international boys’ schools coalition annual … · technology-driven educational needs •...

INTERNATIONAL BOYS’ SCHOOLS COALITION ANNUAL CONFERENCE

PRECONFERENCE SEMINAR FIT FOR PURPOSE:

DESIGNING CHARACTER EDUCATION IN BOYS’ SCHOOLS

Dr Phil Cummins Bradley Adams

CONTEXT: ABOUT US

CIRCLE – The Centre for Innovation, Research, Creativity and Leadership in Education Working with over 1,750 schools internationally Achieving better outcomes for more learners by building cultures of excellence in leadership and learning in communities of inquiry An educational agency that equips, empowers and enables schools and school leaders through consultancy and educational services Strategic alliances with tertiary bodies (including University of Tasmania) and professional associations Creating educational software solutions for improving school performance including Touchstones

Dr Philip SA Cummins [email protected] Managing Director, CIRCLE Adjunct Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, University of Tasmania

Bradley Adams [email protected] Director of Education, CIRCLE Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Education, University of Tasmania

www.circle.education www.mytouchstones.com

@CIRCLEcentral

TODAY’S CONVERSATION

FIT FOR PURPOSE: DESIGNING CHARACTER EDUCATION IN BOYS’ SCHOOLS A strategic forecast for school leaders based on international research and findings from

the consultancy, research and educational practice of CIRCLE – The Centre for Innovation, Research, Creativity and Leadership in Education

All schools can share a commitment to think like a school for 21C, enter into a substantive and rigorous process of improvement and become fit for purpose. A school that is fit for purpose is a school that is ready to meet the needs of our century; a great school consistently exceeds expectations with the excellence it demonstrates in doing this. As schools work towards this aspiration, they should emerge with a learning culture that creates better outcomes for more learners by accepting and engaging with the most significant challenges of our times.

Education for 21C character works across all dimensions of a school for boys. The essential ingredients of a preferred character draw on strands that relate to agreed notions of resilience that comprise curiosity, courage and conviction, as well as core values that flow from a school’s honoured traditions and heritage. Measuring the efficacy of education for 21C character in a school can be achieved most readily in an assessment of the efficiency of processes and the extent of outcomes related to the desired character.

1  Fit for purpose: CIRCLE’s challenges and choices for a great boys’ school for 21C – 50 minutes a)  Fit for purpose learning culture for 21C in your school b)  Building a vision and a vocabulary for 21C learning culture c)  Establishing the value proposition for 21C education d)  Designing the shape, velocity and trajectory of change in a school for 21C

2  Reflecting on education for 21C character in a fit for purpose school for boys – 1 hour 50 minutes a)  Panel discussion – the CIRCLE Culture Capture process for character education – 40 minutes b)  The CIRCLE Character Education Research Project 2013-2016 – 30 minutes c)  Unpacking CIRCLE’s draft performance standards for character education – 40 minutes d)  Reflecting on education for 21C character in your school – 10 minutes

FIT FOR PURPOSE: DESIGNING CHARACTER EDUCATION IN

BOYS’ SCHOOLS

a) Fit for purpose – learning culture for 21C

in your school

•  Learning culture: the congruence of vision, intention, action and output in that which schools are meant to do best – to help learners to achieve better outcomes throughout and by the end of their time at school than they did when they entered it.

•  These outcomes might be academic, social, emotional, developmental, physical and even spiritual.

•  They might also encompass character, values, attitudes and behaviours.

•  And other things too …

LEARNING CULTURE

Data-‐informed research & prac3ce

Teacher performance & professional development

Literacy & numeracy benchmarking

Con3nuous improvement

ICT in learning benchmarking

Standards-‐referenced curriculum

Forma3ve assessment

THE INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL LANDSCAPE

Building understanding for exercising judgment in a fluid and dynamic information society

THE INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL LANDSCAPE

New Curriculum

LEARNING CULTURE NEEDS •  Student engagement: Promote student engagement with a focus on attendance, motivation, self-

belief, a disposition to learning, perseverance, problem-solving and performance, enhanced by positive student-teacher relationships, equitable distribution of resources and less stratification of students

•  Teacher partnership in reform: Enable a relentless, practical focus on learning, and a strong culture of teacher openness, research and learning

•  Professional learning: Implement formal induction, feedback, professional development and mentoring systems for all levels of teachers with systems that are primarily focused on improving student outcomes

•  Positive teaching climate: Promote teacher involvement in decision-making, the use of active teaching practice, teacher cooperation and collaboration, and opportunities to improve teachers’ classroom management

•  Value-added educational measures: Track educational performance and provide the technology that empowers this as a key focus of strategies to improve instruction and programs

•  Distributed instructional leadership: Prepare teachers to enter school leadership through formal training programs and support distributed school leadership and instructional leadership, especially in building school professional learning plans, identifying and implementing essential outcomes for all students, holding students, staff and parents accountable for outcomes, encouraging and coaching teachers to use teaching strategies that improve educational outcomes for all students and assessing student progress in important areas

•  Improved accountability: Augment cultural change with increasing trend towards regulation in terms of teacher qualifications, professional standards, conduct and behaviour

Grattan Institute (2012 ff), TALIS (2013), PISA (2013)

TECHNOLOGY-DRIVEN EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

•  Education paradigms are shifting internationally to include online learning, hybrid learning and collaborative models, social media is increasing its presence in all aspects of society

•  The abundance of resources and relationships available because of new technologies is compelling a fundamental rethink of the role of educators, while openness as a concept and an expectation is changing perceptions of how education should function.

•  Significant challenges to education include the increasing importance of ongoing professional learning of staff, the constraining impact of institutional culture on adoption of new technologies, the challenge to traditional educational modes and institutions offered through technology as alternative sources of education, the requirement to blend formal and informal modes of learning K-12 and the inadequacy of current technologies to meet expectations relating to personalisation of learning

•  Specific technologies include cloud computing, mobile technology and the use of student-specific data to customise curricula and resources as a near horizon focus, learning analytics and open content as a mid-horizon focus, and 3D printing and virtual laboratories as far-term horizons, while Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) is fast becoming the preferred model for facilitation of devices and therefore requiring shifts in attitudes to access and permissibility of smartphone technology

NMC Horizons (2014)

•  Learning culture: the congruence of vision, intention, action and output in that which schools are meant to do best – to help learners to achieve better outcomes throughout and by the end of their time at school than they did when they entered it. These outcomes might be academic, social, emotional, developmental, physical and even spiritual. They might also encompass character, values, attitudes and behaviours.

•  The purpose of learning culture: The notions of improvement and attainment are endemic to this core business: how we can help learners be better at what they do so that they might be able to apply their learning to enter the pathways of their choice during and beyond school, and conduct lives that are more productive and meaningful as a result of their education. In other words, if we see our major role in educational leadership as that of conserving the past and facilitating a sustained status quo, we miss the point of living in our times.

•  Fit for purpose learning culture: To these ends, our essential role as educational leaders is to conceive of what education must become and give priority to those things that will assist our schools and others educational institutions to step forward into the future, as opposed to privileging the preservation of structures and practices that may well have served us well in the past but which no longer have the relevance or currency that obviates their continued institutionalisation.

FIT FOR PURPOSE LEARNING CULTURE

•  “Fit for purpose” means helping learners to achieve better outcomes throughout and by the end of their time at school than they did when they entered it through:

–  Alignment –  Improvement –  Attainment –  Future-focus

•  Does any of this sound new? –  It shouldn’t

•  Are we good at doing this? –  Probably not as good as we should be or we might like to be

•  Do we like being exceptional? Do we strive for fit for purpose? –  Maybe we prefer being the same and seek to emulate best practice

•  What 3 things might we do to build a fit for purpose learning culture? 1  Build a vision and a vocabulary for 21C learning culture

•  Fit for purpose in educating boys? Navigating shifting perceptions of masculinity, gender and purpose – who is a 21C man and how should he be educated?

2  Establish the value proposition for 21C education •  Fit for purpose in educating boys? Communicating the perceived and actual benefits of an education for boys within a

school for boys, supported by a rich body of evidence drawn from the lived experience of the community, curated anecdote and hard data

3  Design the shape, velocity and trajectory of change in a school for 21C •  Fit for purpose in educating boys? Constructing an integrated approach to growth, wellbeing, learning, service (and

spirituality) that promotes courage, confidence and kindness



BOYS’ SCHOOLS

b) Building a vision and a vocabulary for 21C learning culture

•  Capability: Some have characterised 21C readiness according to their capacity to enhance a distinct set of capabilities that are most appropriate for learners …

DOING THE 21C THING

FRAMEWORK FOR 21st CENTURY LEARNING PARTNERSHIP FOR 21st CENTURY SKILLS March 2011

•  Context: Others seek to describe and equip actual and virtual learning environments especially through a range of different technologies that their learners and their teachers might utilise …

DOING THE 21C THING

STRUCTURE OF AUSTRALIAN CURRICULUM PROFESSOR BARRY MCGAW September 2013

•  Character: And some augment this with a set of key values, behaviours and dispositions that will equip all within their community to exhibit the character to endure, succeed and thrive …

DOING THE 21C THING

MODEL FOR 21st CENTURY EDUCATION CENTER FOR CURRICULUM REDESIGN January 2016

Challenge •  Building a vision and vocabulary for

learning, care and student growth and development that meets the needs of our future society

Choice •  Making a choice to anticipate and prefer

what might and must be the future rather than the replication of the past

FIT FOR PURPOSE: CIRCLE’S CHALLENGES AND CHOICES FOR A GREAT BOYS’ SCHOOL FOR 21C

Building a vision and vocabulary for 21C learning culture

For a school for boys? •  Navigating shifting perceptions of

masculinity, gender and purpose – who is a 21C man and how should he be educated?

CIRCLE’S SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT DOMAINS 2001 FF

Framing the experiences of a school community

WH

AT

PEO

PLE

WA

NT

WH

AT

PEO

PLE

NEE

D

WH

AT

WE

PRO

MIS

E

WH

AT

WE

DEL

IVER

ACHIEVEMENT

RELATIONSHIPS

COMMUNICATIONS

INITIATIVES

REPUTATION

A CIRCLE FRAMEWORK FOR LEARNING October 2014

1  Who Am I? Foundational beliefs for 21C learning –  Hope: Inspiring learners by mandating and maintaining a positive tone and attitude –  Care: Displaying an enthusiasm for excellence by striving for better outcomes for more learners –  Research: Cultivating a disposition for investigation by identifying and responding to evidence –  Review: Seeking continuous improvement of outcomes and process by focusing on outputs, evaluating rich data

and honing in on what works – impact –  Creativity: Promoting innovation by harnessing perspective, conceptual thinking, iteration and attention to

detail

2  Where Do I Fit In? A Curriculum of Empowerment –  Language: Developing shared culture and practice with a consistent vocabulary for learning –  Structure: Aligning ends, means and intentions through backwards design of learning –  Flexibility: Progressing learners through clear, logical and adaptable curriculum structures and matrices –  Evaluation: Recognising how and when to give feedback within assessment for learning, assessment of learning,

and assessment through learning –  Challenge: Challenging learners to grow by coaching for achievement and success

3  How Can I Best Serve Others? A Pedagogy of Engagement –  Context: Teaching learners as they present in the right environment –  Motivation: Encouraging discipline and commitment by boosting mastery, autonomy and purpose –  Personalisation: Enhancing individuals by respecting and responding to difference –  Inquiry: Consolidating meaning by asking the right questions and providing the right tools to answer them –  Capability: Building confidence and competence by strengthening knowledge, capacity, understanding and

process


BOYS’ SCHOOLS

c) Establishing the value proposition for 21C education

Challenge •  Establishing the value proposition for

families and students in a time of increased improvement, service and value for money

Choice •  Making a choice about balancing the

needs of the future while retaining that which is precious about what has already been done, while producing more for less in an industry where we continue to value inputs more than outputs


Establishing the value proposition for 21C education

For a school for boys? •  Communicating the perceived and

actual benefits of an education for boys within a school for boys, supported by a rich body of evidence drawn from the lived experience of the community, curated anecdote and hard data

CIRCLE’S ASPIRATIONS FOR A GREAT SCHOOL March 2016

A great school … •  Privileges the disciplined pursuit of achievement; encourages challenging individual and

collective goals; asserts confidence in the capability of all to be successful and seeks out the best processes by which this might be attained; and measures its effectiveness in attaining the best possible outcomes

•  Builds robust and resilient learning relationships within supportive environments that inspire learners to grow in knowledge, skills and character so that they are equipped, empowered and enabled to assume responsibility for making a positive contribution to the world

•  Listens to its community carefully and consistently, connecting and communicating with it by creating a credible narrative of the school that honours the legacy of its past, frames the complexity of its present and projects a compelling rationale for a preferred future that serves 21st century learning

•  Invests significant hope, resources and commitment into research and development by planning, conducting and evaluating intentional projects and initiatives that are aligned to the schools mission, realize the school’s vision and demonstrate the school’s values in action

•  Earns a strong reputation as a great school that exceeds expectations with relation to the quality of it outcomes, the efficiency and efficacy of its processes, its engagement with its community, the consistency of application of its ethos; and the execution of is strategy across the domains of achievement, relationships, communications and initiatives

CIRCLE’S PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR CHARACTER EDUCATION April 2016


BOYS’ SCHOOLS

d) Designing the shape, velocity and trajectory of change in a school for 21C

Challenge •  Designing the shape, velocity and

trajectory of change

Choice •  Making a choice to to inculcate a

procedural discipline of discerning data and ideas, establishing priorities, making wise decisions, planning with courage, developing adaptive processes of implementation and evaluation, management of people in a time of uncertainty, and overcoming the fear and solipsism that can emanate from complexity and challenge


Designing the shape, velocity and trajectory of change in a school for 21C

For a school for boys? •  Constructing an integrated approach to

growth, wellbeing, learning, service (and spirituality) that promotes courage, confidence and kindness

CIRCLE’S DRIVERS FOR CHANGE IN SCHOOLS FOR 21C March 2013 ff

•  Building School Culture: How we contribute to the process of building a school culture that will enable the achievement of the school’s strategic priorities, support others in moving through that change, and impact positively on the wellbeing of staff and students and of the whole school community.

•  Building Leadership Culture: How we research and apply models and frameworks of leadership for personal leadership development and team leadership to enable the development of a shared leadership culture across the school community.

•  Building Learning Culture: How we might can align the learning culture in

schools with innovative approaches to curriculum, pedagogy and assessment that empowers children and young adults to be successful 21st century learners, and how teachers and instructional leaders can create and nurture a school-wide professional culture - based on reflective practice, continuous professional learning and professional learning communities - that focuses on improving outcomes for all students as active and successful 21st century learners.

CIRCLE’S DRIVERS FOR CHANGE IN SCHOOLS FOR 21C March 2013 ff

•  Building School Strategy: How we establish the structures and processes required to build strategy, develop a planning culture and foster strategic thinking within a school environment, especially the impact of various governance structures on the development and implementation of strategy.

•  Building Systems and Operations: How we design the relationship between the business systems and the academic function of the school, examine the need for change, review the usefulness of a compliance framework to drive change and improvement and identify opportunities for collaborative practices to enhance the performance of the school.

•  Building Performance: How we can build school performance by identifying the key factors that contribute to school performance, reviewing the current performance of a school, identifying an appropriate appraisal and school review program to initiate changes within the school and identifying supportive strategies to improve and build a performance culture.

Your questions

REFLECTING ON EDUCATION FOR 21C CHARACTER IN A FIT FOR PURPOSE SCHOOL FOR BOYS

a) Unlocking your school – the CIRCLE Cultural Audit process for

character education

•  Discover: What do we know about our performance and culture? •  Diagnose: What key patterns and trends can we observe from the data? •  Decide: What should we do? •  Direct: What strategies can we use to do this well? •  Deploy: How are we going to get there?

THE CULTURE OF A GREAT SCHOOL FOR BOYS

A PROCESS OF 5 Ds

?


A FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

WH

AT

PEO

PLE

WA

NT

WH

AT

PEO

PLE

NEE

D

WH

AT

WE

PRO

MIS

E

WH

AT

WE

DEL

IVER

ACHIEVEMENT

RELATIONSHIPS

COMMUNICATIONS

INITIATIVES

REPUTATION

•  Discovery: quantitative and qualitative surveys of the community linked to a framework for education

•  Culture Capture: focus groups honing in on the character, aspirations and working of culture

•  Framing + Focusing: focus groups and workshops that develop suggestions for cultural trajectories


THE CULTURAL AUDIT

•  Achievement: Do we achieve good results? •  Relationships in our community: Do we have good relationships? •  Communication: Do we communicate well? •  School initiatives: Do we plan for, conduct and evaluate initiatives well •  The school’s reputation: Do we have a good reputation?


DISCOVERY – FIVE SIMPLE SURVEY QUESTIONS ABOUT PERFORMANCE

•  Outcomes: Do we achieve what we set out to achieve with our performance? •  Processes: Do we use the best teaching and learning, research and

development, information recording and tracking, evaluation and decision-making, and resourcing and other business processes in our operations?

•  Ethos: Do we enhance our school’s ethos and values? •  Community Engagement: Do we engage with and satisfy our community’s

expectations? •  Strategic Intent: Are we aligned with and contributing to our strategic intent?


DISCOVERY – FIVE MORE SIMPLE SURVEY QUESTIONS ABOUT PERFORMANCE

•  What characterises us? •  What do we want to become? •  What’s the best way to get there? •  What works for us? •  What doesn’t work for us? •  How will we know when we get there


CULTURE CAPTURE FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS

For strategising key concepts identified in the first stage of a Cultural Audit: •  How do we connect to this concept? •  How might we nurture this concept? •  What challenges do we face in connecting to this concept? •  What might we do differently in relation to this concept?


FRAMING + FOCUSING FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS

For reviewing and reflecting on a program or initiative as part of a Cultural Audit: •  What were we trying to do? •  What have we done? •  How well have we done it? •  What have we learned? •  What's next? •  How are we going to do this?



For thinking about teacher leadership as part of a Cultural Audit: •  Leadership: what do you do? •  Outcomes: what do you want students to do? •  Resources: what do you need to do it? •  Assessment and Reporting: how do you assess and report on your activity?



For thinking about instructional leadership as part of a Cultural Audit: •  Ask: how do you ask people to do what they do? •  Support: how do you support people to do it? •  Know: how do you know what people are doing?



When we are conducting a Cultural Audit, we: •  Honour the process: Ask the same questions every time and build them in to

the processes •  Keep it simple: Complicated dashboards work for a handful of us; just about

anyone in your school can understand a simple matrix that is used again and again

•  Use a framework to build alignment: Linking everything to a common framework that provides the alignment we need


IMPLEMENTING A CULTURAL AUDIT

For our panel to consider: •  What was on your mind? What issues and questions gave rise to your

commitment to the process of inquiry inherent in the Cultural Audit? What helped you decide that this was the right process for you?

•  What happened? How did the process of Cultural Audit unfold in your school? How did stakeholders respond to the process of consultation and the opportunity to have a voice? What expectations were created and how were these managed? How has the process been reported back to you?

•  What did you learn? What were the major findings for you? Did these confirm or contradict what you had thought before the process began? How are the members of your community responding to these learnings? What are you going to do about these learnings – what’s next?


IMPLEMENTING A CULTURAL AUDIT

Your questions


b) The CIRCLE Character Education Project 2013-2016

1.  Christ Church Grammar School, Perth (2011-2012)

2.  Australian and New Zealand Schools (2013)

3.  International Boys’ Schools (2013ff)

PERSPECTIVES ON CHARACTER EDUCATION

CIRCLE’s Measuring Character Education Project (MCEP)


Boys’ Motivation and Engagement Project Christ Church Grammar School, Perth, 2011-12

A Model of Manhood

Manhood

Strength

Wisdom

Courage

Kindness Diligence

Honour

Joy

In 2013, CIRCLE – The Centre for Innovation, Research, Creativity and Leadership in Education began a four-year project in the measurement of character education in boys’ schools.

This project arose out of specific concerns that the lack of quality research in this area was leading to the development of questionable approaches and unrealistic expectations in this area. A clear desire was identified by a number of schools that their own approaches to testing and validating their claims of building character would be rigorous, well-informed and realistic.

CIRCLE has drawn these schools together in a network of interested educators who are eager to seek solutions and apply them in their schools to help students, teachers and parents understand better the personal and moral development of their boys.

The 2013 Conversation


Measuring Character Education Project

92%


IBSC Regional Conference Christ Church Grammar School, Perth, 2013


Components of Character Education IBSC Regional Conference Christ Church Grammar School, Perth, 2013

1  In discussing what character is, the language of values, virtues and behaviour is used extensively.

2  There is often an explicit connection made between values, virtues and behaviour, and the ways these are demonstrated in community.

3  We want character education to help us develop strong, virtuous, whole, good men, who contribute to society.

4  We don’t really understand how to measure and evaluate character or character education.

5  Many of us assume that there is a link between tradition and culture and the development of character. How do we test this assumption? Consider the importance of “honourable” tradition.


What We Saw in the Data About Our Character Education Programs

6  We want boys to make choices and learn about character for themselves, but we don’t see this as a success factor in our programs.

7  We value opportunity and experience. 8  We are wary of (too much) theory and classroom lessons. 9  Many of us like specific programs. 10  Others prefer a broad approach based on inherent values,

cultural osmosis and a hidden curriculum. 11  Modeling matters, as does a whole-school approach, an explicit

ethos, quality staff and student leadership. 12  50% of respondees identified the importance of

pastoral care in helping their school to achieve its goal(s) for character education. What does pastoral care mean? Should we have a pastoral challenge program?



13  We want a consistent school approach, collaborative practice and a wide range of specific and whole-staff professional learning and resources.

14  We want to learn what is happening at other schools. 15  We want to think about and learn how to evaluate

the success of our programs. 16  We value external support. 17  We are wary of things that are untailored or off-the-shelf. 18  We need to feel recognised, supported, validated and affirmed.



19  In discussing what character is, the language of values, virtues and behaviour is used extensively.

20  There is often an explicit connection made between values, virtues and behaviour, and the ways these are demonstrated in community.

21  We want character education to help us develop strong, virtuous, whole, good men, who contribute to society.

22  We don’t really understand how to measure and evaluate character or character education.

23  Many of us assume that there is a link between tradition and culture and the development of character. How do we test this assumption? Consider the importance of “honourable” tradition.


What We Saw in Our Data About Our Character Education Programs

Ultimately, we should want students to use their education to demonstrate strong citizenship and leadership in their community, acting on strong, positive values and a genuine desire to serve others before themselves. We know that our schools strive to help children to be well equipped for entry into the adult world. And yet, as with all human institutions, no school is perfect … What is common to all schools is their capacity to improve what it is that they do.

Philip SA Cummins and Amy Parish, “Building a Culture of Excellence in Schools: An Architecture for School Improvement”, CSM Ideas, May 2012

1  The provocation – what do we mean by the character of a man? 2  The context – what do we mean by character education in our schools? 3  The rationale – what do we feel about character education in boys’ schools

and why should we measure it? 4  The framework – what might we measure with character education in boys’

schools and how might we measure it? 5  The details – what does this all mean for us in our roles in boys’ schools?


The 2013 IBSC Conversation


2013 Conversation: Measuring character education – Well-intentioned inputs and unclear outputs? 1  Many educators believe that it is impossible to measure character; it's just one of those

things that seems to happen. 2  Others believe that their existing data sources confirm their approach without

necessarily scrutinising the relationship between concepts of correlation and causation in the relationship between actions and effects in this data.

3  In short, while some evidence is referred to, many schools rely more on immediate observation and assertion than a comprehensive framework of evidence when it comes to the impact of such programs on the journey to manhood.



Contextualising character and education: when we say “character” and “character education”, what do we mean? 1  Personality: “His character” ! traits 2  Idiosyncrasy/individuality: “He’s a character” ! distinctiveness 3  Strength in the face of adversity: “He shows character” ! resilience &

robustness 4  Virtue/disposition: “He’s got character” ! values & alignment 5  Role model: “His good character” ! leadership

Does how much we frame character influence … What we expect of a man ? How we might measure it?

How we might educate for it?



In other words, as teachers, we know we need to embrace a status as creators of knowledge, not just passive recipients of decontextualised ideas. We need to be active learners, students of our own practice, whose professional inquiry (in many ways) mirrors and models for the learning of our students ... The most effective learning communities that we have seen are those whose research and development activity is coordinated by staff whose dedication to the improvement of the learning of their colleagues and their ability to channel this successfully according to the ethos and strategic intent of their school is patent.

– Philip SA Cummins, “Your School, Your Strategy”, CSM, May 2014

1  The story so far – how have we established the rationale and context for the Measuring Character Education Project?

2  The scenario in your schools – what character education occurs in your schools? 3  The project so far – what have we been doing since we talked last year

and what will we be doing in 2014-2015? 4  The next steps – what might we do after this conference?

The 2014 IBSC Conversation



•  Our anticipated aim was to design and launch a collaborative research project to assist with the articulation, measurement and evaluation of character education in boys' schools, with a specific focus on identifying tools for measurement and evaluation and aligning these tools with student diagnostics and school programs.

•  Following consultation with this group of interested schools, we identified the following areas for exploration through the project:

–  Developing tools to measure changes in boys' behaviour and possible changes in character as a result of character education programs

–  Developing tools to measure the efficacy of school programs in delivering character education

–  Developing tools to measure the efficacy of schools in delivering character education •  In addition, part of our process will aim to help schools more generally to interact with the data

gained from diagnostic and evaluative tools to implement their character education programs. •  It is imperative that the project interacts with and supports the philosophy and mission

of participating schools and that their distinctive cultures are reinforced through the planning and research process.

MCEP Project Report at the 2014 Conversation



•  Ongoing systematic literature review to provide context for the project and to develop research questions/hypotheses

•  Conducted Stage 1 of the online MCEP survey with participating schools to gather data on: –  Character strengths being developed in schools –  Origin of those particular strengths –  Importance of character strengths to schools –  Character education program types in schools –  Links between character strengths development and subject curricula?

•  Assessment of practices relating to character strength development •  Understanding of school character strengths in their community •  Perceived links between character strengths and developmental outcomes •  Preliminary analysis of data from Stages 1 of the survey process completed

2015 MCEP Conversation



1  2 in 3 respondents thought there was some form of character education programming in their schools.

2  Just over ½ of these schools had specific goals for these programs. 3  Only a small minority of these schools were reported as evaluating or measuring

the outcome of their character education programs; when they did, it was mainly by anecdotal evidence and limited surveys.

4  2 in 3 respondents reported that they had had no professional development in character education, and if they do it is most commonly by workshop or conference attendance.

5  Respondents were invited to identify how their schools’ character strengths were decided upon. 2 in 3 respondents reported that the character strengths promoted by their schools were carried over from their schools’ history, crest, motto or mission.

6  1 in 3 respondents said that the character strengths promoted by their schools had been identified through some form of intentional process; i.e., surveys, faculty discussion, committee or workshop. Of these, 3 involved facilitation by experts, and 2 were identified as including community input, such as students and parents.


Stage One MCEP Survey – Preliminary Observations and Discussion



7  Asked to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools, respondents provided a list of 72 character strengths.

8  The “Big Five” character strengths topping the list were: Integrity, Respect, Compassion, Honesty and Humility.

9  The next most commonly identified character strength is Resilience. Other “performance character strengths” – accountability, grit, perseverance, self-regulation, etc. – were further down the list.

10  Respondents were asked to score the degree to which school programs developed character strengths. The sports program received the highest ranking, followed in order by co-curricular programs, academic program, outdoor education, tradition and rituals, leadership programs and service learning programs.

11  Ranking lower in impact were House systems, pastoral care programs, religious education programs, and boarding programs.





12  Respondents were asked to pick the % of teachers in their schools who would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools. 16% of respondents thought that 50% or less of teachers in their schools would know the character strengths. At the opposite end, 42% of respondents thought that 90% or more of the teachers in their schools would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools.

13  Respondents were asked to report the % of students in their schools who would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools. 27% of respondents thought that 50% or less of students in their schools would know the character strengths. At the opposite end, 27% of respondents thought that 90% or more of the students in their schools would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools.

14  84% of respondents thought that parents of children at their schools would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by the schools.

15  64% of respondents thought that the “wider community” would know what character strengths their schools stand for.

16  61% of respondents thought that the past-student community would support their schools’ character strengths programs, but 32% of respondents didn’t know if the past-student community would support or not support the character strengths programs of their schools.

Significant assumptions are made about the impact of character education plus a significant minority who cast doubt





17  Generally, a high majority (87%) of respondents told us that academic outcomes were very to extremely important for their schools. Slightly fewer (78%) respondents said that character strengths development was very to extremely important for their schools.

18  76% of respondents thought that the character education programs in their schools contributed significantly to very significantly to student development outcomes.

19  Mapping the significance of character education programs more specifically on developmental areas (social, emotional, intellectual, physical, moral/spiritual, and aesthetic), the significance was greater from emotional outcomes, followed by social, moral/spiritual and intellectual.

20  Just under 50% of respondents thought that their schools’ character strengths programs were embedded across subject areas in the academic curriculum.

21  They thought that character strengths programs were most likely to be embedded in English, Physical Education and History.





•  Larger cohort of schools recruited to participate in the MCEP survey •  Online MCEP survey with the second cohort of participating schools conducted •  Survey data from second cohort of participating schools incorporated and analysis completed •  Systematic literature review commenced •  Collegial review of the research through the University of Tasmania commenced •  Full ethics proposal to allow for the collection of data from students

and possible parents completed •  Develop higher order domains to permit the development of measures of the variety

and number of character strengths determined by survey respondent schools •  Sharper definition of the research questions achieved •  Specific character strengths with project schools clarified •  In-depth Cultural Audit consultation process on education for character conducted with lead

schools – The Crescent School, Toronto and Auckland Grammar School •  Draft performance standards for education for character developed •  Research project under consideration by IBSC

2016 MCEP Conversation



1  2 in 3 respondents thought there was some form of character education programming in their schools. 60% said Yes, 40%said No.


Stages One and Two MCEP Survey – Preliminary Observations and Discussion



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes

AU USA CAN UK SA NZ Other

2  Just over ½ of these schools had specific goals for these programs. 50% of the Yes schools above had goals.

3  Only a small minority of these schools were reported as evaluating or measuring the outcome of their character education programs; when they did, it was mainly by anecdotal evidence and limited surveys. 12.5% reported Yes and 87.5% reported no.

4  2 in 3 respondents reported that they had had no professional development in character education, and if they do it is most commonly by workshop or conference attendance. No PD 65.3% Yes PD 4.7% - workshop or conference attendance.

5  Respondents were invited to identify how their schools’ character strengths were decided upon. 2 in 3 respondents reported that the character strengths promoted by their schools were carried over from their schools’ history, crest, motto or mission. No change.

6  1 in 3 respondents said that the character strengths promoted by their schools had been identified through some form of intentional process; i.e., surveys, faculty discussion, committee or workshop. Of these, 3 involved facilitation by experts, and 2 were identified as including community input, such as students and parents. No change.





7  Asked to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools, respondents provided a list of 72 character strengths. 26 schools identified 79 different character strengths that their school promotes.

8  The “Big Five” character strengths topping the list were: Integrity, Respect, Compassion, Honesty and Humility. In order Courage, Integrity, Honesty, Respect, Resilience (identified by 6 or more schools).

9  The next most commonly identified character strength is Resilience. Other “performance character strengths” – accountability, grit, perseverance, self-regulation, etc. – were further down the list. Next group – identified by 5 or more schools – Compassion, Humility, Leadership and Service. Australian schools in the survey mentioned all 9 of this top tier of ‘strengths’ as being promoted while none of the schools from Mexico, Singapore and Spain mentioned any of them apart from Service (Singapore). Likewise only 1 of this group of ‘strengths’ was mentioned by a UK school (Respect) while the South African 9.5

PERSPECTIVES ON CHARACTER EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES ON CHARACTER EDUCATION



10  Respondents were asked to score the degree to which school programs developed character strengths. The sports program received the highest ranking, followed in order by co-curricular programs, academic program, outdoor education, tradition and rituals, leadership programs and service learning programs. In order – Sport, Co-curricular, Academic, outdoor education, Tradition and Rituals, Leadership, Service, Social and Emotional, House, Pastoral care, RE, Boarding, Cadets. 71.9% of respondents rated Sport as “Very much’ developing character (the highest rating). Next highest was 50% of respondents for Co-curricular in the ‘Very much’ rating

•  Schools also had the opportunity to outline and describe any other programs that they had in their school that they believed were aimed at developing character strengths. Fourteen of the schools (4 Australian, 3 – USA, 1 – CAN, 1 – UK, 2 - SA, 2 – NZ, 1 – Mex) indicated that they did. Programs from these schools fell into the following overall categories:-

–  Outside of school –  Overseas travel usually involving some service activity –  Field trips, excursions and longer adventure experiences which one school in South Africa described as a ‘powerful rite of

passage’ –  Inside school –  Specific character education programs that they had adopted or written for their schools. Some were embedded into the

academic curriculum while others were delivered in specifically timetabled character education’ time. –  The use of mentors – often pairing older and younger boys –  There was no noticeable tendency for schools across different countries to favour any particular type of additional program

although the Australian and UK schools were the only ones who indicated a program involving overseas travel.

11  Ranking lower in impact were House systems, pastoral care programs, religious education programs, and boarding programs.




12  Respondents were asked to pick the % of teachers in their schools who would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools. 16% of respondents thought that 50% or less of teachers in their schools would know the character strengths. At the opposite end, 42% of respondents thought that 90% or more of the teachers in their schools would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools. 14.9% of respondents thought 50% or less of teachers … , 42.6% thought that 90% or more of the teachers in their schools would be able identify …

13  Respondents were asked to report the % of students in their schools who would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools. 27% of respondents thought that 50% or less of students in their schools would know the character strengths. At the opposite end, 27% of respondents thought that 90% or more of the students in their schools would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by their schools. 17.4% of respondents thought that 50% or less of students in their schools would know the character strengths … 26.1% of respondents thought that 90% or more of the students in their schools would be able to identify …




14  84% of respondents thought that parents of children at their schools would be able to identify the character strengths promoted by the schools. 89% would …

15  64% of respondents thought that the “wider community” would know what character strengths their schools stand for. 63.8% would …

16  61% of respondents thought that the past-student community would support their schools’ character strengths programs, but 32% of respondents didn’t know if the past-student community would support or not support the character strengths programs of their schools. 61.7% Yes, 6.4% No 31.9% Don’t Know

Significant assumptions are made about the impact of character education plus a significant minority who cast doubt




17  Generally, a high majority (87%) of respondents told us that academic outcomes were very to extremely important for their schools. Slightly fewer (78%) respondents said that character strengths development was very to extremely important for their schools. 93.2% rated 8 -10; 75% 9-10 for academic outcomes while 72.7% rated 8-10; 56.8% 9-10 for character strengths development.

18  76% of respondents thought that the character education programs in their schools contributed significantly to very significantly to student development outcomes. 73.8% 8-10; 42.9% 9-10




19  Mapping the significance of character education programs more specifically on developmental areas (social, emotional, intellectual, physical, moral/spiritual, and aesthetic), the significance was greater from emotional outcomes, followed by social, moral/spiritual and intellectual. No change.

20  Just under 50% of respondents thought that their schools’ character strengths programs were embedded across subject areas in the academic curriculum. 44.7% Yes Embedded 55.8% not embedded

21  They thought that character strengths programs were most likely to be embedded in English, Physical Education and History. Same.





Stage Two MCEP Survey – Preliminary Observations and Discussion


Honesty 9.41 Love of Learning 8.16 Integrity 9.25 Leadership 8.12 Respect 9.21 Judgement 8.10

Responsibility 8.94 Optimism 8.06 Kindness 8.92 Humour 8.00 Fairness 8.80 Industry 7.9

Self Control 8.66 Prudence 7.79 Loyalty 8.52 Curiosity 7.71 Love 8.49 Bravery 7.71

Social Intelligence 8.48 Perspective 7.69 Hope 8.40 Creativity 7.67

Citizenship 8.38 Spirituality 7.51 Gratitude 8.29 Modesty 7.50 Humility 8.21 Zest 7.32

Forgiveness 8.18 Appreciation of Beauty 6.81

22  The rating of a list of character strengths in terms of importance to young people provided three strengths with a rating of at least 9 out of a possible 10.




22  The rating of a list of character strengths in terms of importance to young people provided three strengths with a rating of at least 9 out of a possible 10.

Highest rated 2nd Highest 3rd Highest

Australia Honesty 9.77 Integrity 9.61 Respect 9.54

USA Honesty 9.58 Respect 9.33 Kindness 9.27

Canada Honesty 10 Integrity 10 Respect 10

UK Fairness 9.33 Judgement 9.33 Humour 9.33

SA Honesty 9.25 Integrity 9.13 Fairness 9.12

NZ Honesty 9.43 Respect 9.29 Kindness 9.29

•  The rating of a list of character strengths in terms of importance to young people provided three strengths with a rating of at least 9 out of a possible 10. These top three were Honesty (9.41), Integrity (9.25), and Respect (9.21). In an earlier question in which schools were asked to list the strengths that their school promotes, these same three featured among the four mentioned most by the survey schools. It would seem that many of the schools surveyed have a focus on character strengths that are viewed as being the most important by the survey schools. Courage, which was listed by nine schools along with Integrity as being the strength most often promoted by survey schools, was rated of lesser importance by staff respondents, being listed at equal 23rd on the list. The term Bravery was used in this question, which might account for the difference. It was interesting to note that when these ratings for character strengths were examined by country, the schools in all countries except the UK, rated Honesty highest. The UK schools rated Fairness as the most important character strength.

•  Table 4 indicates the highest three rated character strengths by the schools in each country. The schools in Mexico, Singapore and Spain were not represented in this table as only one school from each country completed the survey. Both schools in Mexico and Spain gave ratings of 10 for Honesty, Integrity and Respect however the Spanish school did not, giving its equal highest ratings of 8 to Love of Learning, Judgement, Creativity, Love and Integrity.







23  Schools had the options of identifying any other character strengths that they saw as being important to students in their school. They were able to give each additional strength a rating as for the previous question. Resilience was the character strength identified most often in this section with six different staff members identifying it. Perseverance , Empathy and Service received the support of two staff each while many others were listed.

AUS USA NZ Resilience Moral Courage Faith Empathy Grit Self belief

Honor Resilience SA Service to others Service

Perseverance Perseverance Resilience Brotherhood Empathy Acceptance Togetherness Inclusiveness

Independence Team work Reliability Resilience

Acceptance

•  Contextualising character and education •  Development of body of knowledge relevant to school culture, desired character strengths, approaches to

education for character and performance •  First and second annual survey of project schools completed •  Cultural Audit process with lead schools conducted •  Complete third annual survey of project schools •  Conduct of Cultural Audit process with additional schools •  Ongoing work with schools to develop refined understanding of culture

•  Ongoing project objectives –  Developing tools to measure changes in boys' behaviour and possible changes in character as a result of character

education programs •  Identification of appropriate existing measures for related student development •  Continue validation of existing measures for student development •  Identify new measures for student character development

–  Developing tools to measure the efficacy of school programs in delivering character education •  Draft performance standards for character education developed •  Continue validation of draft performance standards for character education •  Conduct of Cultural Audit process with additional schools

–  Developing tools to measure the efficacy of schools in delivering character education •  Development of a pilot measure using the higher order domains •  Conduct of a pilot study and investigation with project schools

2016 MCEP Conversation progress report



Prelude: Sync with CIRCLE MCEP Phase 1: Project School selection Phase 2: Set up and orientate project schools Phase 3: Conduct Character Education Discovery with Project School Phase 4: Build knowledge archive on effective practice in Character Education in schools for boys with Project Schools Phase 5: Develop framework for Character Education in schools for boys with Project Schools Phase 6: Final reporting


Proposed IBSC Research Project next steps …



Your questions


c) Unpacking CIRCLE’s draft performance standards for character education

CIRCLE’S PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR CHARACTER EDUCATION April 2016

CIRCLE’S PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR CHARACTER EDUCATION

1. Clarity and Connection

•  The best statements of the core values that fuel character education are built intentionally to be both aspirational and practical, providing concrete direction to the school. Lofty statements are often rhetorical and untethered: grounded statements translate into reportable and accountable actions and responsibilities. “We provide students with opportunities to develop empathy and to act with compassion” is at least more actionable and connected than a stand-alone trait or virtue or character strength.


2. Consensus

•  When clarity is lacking, consensus about the purpose and objectives of character education is hard to achieve and to sustain. Even in highly effective schools, consensus across community stakeholders may be constantly challenged by conflicting goals and hidden assumptions. Agreement on the surface may well fracture deeper down. Without strong resilient consensus, the community pulls apart and a singular focus on the common cause may be diminished.


3. Consistency and Predictability •  Inconsistency from one individual to another and across and even within school

programs is most often reported, especially by parents, as the dominant weakness in character education. It is gratifyingly easy to observe, report and praise outstanding practice and dedication in character education in this teacher or that advisor or this program. But in the adjacent classroom, down the hall, in another activity, in the grade above or the grade below, the scene can be quite different.

•  Schools that are most successful in character education work to strengthen consistency by setting standards, supporting and monitoring how expectations are met, and holding everyone accountable. School leaders who report and governors who hear only the “good news” of character education are not testing this “consistency standard”. In schools with strong consistency, students and parents can expect and “predict” that character education is happening in intentional ways and with recognisably similar expectations and applications across the school.


4. Community of Practice and Total Pedagogy

•  Fostering expertise in the broad, holistic pedagogy of character education is just as important as in any subject or discipline. But schools seldom generate the same professional focus and energy, or set the right conditions. Because character education can take place in the formal curriculum but also informally in activities, events and encounters that inevitably arise, the work of character may feel less structured and less accountable, and more personal and relational than pedagogical and planned. Proficiency in character education needs to be explicit in standards for professional excellence and incorporated in processes of performance review or appraisal. Above all, getting better at this pedagogy of character education should be part of continuous and collaborative professional learning.

•  Character education invites us into a total pedagogy that transcends – flows through – our otherwise compartmentalised and instrumental roles as teacher, coach and adviser. Creating a strong community of practice to develop this “total pedagogy” is an essential performance standard. Far from being at the margin of the environment for teaching and learning, character education may well be its animating core.


5. Communication and Reporting

•  While schools are very good at communicating the high notes of character education, they are often less clear about the operations of character education and the precise translation of character education into the daily transactions of teaching and learning. Parents in particular often complain that they know that character education is important but that they do not always know what “it looks like” in their child’s school career. In schools highly vested in character education, we would expect that there would be ground rules, standards and various channels for reporting about student character development. This would be noticeable in formal reporting, as well as in the rich conversations between students and teachers. While not easy, schools need to find authentic routines to report student engagement and growth with character education.


6. Outcomes for Students and Evidence of Outcomes

•  As suggested above, schools often shy away from posing outcomes for character education, defaulting to the position that character development cannot be “measured” against outcomes. The task for schools is to unlock this defensive default position that measurement of character is inherently subjective and unpredictable, and to establish outcomes appropriate to the situation and to the focus for learning. These outcomes may be subtle and are often situational, but observant teachers set the appropriate conditions for character growth, actively engage with students, and bear witness to the resulting struggle and achievement. Finding a school-wide language for authentic and meaningful outcomes for all students is vital professional work, and a priority for the school.


7. Outcomes for Programs and Evidence of Outcomes •  Advisors, coaches and organisers must be clear about and responsible for the

character education work that goes on in their programs, and are as professionally engaged with this work as they are with their more specifically “academic” duties. Academic departments need to assert the importance of character education in their curriculum and pedagogy; be explicit about the particular “character focus” afforded by the subject and the challenges of mastering it; and indicate precisely how this focus translates into the classroom environment and student learning. We would expect that programs and departments would define helpful indicators that would demonstrate how well they are performing against these goals. Even if we sometimes doubt that we can map student outcomes precisely, we can and must be quite clear about the goals and outcomes for program design in character education; similarly, we can and must evaluate our success with greater confidence and accountability.


1.  Clarity and Connection 2.  Consensus 3.  Consistency and Predictability 4.  Community of Practice and Total Pedagogy 5.  Communication and reporting 6.  Outcomes for Students and Evidence of

Outcomes 7.  Outcomes for Programs and Evidence of

Outcomes

What might this look like in your school?

What might this feel like in your school?


1.  Clarity and Connection 2.  Consensus 3.  Consistency and Predictability 4.  Community of Practice and Total Pedagogy 5.  Communication and Reporting 6.  Outcomes for Students and Evidence of

Outcomes 7.  Outcomes for Programs and Evidence of

Outcomes

How do I rate my school in each of these?

1= Below expectation 2 = Meets expectation 3 = Above expectation

Your School’s Character Education Practice

Add up your scores and divide by 7. How did you rate yourself?

Table Talk

What’s working well? What needs attention?

Your questions


d) Reflecting on education for 21C character in your school

•  How do students in our school learn, think and feel? How should students in our school learn, think and feel?

•  What aspirations could our students have for their futures? What aspirations should our students have for their futures?

•  How might we do things in our school to allow our boys to become the men they should become?

–  Curriculum and co-curriculum? –  Learning and teaching? –  Pastoral care and social-emotional development? –  Spiritual development

•  What enduring values and honourable traditions do we have that will help us to achieve our mission? What will need to change?

•  How can our systems sustain and nurture the culture, educational programs, reputation and business viability of our school?

–  Brand development and maintenance? –  School development?

REFLECTING ON DESIGNING CHARACTER EDUCATION IN OUR SCHOOLS

Questions for your future

TODAY’S CONVERSATION

FIT FOR PURPOSE: DESIGNING CHARACTER EDUCATION IN BOYS’ SCHOOLS A strategic forecast for school leaders based on international research and findings from

the consultancy, research and educational practice of CIRCLE – The Centre for Innovation, Research, Creativity and Leadership in Education

All schools can share a commitment to think like a school for 21C, enter into a substantive and rigorous process of improvement and become fit for purpose. A school that is fit for purpose is a school that is ready to meet the needs of our century; a great school consistently exceeds expectations with the excellence it demonstrates in doing this. As schools work towards this aspiration, they should emerge with a learning culture that creates better outcomes for more learners by accepting and engaging with the most significant challenges of our times.

Education for 21C character works across all dimensions of a school for boys. The essential ingredients of a preferred character draw on strands that relate to agreed notions of resilience that comprise curiosity, courage and conviction, as well as core values that flow from a school’s honoured traditions and heritage. Measuring the efficacy of education for 21C character in a school can be achieved most readily in an assessment of the efficiency of processes and the extent of outcomes related to the desired character.

1  Fit for purpose: CIRCLE’s challenges and choices for a great boys’ school for 21C – 50 minutes a)  Fit for purpose learning culture for 21C in your school b)  Building a vision and a vocabulary for 21C learning culture c)  Establishing the value proposition for 21C education d)  Designing the shape, velocity and trajectory of change in a school for 21C

2  Reflecting on education for 21C character in a fit for purpose school for boys – 1 hour 50 minutes a)  Panel discussion – the CIRCLE Culture Capture process for character education – 40 minutes b)  The CIRCLE Character Education Research Project 2013-2016 – 30 minutes c)  Unpacking CIRCLE’s draft performance standards for character education – 40 minutes d)  Reflecting on education for 21C character in your school – 10 minutes

•  “Fit for purpose” means helping learners to achieve better outcomes throughout and by the end of their time at school than they did when they entered it through:

–  Alignment –  Improvement –  Attainment –  Future-focus

•  Does any of this sound new? –  It shouldn’t

•  Are we good at doing this? –  Probably not as good as we should be or we might like to be

•  Do we like being exceptional? Do we strive for fit for purpose? –  Maybe we prefer being the same and seek to emulate best practice

•  What 3 things might we do to build a fit for purpose learning culture? 1  Build a vision and a vocabulary for 21C learning culture

•  Fit for purpose in educating boys? Navigating shifting perceptions of masculinity, gender and purpose – who is a 21C man and how should he be educated?

2  Establish the value proposition for 21C education •  Fit for purpose in educating boys? Communicating the perceived and actual benefits of an education for boys within a

school for boys, supported by a rich body of evidence drawn from the lived experience of the community, curated anecdote and hard data

3  Design the shape, velocity and trajectory of change in a school for 21C •  Fit for purpose in educating boys? Constructing an integrated approach to growth, wellbeing, learning, service (and

spirituality) that promotes courage, confidence and kindness


Your questions

Remember that when you leave this earth, you can take with you nothing that you have received…only what you have given: a full heart enriched by honest service, love, sacrifice, and courage.

Francis of Assisi

Do you have other questions? Do you want to know more?

Dr Phil Cummins [email protected]

www.circle.education www.mytouchstones.com

@CIRCLEcentral

international boys’ schools coalition annual … · technology-driven educational needs •...

Documents