Unpacking Qualitative Data - My Journey to Balancing Rigor and Transformation...

My central motivation for this inquiry stems from a concern that the necessary rigor of the Structured Literacy framework could unintentionally stifle creative expression and deep demonstration of learning. 

My perspective is rooted in my own educational experiences from a time dominated by repetitive, uninspired reading consolidation (the classic ‘duplicated worksheet’ era) where genuine engagement was rare. The moments that truly stood out were interactive like using the listening post or, more enjoyably, performing plays, especially when we could create our own costumes or masks.

This pattern continued early in my teaching career. I often defaulted to guided reading worksheets that, despite having diverse texts, asked the same predictable questions, which stifled independent thought. While I attempted to introduce new ideas, limited classroom technology and a lack of accessible Professional Learning and Development (PLD) hindered my sustained pedagogical growth.

When I joined the Manaiakalani cluster I was introduced to a culture of continuous learning and innovation that prioritises student engagement. This culture intensified my fear that the required intensity of Structured Literacy might accidentally regress our practice back to those days of ‘boring repetition.’

This concern drove my inquiry into effectively utilising the 'Create' component within our kura. A core goal of our previous PLD was moving teaching and learning 'above the line' of Dr. Ruben Puentedura's SAMR model—a framework that pushes technology use from simple enhancement (Substitution and Augmentation) toward transformation (Modification and Redefinition). My primary focus for this year was to ensure our literacy instruction maintained its rigor without sacrificing this transformational practice.
Initially, I looked at creative opportunities school-wide, quickly realizing the junior team excels in this area. For early readers, creativity is best fostered by hands-on, collaborative fun, rather than only with digital tools. This realisation saw me pivot for the first time as I couldn't limit my study to only digital affordances if I wanted to fully understand and strengthen 'Create' within Structured Literacy.
My next step was to narrow the focus to the senior team. However, I soon realised that a team embracing new PLD needs time to build confidence and implement change. Feedback from team meetings told me they certainly didn't need me critically observing the create opportunities in their reading lessons. This led to my final pivot of focussing exclusively on my own practice in my Year 7/8 classroom.

Focusing on my own Year 7/8 students (our most capable readers), provided an advantage. Given my existing literacy PLD, I wasn't entering the Structured Literacy framework completely cold. I challenged myself to incorporate the affordances of AI, alongside my well established kete of follow-up challenges, to encourage students to build on prior knowledge when showing their understanding of the new texts we unpacked.

A clear example is the inclusion of Gemini Gems in our guided reading follow-up (unpacked in an earlier post). The resulting change has been significant as student responses now feature more extended, student-initiated, and student-led discussion.

Ultimately, when 'Create' is properly embedded, it becomes a purposeful and engaging opportunity for tauira to demonstrate understanding. As educational theorist Elwyn Richardson observed, research shows students learn by actively constructing knowledge—a process that involves breaking down, rearranging, selecting, and demonstrating their understanding so that visualised thoughts were given an opportunity to be created.

Exploring Quantitative Data...

The purpose of this inquiry was to evaluate the integration and frequency of 'Create' opportunities, a key component of the Manaiakalani ‘Learn-Create-Share’ pedagogy, within Reading instruction across our kura.

To measure the shift in practice, analysis was conducted comparing:

1. Opportunities explicitly planned for by teaching staff.

2. Opportunities shared via class Digital Learning Objects (DLOs).

3. Qualitative feedback sourced from Teacher Planning in Term 2 and Term 4 

Confidentiality: Due to the identifiable nature of the small learning environment, all data is presented in aggregated and generalised form. Individual teacher or classroom data will not be shared to preserve the privacy and confidentiality of staff, ensuring the focus of this inquiry remains on collective pedagogical practices rather than individual appraisal.

Quanititative analysis of the data indicates a noticeable increase in the provision of opportunities for our tauira to consolidate their reading comprehension and literacy learning through the 'Create' component of the Manaiakalani framework.

The presentation below unpacks the increase in planned opportunities for our tauira to creatively explore their new learning. The detail in the analysis in reflected in the breakdown of the graphs on slides 4, 6, 8 and 10. It is important here to recognise the fact that our staff have a wide range of teaching experience ranging from less than one year to thirty plus years. It is also important to note that everyone has put a lot of effort into embracing a new curriculum and integrating new PLD, whilst trying hard not to throw the baby of 'create' out with the bath water.

The following factors are hypothesised to have contributed to the observed increase in 'Create' opportunities:

• Recognition that 'Create' extends beyond digital products to encompass various non-digital outputs.
• Completion of Structured Literacy Professional Learning and Development (PLD).
• Targeted staff meeting on the Manaiakalani ‘Create’ principle.
• In-class support provided by Manaiakalani facilitators.
• Active sharing of 'Create' outcomes in team meetings.
• Increased utilisation of blogging as an immediate output and sharing platform.
• Elevated kaiako confidence in teaching Structured Literacy.
• Improved kaiako confidence in utilising digital capabilities for task design.
• Increased staff ownership of accountability for pedagogical integration.
• Active planning for 'Create' opportunities.
• Effective establishment of connections between new and prior learning.
• Development of greater tauira (student) independence, enabling more complex, self-directed creation tasks.

The following factors are hypothesised to account for areas where the integration of 'Create' has seen minimal change:

• 'Create' opportunities were not explicitly integrated into planning cycles.
• Lower kaiako confidence in implementing Structured Literacy instructional practices.
• Lower kaiako confidence in leveraging digital capabilities for task design.
• Perceived pressure resulting from connecting existing practice to new PLD requirements.
• Initial resistance to pedagogical change within some practices
• Disconnects between teacher expectation and tauira capability, particularly concerning the complexity of independent creation tasks.

In summary, this inquiry confidently confirms that 'Create' opportunities are thriving in our kura. We acknowledge the wide spectrum of teaching experience within our staff, recognising that new pedagogical learning often generates self-doubt, leading some to initially favour highly structured, familiar methods. While there is a necessary place for less creative consolidation tasks, the key to effective literacy mastery is 'repetition without boring'. This critical element is demonstrably afforded when students are given agency, choice, and creative opportunity within their follow-up learning.

Stocktake of my Inquiry...

We are half way through the year and I realise when taking stock of my inquiry that the PLD start delay has impacted my inquiry significantly. I haven't really been able to begin until now as we have only had 4 structured literacy PLD sessions so far. My inquiry a school leader is not just a personal one, but also a team one. The positives to date are that we have been keeping the status quo in literacy so I do know we are currently all on the same page as far as planning is concerned. We are all on the same page as far as DLO scaffolds are concerned and our current shared language of instruction is alive and well. 

Moving forward this term sees us starting to implement structured literacy practises. What is a huge plus for us is that the changes are not big ones. Our current planning is structured. It unpacks the text and explores text structures, themes and vocabulary. What we do need to do is approach the tweaks we need to make to the vocabulary instruction at our own pace. What I mean by that is we are a team with a varied range of teaching experience which ranges from 6 months to over 30 years. If we change too much too soon I can see everything unravelling quickly. The point of PLD is to build on what we know to strengthen our practice not to throw everything out and start again.

Before I think about how I can support my team I need to put my own oxygen mask on first. By that I mean I need to jump into structured literacy approaches boots and all. I know I still need to capture student voice and will do this when term 3 begins. I needed to look closely at how I will adapt and tweak my current planning. I have done that by looking at the planning exemplar provided on the structured literacy platform we are using and have then made a few changes in what I already had in place. 

The end goal was to keep a 'create' aspect which I have done. I wanted to make sure I was covering what was suggested but I also know I can do this without folding back to using the worksheets I cut my teeth on as a beginning teacher. The first screenshot below is what is suggested on our PLD provider platform. The way I have interpreted this is to use the perspective DLOs I already have in place but add a creative aspect to this by using ADOBE podcast to capture the conversation behind the end product. (The discussion and summarising aspects are covered in the guided planning.) We do have planning scaffolds that we use but the way my learners show their perspective is totally up to them. I am also making use of text sets and my learning T-shaped literacy gave me. What I have added is a skill drill game that I created using Gemini. These multi-choice tasks have been a game changer in our class. They allow for quick recall and application of new learning. Examples of these challenges can be found here.

As I said earlier I, along with my team, are very much at the start of our structured literacy journey. Ours made slightly more challenging by the year groups being separated into PLD for Y4-6 and PLD for Y7-8. What is helping keep us all aligned is the planning framework and the conversations we have as a team.

Causal Chain - mapping my inquiry...

As a part of the Manaiakalani Kahui Ako we are challenged to think about what we want to achieve then work backwards to map our steps. This is called a causal chain and is the logical thought process we follow to help us stay focused on on track throughout the entirety of our inquiries. As I completed my causal chain for 2025 I realised I was actually building on from the inquiry I began last year. This is exciting as it is an opportunity to see how the team alignment we worked so hard on last year strengthens our team when staff members change and a new program (structured literacy) is introduced.

Link to my 2025 Causal Chain

A causal chain is when a cause leads to an effect and that effect becomes the cause of another effect - A leads to B. B leads to C. C leads to D...start from D and work backwards Any intervention you design will (consciously or not) be based on a causal chain you have in mind - this is your theory of action.... To really understand deeply how teaching (as a cause) leads to a valued student outcome (effect), we need to know about more than just the first cause in the chain and the final - we need to know about each link.' - Dr Aaron Wilson

Building an accurate profile of students' learning - tools, measures and approaches...

Describe the tools/measures/approaches you plan to use to get a more detailed and accurate profile of students’ learning in relation to that challenge. Justify why you chose these approaches and tools.

My challenge is to explore how the create aspect of the Manaiakalani pedagogy fits in and how we harnessing the digital to explore the create aspect of structured literacy. Our Junior team is currently running a structured literacy program and our Senior team are one week away from beginning our own structured literacy journey. As indicated in a previous post, I am very aware that 'creative skills help students become better problem solvers, communicators and collaborators.' (Manaiakalani). If a student can effectively use their DLO to teach it to someone else, then their own level of understanding and critical thought patterns (specifically analysis) are significantly strengthened.

To capture our starting point I chatted to our teaching team about how they currently use create in Reading and then followed this up by exploring the teaching slides on our class sites and a random selection of individual student blogs. The presentation below reflects my initial findings. Classes are randomly positioned on these graphs to preserve anonymity. My objective here is not to identify anyone or any class publicly as everyone is grappling with the challenges new learning brings.

One point I did not consider at the start of the year was the difference in learning needs between the students who are learning to read and those who are reading to learn. I have since discovered that with our newest learners the create aspect is very much 'hands- on' rather than digitally focused. 

With my Year 7/8 class in mind I will be continuing to use what I already know to build on my new learning. Having participated in the T-shaped literacy PLD for the last few years I can see where the ideas I learnt there can be capitalised on here. What is important for our senior team is that we follow the same line of thinking. We don't need to disregard for example, the summarising DLO and shared language of instruction we already use. This alignment that has been across the syndicate for the last few years is paying off in our room this year as our learners already have the knowledge needed to summarise a text. My role is to remind our team as we begin our structured literacy journey, to use what we know to unpack the new learning. We don't need to take our learners back to the start when they're already finding success in what they use now.

My Planning Focus:

• This year I changed the word 'changes' to 'focus' in this section as I am aware if create opportunities are to stay alive in my literacy program I need to ensure they are well thought out and actively planned for. I absolutely can not see the point in throwing the baby out with the bathwater to ensure I am following a structured literacy program.
• Looking ahead at the planning exemplars on the platform we are using I see that there are opportunities for our learners to summarise, find the main idea, identify the theme, make connections and see things from different perspectives. All follow up challenges I already do. What I won't be doing is using the provided worksheets as I have a wide range of strategies in my kete that will allow me to align with the planning but also keep create alive in my classrom.

Teaching as Inquiry 2025...

Click here to see how I align my inquiry with the Manaiakalani framework.

“Recognising and spreading sophisticated pedagogical practice across our community so that students learn in better and more powerful ways...”

The Manaiakalani Community of Learning is working together on this task using the expertise existing in of our community of learning. 

Labels:

LEvidence, LScan, LTrend, LHypothesise, LResearch, LReflect,

CPlan, CTry, CInnovate, CImplement, CReflect,

SPublish, SCoteach, SModel, SGuide, SFback, SReflect

Student Inquiry Foci 2025...

With all our school starting or strengthening our structured literacy journeys this year, I have decided to focus on where the create aspect of the Manaiakalani pedagogy fits in and how we harnessing the digital to explore the create aspect of structured literacy. As I write this our Y4-8 team are yet to begin this journey so my hope is by voicing my hunch, we might avoid overlooking opportunities to create as we navigate our new learning.

I have been a part of the Manaiakalani cluster for many years and know the power the create component in learning has towards helping us achieve the 1.5x accelerated shift we need to ensure our learners are set up for success as they move through their individual learning journeys. 'Creative skills help students become better problem solvers, communicators and collaborators.' (Manaiakalani).

Sourced from Manaiakalani Pedagogy for DFI DLO

Students learn by actively constructing knowledge, not just absorbing it. This involves breaking down, rearranging, selecting, and demonstrating their understanding, so that  “...whatever was in their mind, whatever they could visualise, whatever they could see they created...” - Elwyn Richardson. 

The Apple curriculum supports this thinking and states 'After 40 years working alongside educators, we've seen — and research has shown — that creative thinking leads to deeper student engagement. And when students are more engaged, they take more ownership of their learning. Creative skills help students become better problem solvers, communicators and collaborators. They explore more and experiment more. They tell richer stories and find their own unique voices. They stretch their imaginations and make connections they might not otherwise make — and they carry these skills through everything they do in school. And beyond.' Why Creativity Matters - Apple Curriculum. 

The challenge of student learning is to demonstrate their understanding of a concept by creating something with the knowledge that they have unpacked and internalised. If the create process is overlooked where will we find ways to facilitate discussion and reflection? I can't imagine any student being inspired by. If students are not inspired to learn, then following a preset lesson to the letter will result in a structurally embedded underachievement issue that will see us lose the interest of those readers we have worked so hard historically to capture.

If I look back at my own time at school, with the exception of one year, I can not recall anything in reading lessons other than sitting in a circle reading a text round robin style then being sent back to my desk to answer questions in silence to demonstrate that I had gained meaning from what I had read. There were no opportunities to learn from others, no opportunities for collaboration and no opportunities to talk about the text, let alone creating anything with the information I had found. Sadly this was reading until I was about 9 years old, something I viewed as just a thing we did at school. The one year that stands out saw us being asked to draw characters in a particular scene, make information posters and redesign book covers. That was the year I saw reading at school as fun.

It is because of the very reason just mentioned, that I feel this is the the most important and catalytic issue of learning for our learners this year. I don't want to be introducing and unpacking a text verbally through preset comprehension strategies. I don't want to be the teacher who asks my students to summarise a text on a graphic organiser then leave it there. I want to be the teacher who asks a provocation and encourages talk and creativity. I want my learners to show me their connections to the aspects of the text we are unpacking using the plethora of digital tools available to us. Defaulting to substitution in response to a structured learning process does not, in my opinion, open the opportunities to 'empower my students with creative learning opportunities to help accelerate achievement'.

Exploring Quantitative Data...

To measure the difference our syndicate focus on effective reading planning has made, I have analysed the achievement shifts of our students who achieved 'below' in the PAT Panui / Reading comprehension assessments at Time Point 1 (TP1), and were present for the Time Point 2 (TP2) assessments. The graphs show a decrease in 'below' levels across the syndicate. These shifts across the year groups are illustrated in the graphs in the DLO above. To unpack this further I have analysed the GAP analysis completed by each class teacher. Due to the need to maintain privacy I will not be sharing these docs as students and teachers are easily identifiable. 

Possible reasons for students with no shift or a shift backwards:

• IEP
• Erratic attendance
• Behaviour
• Limited connections to the learning
• ESOL funded
• Disconnect with language of questioning
• Low level text comprehension
• Low self efficacy
• Overthinking the challenge

Continued absence from school prevents strong connections to the learning being made. These students are still learning to read and a lack of continuity means their cognitive load has increased as the gaps in their learning have widened and they have not been able to capitalise on the supports put in place for them. 

A lack of focus during learning time often results in learning has been impacted. Students who are off-task are not engaged in their learning tend to fall even further behind as the gap widens, causing already low levels of self efficacy to become an even bigger hurdle to get over. Low self efficacy also brings about the fear of failure, something often masked with a reluctance to participate and engage in the learning. 

Students with an IEP, or who are ESOL funded, often have disconnects with the language of questioning and low level text comprehension due to their limitations in gaining meaning from text at a higher than normal level. Removal of additional learning support or the opportunity to collaborate in testing situations, are also factors to be considered here as the reality of having to rely on the underdeveloped independent working skills leads to self doubt. In turn this leads to overthinking and/or not knowing how to access and apply the strategies needed to gain meaning. 

Possible reasons for no shift or a shift backwards linked to teacher practice:

• Students not being taught at the right level
• Teacher content knowledge not a strength
• Limited opportunities for differentiation
• Links to writing not planned for
• Learning Intentions and Success Criteria not being unpacked or linked directly to the learning
• Text choice
• Limited opportunities for discussion
• Create opportunities too limited
• Reading To missing
• Shared Reading missing
• Reliance on 'safe' and 'known' comprehension strategies
• No opportunities to reflect on own fluency
• Multimodal opportunities present in only some classes
• Syndicate created comprehension scaffolds used and displayed in some classes

 

Year Group	Shift backwards	No shift	Shift
4	13.3%	26.6%	0
5	6.5%	13%	6.5%
6	0	6.3%	9.4%
7	0	7%	14%
8	0	7%	14%

Time Point 1 achievement data was the catalyst behind the introduction of the Manaiakalani Reading Pillars of Practice (MRPP) as a framework to align our reading planning with. Through observations, appraisal discussions and planning feedback I noticed areas in our practice that were strong and the areas that needed strengthening. These are illustrated below in the TP1/TP2 reading planning analysis. After the TP1 planning analysis had been discussed both with the team and individually we set ourselves both syndicate and individual focuses. As with the data above, anonymity has been respected so classes and teachers have not been identified.

Shift in effective teacher practice between TP1 and TP2:

• Data analysed effectively to support group learning needs
• Teacher content knowledge strengthening
• Text choice strengthened
• Text structure and vocabulary focus introduced in all classes
• LI/SC align with syndicate co-created LI/SC to promote shared language of instruction
• A wider variety of reading comprehension strategies being explicitly planned for
• Multimodal opportunities present in 4/5 classes
• Explicit links between student achievement data, long term plans and guided reading plans
• Wide variety of questioning being used
• Questioning linked to comprehension strategies
• Syndicate created comprehension scaffolds used and displayed in all classes
• Planning is moving from being done for compliance to be done for a purpose.

                                      

Adopting the Manaiakalani Reading Pillars of Practice as a guiding framework has directly benefited our students by empowering our team of teachers with the knowledge and tools to improve instruction. This shared understanding has facilitated our collaborative learning journey, and highlighted the importance of using data to inform our planning to help us meet the learning needs of the students in our classes.

Exploring Qualitative Data...

This qualitative evaluation explores the impact of the Manaiakalani Reading Pillars of Practice (MRPP) on reading planning, teacher practice and capability, and student achievement within our school context. Capability, defined as the ability to effectively apply knowledge and skills to achieve desired outcomes. By aligning our planning to the MRPP has helped strengthen teacher capability and enhance reading instruction for our Year 4-8 teachers. In turn this has helped accelerate shift in student achievement in Reading.

To do this I analysed both long term planning and guided reading lesson plans with the time point 1 student achievement data in mind. Learning conversations with teachers allowed us both to explore their perceptions of what was needed to help all our students find success in reading. This process fostered a shared understanding of effective reading instruction within our team and promoted a cohesive approach where our thinking is more aligned. It allowed us to introduce mini PLD sessions that explored and unpacked comprehension strategies and the need for an aligned shared language of instruction in our team meetings. We co-constructed learning intentions, scaffolds and group norms. Using these resources helped us strengthen the questions we asked to ensure we were introducing our students to a wider variety of comprehension skills and providing them with increased opportunities to apply these skills in context both independently and collaboratively through discussion.

The MRPP has provided a clear framework for aligning long-term and short-term planning with evidence-based practices. The use of student achievement data alongside this has facilitated a shift from compliance-based planning to purposeful instruction. This shift has resulted in teachers moving away from simply falling back on the known to actively considering the specific needs of their students and tailoring instruction accordingly. 

                                                               

This process has introduced opportunities for rich professional conversations to take place. Additionally it had provided opportunities for best practices to be shared and both syndicate wide and individual areas that need strengthening to be identified. Using the Manaiakalani Reading Pillars of Practice has provided us with a clear framework for planning and instruction. This has as previously mentioned, reduced ambiguity, strengthening teacher confidence and has helped to put us all on the same page. From a leadership perspective this process has been the stepping stone we needed to engage in rich professional conversations where both successes can be identified, hard messages given and clarity of where to next co-constructed.

Use of a gap analysis has helped us to tailor instruction to meet individual learning needs of the tamariki in our own classes. Embracing change by beginning to multimodal text sets has provided our students with more opportunities to engage with and unpack the texts in front of them. We still are still on a journey but with a stable staff going forward we have the advantage of having already taken the first steps towards change.

The implementation of aligning our planning with the Manaiakalani Reading Pillars of Practice has had a positive impact on teacher capability and student achievement. It has provided us with the common ground needed for professional collaboration, and has highlighted the importance of implementing the data-driven planning decisions around our syndicate wide focus on the comprehension strategies. 

Describe and Explain the changes/tweaks you have made in your practice along the way...

My inquiry this year has had many twists and turns. Achieving accelerated shift in Literacy was identified as being one of the most important and catalytic issues of learning facing our students in Y4 - 8, this year, when the time point one data was analysed. Exploring how learning gained from professional development is helping to strengthen teacher practice and achievement in literacy is something I haven't looked at before so I began with one idea which over the course of the year has completely morphed into another. Not because as I mentioned in an earlier post, because it was unachievable, but because my initial idea simply wasn't working. The effect of staff changes on PLD is something I hadn't initially taken into consideration. What began as an inquiry into how we (PBS) are using PLD to accelerate shift across our school' and over the course of the year required a change of tact to inquiring into how are we building and strengthening our capability in raising student achievement outcomes in Reading for years 4-8 at PBS.

I began my journey by trying to ensure we were all on the same page. Consistency and a shared language of instruction help our students to make the connections they need to be able to access their learning with confidence and understanding. At the start this wasn't about paying no regard to the skills and knowledge my team brought to the table but rather to align our thinking. This is explained in detail with examples in an earlier blog post. This wasn't as successful as I hoped as we were all coming from such different places both literally and in knowledge gained from recent PLD, so it was back to the drawing board.

After speaking with Naomi Rosedale, I realised I needed a new pathway forward, a pathway that included a framework that would bring everything together and provide clarity. Aligning what I was looking for with the Manaiakalani Reading Pillars of Practice (MRPP) was the lightbulb moment I needed. In Term 3 I used the MRPP to look closely at what and how we, my team and I, were actually teaching the tauira in front of us in our reading lessons. I looked at the data and used the initial gap analysis to help me gauge whether or not the learning planned matched the student needs. To allow for consistency I stood by my decision that if it wasn't in the planning it wasn't there. The follow up discussions were both rich and gave all of us the clarity we needed to help us meet the learning needs of our individual classes.

This process was repeated in Term 4. I am yet to complete all my follow up discussions but have them timetabled for later in the week. What I noticed was with a shared understanding and stronger knowledge of why we need to make the changes. All my team have now included multimodal text sets, are looking at the structure and language in the different text types and have put a lot of thought into the questions they are asking. There is definitely a growth in the use of our shared language of instruction, a wider variety of comprehension skills being accessed. 

Changing my inquiry focus has allowed me to introduce change in a manageable and achievable way. Mindsets where planning is concerned has moved from compliance to purpose, something I struggled to initially get buy in from. I feel that looking closely at my own planning has added the 'teacher model' element to the learning. By using the MRPP it has allowed us to all learn together but at our own pace. Sharing people's successes and valuing their ideas has afforded us opportunities to learn with and from each other. 

The big message I want to share here is that change is good, it should be embraced and we should not be afraid to walk in a different direction if what we have tried is not working. 

You can't help yourself if you can't see yourself...

Once again I'm tapping back to Jason Borland's thinking in our 2015 Manaiakalani Innovative Teacher's PLG where he stated that "You can't help yourself if you can't see yourself." This thinking resonated with me when I first heard it, and after following Jason's inquiry I have often repurposed this idea in the classroom but know it has reaches much further and wider than only our learners.

At the start of this term I asked my team to video themselves teaching a guided reading lesson. The idea was to help everyone to see what they were doing well and what they felt they could do in a different way. I made it clear this was for personal use only, I didn't want to see it and I definitely didn't want a written analysis of it. The only video I wanted to see was my own because I do the same as I ask my team to do. It also gives me a video to use as a resource if I need to model the process. All wanted was for everyone to take a moment to reflect on what they do in the classroom to help their learners connect to the learning. 

Initially this challenge was seen as something my team needed to do for me. However, this recording definitely wasn't for me, it was for them. Falling back on the phrase 'you can't help yourself if you can't see yourself,' was the game changer. Through observation opportunities I have been able to see each room first hand. I often record these observations for this purpose but after watching some parts together I imagine time plays a huge part in the decision to continue watching it in entirety or not. When challenged to watch and reflect in a safe way, the table below identifies areas from our team discussion that we need to strengthen. 

This picture is real and as is it co-constructed there is an element of ownership that we can all capitalise on to make the changes needed in our practice that will help accelerate student achievement.