C21 Teaching
  • Home
  • FTPL Videos
  • Blog
  • List of Blog Series
  • Education Resources
  • Starting with Flipped Learning
  • Friday Freebie
  • About Me
  • Contact

Honours Dissertation Chapter One

11/4/2017

0 Comments

 
“I’m not going to be an art teacher that teaches art”
- Research Participant, during our interview for my Dissertation
When I was in the process of completing my initial teacher education (ITE), I considered whether or not it would be worth undertaking the Honours process as part of that. There were a lot of factors that fed into the eventual decision to apply for a place, and ultimately, though it helped not one whit with acquiring a full-time position as a teacher, I am glad that I went through the process. It was long, mentally and intellectually challenging, and it pushed me to think more critically, to be more aware of research processes and biases as well of various research methodologies. I actually enjoyed the process of researching, and writing and it has had a significant influence on my writing style.

I had considered working towards having it published, however, have neither the time nor the mindset at this point to sit down and re-edit it sufficiently so that it fits within the word limits of a journal article. More importantly, I have no disconnected with the data and with that piece of research and would need to invest significant time and effort into reconnecting. I do wish to pursue a Research Higher Degree at some point (after Youngling has started school at the earliest is what I have been told) and so offer up over the next few articles, my Honours dissertation for feedback.

I have not made any edits whatsoever to this version. It is a straight copy and paste from my original 2014 file. I am rather proud of it, despite its now (to me) glaring flaws. If you wish to dive straight into the whole dissertation, you can find it here as a PDF. I have also made available the examiners reports and rubrics (after redacting their identifiable information). I found it interesting that one examiner marked it as an eighty-eight whilst the other marked it as an eighty-two. A fairly significant variation in marks, however, the average of eighty-five was sufficient to earn a High Distinction and thus, with the other requirements met regarding my Grade Point Average etc., the award of Honours Class I.

​I welcome any constructive feedback you care to offer.
Chapter I – Literature Review

Since Dewey’s writings in the early twentieth century, the status of the arts in education curricula has waxed and waned in line with the socio-political movements of the day; from progressive reform to back-to-basics devolution and back again (Oreck, 2004). Art education is considered to be a key learning area (KLA), and has been endorsed as such within the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (hereafter, the Melbourne Declaration) (Barr, Gillard, Firth, Scrymgour, Welford, Lomax-Smith, ...Constable, 2008) and the National education and the arts statement (Barr, Bishop, Della Bosca, Maharey, Henderson, Welford…McHale, 2005). The current New South Wales (NSW) prescribed curriculum includes a creative arts syllabus (Board of Studies NSW, 2006) encompassing the strands of dance, drama, music and visual arts, whilst the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), which has been tasked with writing the national curriculum, has also prescribed a (still in development) creative arts syllabus (ACARA, 2014a).

Art education has been extensively studied and has been correlated with a range of benefits including; improved standardised testing outcomes irrespective of socio-economic status (Brouillette, 2009; Ewing, 2010), decreased levels of boredom in class (Ewing, 2010), higher self-concept (Barr, Bishop et al., 2005; Ewing, 2010), higher rates of tertiary education entry (Brouillette, 2009), increased levels of self-efficacy across various KLAs (Ewing, 2010), reduced truancy levels (Barr, Bishop et al., 2005; Ewing, 2010) and increased levels of pro-social behaviours such as volunteering and engagement in the political process (Brouillette, 2009). Additionally, Ewing (2010) notes that there are many health, social and economic benefits that can be correlated to education through the arts. Correlational effects must of course be read while keeping in mind the caveat that correlation does not necessarily equal causation.

This is due to the wide range of variables within educational practices, classrooms and participants making it difficult to find a causal link between the improvements found in research and the specific art education, as has been noted elsewhere (Baker et al., 2002; Eisner, 1999; Ewing, 2010; Fiske, 1999)*. Despite the absence of an established causal relationship between art education and the correlational benefits associated therein, the arts have been identified within various governmental position papers and statements as being crucial to future economic and social progress within Australia (Barr, Bishop et al., 2005; Gillard, 2008; Prime Minister’s Science Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC), 2005).

Tasked with implementing the national curriculum and the prescribed syllabus documents therein, are the approximately 261,000 qualified Australian teachers (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2013). Qualifying as a teacher in Australia currently involves undertaking an initial teacher education (ITE) program of four years (duration), consisting of a mixture of discipline and educational studies, which is provided through the various Australian universities (Hooley, 2008). For the purposes of this study, only primary teachers, covering Kindergarten to year six and the ITE they undergo have been included. The quality of teachers graduating from these ITE programs has been the source of contentious debate for a number of years, with various government reports recommending additional funding to ITE to improve teacher

quality (Fawns, Misson, Moss, Stacey, & Ure, 2007; Interim Committee for the Australian Schools Commission, 1973; Senate Employment Education and Training References Committee (SEETRC), 1998), as well as a body of social commentary and research lamenting the quality of ITE and the state of teaching (for example Aubusson & Davison, 2012; Connell, 2009; Donnelly, 2007; Edwards & Protheroe, 2003; Gillard, 2008, 2012; Gillard & Garrett, 2012; Hooley, 2008; Plourde, 2002; Pyne, 2014; Rice & Roychoudhury, 2003). 

The importance of quality teachers and the requisite ITE programs is highlighted in a report from the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) entitled Teachers Matter (OECD, 2005), which summarised research and examined the variables which impact on student learning outcomes. This report concluded that of all the factors which are open to policy influence that have an impact on student learning outcomes, the most important factor was found to be teacher quality (OECD, 2005). But in spite of the OECD’s findings and the substantial body of research into the critical nature of ITE (Atkinson, 2004; Connell, 2009; Desforges, 1995; Edwards & Protheroe, 2003; Hooley, 2008; Plourde, 2002; Ravindran, Greene, & DeBacker, 2005; Rice & Roychoudhury, 2003; Wilson, R.E., & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002), as well as successive inquiries into the state of the teaching profession and ITE (Fawns et al., 2007; Interim Committee for the Australian Schools Commission, 1973; OECD, 2005; SEETRC, 1998) noting shortages amongst particular subject areas (SEETRC, 1998), and consistently recommending additional funding for ITE programs, Connell (2009) observes a lack of increased funding into this sector of education budgets.

The body of evidence establishing the beneficence of art education has been built up through a wide range of research (Brouillette, 2009; DuPont, 1992; Fink, 1976; Gradle, 2014; Hargreaves, Galton, Robinson, & Windridge, 2002; Keinanen, Hetland, & Winner, 2000; Krash, 1954; Moore & Caldwell, 1993), but in spite of this there appears to be a divergence between teachers understanding of the beneficence of art education, and the implementation of the arts in pedagogical practice. This divergence was noted by Oreck (2004) in his study on teacher’s attitudes towards, and use of, the arts in pedagogical practice, where he found that although teacher’s may recognise and be aware that art education is important, and that teachers may be understanding of the potentially significant cognitive and social benefits for students from art education, that teachers undertaking generalist ITE appear to feel that they are not the ones who should be tasked with teaching the arts.
​
It needs to be asked why this is the case, given that the definition of a successful learner in the Melbourne Declaration (Barr, Gillard et al., 2008) is that “Successful learners…are creative, innovative and resourceful, and are able to solve problems in ways that draw upon a range of learning areas and disciplines” (p. 8), and that the PMSEIC noted that “Creativity…is a central concept of innovation” (PMSEIC, 2005, p. 2). These two statements create a vision of art education as being not only of critical value to student’s successful learning and future, but of their future success in the job market, with the implication that art education is critical to the future economic growth, stemming from innovative practices. This conceptualisation of art education is further reinforced in the National arts and education statement (Barr, Bishop et al., 2005) which states that:
“[t]he arts foster imagination, risk-taking and curiosity—important aspects of creativity. Governments, businesses and communities now widely regard creativity and innovation as fundamental to social, economic, cultural and technological growth. Arts-based enterprises are vitally important to economic success.” (p. 4)
​With this view of art education promoted in official government documents, it is all the more concerning to discover the divergence between understanding the beneficence of art education and the implementation of the arts in pedagogical practice that has been observed by Oreck (2004). This divergence begs the question how is the divergence between understanding and practice formed? To answer this question, I begin by examining more broadly current discourses regarding ITE.

It must first be acknowledged that discourse is a polysemous term (Bacchi, 2000), and in this context I take the view that discourses are a productive force created through the amalgamation of ideology, linguistic practices and social relationships which constitute the taken-up position, and is the means by which we make sense of the world around us (Davies, 2004; Ma, 2013). There are a multitude of discourses encountered daily, and it is not possible to take up all available discourses (Davies, 1990). Understanding that there are multiple discourses which are not all able to be taken-up allows for an understanding of our existence at the nexus of multiple discursive practices, which can be conceptualised as subject positioning (Davies, 2004). Our subject positioning is constituted through internally owned, or taken-up, discourses (Atkinson, 2004), which are, and do, change over time (Atkinson, 2004; Davies, 2004). This post-structuralist conceptualisation of subject positioning then allows for an ongoing cycle of making sense of, and continually updating, the competing and often contradictory discourses to which we are exposed (Atkinson, 2004; Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004; Davies, 1990, 1997).

Post-structuralism, which is the theoretical framework used in this study, contends that the truth of structuralism is in fact a fiction, wherein all truths are constructed discursively (Fuery, 1995, as cited in Davies, 1997). This conceptualisation results in a deconstructionist view of social discourse, revealing, and being critical of, the nature and purpose of the power and knowledge relations contained within discourse (Ma, 2013). A post-structuralist framework therefore allows us trouble the ‘taken for grantedness’ of assumed truths (St Pierre & Pillow, 2000 as cited in Davies, 2004). 

Education within Australia is largely funded by the government and accordingly it can be considered to be in the public sphere (Hooley, 2008). With the conceptualisation that human experience is made up of multiple and often contradictory discourses (Atkinson, 2004; Davies, 2004), it is expected that there are a wide range of discourses encountered during a generalist ITE program (Hooley, 2008). As noted above subject positioning is the result of taken-up discourse (Davies, 1990). Cohen-Evron (2002) and Plourde (2002) both note that teachers and pre-service teachers carry with them discursively constructed beliefs about education as a result of their life of experiences as a student and that those subject positions, combined with the discourses encountered throughout their ITE program, influence the way they think about teaching and learning. 

This discursive construction of teacher’s formal educational subjectivities commences with identification and analysis of political, educational and social discourses during a teacher’s ITE program (Hooley, 2008). Hooley (2008) expands on this concept, postulating that as education is in the public realm, that development of teacher’s pedagogical practice can only take place when there is an evolving theoretical understanding of the link between teaching and society. Taking this further, Hooley (Hooley, 2008) writes that arranging teaching programs to cater to all students can be exceedingly difficult to accomplish without a fluid teaching philosophy encompassing the purpose of education and the role of the teacher and student from an ontological and epistemological viewpoint.

Krug and Cohen-Evron (2000) agree with this view, writing that pedagogical practice is a product of continual evolution, as it is discursively constructed by the pressures of social, economic and political forces that creates limits and possibilities with which teacher’s must accept, resist or negotiate in relation their own subject positioning, their philosophical views on education. These social, economic and political discourses interact with what is understood as a good or effective teacher.

The definition of an effective teacher varies temporally as well as inter- and intra-culturally (Armstrong, 1984; Connell, 2009). At this point in time however, an effective teacher seems to be a teacher who complies with the set of market-driven auditable competencies outlined by the Australian Institute of Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) (AITSL, 2014) that are now an integral component of teacher certification and on-going registration. The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (AITSL, 2014) is steeped in marketplace discourse through use of terminology such as challenges, stakeholders, goals, strategies and achievable (Connell, 2009). Atkinson (2004) takes the viewpoint that the discourse of quality teaching as conceptualised within the AITSL Standards document (AITSL, 2014) contains many laudable characteristics that identify an effective teacher and which can be valued and taken-up as such, but that at its heart, the document fails to capture the inherent social and psychic processes that encapsulate teaching and in fact obfuscates the nature of teaching. Atkinson (2004) goes on to comment that “…a colleague made the point that when all the competency statements are taken together they still do not capture what it is like to teach” (p. 380).

Connell (2009) posits that this focus on auditable competencies has resulted in the lowered priority of the arts in education and in ITE programs, as well as in the minimisation of the need for thinking of education as an intellectual discipline due to the research focus on what is best practice, whilst Dillabough (1999, as cited in Beijaard et al., 2004) indicates the belief that it leads to a loss of the discursive notion of the teaching self. Connell’s (2009) research into teacher standards indicates that teachers are positioned as conformists due to the requirement to attain and maintain prescribed professional standards. This creates a situation where teachers are required to negotiate their teaching identity within their personal beliefs and perceptions, their subject positioning, about teaching and learning, and the external expectations and discourses about what is desirable and those standards with which they must conform (Boyd, Wadham, & Jewell, 2007; Cohen-Evron, 2002; Kagan, 1992). This requirement to conform to competency standards has been postulated by Edwards and Protheroe (2003) as having had a negative impact on ITE programs, whereby the capacity of teacher graduates is being limited through a lack of art education and learning in ITE programs, as evidenced by the deficiencies in time allocated to the arts across ITE programs, at both undergraduate and post-graduate level (Gibson & Anderson, 2008). 

This observation is a reflection of a study reported on in A class act: inquiry into the status of the teaching profession (SEETRC, 1998), which noted that sixty-two percent of respondent NSW primary and secondary teachers believed they were inadequately prepared to teach by their ITE program. This notion of inadequate preparation through ITE programs is a critique which has been made as far back as the Karmel Report (Interim Committee for the Australian Schools Commission, 1973) and reflects the low priority given to the arts in education (Fawns et al., 2007; Oreck, 2004).
​
The current socio-political climate in Australia places a significant level of attention on the results of the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) standardised testing regime. NAPLAN testing is conducted on an annual basis and administered to students in years three, five, seven and nine by ACARA, which collates the results which are then made available to the general public through the My School (ACARA, 2014b) website. Unfortunately, such standardised testing has been critiqued for a variety of reasons, including gender bias (Dodd, 2010), invalid data reporting and comparisons (Wu, 2010), failing to take into account the differences within schools through teacher quality and pedagogy (Ladwig, 2010). Additionally, NAPLAN testing results are taken as a judgement of whether a teacher, or set of teachers, is ‘performing,’ when in fact teaching is a process of joint-labour, involving not only the regular classroom teacher, but also the release from face-to-face teacher and support and ancillary staff, all of whom have an impact on a student’s learning, a situation which standardised testing fails to take into account (Connell, 2009).

The current focus on standardised testing results is counter-intuitive to the structure and process of art education. The focus on standardised testing results can lead to a test-driven curriculum with a mentality that student’s answers are either right or wrong, a state of affairs that encourages didactic pedagogical approaches (Oreck, 2004). This is almost antithetical to the nature of learning through the arts, which sees open-ended discovery as part of the regular experience of students, an approach which encourages personal and subject responses to art, with the student as both artist and audience (Oreck, 2004). Art is by its very nature subjective and art therefore is only truly assessable as a piece of art by the artist. This poses an issue for teachers within the current outcome and content based curriculum which requires teachers to objectively evaluate students’ learning outcomes as part of the assessment of non/achievement of specified learning aims, and holds them accountable for doing so (Hargreaves et al., 2002).

It has been previously established that ITE programs within Australia are generally a four year program of university studies (Hooley, 2008), and that these ITE programs qualify teachers to teach students from kindergarten to year six, as generalist teachers. Graduate teachers are then often required to administer an art education program (Garvis, 2009), often in isolation from the rest of the KLAs, as it is common practice in many schools to timetable learning periods in discrete KLA-specific blocks, limiting the opportunity for cross-curricular inquiry (Cohen-Evron, 2002). This is with the knowledge that there is a dearth of art education training within ITE programs, as has been identified (Gibson & Anderson, 2008).

In examining the divergence between the awareness and understanding of the potential benefits of art education and the level of implementation of the arts in pedagogical practice, Oreck (2004) found that the concern most frequently cited by teachers as an explanation for the lack of art education in their pedagogical practice was the need for further training in art education pedagogical strategies and techniques, followed by pressures to teach the mandated curriculum. This is of concern, as Oreck’s (2004) research was an examination of in-service teachers who had access to professional development opportunities around art education, and it has been noted by Cohen-Evron (2002) that a large percentage of graduate teachers leave the teaching profession within five years of completing their ITE program, and that for those who do remain within the profession, it is not uncommon to revert conservative and traditional didactic practices as a survival strategy. This view was strengthened by Armstrong’s research which found that a graduate teacher’s first employment setting is of critical importance to determining whether or not they remain in the teaching profession (Armstrong, 1984). 

These observations reinforce the findings of Garvis (2009), who reported that upon graduating from their ITE programs, and having positioned themselves as particular kinds of teachers based upon their discursively constructed subject positioning, graduate teachers often feel a sense of shock upon being exposed to the realities of the teaching profession. This is particularly relevant for art education as there are a variety of discordant discourses exerted on teachers from many different parties in relation to educational values and priorities (Cohen-Evron, 2002; Oreck, 2004), with the overall message appearing to be that art education is very low on the academic hierarchy (Cohen-Evron, 2002).

This creates a situation where generalist teachers’ confidence, motivation and knowledge as to the delivery of art education (Garvis, 2009), combines with conflicting subject positions regarding their own autonomy and the support received from supervisors to act as barriers to the implementation of art education (Oreck, 2004). This can result in a reversion to didactic pedagogical strategies and teacher-student power relations as a result of the perceived unsuccessful implementation of art education pedagogy, as opposed to making pedagogical choices on the basis of pedagogical theories (Atkinson, 2004).

The reversion to didactic pedagogical choices maybe read as being indicative of the combined need for more pedagogical and content knowledge education during both ITE and during on-going professional development sessions (Oreck, 2004). Furthermore, as noted by Plourde (2002) possessing content knowledge and skills is different to the ability to enact those skills. This observation is consistent with many reports into the state of ITE and the teaching profession since the release of the Karmel Report (Interim Committee for the Australian Schools Commission, 1973) that ITE programs are of limited effectiveness to prepare teachers. 

This observation, combined with the student-researchers concern about the level of art education preparation administered during his ITE program, and the cited research highlighting the correlated beneficence of art education has led to the three aims of this research study:
  1. To examine how the subject positions taken up by pre-service teachers vis a vis the arts in education have been discursively constructed.
  2. To identify barriers towards pre-service teachers implementation of the arts in their pedagogical practice.
  3. To utilise this research to inform ITE programs in relation to the arts.
*​For the sake of expediency, future references to benefits of art education are to be assumed as correlational benefits, unless otherwise noted.
If you have made it this far, well done.  I would genuinely appreciate any constructive feedback you care to offer. Chapter Two - Methodology, will appear tomorrow.

Until then, thank you for reading.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    RSS Feed

    Tweets by @C21_Teaching

    Categories

    All
    21st Century Learning
    3D Printing
    Aaron Sams
    Abdul Chohan
    Aboriginal Culture
    Aboriginal Education
    Academia
    ACARA
    Accreditation
    ACER
    Action Research
    ADE
    Aimmee Shattock
    AirSquirrels
    AITSL
    Alex Smith
    Alfie Kohn
    Alfina Jackson
    Alice Keeler
    Alice Leung
    AM Hon DLitt
    And Clark
    And The Band Played Waltzing Matilda
    Anne Van Der Graaf
    Announcement
    ANZAC Day
    Apple Distinguished Educator
    App Speed Dating
    Artificial Intelligence
    Ashanti Branch
    Assessment
    Augmented Reality
    AussieEd
    Australian Curriculum
    Awards
    Awesome
    Baby
    Behaviour
    BetterU
    Blake Seufert
    Blogging
    Bloom's Taxonomy
    Books
    Book Study
    Bradley Loiselle
    Brad Loiselle
    Branching
    Break
    Brett Salakas
    Brett Wood
    Brighton Secondary School
    Bron Stuckey
    BYO
    BYOD
    BYODD
    BYOT
    Cameron Malcher
    Camtasia
    Cara Johnson
    Career Change
    Carol Dweck
    Carolina Buitrago & Martha Ramirez
    Casual Teaching
    Catherine Ford
    Cathie Howe
    Change
    Charles Fadel
    Charles Leadbeater
    Chelsea Wright
    Chris McNamara
    Christopher Pyne
    Chromakey
    Chromebooks
    Clarification
    Class Notebook
    Classroom Economy
    Classroom Management
    ClassTech
    Class Tools
    ClickView
    CLT
    Coding
    Coercion
    Cognitive Load Theory
    Collaboration
    Collegiality
    Community Engagement
    Computer Skills
    Conference Expo
    Conference Review
    Confidence
    Connected Classroom
    Consequences
    Constantin Lomaca
    Constructivism
    Contemporary Pedagogy
    Cooinda AECG
    Copyright
    Corinne Campbell
    Cornell Notetaking
    Creative Writing
    Creativity
    Critical Thinking
    Crystal Caton
    Cultures Of Thinking
    Curiosity
    Cyberbullying
    Cyber Security
    Daily Summary
    Dan Haesler
    Dan Jones
    Data
    David Jakes
    Deborah Nicholson
    Democracy
    Digital Citizenship
    Digital Curriculum
    Digital Learner
    Digital Literacies
    Digital Literacy
    Digital Natives
    Digital Pedagogy
    Digital Pedgogy
    #DigLit
    Discipline
    DocHub
    Domains Of Knowledge
    Dominic Hearne
    Drama
    Dr. Britta Jensen
    Dr Caroline West
    Dr. David Zyngier
    Dr. Jane Kise
    Dr. Janelle Wills
    Dr Janine Beekhuyzen
    Dr Jill Margerison
    Dr. Kevin Donnelly
    Dr. Milton Chen
    Dr. Nerida McCredie
    Drones
    Dr. Rachel Wilson
    Dr. Robert Talbert
    Dr. Ruben Puentedura
    Duolingo
    Dyslexia
    Dyslexie
    Early Years Learning
    Earth Engine Time-Lapse
    Easter
    Ed Cuthbertson
    EdTech
    Education
    Educational Technology
    Education Funding
    Education Nation
    Education Policy
    Education Portfolio
    Education Vendor
    Education Week
    EduChange
    EduMedia
    #EduNationAu
    EduTech
    @EduTweetOz
    Edward DeBono
    Elder Gavi
    ELearning
    Elizabeth Amvrazis
    Employment
    English
    Eric Bogle
    Eric Mazur
    Errol St Clair Smith
    Esafety
    ESafety Commissioner
    Eureka
    Evidence Based Practice
    Experienced Teachers
    Family
    Feedback
    Film
    Flexibility
    #FlipConAdl
    FlipConAus
    FlipConNZ
    FlipLearnCon
    Flipped Learning
    Football
    Foundation For Young Australians
    Friday Freebie
    Frozen
    FTPL
    Fun
    Fundamental Movement Skills
    Furniture
    FutureSchools Expo
    GAFE
    Game Based Learning
    Game-Based Learning
    Gamification
    Gaming
    Gary Stager
    Gavin Hays
    GDocs
    GDrive
    Genius Hour
    Geography
    Gert Biesta
    GForms
    Glenn Carmichael
    Glenunga International HS
    Gonski
    Google
    Google Apps For Education
    Google Classroom
    Google Docs
    Google Drive
    Google Forms
    Google Lines
    Google Maps
    Google Slides
    Google Suite
    Graduation
    Gratefulness
    Green Screen
    Greg Ashman
    Greg Whitby
    Group Work
    Growth Mindset
    GSheets
    Heather Davis
    Heath Wild
    Higher Education
    History
    Hogan Assessments
    Holidays
    Homework
    Honours
    Hopscotch
    Horizon Report
    HSC
    Ian Jukes
    Ian Thomson
    ICT
    Ideology
    Indigenous Culture
    Initial Teacher Education
    Inquiry Based Learning
    Interland
    International Baccalaureate
    Internet Skills
    Invent To Learn
    IPad
    IPads
    ITE
    Iteration
    IWBNet
    #IWishMyTeacherKnew
    Iyah Rahwan
    Jack Hyland
    Jack Hylands
    Jacqui Murray
    James Meijboom
    Jamie Dorrington
    Jane Caro
    Jan Owen
    Jared Cooney Horvath
    Jean Piaget
    Jennie Magiera
    Jenny Magiera
    Jeremy Cumming
    Jeremy LeCornu
    Jim Sill
    Joel Speranza
    John Bergmann
    John Burfoot
    John Catterson
    John Dewey
    John Goh
    John Hattie
    Jon Bergmann
    Josh Aghion
    Kahoot
    Kanga Cup
    Kate Lanier
    Katharine Birbalsingh
    Katie Jackson
    Kaye North
    Keith Crawford
    Ken Bauer
    Kid President
    Kim Maksimovic
    Kindergarten
    Kirschner
    Kirsty Tonks
    Kirsty Watts
    Language
    Leadership
    Leanne Steed
    Learning
    Learning Spaces
    Library
    Lifelong Learners
    Life Maths
    Lila Mularczyk
    Lily Young
    Linda Ray
    Lindy West
    Lip Sync Battle
    Lisa Rodgers
    Literacy
    Louann Brizendine
    MacICT
    Makerspace
    Marc Prensky
    Margaret Merga
    Marissa Peters
    Mark Gungor
    Mark Liddel
    Mary Lousie Ryan
    Masterclass
    Mastery
    Mathematics
    Mathletics
    Matt Burns
    Matt Noffs
    Matt Richards
    Matt Scadding
    Media
    Melbourne Declaration
    Melbourne Girls Grammar
    Melinda Cashen
    Mental Health
    Merrylands East PS
    Metacognition
    Michaela Community School
    Michael Aulden
    Michael Beilharz
    Michael Ha
    Michael O'Leary
    Microsoft
    Milton Chen PhD
    Minecraft
    Mistakes
    Monique Dali
    Moral Machine
    Morals And Ethics
    Motivational
    Movie Making
    Murat Dizdar
    Music
    MyEd
    NAO Robotos
    NAPLAN
    Netiquette
    New Beginnings
    Newspapers
    New Teachers
    NMC Horizon Report
    No Excuses
    Note Taking
    Numeracy
    Oakhill College
    Office365
    Offline Access
    Old School Teachers
    Olivia-oneill
    Onedrive
    Onenote
    Organisation
    Padlet
    Panel Discussion
    Parent Communication
    Paul Hamilton
    PBL
    PCPS
    PD
    PDHPE
    PDP
    Pedagogy
    Pedro Negouera
    Peer Instruction
    Peggy Sheehy
    Penny Bentley
    Personal Characteristics
    Peter Adams
    Peter Ellis
    Peter Hutton
    Peter Mader
    Peter Paccone
    Peter Whiting
    Phillip Cooke
    Phillip Heath
    Philosophy
    Phonics
    Physical Education
    PISA
    Place Based Learning
    Planning And Programming
    PLN
    Politics
    Prakash Nair
    Pranav Mistry
    Pre-Learning
    Presenting
    Primary Classroom
    Privacy
    Private Education
    Problem Solving
    Productivity
    Professional Associations
    Professional Development
    Professional Learning
    Professor Barry McGraw
    Professor Geoff Masters
    Professor Jane Burns
    Professor Ken Wiltshire
    Professor Richard Buckland
    Professor Richard Telford
    Project Based Learning
    Prue Gill
    Public Education
    Public Vs Private
    Punishment
    QR Codes
    Questioning
    Rainy Mood
    Ralph Pirozzo
    Reading
    Recycling
    Referee
    Reflection
    Reflector
    Reggio Emilia Approach
    Relationships
    Reports
    Research
    Research Skills
    Resilience
    Resources
    Respect
    Rewards
    RFF
    Richard Byrne
    Robert Livingstone
    Robotics
    Roundtables
    Rupert Denton
    Ryan Gill
    Ryan Hull
    Sally Wood
    SAMR
    Santa
    Sarah Asome
    School Culture
    School Policy
    School Tour
    Science
    ScopeIT
    Self-Branding
    Seymour Papert
    Shane Hancock
    Shireen Winrow
    Silence
    Simon Birmingham
    Simon Breakspear
    Simon Brooks
    Simon Crook
    Simone Segat
    Simon McKenzie
    Simon Sinek
    Sir Ken Robinson
    Sixth Sense Technology
    Social Media
    Socratic Seminars
    Solar System
    Special Needs
    SponeBob Squarepants
    Sport
    Spreadsheet
    Staff Development Day
    Stage One
    Stage Three
    Standardised Testing
    Star Wars
    STEM
    Stephanie Kriewaldt
    Stephen Lethbridge
    STM Bags
    Stories
    Storify
    Stress
    Student Mobility
    Student Wellbeing
    Sue Waters
    Sugata Mitra
    Sunk Cost
    Super Awesome Sylvia
    Susan Bowler
    Sweller
    Sylvia Libow Martinez
    Teacher Education
    Teacher Fever
    Teacher Life
    Teachers Talking Teaching Podcast
    Teacher Value
    Teacher Wellbeing
    #TeachforThink
    Teaching
    Teaching Boys
    Teaching Philosophy
    TeachMeet
    Team Teaching
    TED Talk
    Temporary Contract
    Teresa Deshon
    TER Podcast
    The Arts
    The Eddies
    The Four Cs
    The Hewes Family
    Thinking Skills
    Think Pair Share
    Thomas William Nielsen
    THRASS
    Times Tables
    TMCoast
    #TMSpaces
    Topic Tags
    Tour Builder
    TPCK
    TPL
    Transmedia Storytelling
    Trial And Error
    Troy Faulkner
    Trust
    Tweetdeck
    Twenty-First Century Skills
    Twitter
    University
    URL Shorteners
    Vale
    Value
    Video
    Virtual Reality
    Visual Art
    VR
    Warren McMahon
    Winning
    Word Online
    Work Life Balance
    Worklife-balance
    Writing
    Youngling
    Youtube

Support

Contact
About
Flipped Teacher Professional Learning Videos
© COPYRIGHT 2015. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Photo used under Creative Commons from brianc
  • Home
  • FTPL Videos
  • Blog
  • List of Blog Series
  • Education Resources
  • Starting with Flipped Learning
  • Friday Freebie
  • About Me
  • Contact