It’s Our School, It’s Our Time: A Companion Guide to Whole-School Collaborative Decision-Making

Geraldine Rowe

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• eBook ISBN:
  9781000220292
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

It's Our School, It's Our Time outlines a whole-school approach to teacher–pupil collaboration, illustrating how aspects of social inequality can be addressed by involvement in the school community and active participation in decision-making from an early age. The book presents insights into the psychological processes that are at work when pupils and teachers share decision-making, and how this can harness and increase motivation for teachers and their pupils.

Combining both theory and examples of practice, this book provides clarity about the impact of collaborative decision-making and how it can help pupils to take ownership of their classrooms and promote greater cooperation and productivity. This book:

• draws on 25 stories from Dr Rowe's own study and experiences as an educational psychologist, and the accounts of other educators and researchers.

• shows how teachers and school leaders have overcome some common hurdles that those in conventional schools might encounter.

• provides research-evidence and practical examples from real-life classrooms that will inspire teachers, teaching assistants and school leaders.

Written by a highly experienced educational psychologist, this companion guide will help teachers, head teachers, teacher educators and student teachers to transform achievement, behaviour and motivation through greater collaboration with their pupils.

For all my working life, as a teacher and Educational Psychologist (EP), I have been aware of the importance of involving children and adolescents in decisions and have seen for myself the damaging effects that powerlessness and disaffection can have on children and adolescents. I've also witnessed the positive impact on achievement, fellowship and morale that comes from involving pupils in their own educational, social and behavioural plans. I've noticed that teachers who listen to and involve pupils in this way are also the teachers who get the most productivity and co-operation from pupils, particularly those with a history of deprivation and educational failure.

Why no collaborative decision-making (CDM) in classrooms?

Despite decades of research showing the benefits of pupil participation in decision-making, it is still rare to come across classrooms where this is happening. Rather than finding out more about why CDM is not happening, I used my doctoral research to search for teachers who were working in this way and study them (Rowe, 2018). I eventually found three teachers who were using some CDM in their classrooms some of the time, and who were willing to help me in my research. They were all working in conventional schools where this way of teaching was not the norm, and had developed this approach independently with their pupils. Over 15 months I explored the experiences of these three teachers who were involving their pupils in some collaborative decision-making.

I carried out multiple, in-depth interviews interspersed with classroom visits. Through this approach I hoped to gain a better understanding of what it is like to be a teacher using CDM in a regular state school. The three participants were interviewed over a period of 13, 8 and 5 months respectively, and data was analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). IPA is a relatively new research methodology, involving an in-depth analysis of data from a small number of individuals who are all experiencing a similar phenomenon. The idea is that by researching in depth the experiences of a small number of individuals, a deeper insight is gained into the phenomenon participants are all experiencing – in this case, CDM.

The research aims were:

• To develop an understanding of what CDM looks like in the teaching environments of the participants;
• To understand how this practice develops;
• To understand the meaning that CDM holds for teachers;
• To understand the uniqueness, commonalities and divergences of teachers' experience of CDM; and
• To identify possible implications for education, policy and future research, based on these findings.

My participants

My particular research design meant that I needed to find three participants to study in depth over several months. My concerted efforts to find suitable participants through letters to schools, recommendations from friends and colleagues who work in schools and even setting up my own Pupil Participation Interest group, put me in touch with a dozen or so wonderful teachers, none of whom was actually using CDM with their pupils, although many expressed an interest in CDM. Most of these teachers involved their classes in regular discussions on slavery, values, human rights and the like, but rarely were discussions about pupils' own experiences of their classroom and school; about the way assemblies were organised; the benefits or otherwise of spelling tests; or their suggestions for next term's science curriculum. I knew that teachers using CDM were rare, but that they did exist, because I had occasionally come across them in my EP work in schools over the years and had also read about them and met them at meetings and conferences. Fortunately, as I was still going into schools I had daily contact with teachers, and in this way I was able to find my participants.

Once my research was underway I discovered why it had been so difficult to find participants through the normal recruitment channels: not only are teachers using CDM rare, but they would not necessarily have recognised that what they were doing had a name or was worthy of study. Indeed, all three teachers would occasionally give me a puzzled look and ask, ‘Why are you so interested in me?’

The research took place in three state primary and middle schools in the south-east of England. Participants were, to the best of their knowledge, the only teachers using CDM in their schools. Here is a brief pen picture of each of my participants (pseudonymns are used).

Carl

My first participant, Carl, was in his second year as a qualified teacher working in the primary school where he recently trained. Before entering teaching, Carl studied History and worked in sales and cafés, but ‘had it in his head’ that he would end up working as a teacher. These experiences as well as captaincy of a football team have some possible bearing on the type of teacher he is today. His focus on History has taught him to take a ‘long view’ of his pupils' education; his football experience has convinced him of the advantages of teamwork; and his sales experience has perhaps convinced him that

I'm not going to force … thirty children to do something they don't want to do – it's a waste of my energy. So you shape it so that they drive it.

Michael

Michael, my second participant, was in his second year of teaching in a middle school, having completed a degree in Primary Teaching. He decided when he was five years old that he wanted to be a teacher. At that age he felt that teachers had ‘that kind of celebrity status' and liked the idea of a career around ‘learning’:

I've always been a learner. Even now as an adult I still go on learning things in the background while I'm teaching.

He felt very lucky with the education he was given and wanted to give children the same kind of education that he had.

Philip

My third participant, Philip, had been teaching for 17 years at the time of the study. Prior to this, he completed a Sports Science degree and a PGCE and worked as a peripatetic sports coach in schools. He recalled his own schooldays with pleasure. The state primary school Philip attended was run by a non-traditional head teacher who kept animals, believed in children spending time outdoors and did not insist on school uniform. Philip believes that this experience gave him a lifelong interest in animals and ecology. This unorthodox head teacher may also have provided a ‘collaboration’ role-model for Philip.

Participant 1: Carl

I identified my first participant, Carl, through a discussion we had about one of his pupils, who had been referred to the Educational Psychology Service where I worked. I was involved in a review meeting with Carl a couple of weeks after an initial consultation concerning a socially isolated child, Harry, who was not co-operating in class. I had previously offered some recommendations for Carl to consider, and in our review meeting he told me that he had discussed my recommendations regarding Harry with the whole class, who said they wanted to do it differently. This is the only time in over 30 years that I have come across a teacher independently discussing an EP's recommendations with the whole class. Further discussion suggested that he regularly involved pupils in classroom discussions and decision-making. Shortly after this, he agreed to take part in my research and we met regularly over the next 15 months for in-depth interviews, interspersed with classroom visits.

Carl was the only teacher in that school using CDM. He explained how he had come to use CDM because he wanted to be a nurturing teacher who showed respect to his pupils. This involvement in decision-making seemed to him to be a natural way of doing it: ‘As a teacher, you've got to treat every child like a person, otherwise you can't help them. That's what we're there to do … at the end of the day.’

Carl knew that he wanted a classroom where every pupil felt safe and confident to say whatever they wanted, without fear of being ridiculed, or feeling stupid or rejected. So at the start of term they watched lots of YouTube videos together and discussed these as a class, talking about how the people involved might have felt and sharing their own feelings about similar situations. Carl joined in and encouraged children to speak to each other rather than directing their comments to him. He then developed this culture of communication by regularly sharing his plans with them and asking what they thought. If any child appeared to be starting to make a suggestion, or question the way things were done in the classroom, Carl encouraged them to go further. At the same time, he consciously held back from talking himself, encouraging pupils to take a more active role by placing them, rather than himself, centre stage.

Discovering boundaries together

Although Carl was aware that children sometimes say and do inappropriate things, he told the class that they were not going to start with any rules, but to work out the boundaries together as they went along. This led to some interesting discussions, helped the pupils to learn about negotiating relationships and seemed to work, according to Carl.

If children are never given the opportunity in class to collaborate in decision-making, teachers would find it very hard to identify those children who need extra help in this area. Carl realised that in order to develop a collaborative culture in his classroom, with children who had had three to five years of ‘being told what to do’, some children would need to change perceptions of themselves and others, and would need to learn some new skills. For example, Carl was working with a small group one day when a boy approached needing help. He just stood by the group with his hand up until Carl turned and said, ‘With a group this size, you just say, “Excuse me” to get attention.’ Carl also recognised that some children did not yet believe that their ideas were valuable enough to express, and he wanted to do something about this.

This example illustrate three points: (1) Carl's belief that every pupil in his class is important; (2) his recognition that some children need nurturing in order to participate fully; (3) and the role the teacher can play in changing both a child's own self-perception, and the way that they are regarded by their peers.

Trust and openness between teachers and pupils are key when developing a collaborative classroom. And Carl's class soon discovered that a difficulty experienced by even one pupil in their class was everybody's business, and something they could all help with. He found ways of involving his class in discussions and support around individual pupils (see Corey's Computer Time later in this chapter) and at the start of term, for example, he asked his class if they would be patient with him while he showed patience to two boys who had not yet ‘learnt to be part of the class', which they all accepted and supported.

STORY: SHARKEY

At Parents' Evening, Shaun's mother asked Carl what could be done to help her son to think more highly of himself. Carl told his mum he was going to brainwash him. He said, ‘I'm going to make him more confident. I'm going to fix his self-esteem,’ and she laughed.

In Carl's school, resilience is represented by a fish; children are encouraged to ‘be like a fish’ and keep going when things are tough. So for the first six months Carl started calling Shaun ‘Sharkey’. He wasn't just a fish, he was a super-fish who was going to learn to be the most resilient person in the school. So he became ‘Sharkey’ and all the other children started calling him ‘Shark’, and Carl put a picture of a shark above his desk. He didn't say anything, but Shaun started to be more resilient.

One day the Head came into class to hear the children giving European Union Referendum speeches. Shaun was reluctant to get up. All the other children gathered round him to offer encouragement, urging him on, ‘Remember when you couldn't do anything … When you just used to cry … go for it!’ Shaun's face filled with pride and he got up and read out his speech.

The head teacher was very complimenta...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 It is possible! A study of three teachers
• 2 Rationale and psychology
• 3 Monitoring and evaluation
• 4 Which decisions? Which pupils?
• 5 How to collaborate
• 6 Negotiating the curriculum
• 7 Culture and leadership
• 8 Teachers and CDM
• Conclusion
• Index