A few weeks ago I had the opportunity to spend some time at two of the most innovative schools in New Zealand: Hobsonville Point Secondary School and Albany Senior High School.  I joined a team of teachers I work with from a local high school.  Their school is starting construction on a new building.

Here’s a video about Hobsonville Point Secondary School

I’ve also spent time working with teachers and school leaders at Stonefields School, which is a primary (K-8) school with an Innovative Learning Environment.  Here’s a quick video about Stonefields.

School facilities in New Zealand are funded from the national government, not local taxes.  Because of this national funding, the national Ministry of Education gets a significant voice in the design of the buildings.  The Ministry has recently begun funding only buildings that meet the criteria of what they call Innovative Learning Environments (ILE).  ILEs are very similar to the “open classrooms” idea the U.S. experienced a few decades ago.  The difference, though, is that the Ministry seems to have learned from the problems open classrooms caused.  As a side note: “The Ministry” employs university education professors as consultants to advise most decisions.  These professors have assisted the Ministry of Education in making long-term, strategic decisions based off educational research.  The difference between “open classrooms” and ILEs is that the philosophy behind ILEs is more than facilities (Ministry, 2016).  The New Zealand vision for Innovative Learning Environments is based on studies from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).  In their studies, the OECD explains that innovative learning environments continuously evaluate all systems within schools, instruction and operations, and adapt to changing needs.  ILEs also have school leaders that are focused on instruction and are able to create professional environments that embrace change (OECD, 2016).  The ILE philosophy combines facility redesign/remodel with pedagogical change, systems changes, and instructional leadership.  Hobsonville Point Secondary School and Albany Senior High School are the models that the ILE philosophy are built around.

Quick Observations

The first thing I noticed about these two schools was the layout.  In addition to classrooms, there were large open spaces where students were collaborating.  The floors were carpeted, even the hallways.  In most areas, though, it was hard to distinguish between hallway and learning space because the design allowed easy movement between learning spaces.  The student cafe was a large, open space as well.  The cafe was not carpeted.  Another interesting thing I noticed is the lack of a bell system.  I was there long enough to see students transition to new learning spaces, the cafe, and fitness class.  At no point did I ever hear a bell.  I also never heard a teacher tell students that it was time to transition.  These two schools did not have a rushed or hurried feel.

I also took note of the students’ interactions with each other and their teachers.  Some students were working together at tables.  Some students were sitting next to each other on the floor while working together and/or independently.  Some students were sitting alone working on their mobile devices.  When students were talking, all were talking at appropriate levels.  Teachers moved between groups and individuals to offer assistance.  Some teachers had small groups clustered around a whiteboard for a short tutorial.  These tutorials lasted just a few minutes and then students were back to working together or independently.  There weren’t any loud noises or talking causing distractions.  The learning environments were very calm, but focused.

Learning Innovations

Hobsonville Point Secondary School and Albany Senior High School have some pretty amazing innovations working within their schools.  All of the changes within these schools started with the leadership teams.  I was able to meet with the Principal of each school and a few Assistant (Deputy) Principals.  During our conversations, they explained the shared philosophies of their leadership teams and the major decisions they made when redesigning the schooling experience.  The most impactful thing I noticed about these leadership teams was their focus on teaching and learning.  The school leaders actively participate in and lead the teacher professional development and learning.  The school leaders model professional learning.  The school leaders stay informed of academic research and include research findings into their decisions.  They looked at every aspect of their schools and made changes/improvements to anything that was negatively impacting teaching and learning and emphasized things that were positively impacting teaching and learning.  Here are a few examples.  Both schools recognize the importance of having students not only apply learning to real-world applications, but also to use real-world applications as mechanisms of learning.  Because of the educational benefits of authentic learning and application, both schools have students engage in large, interdisciplinary design projects.  Both schools also read significant research studies that suggested interruptions in “flow-like” learning are very detrimental to the learning experience.  Therefore, they moved away from traditional bell scheduling and into block scheduling with enhancements.  The enhancements include dedicated time each week for students to work on their design projects under the mentorship of staff members.  The enhancements also include almost no punishment for tardiness to the next “class.”  Because of the open spaces, there are very few places where students can “hide” during class transitions and therefore are either deeply engaged in the previous class work or conferencing with a teacher.  Both are valid reasons to be tardy to the next class.

Another very important thing to note about these two schools is the absence of Deans and the limited number of Guidance Counselors.  Instead, teachers are assigned to serve as a coach for a small group of students.  This coach helps students make course decisions, conferences with students regarding their schooling, and is the liason between the the school and parents/guardians.  Discipline problems are first routed through the coach.  Larger discipline problems are routed to the school leadership team.  The coach also teaches curricula that are often difficult to find a home in traditional high schools (e.g. digital citizenship).  These teachers and their small groups have scheduled times during the school week when they meet.  It looks very much like a homeroom design.  The benefit for the families is that they only get 1 phone call regarding academic progress and discipline from 1 person at the school.  The school leadership team learned that parents of struggling students were getting multiple phone calls and having a difficult time managing the multiple communications.  They resolved this issue through the coaching model.  Families also get an individual in the school that is closely monitoring the academic achievement of their students.

As I walked around the schools talking with school leaders, teachers, and students, I noticed a few smaller rooms with glass walls.  Inside these small rooms was one or two adults working.  I asked who the adults were and what they were doing.  Those adults were employees from local businesses.  The schools provide office space for local professionals  working on design projects.  These projects might be engineering, architecture, marketing, or finance as examples.  In exchange for office space, the professionals agree to have open offices for students to see what they’re working on, and for students to get advice from the professionals on their own design projects.  The professionals get office space and the students get access to working professionals as mentors!

Curriculum

New Zealand high school students have higher stakes in their academics than U.S. students.  For almost all of their courses, they have end-of-year examinations and portfolios that are assessed both locally by their teachers and nationally by an assessment group.  The curriculum for the NCEA courses, which are courses that students need to take in order to earn enough credits to graduate high school and gain admission to university, have learning standards attached to them that teachers must address during the course.  The NCEA courses are very similar to the AP course formats in the U.S.  So a question that’s been lurking in my mind has been, “how do these schools, which have high-demanding courses that are externally assessed, find the time to have students working on design projects?”  From looking at their curriculum, courses, projects, and school schedule, and from talking with the school leadership teams, I believe these schools took a chance and incorporated some very important academic research into their philosophies.  These schools choose to focus on deep, authentic learning experiences as the primary vehicle for students to gain knowledge and skills.  They plan research/design projects, conduct the research/design, and then communicate their findings/products with authentic audiences.  During the process, students are learning new ideas, facts, and procedures that would traditionally come from lectures in class.  These students are discovering information on their own.  Just to clarify, though, there are traditional classes incorporated into these schools too.  Students still take core courses that are typically found in high schools, but those courses are packaged into learning modules that combine different disciplines to help students see the connectedness of learning topics.  Because of the interdisciplinary curriculum and passion projects, students at these schools also get the opportunity to participate in electives.  Although, at these schools, they don’t use the label “electives” because they don’t want students to think non-core subjects are secondary.

Whole-school redesign

As I stated above, the Innovative Learning Environments (ILE) at Hobsonville Point Secondary School and Albany Senior High School are more than just new classrooms and passion projects.  These schools redesigned everything related to schooling to better serve the academic needs of students.  The facilities are designed to encourage collaboration between departments and to highlight the great work of each department.  The master schedule is designed to reduce the interruptions students face when deeply engaged in learning.  The staffing is designed to help students be more responsible for their learning.  The budgets and resources are strategically invested in programs that have proven to be effective in improving student learning.  The leadership teams expect continuous professional growth from the staff and models continuous professional growth through their participation in and leading teacher professional development.  The leadership teams focus talk and decisions on the vision of the schools.

My visit to these two schools convinced me that providing engaging and relevant schools to students in this century requires more than just updated facilities or curriculum improvements.  It requires that all aspects of schooling be re-evaluated and redesigned to work together.  Operations, Curriculum, Teaching, Student Services, and Athletics all impact each other and should be evaluated whenever innovations are implemented in schools.  Viviane Robinson (2009) found that the most important factor in student success in schools is the focus on teaching and learning.  21st century schools require all school leaders, regardless of their daily duties (Instruction, Curriculum, Operations, Finance, Student Services, Athletics, etc.) to be instructional leaders by being well-versed in teaching and learning, and to center discussions and decisions around the teaching and learning that happens in schools.

Here’s a 15 minute video about Albany Senior High School.  Pay particular attention to the language and philosophy of the school leaders as they’re interviewed in this video.

In previous posts, I discussed some of the problems associated with the school reforms from 1989 which caused schools to become isolated.  These schools are examples of how some schools have overcome those problems through strong instructional leadership throughout their entire organizations.

References

OECD. (2016).  Innovative Learning Environments.  Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/innovativelearningenvironments.htm

Ministry of Education.  (2016).  Innovative Learning Environments.  Retrieved from http://ile.education.govt.nz

Robinson, V., Hohepa, M., & Lloyd, C. (2009).  School leadership and student outcomes: Identifying what works and why.  Ministry of Education.  Wellington, New Zealand.  Retrieved from https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/60180/BES-Leadership-Web-updated-foreword-2015.pdf