen as precious. When a teacher engages in research, it results in the deepening of rigor in her daily practice and a sense of empowerment. Reviewing each other’s work in an environment that supports appreciative enquiry enriches both the reviewer as well as the person whose work is being reviewed. Communication systems need to be put in place for voicing of resentment, expression of feelings of hurt and airing of conflicts. Silence can be interpreted in multiple ways. Unless the community positions open and free communication centre stage, sustaining a community is not likely.

214  Neeraja Raghavan The See-Saw of Trust and Doubt With trust and doubt as the determining lever, the swinging of a member’s location from that of a consumer to a contributor (and back) is depicted in Figure 11.3, which shows the overall process that unfolded in this model of teacher development. In the figure, the participant veers increasingly towards being a consumer along the left side of the X-Axis, and to being a contributor to its right. The Y-Axis therefore shows increasing levels of trust upwards and increasing levels of doubt downwards. Although some of the points on the graph may seem to be self-explanatory, it is important to note that none is a frozen location for any member. It can happen that the same person can be located in one quadrant at one time and in another at a later point of time. In fact, movement of a member’s location across quadrants (and even within a quadrant) is as inevitable as are typical ups and downs in any human relationship. The four quadrants (starting with the top right and moving clockwise from there) are explained below: 1 The Trusting Contributor: A member of a professional learning community who is a trusting contributor believes in the idea of a community and values it. Further, she feels trusted and is sufficiently sure (of herself as well

Figure 11.3 The role played by trust and doubt (Y-Axis) in determining the manifestation of various facets of the community member who is a consumer or a contributor (X-Axis)

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  215 as) of the decision-makers of the community to be present and articulate in meetings, to listen and also feel listened-to and express her angst if she does not feel listened to. As her articulation gets stronger, so does her trust – provided she does not feel silenced by others present. If her level of trust in the community remains low, or drops, however, she slips down into the second quadrant and eventually leaves the community. Sometimes, changing priorities or personal exigencies may compel her to drop out, as she no longer trusts her own ability to remain as a contributing member of the community. Increasing levels of trust on the other hand, permit such a member to blossom into a thinker, debater, discussant, researcher and reviewer. From one who began with a clear idea of her rights as a consumer, she can turn into one who also feels responsible for keeping the community alive. If the member is sufficiently convinced of the impact of the processes here, she may even turn into a co-creator or a community builder in her own space. 2 The Doubting Contributor: Such a member values the idea of a community but has serious doubts if the present cohort can really turn into one. Believing in the power of a community, she is silently present in meetings and makes a few tentative contributions as well. Her stance is along the lines of: “Let me try this out, it may work.” Slowly, she waits and watches if the existing dynamics in the community merit her trust and her contribution. If that is indeed so, she finds her trust being reinforced and slowly moves into the first quadrant, but can easily slip down again whenever she loses trust. However, when her trust in the decision makers of the community remains inadequate for a sustained period, she is left with no choice but to leave the community as it has ceased to hold any meaning for her. Alternatively, while her trust may not have weakened significantly, she doesn’t feel enough of a sense of ownership to address the perceived gaps. She is willing to sustain engagement and contribute to the community as long as things sail smoothly, but does not feel the need (or equipped) to help build its foundation. 3 The Doubting Consumer: Starting off with a minimal level of trust that her expectations will be met at least partially, this member is present but remains silent most of the time. She tentatively reaches out whenever she thinks she can get her needs met, but seldom feels inclined to do more than that. Her guardedness makes her weigh her options and wait and watch to see if the people here truly walk their talk. Her belief in such a community (if present) is notional, like that of a fairy tale, especially if her doubts slowly harden into scepticism. As and when her doubts get mitigated, she begins to feel a wee bit of trust and if processes in the community allow that to grow, she may even move up to the fourth quadrant. But if her doubts in the members and/or decision-makers of the community prevent her from voicing her discomfort, she stays away from meetings whenever she can and finally leaves the group. 4 The Trusting Consumer: With full trust that her expectations will be met, this member is present in most meetings and eager to take away valuable

216  Neeraja Raghavan learnings. Acquiring new skills is also something that excites her and she stays in the group which promises her this. She is therefore present and articulate as long as her trust is not broken. After her expectations are met and she takes away something meaningful, she no longer finds it necessary to remain in the group as she joined it only to meet certain needs. It may also happen that her experience in the community now causes a shift in her location to the first or second quadrant, by her slowly turning into a contributor. However, if she is disappointed with the outcomes of the programme that she signed up for, she articulates it on the days that she trusts that she will be listened to. If her faith is borne out, she stays. If not, she too finally leaves. This diversity showed up even in as small a cohort as LCoRPs. What then, to speak of larger networks? How can professional communities mushroom across wider spaces? What are the ways in which power can be distributed and participative? Although I was focused only on building a small community right from the start, I now turned to the question: If members of LCoRPs who aspire to be community builders themselves need some framework, where can they turn for guidance? Thus far, I had been unaware of the way in which my intent of gradually flattening the configuration of this initiative was mirroring what (digital) networking experts had thought through decades ago. Networks and Their Evolution In the present age of the Internet, our understanding of networks and networking is probably higher than it ever was. However, we owe this ease of networking to many pioneers, one of whom is Paul Baran. During the 1960’s, he helped develop the building blocks of what we now call the Internet. While his work was largely on distributed communication networks (Baran 1964) in RAND, USA, the three types of networks that he summarized are shown in Figure 11.4. The first configuration (A) is a familiar centralized model, which I followed for the Reflective Writing Course. As was pointed out by the proposer of this model, the weakness of the centralized model is that it is totally dependent on the centre. Should the centre snap, the entire network will crumble. Obvious as this was to me, I strove to bring about a more decentralized structure in Teacher Jottings, and even more so by the beginning of TACA I. The second (B) configuration allowed for a certain degree of decentralization, with clusters that were formed and that met separately (in addition to the large group meetings of TACA I and Teacher Jottings that were anchored by me but had their content drawn from members’ concerns). Thus, total dependence on the centre was absent in this cycle of the programme; nevertheless, there was still a high degree of dependence. [In Baran’s own words “complete reliance on a single point is not always required” in a network.]

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  217

Figure 11.4  Three types of networks (Reproduced with permission from https:// www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM3420.html. Introduction to Distributed Communications Networks | RAND) Networks | RAND)

This model also calls for a shared holding of responsibility and demands a level of clarity of each member’s role. By TACA III, although the degree of dependence had lessened, the configuration still remained more or less as depicted in (B). Clusters loosened their grip on each other and began collaborating in pairs across clusters, so as to conceptualize and anchor sessions. With peer feedback of these sessions, a critical review of the level of engagement and stimulation that each session offered became a real possibility. This deepened the thirst in some members for such a sustained group and many members expressed the desire to keep it going even after research papers were written and compiled. Liacas (2019), who employed this description of digital networks to analyse people-powered campaigns, describes the main difference between decentralized (B) and distributed (C) networks as follows: decentralized networks allow self-emergence of local groups that are all sparked by a common trigger for social change. While these local groups share a common purpose and philosophy, they also enjoy a great deal of autonomy. Liacas (2019) points out that such networks are hard to maintain without active effort from all the nodes of the system. Baran (1964) reaffirms that since the destruction of even a few nodes in the decentralized network can cause communication to break down, it is very important that distributed networks are built. Distributed networks [as shown in (C)] maintain a connection with a central catalyst, even as they allow a certain degree of autonomy within each cluster. Thus, their autonomy is combined with a constant touching base with the central catalyst, so as to strategize and act within an overall framework that is designed by the central catalyst.

218  Neeraja Raghavan At present, LCoRPs is evolving further into a small decentralized network. At the time of writing this book, I have disengaged further, and LCoRPs is donning a new avatar: being run by different members of the existing group, by rotation, with myself as one of its ten members. The success of this twoyear-old community allows me to suggest that if, to begin with, small groups like LCoRPs can mushroom across the country – aligned with the decentralized model (B) – there is no limit to the possibilities that such networking can open up. While each decentralized network will have its own centre – and therefore, unique objectives and strategies – the broadly common aims of education can link these groups to each other. The self-arising element of such group formation necessitates its constitution by motivated teachers, as already pointed out. Admittedly, this is the limitation of such a model. I shared with the group my urge to see this effort upscaled thus: I just came out of a lovely discussion with Madhusree. Vidhya has inspired her to read FLUID as it is so very relevant to her AR. It is so exciting to see the way each member is impacting the other! Can you imagine what would happen if such communities began to form all over the country? Where would we be? What, then, would a distributed network (C) look like, in this regard? If there is a central catalyst or a catalyzing organization that conceptualizes an implementable framework, individual teachers across the country could reach out and connect with each other, in alignment with that framework. Here, the reader’s attention is drawn to a very early reference in this book (see Chapter 1) of the intent that drives different models of teacher development. To recapitulate briefly, there are three kinds of knowledge that CochranSmith and Lytle (1999) have described: 1 knowledge for practice, 2 knowledge in practice and 3 knowledge of practice. Knowledge for practice refers to the content and theory that a teacher acquires during her own education and her pre-service training. Lesson planning, pedagogical approaches, subject knowledge, assessment techniques and classroom management are some examples of knowledge for practice that a teacher requires. Knowledge in practice is more practical in nature, and can be gained by a practicing teacher every day – particularly if the teacher is reflective and open to learning from others. When a teacher learns from the teaching practice of an expert teacher, she is gaining knowledge in practice. This knowledge in practice is essential if a teacher is to ripen with experience and use every opportunity to learn practically what theory may (not) explicitly offer. Third, knowledge of practice bridges the theory-practice divide by allowing teachers to construct their own knowledge of the practice through intentional investigation within their classrooms, that allows them to connect that microcosm to the world outside (Cochran & Smith 1999). Identifying

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  219 and examining one’s own assumptions, revisiting school policies and practices and reviewing teaching practices as well as curriculum development are all part of knowledge of practice. Against this backdrop, it is pertinent to ask the following question How did this two-year engagement enable members of this community to gain knowledge in and of their teaching practice? LCoRPs Members’ Knowledge In and Of Practice It is precisely in these two areas that the richest rewards were reaped by each member. While they are described in detail in each of the research papers compiled in Section 2, a summary is presented here. A Nursery School Headmistress (Nandashree) learned the importance of opening up a space for her teachers to voice their views, and thus acquired a very valuable piece of knowledge in practice. Her prior acceptance of her teachers’ inadequate articulation of ideas was brought to question when she realized that she had seldom given them the opportunity to express their ideas. This newly acquired knowledge turned around her own administrative practice as she now adopted a new stance – that of pausing and opening up a space for her teachers to express their views, instead of always singlehandedly steering their discussions. A first-time teacher, Krithika Bharath, re-examined her own assumptions of her kindergarteners’ intolerance and exclusivity as necessarily stemming from their privileged backgrounds. When she discerned a connection between their sense of autonomy and their behaviour, she opened the doors to their taking ownership of their own learning. Now their innate sensitivity and tolerance began to manifest palpably. Her valuable learning, while engaged in this action research, was that the children became more motivated to learn as soon as they experienced a sense of ownership and freedom of choice. This resulted in their naturally becoming more respectful to (and empathetic of) each other. An exemplary piece of knowledge of practice! Vidhya Nagaraj (Principal of a school) set out to change the mindset of her teachers, from being dependent on her for their own development to taking charge of it themselves. Through her carefully thought-out approaches, she emerged with a renewed conviction of the critical importance of an administrator stepping back from the compulsive habit of directing a teacher’s learning trajectory. As she mapped her teachers’ movement from the ‘unaware stage’ to the ‘conscious stage’ – and then, from the ‘action’ stage to the ‘refining’ stage – she, too, made the same movement through all these stages. Her acknowledgement of the role that is (often unwittingly) played by an administrator – of reinforcing dependence of teachers on them – is a powerful piece of learning that she acquired during her practice. In so doing, she as well as her teachers learned the significance of stepping out of their respective comfort zones and thus enriched their own knowledge of the practice.

220  Neeraja Raghavan In an effort to nurture critical thinking in rural children during the pandemic, Nivedita Bedadur overcame numerous challenges: of limited connectivity, total lack of face-to-face engagement and inadequate exposure to books. Her initial assumptions of the necessity of these (and other enabling) factors to render such an initiative successful were turned on their head as a result of her action research, which made extensive use of just two things – mobile phones and simple picture books – and eventually succeeded in drawing out the writer as well as the critical thinker in four rural children. Breaking the silos that teachers often find themselves encaged in was Madhusree’s prime objective. As she strove to build bridges between disciplines, she unearthed heretofore unexpressed biases and assumptions in teachers’ minds that simply blew her own mind away. Her confrontation of the inevitability of a teacher transmitting such a bias to the students is a telling truth – learning and unlearning have to begin in the minds of teachers, if they are to be triggered in their students! That must surely be a gem in a teacher’s knowledge of practice! Starting with a modest intent of enlivening teachers’ lesson plans, Deeptha Vivekanand (a storyteller and teacher educator) found her Action Research problem expanding in scope almost without her intending that to happen! Her perception of the web of latent connections that lie embedded in a teacher’s thinking and practice was soon mirrored in the teachers’ perception of their own thinking-practice links, too. She sums up her knowledge of practice tellingly as follows: “While schools are increasingly on the lookout for storytellers and storytelling coaches, they often miss seeing the fact that a story can be told well only when it is truly felt. Likewise with teaching.” Turning middle schoolers into autonomous learners (who also take responsibility for their learning space) was Ganga Sundar’s intention. Her deep exploration of their seemingly blasé attitudes resulted in the realization that they lacked a sense of belonging to the place. No sooner did she set about addressing this, than a transformation in her students began to rapidly unfold. The importance of probing beneath apparently rigid patterns of behaviour led both the teacher and the students to learn very valuable lessons. A teacher of Hindi in a residential school, Swati Gautam started off by noticing the disturbingly insensitive attitudes of students to the support staff. The larger ramifications of regarding indifferent attitudes in students as lying ‘outside the scope’ of a teacher teaching a particular subject compelled her to question the meaning of true ‘education’. Her explorations led to her unearthing long-held conditioning in her own mind as well as that of her students, and eventually to an examination of questions like: what are the causes of poverty? How wide is the scope of a teacher of Hindi? Should attitudinal change in students be left only to the management of the school to address? If yes, then is a teacher’s work done if she transacts textbook content to completion? Clearly, these teachers grew their own knowledge in and of practice, as a result of their collaborative efforts to conduct action research in specific

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  221 areas. Much of this was rendered possible by the collaborative platform that LCoRPs provided. From seemingly localized questions and concerns, their collective brainstorming expanded the scope (and therefore, the eventual impact) of their individual action research projects. This begs the question: is action research the central tenet of the proposed model of teacher development? Multiple Ways of Engagement within such a Community Teachers who join a learning community such as this need not necessarily choose to carry out action research. Depending on each one’s unique location, the specific learning that each one begins by seeking (as a consumer) and the later shift from consumer to contributor may take many different forms. Presented below is a set of possibilities, which is neither comprehensive nor exhaustive, but rather serves as an indicator of several avenues that such communities can open up for its members. • Pedagogy: The most frequent question that pops into the mind of many a teacher is: “How should I go about teaching this topic?” In a community of teachers who hail from different schools, there is a high possibility of exchange of ideas to teach topics in the prescribed curriculum. When a teacher who has tried and tested a certain method shares her learning with another, the power of the collective space to re-examine that pedagogy and even generate fresh ideas can be exploited by all members. • Curricular Objectives: Seldom do harried teachers pause to ask why a certain topic is to be taught. That it is prescribed as part of the curriculum is justification enough, especially when there is insufficient time to transact the prescribed content to the teacher’s satisfaction. In a platform that allows one to question the importance of learning something, questions such as: “Why should this be taught? When is it most appropriate for a child to learn this?” will find space for deep and collective exploration. Having asked and debated over such questions, chances are higher that the teacher will return with greater enthusiasm and energy to transact the content, by finding ways of transacting it that bring home its significance to the learner as well. • Knowledge for practice: When a teacher is confronted with the challenge of teaching something that she is herself not fully conversant with, there are many impediments to her successful transaction of that content. First, the widely prevalent expectation that most people have of a teacher is that she should know her subject matter well. While this is definitely a reasonable expectation, there could well be gaps in anyone’s grasp of a subject for many reasons, not the least of which could be that the teacher herself was not taught that subject well enough when she was a student. This inhibits the teacher from admitting that she needs help. Second, even if the teacher manages to acknowledge such a need, there are not enough structured

222  Neeraja Raghavan spaces within a school where a teacher can enrich her own knowledge satisfactorily. In a learning community of teachers, there is room for relearning a subject with the help of others who may have a better grasp of it. Especially if the community comprises teachers across institutions, the obstacle of professional rivalry is minimal, if not totally absent. • Classroom Management: This is one area that can never have enough discourse, as there are always newer and more complex challenges every day for a teacher. Teachers who can bring to the table their own dilemmas in managing diverse learners are likely to receive reassurance from their colleagues across schools of the universality of such issues. They may well learn some new ways of tackling issues that teachers seldom find time otherwise to focus on deeply, as ‘covering the syllabus’ takes precedence in most cases. • Material Development: Teachers are almost always in need of innovative materials and resources that will add vibrancy to their transaction of lessons. Many minds working together to design and develop novel resources will seldom fail – whereas a lone teacher struggling to find the time to make that lively teaching aid may give up. This is often a burning need for many teachers and the support that a group of teachers working towards this goal provides is immeasurable. • Overarching issues: How often do teachers ask and discuss questions that go to the very core of education? Questions such as “What is the purpose of education?” or “Is schooling the only way to educate a child?” need to be asked especially by those who are directly in contact with school goers on a daily basis. This platform can serve to draw out such questions and offer a relaxed space for exploration, sometimes resulting in a teacher’s greater conviction of the worth of her profession. Exploratory spaces like these can benefit those who value such reflection. How then does such an initiative find a place in a larger model for teacher development? The Intent of a Teacher Development Model and Its Consequent Manifestation Against this backdrop, if this model of teacher development is driven by the sole intent to equip teachers with knowledge for practice (Cochran-Smith & Lytle 1999), it would necessitate collaboration only between teachers working in similarly affiliated institutions – for different Boards in India are characterized by varying assessment patterns and curricula with differences in the volume (and depth) of content. While this could result in a transformative experience for those teachers as well as their students, the question then arises as to the identity of the central catalyst: logically, it would seem to be the specific Board that each group of institutions is affiliated to. Members of the Board concerned could appoint teacher educators as central catalysts for this model to enrich knowledge for practice amongst teachers across the

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  223 country. Particularly as the prevalent system assumes that most teachers have received all the requisite knowledge during their (brief and often inadequate) pre-service degree/diploma course, this sort of sustained enrichment of knowledge is definitely needed. As already pointed out, there is an existing system of a mandatory number of days of teacher training every year, in many Indian government as well as private schools. However, as described earlier, when teacher development is restricted to just this sort of effort, there are inevitable gaps. If teacher development is more focused on knowledge in and of practice, then it can disengage from Board and Curricula, aligning itself, instead, with commonly agreed upon aims of education. The central catalyst in this case would have to be a cohort of educators who can drive this sort of national networking. The possibilities are then enormous: not only in the extent to which teachers across the country can link with each other to examine the underlying values of prescribed content, but also to discover how different local contexts lend themselves to a scrutiny of these values. For example, urban environments that uphold speedy completion of tasks as signifying ‘efficiency’ would now be open to examination by their rural counterparts for compromising a slow enjoyment of the process that leads to completion. Notions of ‘success’ and ‘failure’ would find multiple interpretations by the sheer reach of such a network. Among the aims of education that the National Education Policy 2023 states, the emphasis on the importance of respecting India’s cultural diversity is significant. Another real possibility of this sort of networking is the organic way in which an appreciation of India’s cultural diversity will seep into teaching and learning. Attractive as such a vibrant networking seems, it is still a distant aspiration. To begin with, the evolution of LCoRPs hinged on the already existing (high levels of) motivation in the teachers who are part of the community. An obvious limitation of a configuration like LCoRPs is its constitution: only motivated educators will voluntarily form such a group. The unmotivated and disinterested teacher is highly unlikely to join such a group. And yet, if at all teacher development is to have wide reaching impact, it should include the not-so-motivated – and eventually, the utterly dispirited – teachers as well. While that is certainly true, it is my submission that a beginning can definitely be made with the existing teachers who are motivated – and there are more of these than one would assume! As more and more such communities mushroom across the country, their ripple effect may slowly penetrate the boundaries of the less motivated too. In this regard, it is pertinent to quote Rogers (1963) whose theory of Change Management – though having its origins in the field of management – lends itself well to other domains as well: It is useful to remember, that trying to quickly and massively convince the mass of a new controversial idea is useless. It makes more sense in these circumstances to start with convincing innovators and early adapters first.

224  Neeraja Raghavan His theory is based on the following five personality traits: • • • • •

Innovators – Usually the implementers of change Early Adopters – Cautious about change Early Majority – Adopt to change quickly Late Majority – Change sceptics Laggards – Stick to tried and tested methods

While it is undoubtedly easiest to begin working with the innovators – as I have done in the current initiative – a slow expansion to the early adopters as well as the early majority should follow, if at all a critical mass is to be reached. If we wish to scale up the model of teacher development that is being used, then we need to ask the question: how can the three intents of teacher development listed by Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) be mapped to the three types of networks shown by Paul Baran (1964)? What sort of network would enable each kind of knowledge (of, in or for practice) for teachers? A Network That Suits This Model of Teacher Development Central to the structure of this model of teacher development are two main principles: 1 The model has as its bedrock peer exchange and interaction. Unlike teacher-educator-driven models of teacher development, which veer towards being top-down (however democratic the intentions), this model necessitates a stepping back of the central anchor so as to allow mutual accountability. Starting with a distribution of the responsibility of drawing up the agenda for community meetings, the structure slowly ripples out into an increasingly participative model that demands ownership from members of the community, if it is to sustain. 2 Here, the emphasis is heavily tilted towards knowledge of and in practice, as members of the community glean rich learnings from their own practice as well as that of others in the community. I would be making an inauthentic claim if I declared that LCoRPs has definitely reached the location described in point 1 above: all I can say is that at the time of writing this book, LCoRPs is engaged in a collective visioning exercise which has as its intent a shared ownership. Drawing from Liacas’s (2019) adaptation of Paul Baran’s (1964) digital networks to communities, I have made an attempt in Figures 11.5a–c to knit together the three types of knowledge that teacher development can build, with the three types of networks described above. Teachers are positioned at nodes of Baran’s digital networks, with an anchor/moderator at the centre.

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  225

Figure 11.5a  Knowledge FOR Practice: Centralized Network

Figure 11.5b  Knowledge OF and IN Practice: Decentralized Network

Figure 11.5c  Knowledge IN and OF Practice: Distributed Network

226  Neeraja Raghavan In Figure 11.5a, the traditional mentor-driven model of teacher development is shown, which is most familiar for the Knowledge FOR practice mode of teacher development. The mentor is located at the centre of this network and is connected to a set of teachers (at each node) who learn from the mentor. This is an example of a centralized network. The learning could be anything ranging from Learning Theories to the how-to’s of daily practices like drawing up a lesson plan, developing resources, designing suitable assessments, etc. On a national scale, the central circle could represent a Teacher Educator from the Board that schools are affiliated to, and the lines from the central circle could connect to teachers from schools across the country that are affiliated to that Board. Figure 11.5b depicts the configuration that was adopted in LCoRPs, where sub-groups or clusters focused on different areas of interest, [like Pedagogy, Curriculum and Teacher Development], but which remained interconnected as one large group throughout the journey of exploration through their intermittent engagement with a mentor. Liacas (2019) rightly emphasizes the difficulty in maintaining such a network without “very active effort throughout the nodes of the system.” Thus, each cluster had a certain degree of autonomy even as clusters remained inter-connected in the large group. Although each cluster did not have a designated anchor or moderator, this role was donned organically by one or the other member, as and when the need arose. Often, the implicit anchor simply facilitated expression of all members without taking any decision single-handedly. This configuration of a decentralized network works best for Knowledge IN and OF practice, from the experience of LCoRPs. Clusters should ideally work in a distributed way, with each one learning from the other, with a light touch of moderation or facilitation. [In some instances, a cluster could also operate with the intent of transfer of knowledge FOR practice, if the anchor of that cluster has expertise that others there wish to gain from her.] Finally, Figure 11.5c shows the distributed configuration which could well be a long-term aspiration for LCoRPs – if the present community can multiply into more such communities of practice. Some nodes are connected to several others – depicting teachers who wish to engage in the exploration of multiple issues with different members of the community. Depending upon the individual teacher’s interest, she may locate herself along the vertices in the periphery (which means she engages with one or two issues) or in one of the central nodes (like the central node, which depicts a teacher with a finger in every pie). Again, Figure 11.5c shows some possible areas of investigation and exploration for the clusters within each network. Along with a couple of areas that LCoRPs clusters dove into (Curriculum and Pedagogy), the figure also describes other possibilities: like Assessment and the Parent-Teacher interface. These are merely suggestive: as already explained, there are a plethora of issues that teachers can probe deeply, if they join together to do so. As Liacas (2019) points out, such a network calls for consistent coordination between local groups who should all be guided by a common goal.

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  227 There are of course other possible configurations, like a mix of decentralized and distributed networks, depending upon the appropriateness of each for the purpose at hand. The most important consequence of such collective examination of issues, however, will be that the teacher’s voice will gain strength. When networks like these start forming, teachers across schools can begin to make their collective voice heard. A Teacher Can Begin to Be Heard For far too long, teachers have been delegated to the position of doing as they are told to do, when they are, in fact, best positioned to redesign schooling and reinvent education. It has become an acceptable practice for people who have never taught children themselves to actually design curricula, set standards, formulate educational policy and write textbooks. Teachers then become the end-users of readymade materials and implementers of formulated decisions. Their opinions are hardly ever solicited for any of these. Even within a school, teachers seldom take the risk of questioning managerial decisions that they may sometimes find unacceptable. Especially in India, school teachers are frequently called for non-academic tasks like election duty and census duty, heedless of the multiple demands on their time for academic work that they are actually meant to do. It is significant that people from no other profession are called upon to perform such tasks: teaching (or learning?) is regarded as the least likely to be affected, by pulling teachers out of school for such administrative tasks. If this does not speak of the place accorded to the importance of a teacher in a school, what does? But when teachers across schools engage with each other, it is likely that they will be able to come up with informed and reasonable arguments to question such long-standing practices that hamper their own growth. When teachers begin to articulate their own perception of the value of their work, they increase the chances of changing widely held perceptions of the teaching profession. Such a network across different schools (and outside school) could give that much-needed momentum to a movement that pitches for the voice of the teacher to be heard. Slowly, the voices of teachers may then find expression in public spaces, and the possibility of the whispers of the teaching community turning into resonance may indeed become a reality. Any such community has to arrive at its own understanding of the collaborative effort, and members have to reach an agreement on the extent to which each one controls the agenda. As each member’s strength in an area will surely vary, clusters can have temporary moderators or anchors, depending upon the issue that is being explored by the cluster. [In LCoRPs, as already described, often the implicit anchor simply facilitated expression of all members, without taking any decision single-handedly.] Each cluster can explore an issue of relevance to that cluster. Convivial tools (Illich 2009) of communication that allow the emergence of a distributive and participative form of justice need to be designed. There has to be a shift from a managerial

228  Neeraja Raghavan form of accountability to one of mutual accountability. (As described, we strongly experienced the need for this shift in LCoRPs, and this is why we are exploring different systems of management at the time of writing this book.) This necessitated a constant effort on my part to step back and redefine my own role, and it proved to be one of my biggest challenges – but also my most valuable learning. Much of this sort of “stepping-back-yet-continuingto-mentor” was made possible due to the use of technology – which the ongoing pandemic necessitated. Offline versus Online My pre-pandemic experience of engaging with teachers had always been face-to-face, during my visits to their respective schools. I therefore began this online engagement (necessitated by the pandemic) with trepidation, if not full of doubt. I was not alone in this, as most teachers had taken to online schooling with a sense of discontent, and were longing for schools to reopen again. After all, the physical space called a ‘school’ had been the place for teachers and students for centuries! When the pandemic suddenly snatched away the traditional school structure, schools that could afford to do so switched to the online mode in a very short time frame. There was little time (or a felt need) to pause and question the need of the hour or even to examine the optimal way to go forward – much less to enquire into the purpose of education itself! Not so with the teachers in LCoRPs, for in the words of one member: I believe that the truth is that COVID brought forth the meaning of education and the urgency of learning new ways of teaching learning into focus. Already struggling teachers depended heavily on such a non-judgmental space. It was such a contrast to a normal competitive staff room and authoritative leadership which encouraged sycophancy and discouraged questioning. It is my belief that the structure of the group permitted a greater level of openness than a typical employer-employee equation allows. Here, members were more or less on an equal platform, regardless of their chronological age, years of experience or educational qualifications. That, and the distribution of teachers from multiple institutions largely precluded rivalry and competition. Also, the limited time that members actually conferred with each other in cyberspace was in stark contrast to the choiceless (and prolonged) throwing together of colleagues in a physical workspace. The downside, of course, is that this could make for weak interaction – particularly as it was all online. Thus, while technology limited the extent of engagement, it also offered many benefits. Recordings of each and every meeting allowed accurate documentation, as members of each cluster volunteered to minute each meeting, by taking turns. Whenever an action researcher needed a one-on-one meeting with me, that

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  229 too was recorded. If it seemed to me that some parts of the discussion had a bearing on generally useful aspects of Action Research, I made a practice of either requesting members to watch the entire recording, or edited relevant clips to share in the next large group meeting. This was one important element which encouraged teacher-teacher collaboration, as members could see a commonality to their struggles and therefore, the opportunity to learn from each other. Chat messages were also a medium of communication – especially when there wasn’t enough time to draft a long email. Clusters quickly formed chat groups and kept in touch with each other even during lean periods of LCoRPs meetings. Collaboration between Busy Teachers Despite not meeting physically for a period of two years, there was a noticeably increasing ease with which the group gradually bonded. While the degree varied between clusters, their action research problems compelled them to confer with each other and seek feedback. Often, it was not even the sole purpose of action research that made these meetings desirable. It was explicitly stated by more than one member that Tuesday evenings (which was the time slot for LCoRPs) were eagerly looked forward to, as an unwinding platform as well as an energizing one. The need to ‘make time’ for meetings was therefore rendered unnecessary. Since these teachers were struggling to transact lessons with their students online, the opportunity to speak their minds to fellow teachers – even if only online – was more than welcome. From teachers who began by bonding with each other during a stressful period in most schools, they slowly grew into a band of action researchers. [This has been described in detail in Chapter 2.] Members of each cluster questioned each other, sought clarity when needed, suggested strategies for implementation and demanded greater robustness of evidence. My initial misgivings about full-time teachers experiencing a time crunch to regularly confer with each other thus proved to be unfounded. I found that not only did they meet with a certain degree of regularity, they also began to sharpen their own critical thinking skills as they probed each other’s action research. Chapter 2 highlights the steady sharpening of questions that members posed to each other. While collaboration and co-creation manifested as action research that is documented in this compilation, a learning community of teachers need not necessarily engage in action research in order for the community to sustain. [In an earlier section, several other ways of collaboration have been elaborated upon.] An important element of the process of collaboration was the intermittent questioning by the person overseeing the entire action research, namely, myself. This drew out the dormant researcher within each teacher.

230  Neeraja Raghavan The Dormant Researcher Inside a Teacher A repetitive experience through the third cycle of the TACA was the emergence of very important observations from the researchers – after my posing certain questions to them. I was struck by the fact that in almost all instances, the researcher concerned did not have to think long (or plan another strategy) in order to answer my questions. This was because the answer to my question was lying unarticulated in the recesses of the researcher’s mind, and all it took was for me to ask the question which would make that important observation emerge. A few examples are cited below: • Nursery School Headmistress Nandashree (whose action research was aimed at enabling her Nursery teachers to make learning process-centric) had created a very rudimentary rubric to assess the shift in her teachers’ thinking and practice. Designating three levels for parameters like Teacher Beliefs, Methods Adopted, Content Transacted, etc., she had gauged the shift of her teachers against each of these parameters from the beginning of her research until the end. When her co-author, Anne Isaac and she had an online discussion with me as they were putting the paper together, I asked Nandashree how she had slotted her teachers in specific Levels. How, for instance, could she state with such certainty that six teachers had been at Level 1 with regard to their beliefs in the start, and by the end of her Action Research, none of them remained at that level? After all, the most natural thing for anyone would be to state beliefs that sound politically correct, so how robust was her parameterization? Without a moment’s hesitation, she replied that she had not merely accepted their stated beliefs as true in order to slot them in a particular level. Instead, she had triangulated her data by seeing how these beliefs aligned with the teaching practice of each teacher (during her weekly observations) and also gauged their authenticity during her one-on-one conversations with each teacher. Coherence of stated beliefs with actual practices was thus scrutinized by her before she actually marked the level to which each teacher had shifted. This kind of exchange reaffirmed to me the rigour that Nandashree had practised – but not yet articulated – and it now prompted the two authors to add very important sections to their paper. • Hindi teacher Swati’s action research was as ambitious as it was challenging. Aiming to sensitize her students to forge bonds with the local community, she realized that the small beginnings that she had made would serve as initial steps to a much larger action research study. Again, it was during an online chat with her and Nivedita (who, being an English teacher, helped her write her paper) that my questions to Swati elicited very important ideas that she had thus far not articulated. Nivedita found her own insights about language learning being reaffirmed (as her email to me in the textbox below shows):

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  231 I do think that as language is the medium of instruction, it is also a medium of culture transmission, because the social purpose of language can never be divorced from its content. There are two threads to this: Language content has to be selected with care and with an attention to constitutional values. Secondly the language teacher cannot but be political, her ideology is transmitted to the students. Culture, tehzib*, are talking through her. So I believe a language teacher always has a larger canvas. To me it opens up questions like… 1 Are we being fair by limiting content to a text book? What about diverse views? 2 Are language teachers even aware of the enormity of their responsibility? 3 Do language teachers ever make full use of their vast range? 4 Do they think of supplementing the biases, the one-sidedness, in the text book? 5 Do they go beyond spelling and grammar errors to the beauty, humour, nuances of words as concepts? *tehzib – discipline (Urdu)

• For her part, Swati discovered that she had been thinking about those ideas all along, without knowing it! For example, her initial hesitancy about being able to effect an attitudinal change in her students, being a ‘mere Hindi teacher’ underwent a transformation when she experienced success in several small ways. This led to her expressing far-reaching aspirations like: “Akka, when these children go out into the world, I don’t want them to disregard the poor by thinking that poverty is the fault of the poor. If I can do something in my Hindi classes to bring that about, I will feel I have done something that is very necessary.” Further questioning brought out the role of a Language teacher, the place of language in shaping one’s thinking – and therefore, in determining one’s actions. Much of this would not have found a place in her paper but for this very critical process of drawing out her innermost thoughts. • Ganga (a middle school teacher) swung into action very soon after she read a research paper that gave her a route for bringing in autonomy and a sense of ownership of the learning space in middle schoolers. By the end of her Action Research, her students had selected specific areas that they wished to take ownership for. However, when she finished writing her paper, I had to nudge her to express the reasons for her middle schoolers choosing the particular areas that they did. It was this step of actually examining the basis of their choices that made her even more acutely aware of their perceptions of (and expectations from) a learning space.

232  Neeraja Raghavan Nivedita described the process succinctly in her text message to me: Thank you for asking me to do Swati’s paper, it was such a pleasure. You nudged her to bring out the really deep, global and universal need for understanding and living with diversity. Wouldn’t have been possible without your pushing for going higher. Sometimes one has to cut down the branches on the lower limbs for a tree to grow tall enough to touch the sky. You do this constantly. Thus, the researcher within the teacher had to be constantly drawn out – both by her peers and by me. That the researcher was dormant within every teacher is fairly evident. As I watched with increasing delight the emergence of that researcher in each teacher, I revisited my own questions and inevitably began asking some more. Learnings That Emerged My uncertainty about the optimal route to enabling a sustained community of teachers to learn from each other slowly turned into a crystallized understanding of the following principles and associated practices. • A teacher-educator-driven model of Teacher Development does not allow for as much peer exchange and interaction as this model does. Even in this model, a periodic stepping back of the central anchor is necessary, as I discovered from one cycle of TACA to the next. There should be a steady shift from a managerial form of leadership to one that demands mutual accountability, if the community started by the anchor is to sustain. • When teachers across schools engage with each other as a community, they are less likely to be obstructed by feelings of professional rivalry, as they do not share the same workspace. This enables rich sharing and collaboration between them, and the opportunities for each one to learn from the other can be fully explored. • A teacher can understand a fellow teacher’s diffidence and fears far better than a so-called ‘experienced mentor’ can. As Mazur (2009) points out, peer instruction is far more effective than a lecture-driven pedagogy. This is as true in teacher development. • Again, as Mazur points out so articulately in his talk titled Peer Instruction for Active Learning, the ‘curse of knowledge’ bestows on the ‘knowledgeable’ person a forgetfulness of a learner’s difficulty. This difficulty is bypassed when one teacher explains her understanding of the path to change (or her experience of the obstacles to change) to another teacher. • Robust systems need to be put in place for free and authentic expression of changing levels of trust in the perceived leader, the community and its basic principles.

A Pandemic of Pedagogical Transformation  233 • While each member’s starting location will almost always be that of a consumer, the necessary shift to that of a contributor and then, a collaborator, needs to be facilitated through these robust systems and by the leader. In some cases, co-creators may also be enabled. • Among many other possible ways, Action Research proved to be an excellent route to sustaining the churning that it initiated in each teacher’s mind, as more than one member of LCoRPs testified to the long-term impact of it on their day-to-day practice. “I find myself approaching many issues with the AR approach,” said one. “I find that the steps to be undertaken for any initiative automatically begin to play out in my mind,” confessed another. • Posing sharp and incisive questions to a teacher who is exploring a certain issue is a powerful way of drawing out unarticulated insights from that teacher. Often, such unarticulated insights get lost in the absence of such structured probing. This kind of synergistic inquiry within a learning community enriches both the asker as well as the answerer of the question. • Discussion and debate within the community that is anchored in rigorous exploration can draw out the dormant researcher that often lies hidden in a teacher. • Several other avenues for collaboration between teachers opened up as possibilities in this community: gaining access to relevant resources cited by a member, learning about each other’s approaches to teaching the same subject, acquiring new skills like writing abstracts, editing and reviewing another’s writing, acquiring tech skills by watching each other and revisiting their own assumptions about a time crunch when they saw busier members successfully donning many hats. • Stepping back was enabled by the distance (in both time and space) that technology necessitated. Since I was not physically present during the cluster meetings, I did not interrupt the discussion with my own views. Instead, I watched the discussion after it had taken place, and therefore, a measured response was inevitable. Also, my response did not interrupt the flow of the discussion, since it was shared only after it. • Aligned with the above understanding, therefore, one of the most effective enablers of teacher-teacher facilitation of Action Research is the sharing of insights gained by the teachers during the course of their individual action research projects. • Insights, however, are often caught more easily by a third party – which was where I stepped in. Watching the recordings of the cluster meetings, or engaging in one-on-one conversations with individual action researchers, I sifted out the insights that one member shared and brought these into the common platform for others to scrutinize, question – and accept, if it resonated with them. Sometimes, the very same principle that I would otherwise simply have touted out to the group now emerged as a fresh discovery by a teacher and therefore, was received with greater acceptance by others.

234  Neeraja Raghavan • As their workplace dynamics did not impede their communication with each other, such peer instruction between practising teachers working in different institutions was found to be effective even in the fully online mode. • A community is never completely built and ready. Community building is a never-ending journey. This two-year sojourn proved transformative for almost all members of this small community, which is an evolving group. Small in number as it is now, it raises pertinent questions about the scalability of such a model. With the limited scope of the present work, upscaling is still in need of exploration. As the current design only allows working with small numbers at a time, there are as yet no clear answers to questions of scalability. Perhaps upscaling (along the suggested lines of Figures 11.5b and 11.5c) will form the basis of the next step of this work. If the day comes when more and more teachers learn from their fellows across the country, the resulting vibrancy in these teachers is bound to impact their learners as well as their school environments. To rephrase Rabindranath Tagore, “Into that Heaven of collaborative learning, my Father, let my country’s teachers awake!”

“It is probable that the next Buddha will not take the form of an individual. The next Buddha may take the form of a community, a community practicing understanding and loving kindness, a community practicing mindful living. This may be the most important thing we can do for the survival of the earth.” ~ Thich Nhat Hanh

Note 1 https://thinkingteacher.in/research-papers/

References

Allan, B. (Designer). (2008). Knowledge creation within a community of practice. https:// convcme.wordpress.com/2011/02/04/communities-of-practice-a-framework-forlearning-and-improvement/#8230 Argyris, C. & Schon, D. A. (1974) Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Baran, P. (1964) IEEE transactions of the professional technical group on communication systems, Vol. CS-12, No. 1. Baran, P. https://www.rand.org/about/history/baran.html [Report is here: https:// www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM3420.html] Bell, B. & Gilbert, J. (1996) Teacher development: A model from science education. London: Falmer Press. Bhaskar, K. & Raghavan, N. (2017) Bringing excitement into Chemistry through action research. https://thinkingteacher.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Paper-Bhaskar.pdf Boreham, N. (2000) Collective professional knowledge. Medical Education, Vol. 34, 505–506. Brindley, R. & Crocco, C. (2009) Empowering the voice of the teacher researcher. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Bullough, Robert V. Jr. (2007) Professional learning communities and the eight-year study. Educational Horizons, Spring, Vol. 85, No. 3, The New Economy’s Impact on Students Lessons of the Eight-Year Study Open Lessons, 168–180. Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. M. (1999) Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, Vol. 24, 249–305. Costello, P. (2011) Effective action research: Developing reflective thinking and practice. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Darling-Hammond, L. (1996) The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership, March, Vol. 53, No. 6, 4–10. Dewey, J. (1910) How we think. https://bef632.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/deweyhow-we-think.pdf Dewey, J. (1933) How we think. New York: Heath & Co. DuFour, R. (2004) What is a “professional learning community”? Educational Leadership, Vol. 61, No. 8, 6–11. Fechoe, B. (2003) Yeki Bood/Yeki Na Bood: Writing and Publishing as a Teacher Researcher. Research in the Teaching of English, Vol. 37, No. 3, 281–294. Published by: National Council of Teachers of English.

236 References Fraser, C. & Kennedy, A. & Reid, L. & McKinney, S. (2007) Teachers’ continuing professional development (CPD): Contested concepts, understandings and models. Journal of In-Service Education, Vol. 33, No. 2, 153–169. Fullan, M. (2007) The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. Giroux (1988) Teachers as intellectuals – Towards a critical pedagogy of learning. London: Bergin & Garvey. Gowda, H., Suryakumar, K. & Venkatraman, S. (2017) Action research on Mixed Age Group (MAG) classes for mathematics in middle schools. https://thinkingteacher. in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Mixed-Age-Group-Action-Research_final.pdf Guerrero, G. & Ugalde, R. F. (2020) Teachers as researchers: Reflecting on the challenges of Research-Practice Partnerships between school and university in Chile. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341314203 Hargreaves, A. (2001) Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age Teachers College Press, Columbia University. Hargreaves, A. (2008) Foreword in Hord & Sommers, Leading professional learning communities: Voices from research and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Hord, S. M. (1997) Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Hord, S. M., & Sommers, W. A. (2008) Leading professional learning communities: Voices from research and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Illich, Ivan (2009) Tools for conviviality. London: Marion Boyars. Kennedy, A. (2005) Models of continuing professional development: A framework for analysis. Journal of In-service Education, Vol. 31, No. 2, 235–250, DOI: 10.1080/13674580500200277. Kincheloe, J. L. (2001) Counterpoints, Vol. 100, Getting beyond the facts: Teaching social studies/social sciences in the twenty-first century: Second edition, 349–370. Kincheloe, J.L. (2003) Teachers as researchers. London: Routledge Falmer. Lee, E. & Hannafin, M. J. (2016) A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centred learning: Own it, learn it, and share it. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 64, No. 4, 707–734. Lewin, Kurt (1952) Group decision and social change. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb & F. E. Hartley (eds.), Readings in social psychology, pp. 197–211. New York: Holt. Liacas, T. (2019) https://netchange.co/whats-the-difference-between-distributed-anddecentralized-organizing Lortie, D. C. (1975) School teacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mazur, E. (2009) Farewell, Lecture? Science, January, Vol. 323, No. 5910, 50–51. www.sciencemag.org McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (1993) Contexts That Matter for Teaching and Learning. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching, Stanford University. Minnett, A. J., Dietrich, S. E. & Ekici, D. (2022) Person to person peacebuilding, intercultural communication and English language teaching Channel View Publications, Bristol.

References  237 Moreira, M. A., (2016) Counteracting the power of the single story in teacher education: Teacher narratives as lions’ voices. Counterpoints, Vol. 491, 663–684. Morrison, K., Church, M. & Ritchhart, R. (2011) Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. San Francisco, CA: Wiley. Poekert (2012) Examining the impact of collaborative professional development on teacher practice. Teacher Education Quarterly, Fall, Vol. 39, No. 4, 97–118. Raghavan, N. & Sood, V. (2015) The reflective teacher. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Reshma Kiran (2017), Enlivening the teaching and learning of Chemistry https:// thinkingteacher.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Reshma-Kiran-Paper.pdf. Ritchhart, R., Church, M. & Morrison, K. (2011) Making thinking visible. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint. Rogers, E. (1963) Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press. Rosenholtz, S. (1989) Teacher’s workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman. Schon, D. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith. Servage, L. (2008) Critical and transformative practices in professional learning communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, Winter, Vol. 35, No. 1, 63–77. Singamsetty, R. & Raghavan, N. (2015) Teacher empowerment through action research. https://thinkingteacher.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/teacher-empowermentthrough-action-research.pdf Solomon, J. & Tresman, S. (1999) A model for continued professional development: knowledge, belief and action. Journal of In-service Education, Vol. 25, 307–319. Vittachi, S. & Raghavan, N. with Kiran Raj (2007) Alternative schooling in India. Delhi: SAGE publications. Wald, P. J. & Castleberry, M. S. Eds. (2000) Educators as learners creating a professional learning community in your school. USA: ASCD.

Index

Note: Bold page numbers refer to tables; italic page numbers refer to figures and page numbers followed by “n” denote endnotes. accountable 11 action research xiv, xxii, xxv, 4, 24, 28, 30–33, 35–43, 47, 49–51, 53, 55, 57, 69–74, 76, 79–81, 84, 86, 87, 97, 102, 103, 125, 135, 137–141, 143, 145, 151–153, 156, 160, 166, 176–178, 189, 190, 192, 197, 200–202, 204, 210, 219–221, 229, 230, 233, 235 ambience 4, 29, 30, 38, 180, 198, 205, 207, 213 articulate 6, 9, 10, 12, 28, 29, 50, 154, 168, 211, 215, 216, 227 assessment 4, 7, 9, 39, 49, 51, 58, 59, 67, 73, 76, 99, 105, 107, 153, 161, 205, 218, 222 assumptions 6, 30, 31, 36, 39, 47, 48, 113, 120, 124, 134, 142, 149, 159, 170, 187, 189, 192, 197, 202, 210, 211, 213, 219, 220, 233 autonomy xxiii, 13, 24, 48, 49, 55, 69–71, 76, 77, 77, 78, 81–84, 89, 148, 160–162, 161, 164– 166, 170–173, 171, 198, 199, 204, 205, 217, 219, 226, 231 Baran, Paul xxv, 197, 216, 224 being listened to 10, 203 belief 11, 12, 29, 49, 89, 104, 125, 134, 145, 177, 192, 215, 228, 237 capacity xxi, 70, 93, 98, 139, 199 centralised 203, 216, 226 challenge 12, 15, 27, 36, 41, 69, 85, 87, 92, 94, 96, 97n11, 117, 131, 149, 152, 172, 191, 202, 221

chores 9, 143 classroom management 4, 22, 24, 199, 218 classrooms 9, 24, 57, 67, 68, 93, 132, 135, 137, 218 cluster 7, 14, 22, 33–40, 43, 51–53, 60, 63, 66, 67, 97, 103, 180, 192, 204, 205, 217, 226–229, 233 Cochran‑Smith, M. xxi co‑create 5, 19, 170, 173 collaboration 6, 24, 33, 37, 71, 74, 78, 129, 137 communication 123, 178, 179, 207, 213, 235 community xxii, xxiii, xxv, xxvi, 3, 4, 6, 14, 16, 18, 21–27, 24, 29–31, 37, 84, 85, 103, 124, 135, 154, 170, 175–177, 180, 183, 189, 190, 191, 197, 199, 203, 205– 216, 212, 218, 219, 221–224, 226, 227, 229, 230, 232–235; learning community 13, 22, 49, 67, 84, 137, 199, 200, 208, 210, 214, 221, 222, 229, 233, 235 community building 9 community of practice 203, 208, 212, 235 competition 6, 27, 61, 205, 228 complacent 205 configuration 6, 201, 204, 216, 217, 223, 226 connection xxv, 21, 39, 131, 141, 154, 178, 217, 219 consensus 7 consumer 206, 207, 209–211, 214, 215, 221, 233 contributor 207, 210, 211, 214, 216, 221, 233

240  Index convivial 209 conviviality 209, 210 Costello, P. J. M. 31, 53, 68, 71, 82, 235 courage 13, 187 Course Instructor 203, 205, 209 courses 4, 138, 143 critical thinkers 12 cross‑country 201

framework 30, 39, 41, 42, 53–55, 68, 71, 87, 105, 106, 153, 164, 165, 170, 173, 178, 180, 208, 216–218, 235, 236 friendship 198 From Whispers to Resonance 29

day‑to‑day 9, 22, 183, 211, 233 debate and discussion 5, 211 decentralisation 216 dependence 7, 199, 201, 203, 210, 216, 217, 219 Dewey, J. 12, 32, 51, 136, 235 documented evidence 4 dormant researcher 229, 230, 233 doubt 24, 25, 152, 153, 190, 191, 212, 214, 228

Headmistress xiv, xxiii, 34, 35, 47, 49, 51, 52, 59, 60, 67, 67n1, 202, 219, 230 heard xx, 16, 17, 29, 30, 34, 55, 60, 95, 109, 123, 126, 127, 145, 205, 211, 227 hierarchy 10 Holt, John 10 hope 10, 29, 130, 151

education xv, xxi, xxii, xxiii, 3, 6, 12, 20, 23, 27, 29–31, 47, 50, 70, 82, 89, 98, 103, 114, 116, 120n5, 121, 123, 130, 135, 137–139, 153, 155, 156, 159, 162, 171, 174, 176, 192, 193n2, 200, 203, 206, 211, 218, 220, 222, 223, 227, 228, 235 educational issues 4, 26 empathy xiv employer 7, 10, 27, 228 engagement xxii, xxv, 3, 4, 6, 20, 26, 27, 41, 50, 51, 68, 69, 71, 72, 76, 93, 97, 102, 107, 122, 130, 135, 147, 161, 164, 166, 173, 176, 177, 180, 201, 206–208, 210–212, 215, 217, 219–221, 226, 228, 236 equipping teachers 141, 198 exercise 9, 12, 37, 42–44, 47, 100, 122, 127, 130, 133, 143, 146, 147, 149, 150, 156n1, 164, 165, 168, 170, 178, 188, 224 express 5, 12, 40, 55, 59, 61, 71, 73, 74, 112, 117, 118, 120n8, 127, 159, 168, 169, 173, 180, 188, 207, 210, 211, 215, 219, 231 expression: free expression 10, 28, 143, 212 face‑to‑face interactions 207 facets 211, 212 facilitator 4, 15, 38, 88, 158, 159, 161, 203 fee 175, 206, 207, 209, 210

Giroux xxi, 4, 5, 236

ideas xiii, xxi, 6, 21, 29, 32, 36–38, 44, 47, 48, 50–52, 52, 54, 55, 57, 60, 63, 64, 66, 71, 91, 98, 100, 106, 109, 111, 114, 120, 125, 126, 132–134, 137, 139–141, 145, 146, 149, 155, 168, 168, 179, 180, 199, 200, 203, 209, 219, 221, 230 identify xxii, 47, 50, 66, 85, 86, 88, 129, 130, 131, 137, 143, 154, 160, 161, 170, 213 Illich, I. 209, 210, 227, 236 insights xxii, xxiii, 44, 63, 124, 137, 139, 151, 157, 208, 213, 230, 233 institution xv, 4, 6, 28, 50, 201, 206, 211 isolation: teachers xxiii, 9, 10, 26, 27, 54, 71, 77, 103, 119, 125, 126, 209, 212, 212 journey xiii, xxiv, 3, 12, 32, 33, 35, 38, 41, 44, 47, 52, 59, 69, 81, 85, 102, 104, 110, 112, 116, 118, 127, 138, 150, 156, 158, 165, 168, 173, 175, 181, 187, 197– 200, 207, 226, 234 Kincheloe, J. L. 4, 30, 31, 47, 200, 201, 236 knowledge xiii, xxi, 3, 11, 12, 23, 29, 47, 49, 55, 89, 95, 99, 126, 128–132, 146, 155, 164–166, 170, 179, 190, 198, 201, 208, 218–220, 222–224, 226, 232, 237

Index 241 knowledge for practice xxi, 23, 218, 222 knowledge in practice 218, 219 knowledge of practice 218–220 LCoRPs xiii, xxv, xxvi, 3, 13, 24–26, 28–30, 33, 34, 41, 45n3, 47, 50, 51, 54, 55, 65, 67, 67n2, 70, 71, 85–87, 89, 93, 97, 97n3, 103, 104, 119, 122, 124–126, 135, 135n2, 139, 141–143, 145, 147, 149, 159, 160, 175–177, 180, 192, 197, 206, 209–211, 216, 218, 219, 221, 223, 224, 226–229 leadership xiv, 60, 64, 228, 232; managerial 227, 232 learning xiii, xiv, xv, xx, xxi, xxiii, xxv, 4, 8, 11, 13, 19, 21, 22, 24, 24, 27–30, 32, 35–37, 49–51, 55, 59, 60, 62, 63, 64, 66–71, 74, 76–82, 84–89, 91, 91, 92, 93, 95–98, 97n1, 97n4, 99, 100, 102, 103, 105, 107, 110, 111, 117, 118, 120n4, 121–124, 127, 129–135, 138–142, 147, 149, 150, 153, 154, 155, 156–162, 161, 164–166, 167–169, 168, 170–173, 171, 173n2, 178, 180, 192, 198–200, 204, 206, 208, 210, 214, 218–223, 226–231, 233–237 lesson planning 9 levels 44, 61, 64, 72, 76, 84, 89, 107, 120n4, 120n7, 123, 144, 145, 153, 170, 205, 207, 214, 215, 223, 230, 232 Liacas, T. 217, 224, 226, 236 limited 39, 41, 52, 62, 81, 87, 103, 124, 125, 134, 137, 140, 182, 189, 199, 200, 220, 228, 234 listening 10, 182, 211, 212 lockdown 8, 20, 102, 177 Lytle, S. M. xxi mandatory 6, 42, 85, 95, 145, 148, 223 marginalised children xxiii Mazur, E. 29, 232, 236 meaningful 22, 27, 40, 47, 55, 69, 70, 93, 122, 127, 130, 131, 134, 150, 164, 178, 188, 206, 210, 216 measurable 6 meetings 7, 9, 16, 19, 25–27, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40, 43, 44, 49–52, 54, 55,

57, 60, 64, 66, 67, 89, 93, 103, 125, 134, 135, 143–145, 147, 153, 156, 159, 176, 190, 200, 202, 204, 210, 211, 215, 216, 224, 229, 233 mentor 4, 37, 47, 50, 61, 87, 119, 123, 125, 139, 141–143, 148, 149, 170, 198, 201, 203, 226, 228, 232 mindful 12, 81, 134, 234 model of teacher development xxii, xxiii, xxv, 3, 4, 6, 21, 23, 29, 197, 199, 214, 221, 222, 224, 226 Moreira, M. A. 11, 12, 31, 237 motivation xxii, 4, 27, 48, 49, 76, 80, 82, 86, 173, 212, 223 narrative xxii, 7, 13, 17, 44, 59 network 18, 95, 102, 103, 216– 218, 223, 224, 226, 227; decentralised 216; distributed 26, 167, 216–218, 226, 227, 236 non‑judgmental space 5, 10, 135, 228 norm 10, 138 objectives 4, 49, 120, 121, 125, 126, 164, 166, 167, 172, 190, 218 offline 228 online course 3, 8, 9, 21, 197 opportunity 9–11, 20, 25, 52, 60, 61, 70, 86, 117, 125, 127, 128, 134, 149, 151, 166, 171, 177, 180, 183, 200, 218, 219, 229 organic 6, 52, 189, 223 overworked 10 pandemic xxvi, 3, 7, 8, 21, 25–27, 29, 37, 40, 44, 50, 55, 66, 69, 71, 78, 89, 96, 102, 103, 109, 112, 120, 120n4, 121, 177, 178, 180, 181, 183, 199, 201, 209, 212, 220, 228 parent 9, 74, 226 participatory 209, 210 pausing 11, 12, 58, 219 pedagogy xxi, 3, 4, 20, 24, 32, 33, 39, 58, 60, 87, 92, 98, 99, 102, 103, 119, 125, 135, 138, 221, 232 peer evaluation 9 peer instruction 29, 232, 234 platform 7, 10, 11, 17, 26, 27, 29, 67n2, 97n3, 125, 126, 137, 176, 203, 211, 212, 212, 213, 221, 222, 228, 229, 233

242  Index power xxvi, 12, 22, 24, 49, 54, 59, 65, 67, 77, 119, 126, 134, 135, 144, 145, 148, 167, 190, 201, 203, 205, 206, 211, 212, 215, 216, 221 principles xxii, 29, 30, 54, 69, 84, 206, 212, 212, 224, 232 process 6, 20, 24, 24, 28, 30–34, 36–38, 41, 44, 47, 49–51, 53, 55, 58, 59, 62, 64, 66, 67, 71, 78, 80, 84, 85, 89, 92, 94, 97, 117, 127, 128, 133, 135, 141–143, 145, 149, 150, 152, 153, 161, 161, 166, 170, 171, 171, 173, 176, 180, 181, 189, 191, 198, 201, 207, 211, 213, 214, 223, 229–231 professional spaces 13 quadrants 214 question xxii, xxiii, 7, 12, 18, 19, 20n2, 23, 29, 30, 32, 34, 36, 49–53, 62, 66, 67, 76, 90, 91, 94, 100, 101, 103, 110, 119, 120, 123–125, 127–129, 135, 138, 141, 143, 148, 152, 155, 159, 160, 177, 187, 192, 200, 213, 216, 219–222, 224, 227, 228, 230, 233 reading xiii, xxiii, xxv, 10, 11, 17, 21, 24, 30, 32–35, 38, 40, 42, 47, 48, 50, 71, 72, 74, 79, 82, 85, 88, 90, 92, 93–96, 101–103, 106, 107, 109–111, 113, 115–119, 120n4, 121, 137–139, 144–149, 153, 155, 156, 202, 204, 211, 213 reflected 12, 28, 39, 50, 86, 92, 125, 164, 165 reflective thinking 13, 54, 141, 142, 150, 156n1, 235 reflective writing 3, 6, 8, 14, 21, 25, 26, 41, 103, 124, 139, 145, 150, 199, 200, 202, 203, 207, 209, 212, 216 relationship 144, 155, 186, 198, 209, 214 remarkable 4, 6, 20, 40, 135n4, 166 researcher 30–33, 35, 38, 39, 41–43, 48, 54, 71, 73, 76, 85–91, 93, 96, 97, 97n3, 104, 105, 106, 120n1,

120n9, 122, 199, 205, 210, 212, 215, 228, 230, 232 research paper(s) xxiii, 30, 36, 38, 39, 41–44, 47, 102, 205, 231 resources 10, 20n2, 54, 63, 64, 90, 95, 97n11, 102, 103, 106, 141, 168, 169, 170, 210, 222, 226, 233 respect 58, 64, 66, 69, 70, 79–81, 130, 141, 175, 198 revisit 39, 43, 145, 192, 202, 206 rigour 35, 38, 230 risk 10, 45, 64, 141, 143, 183, 211, 227 routine 17, 35, 57, 60, 61, 66, 76, 91, 92, 122, 164, 175, 176 Schon, D. A. 9, 31, 41, 156, 235, 237 schooldays 11 shared 16–18, 20, 21, 25, 26, 30, 33, 35–40, 42–44, 57, 63, 64, 79, 89, 116, 126, 128, 130–132, 141, 144, 147, 151, 153, 165, 176, 177, 183, 199, 203, 204, 209, 211, 212, 213, 217, 224, 233 sharing readings 205 skills xxvi, 29, 33, 48, 54, 58, 60, 66, 71, 85, 86, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 98, 102, 105, 117, 137, 139, 141, 142, 151, 159, 161, 162, 163, 165, 169, 171, 172, 178, 180, 190, 198, 216, 229, 233; tech skills 233 solicited 6, 18, 43, 53, 182, 227 stimulate 180, 205 storyteller xv, 35, 47, 93, 138, 139, 220 strategies 17, 47, 49, 54, 55, 57–59, 66, 69, 71, 82, 84, 86–88, 90, 95, 98, 102, 106, 107, 120, 126, 127, 134, 139, 143, 145, 150, 152, 153, 154, 161, 173, 178, 180, 186, 189, 199, 210, 218, 229 students xxiii sustain 6, 7, 14, 34, 50, 67, 134, 145, 149, 209, 212, 215, 224, 229, 232 synergy 6 TACA 25, 25, 28, 33, 38, 39, 41, 44, 47, 203–205, 216, 217, 230, 232 teacher development: new model 3, 6; prevalent models 3, 197; traditional 4, 49, 50, 62, 64, 84,

Index 243 97n1, 109, 137, 139, 203, 226, 228 teacher educator i, xiii, 4, 35, 47, 197, 198, 200–202, 220 teachers’ voices 29, 203 teaching fraternity 29 teaching practice 22, 23, 63, 85, 91, 137, 146, 154, 208, 218, 219, 230 teaching profession 9, 227 Ted talks 10 transaction xx, 9, 40, 142, 192, 198, 204, 206, 209, 221, 222 transformative xxiv, 5, 59, 158, 198, 199, 222, 234 transmissive 199 trust 20, 22, 66, 68, 90, 130, 190, 205, 207, 211, 212, 214, 215, 232 two‑year 30, 151, 197, 218, 219, 234 uncertainty 11, 44, 232 understanding 9, 22, 43, 64, 69, 70, 74, 77, 80, 81, 89, 90, 94, 99, 102, 109, 125, 127, 128, 130, 131, 135, 160, 161, 165, 174, 180, 184, 188, 189, 191, 200, 203, 206, 210, 216, 227, 232–234

validated 10, 126, 212 vulnerability 10 vulnerable 213 weakness 198, 216 workplace 4, 16, 22, 26, 27, 29, 141, 174, 207, 212, 234, 237 workshops xiv, xxi, 3, 49, 85, 88, 96, 138, 139 work together 199 write xiv, 11, 38, 41, 43, 47, 60, 71, 73, 74, 100, 101, 108, 110, 116, 118, 139–142, 148, 149, 151, 156, 162, 181, 186–188, 192, 210, 227, 230 writing i, 9, 11, 13, 21, 26, 27, 33, 41–44, 49, 59, 66, 71, 73, 74, 78, 79, 85, 92, 93, 95, 97, 101, 102, 106, 109–115, 117–119, 140, 142, 143, 147, 149, 151, 152, 156, 159, 178, 180, 181, 186–188, 190, 200, 205, 206, 211, 218, 224, 228, 231, 233 Zeichner xxi