Conference Agenda

Research has clearly indicated the importance of functional reading skills as a tool for personal, social and economic development and empowerment (Nelis et al. 2021). However, although Ireland ranked second in relation to overall mean reading achievement in Progress In International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2021 (Mullis et al., 2023; Delaney, et al., 2023), a considerable difference in literacy achievement continues to exist between children in disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged schools, particularly in relation to reading development (Nelis & Gilleece, 2023; McNamara et al. 2021; Karakolidis et al. 2021; Kavanagh et al., 2017). This is despite a sustained policy focus in recent decades on initiatives designed to narrow the gap, such as the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategy (Department of Education [DE] 2011), and the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools (DEIS) Strategy (DE 2005; DE 2017).

This poster presents the key concepts, methods, findings and conclusions in relation to a research study which explores literacy practices in urban socio-economically disadvantaged schools situated in Ireland. The aim of this research is to investigate what existing literature in this area indicates concerning the adaptations that can be made to the literacy practices utilised in mainstream urban DEIS primary schools in Ireland for reading instruction, to more effectively support the reading development of students experiencing socio-economic disadvantage. The poster first asserts and contextualises the problem and purpose statement of the research. Relevant policy documents and research illustrating the current reading achievement gap between DEIS schools and non-DEIS schools are drawn upon, to give readers an insight into the current context in Ireland in which this research has been conducted.

A brief overview of the research methods is then outlined to capture the research design, and methods of data collection and analysis which were used within this study. This research consisted of a qualitative desk-based thematic analysis, which utilised secondary data sets that were identified within an in-depth literature review of the research topic. This is followed by a findings and discussion section which details four key themes which emerged within the findings of this study: (i) teacher autonomy in the implementation of reading instruction, (ii) configuration of a Balanced Literacy Framework, (iii) whole school approach to literacy education, and (iv) literacy as a socio-cultural practice. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the significance of the research for professional learning networks such as DEIS primary schools. This discussion recognises the challenges which exist in relation to reading instruction in mainstream urban DEIS primary schools; and highlights the policy and curricular context in which adaptations to school literacy practices must be made.

One important finding in a study investigating how the ongoing digitalization of schools affects teaching and learning in public schools in Malmö, Sweden, is that teachers see many opportunities to use digital tools and resources to create inclusive environments that are more accessible to their students (Ideland et al, 2023b). On the other hand, the study also illuminates large differences between schools in terms of organization, school culture, teaching and development processes related to digital tools and resources. Teachers often state that they want to learn how to use and teach with digital tools together with their colleagues and in connection to their own subjects and teaching practices (Ideland et al, 2023a). Although this view is in line with research on learning in practices (Kemmis et al, 2013) this is not how all schools organize professional learning. Researchers have pointed out that teacher groups working with professional learning and development often need support from external experts (e.g. Timperley, 2011) and can benefit from networking and learning together with other schools and teacher groups interested in the same questions and issues (Brown & Poortman, 2018). Furthermore, it is important to involve teachers to bring about a clinical practice-based research (Bulterman-Bos,m 2008) that can contribute to new teaching methods and ways to meet students as well as new knowledge of e.g. teaching and different student groups (McKenney & Reeves, 2014).

The aim of this roundtable discussion is to highlight and discuss interesting aspects, constraints, and possibilities in a professional learning network (PLN, Brown & Poortman, 2018) that is started up during the fall of 2023. Through this PLN special needs teachers and lead teachers from five schools in Malmö collaborate and are supported by each other as well as by central ICT-developers and researchers from the local school administration. The special needs teachers and lead teachers organize and lead professional learning communities (PLC, Brown, 2017) at their schools, focusing on the use of digital tools and resources to create inclusive and accessible learning environments, in collaboration with the central ICT-developers. The researchers organize and lead meetings and discussions in the PLN together with the central ICT-developers. They are also responsible for bringing in relevant literature and research methods to anchor the learning and development processes in relevant research and make the PLN contribute not only to new methods for teaching but also to new knowledge about teaching, learning and ways to create inclusive learning environments. This knowledge should be of interest for both professionals in schools and researchers. Questions to discuss at the table might be:

- How do the organizations of schools and support from the local school administration facilitate, hinder or shape PLN:s?

- What forms of collaborations and research methods facilitate or hinder learning and progress in PLN:s?

- How do relations between participants with different roles shape PLN:s?

- How can this kind of PLN contribute to research?

Objectives

The Wāhkōhtowin teacher education model was created to decolonize teacher education in Saskatchewan, Canada, utilizing a Nēhiyawak (Cree) worldview. It was informed by Indigenous Elders and responds to Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (2015). Teacher candidates, university and school partners work together to decolonize their thinking, teaching practice and relationships in order to (a) foster student learning; (b) develop Nēhiyaw teacher identity, and; (c) understand colonial truths for reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. This presentation reports on a research study examining the extent to which the model is achieving these objectives.

Perspective

The TRC (2015) admonished Canada’s education system as being designed to “kill the Indian in the child,” in order to assimilate Indigenous peoples into society (TRC, 2015). Although significant changes have been made, scholars continue to critique teacher preparation programs as privileging whiteness and reifying colonial assumptions that perpetuate inequitable experiences for Indigenous peoples (Cottrell & Orlowski, 2014; Pratt & Danyluk, 2017; Wallin & Peden, 2014). To offset this critique, the Indian Teacher Education Program at the University of Saskatchewan worked with partners to conceptualize a model from a worldview supported by Nēhiyaw māmitonēyicikan, or Cree thought and philosophy. The Wāhōhtowin model was developed through oral teachings provided by First Nations Elders. Cultural traditions such as mentoring and relationships with Elders are integral (Restoule, Gruner, & Metatawabin, 2013), and are governed by Nēhiyaw Law (Innes, 2013). Partners work together in a spirit of love, respect and humility for teacher candidates and students. The foundational constructs of the model include relationality, ceremony, language, and child-centredness, and is designed to help Indigenous teacher candidates feel comfortable in the school setting (tipéyimisowin), support them in cultural learning and identity (kīwēwin), and foster their pedagogical growth as teachers (mamáwi kiskinomāsowin).

Methodology and Methods

Our research employs a qualitative mixed methods approach (Merriam, 2009) of interpretive description informed by Indigenous perspectives (Kovach, 2009). We frame the research as “practice research” (Goldkuhl, 2011) and hold to a spirit of research as ceremony (Wilson, 2008). Research activities include: observations of meetings, professional development opportunities, cultural events and lessons; feedback surveys; sharing circles/interviews, and; analysis of student and employment data. We hold an annual research gathering where participants share learning related to ceremony, language, culture, and teaching identity and development. The culminating research project is a digital storywork documentary (Archibald, 2009).

Results

Selected lessons focus on:

• Privileging field experiences key to an Indigenous epistemology;

• Responsivity to changing needs and perspectives across systems;

• Diverse personal experiences and comfort with Indigeneity;

• Language, cultural, land-based and Elder engagement;

• Anti-racist education

• Indigenous placements in religious-based schools.

Significance

The findings have the potential to: mitigate intergenerational effects of colonial policies; (b) increase educational and employment outcomes; (c) provide direction for successful partnerships, and (d) offer strategies for decolonizing teacher education.

Theme

The presentation focuses on partnerships invested in the provision of quality education conceptualized through an Indigenous worldview. Its intention is to decolonize teacher preparation to improve teacher development and student educational outcomes.

Increased emphasis on the use of research in the educational sector has challenged researchers, teacher educators and other actors to clarify how research can support professional development. This article draws attention to epistemic interrelationships between research-based and experience-based knowledge in the educational sector. These interrelationships are visible through tensions between the expectations of knowledge development and school development. The ability to combine different knowledge forms and knowledge relationships in both academia and the field of practice is central. Fekjær et al. (2022) have emphasised the need to specify these knowledge forms further. This research aims to highlight this gap from the perspective of a local authority related to education, such as national departments, counties and municipalities, focusing on decision-making through processes of assessments based on broad knowledge bases. To make knowledge-based decisions, these professions require experience from the field combined with knowledge extracted from research. In addition to these two, experience from these professions is the advantage of knowing the "tools of the trade" as a researcher, which recognises both processes and outputs of research as important. The research questions we pursue are: Which educational practices do local educational authorities move between? Which forms of knowledge are mobilised in various educational practices, and which epistemic relationships are relevant to support knowledge development?

This article examines conceptual descriptions of local authorities' various practices through a duoethnographic methodology, allowing two researchers to collaborate to provide a common understanding (Norris & Sawyer, 2012). The analytical perspectives that will shed light on these practices are epistemic relationships and boundary work in various contexts between schools and academia where local authorities work to support knowledge development. With these analytical perspectives, we seek to increase the understanding of how research and research competence may be relevant to support knowledge development in the contexts of local authorities.

The project looks at the use of Literature in the Second Language and at the ways this element can help students to improve their writing skills. The use of literature can contribute effectively to the developing of students’ writing skills, fostering not only their language abilities but also their knowledge of the culture they are learning (Paran and Robinson, 2016). However, literature is not regularly included in second language instruction, leading to a disconnect between the study of language and that of literary texts.

By intending learning as a social process, I will look at how the use of literature in a collaborative learning context can foster students’ writing skills. To do that, I will adapt the workshop structure developed by Lucy Calkins (1994) for American middle school to the KS3 British curriculum adopted by my school.

Calkins’ model draws on collaborative learning and on the use of mentor texts as a model for students and on the use of workshop model during English lessons. The project will also lead to the redesigning of the KS3 curriculum, integrating in a more purposeful way the study of language and literature.

The purpose of this session is to explore an approach that will support schools to measure progress and improvement through a collaboratively designed measurement tool being trialled in Aotearoa | New Zealand. The approach holds importance for educational practice in that school leaders collaboratively set a balanced scorecard for measuring, monitoring and supporting strategic decision making.

Aotearoa | New Zealand’s schools are self-managing, self-governing entities. For a small nation, we have struggled with the measurement of progress and improvement in schooling. This has become both divisive and politicised with frequent concerns arising regarding comparison and ranking of schools.

During 2021 and 2022 Springboard Trust embarked on a new way of thinking and exploring this measurement challenge, trialling and adapting a tool from the business sector which enabled school principals to develop their own balanced scorecard for their school. In this pilot programme, school leaders took the balanced scorecard concept to develop measures for their school’s progress across four perspectives. The principals learnt alongside other principals, supported by volunteer subject matter experts, as they developed this key communication tool.

Through collaboration with their school stakeholders, Boards of Trustees, parents, teachers and students, school principals determined four clear, measurable objectives that were aligned with the school’s vision.

The subject matter experts, volunteers from the business sector, scaffolded the school leaders to gain clarity in this process, to de-jargonise their language and to determine clear lead and lag measures. As a result, educational practices of school leaders were enhanced through this sharing of knowledge.

The piloting of the programme occurred through four iterations over the two years resulting in an online delivery format that is currently utilised, and still improvement focussed. Some 50 schools have completed the process.

Participants in this session will view summary slides outlining both the Balanced Scorecard for Schools Aotearoa and the development of leadership learning practices. As well, a range of short video clips will be shared where principals/school leaders:

• Present their dashboard on a page at the conclusion of the programme.

• Share insights regarding their leadership learning and the development and early utilisation for their school.

Participants will have the opportunity to practice using the tool with a context they are familiar with

Conversation will be enabled through the presentation, followed by an interactive Q&A session.

Connection to the conference theme: Enhancing educational practices of school leaders – knowledge mobilisation through collaborative school improvement practices.

Purpose and Educational Importance

The purpose of this innovate proposal is to use research evidence about school leaders and school operations to consider how to improve school leader preparation. Specifically, the session will consider how increased instruction about management skills and effective practices could enhance school leader training and development.

An extensive amount of research has identified the importance of school leaders to school effectiveness and improvement. For instance, Grissom et al. (2021) concluded that principals were the most important school-based factor contributing to educational outcomes. From their meta-analysis, Liebowitz and Porter (2019) found principal behavior influenced several student and teacher outcomes. Similarly, a substantial amount of research has identified policies and practices that contribute to effective and improving schools. Studies such as Stockard et al. (2018) and Stringfield et al. (2008) provide evidence about specific initiatives that support effective or improving schools. In addition, works such as Reynolds et al. (2014) and Bryk et al. (2009) have provided more general guidelines for operating effective or improving schools.

Despite knowledge about the importance of school leaders and effective schools operations, the formal preparation of school leaders has not reliably produced graduates with the capacity to lead effective and improving schools (Grissom et al., 2019). In addition, observations of and reports from practicing school leaders have indicated that they spend more time in managerial activities than instructional ones (Hochbein et al., 2021). While many school leaders feel like managerial responsibilities detract from the effectiveness of their instructional leadership (Wang, 2022), evidence indicates a positive association between school leader time dedicated to managerial tasks schools and educational outcomes (Horng et al., 2010, May et al, 2013).

Approach to the Session

These disconnects between the importance of school leaders, knowledge about effective schools, and school leader time use calls for reconsideration of how to reliably train effective school leaders. To ultimately create a focused discussion on ways to meaningfully improve the preparation of school leaders, the first portion of the session will ask attendees to consider a series of questions about school leadership and school operations, such as:

1. What activities would you expect to see from an instructional leader?

2. What could a school leader have done to improve your school experiences?

3. How would you define a noninstructional activity for a school leader?

The attendees will formulate their answers and then publicly share some responses. I intend these questions to create cognitive dissonance in the attendees and help focus attention on the disconnect between school leader activities and management of school practices. From these responses and discussions of evidence, I will lead a discussion considering the need to better incorporate management training into school leader preparation and development.

Conference Theme Connection

This innovate proposal directly connects to the conference theme of “Quality Professional Education for Enhanced School Effectiveness and Improvement”. The presentation will use attendees’ experiences and existing evidence about school leader and school effectiveness to consider how improved managerial training could enhance the education and professional development of school leaders.

Higher education (HE) in the Republic of Ireland experiences ongoing challenges in achieving wider participation by some groups as outlined in the desired intentions of national policy (HEA, 2015; Fleming, Loxley and Finnegan, 2017; Colum and Brennan 2022). This is mostly palpable within initial teacher education (ITE) where there is a lack of representation from diverse backgrounds or in the preservice teachers’ personal educational experience (Keane and Heinz, 2016) and further consolidated by data reporting that a mere 0.1% of the student body comprises Traveller young people accessing HE (HEA, 2015). Essentially, students from the Traveller community are almost non-existent in ITE programmes. In order to address the disparity, the Higher Education Authority (HEA) called on HE institutes to develop initiatives to identify and support students from pockets of society typically underrepresented in ITE. It was within this context that the TOBAR programme (phase one 2018 – 2021) in Marino Institute of Education was conceptualised and in 2021 expanded to partner with Trinity College Dublin (phase two 2021 – 2024).

The poster will address the following key concepts:

1. What is TOBAR? An overview of this access initiative in MIE/TCD.

2. Supports offered by the TOBAR programme: identification of specific supports offered to TOBAR students.

3. Challenges for students from the Traveller community to and through ITE programmes: the ongoing and persistent challenges for students.

4. Success stories: A showcase of four students from TOBAR, now newly qualified teachers, from the Traveller community.

5. Next steps: future directions for the TOBAR project and for TOBAR graduates.

Methods

The poster highlights Irish Travellers’ journeys to and through the TOBAR and ITE programmes via a narrative approach from a sample of four TOBAR students. It will highlight research on the engagement of TOBAR students in ITE (namely Colum and Collins, 2021; Colum and Brennan, 2022; Uí Choistealbha and Colum, 2022; Burns, Colum and O’Neill, 2023). Much of the literature exposes both the supports and the continuous specific barriers that Irish Travellers face to and through their higher education (HE) journey.

Findings and conclusions

Findings comprise:

(1) The importance of programmes like TOBAR : having a dedicated programme for ethnic minority groups are crucial in order to identify bespoke, individual supports.

(2) The value of the relational space: the importance of having caring, trusting relationships with students and families.

(3) Challenges to and through ITE programmes: experiences of TOBAR students to and through HE.

(4) Post TOBAR journeys: retention in the school system as NQTS and the new challenges that follow our students.

Conclusions:

(1) Entrench dialogue on HE and ITE at the upper end of primary and early post primary years. Have partnerships with schools to encourage students from the Traveller community to access third level education.

(2) Draw on the expertise of families, bring them in as experts, discuss aspects of culture and how we can support students.

(3) Work with Traveller advocacy groups to provide information and direct support students.

(4) Have substantial bursaries in place to ease the financial difficulty.

(5) Have academic supports in place from primary school up to third level.

Purpose: Research shows that parents engage girls more frequently in spatial tasks than boys (Thomson et al., 2018), and that children’s math identities are formed as early as the K-4 years (Dou et al., 2019). Early math skills have also been found to impact later career development (Pritulsky et al., 2020). Few studies have examined how sociolinguistic factors relate to children’s gendered socialization. Understanding how home language practices align with classroom practices could provide opportunities for educators and parents to co-create enriching activities that enhance children’s math achievement (York & Loeb, 2018). This study examines: 1) parental perceptions of play, 2) child gender mediation of parental language during a puzzle play task, and 3) parent/child task engagement for boys and girls.

Methods:

This study draws from home visits conducted the summer before kindergarten in a larger research practice partnership (Wishard Guerra et al., 2020). Parents were asked to play with their child (n (girls) = 8, n (boys) = 12) using three sets of toys. Data includes play interactions in a tangram puzzle task. Children’s quality of involvement was analyzed using a Play Experience Scale (The Lego Foundation, 2019). Child language outcomes were measured with the WJ-ECAD (Schrank & Wendling, 2018). Parents’ verbal input (frequency of conversations and total words spoken) was measured using The CLAN (Computerized Language ANalysis) program (MacWhinney, 2000). Parent interviews examine patterns of parental learning perceptions.

Results:

Parents spoke more frequently (t(28) = 2.45, p = .02) and used more words (t(28) = 2.22, p = .04) with their daughters compared to their sons during the spatial task. Similar patterns were found within Hispanic and Spanish bilingual families. Preliminary results from the puzzle task indicated that girls were more actively engaged in the task, (t(18) = 2.27, p = .04). Girls had higher expressive language scores (t(33) = 2.0, p = .05). Future analyses will include parent interview data on beliefs about learning through play and gendered language differences.

Educational Importance

Our study suggests that girls’ levels of expressive language are related to their task engagement. Also, boys were not as engaged in the spatial task, nor were their parents interacting verbally with them as frequently as girls. Educators can use these findings to develop spatial awareness tasks in the classroom that address low task engagement, as well as at-home parental involvement for boys. The sociolinguistic data can inform teachers why this may be the case and how they can support parents in enhancing their engagement with all children. Future research can also juxtapose these results with math achievement scores to identify a relationship among them.

Connection to the Conference Theme

Our findings align with the conference theme by urging educators to account for gendered differences in math performance. Teachers’ professional development must address how at-home sociolinguistic practices relate to math performance. The insights gathered from the parent interviews can provide important feedback for teachers as they develop their mathematical pedagogy. It is imperative for teachers and parents to leverage data like ours as they support children’s math growth.