6 Pillars of Learning – A time for ‘Review’ (Part 1)

At St Luke’s Catholic College, our 6 Pillars of Learning provide a strong reference point for learning growth and development for each child. These 6 Pillars, framed largely from the Australian General Capabilities, were established in 2017 in response to the school’s commitment to bring social skills and enterprise skills to prominence when considering the development and growth of each child at St Luke’s. So much so, that more substantial feedback is offered on the Pillars than for subject areas. Also, when we have Student-led Conferences, each child speaks with their parents using work samples to explain their self reflected growth using the Pillars as a scaffold for conversation.

However, like all things in this changing world, we have had cause to reflect on the Pillars based on the experience of a number of teachers and students new to the College this year. Just like we have too many learning outcomes to consider, there are too many ‘sub elements’ of 6 Pillars, 56 in total, for teachers and students to address. Many teachers agree with me on that one!

So, it was with interest that late last year I was introduced to Review – the future of assessment. Soon after, early in the new year, I was invited to a meeting with CEDP senior leaders and University of Technology Sydney (UTS) personnel. At that meeting, it was made obvious to me that through self reflection, peer assessment and teacher feedback, Review offers much promise and potential to more closely and seamlessly align KLA outcomes with our 6 Pillars of Learning.

A number of conversations then led to 5 St Luke’s teachers attending a full day workshop with UTS personnel and 2 other CEDP schools on Wednesday 20 June. As part of that meeting we heard how ‘Review’ breaks down graduate attributes into five categories so that students can self-assess their own work against specific criteria and monitor their disciplinary skills as illustrated in the diagram below.

Screen Shot 2018-07-04 at 7.59.56 pm

There were many reflections and conversations stemming from that day with the team of 5 speaking positively about Review with staff. As part of that follow up, UTS personnel offered questions for reflection. As our Pillars only refer to 5 of the 7 General Capabilities, we were asked why we do not include aspects of the Literacy and Numeracy Capabilities. Well, at this stage, literacy and numeracy are not part of 6 Pillars for two reasons:

  1. We already have a sound learning approach to offering feedback to students and parents in these areas due to a whole of system strategy called ‘Focus 160’.
  2. At the ‘back end’ of the school learning journey, around graduation time, literacy and numeracy requirements for post school pathways are obvious and observable based around the evidence of work in the student’s folio of work.

We know we need to become far more ‘precise’ with the 6 Pillars. The “6 Pillars” language is a part of our DNA at St Luke’s. Students and staff can recite the 6 Pillars ‘on the spot’. However, we are not yet across the ‘detail’ of sub-elements, nor are we across a range of evidence across various contexts that can assist a student to quickly identify where their strengths lie and how they can assist them to understand their life purpose. Furthermore, we need to consider an equity question – Is it fair to offer feedback on the 6 Pillars if we do not explicitly teach aspects of those pillars as a part of our learning? For example, if we don’t explicitly teach how to “Manage”, is it fair to offer feedback on that Pillar?

I suppose another way of thinking about alignment, or leading first with Pillars/capabilities and then addressing KLA outcomes is to ask… How can we teach and assess elements of:

  • ‘Witness’ when teaching PDHPE?
  • ‘Manage Self’ when teaching Mathematics?
  • ‘Relate with Others’ when teaching Religious Education?
  • ‘Communicate with Others’ when teaching when teaching English?
  • Think Critically when teaching Creative Arts or TAS?
  • Think Creatively when teaching Science or LOTE?
  • Be Digitally Literate when teaching teaching HSIE?

For any of the above you can interchange Pillars with KLAs.

The challenge for us will be ‘flipping our thinking’ to universally lead with Pillars/Capabilities and have KLA outcomes appear to be ‘secondary’ in the process, just like Liverpool Boys High School. There is no doubt we are well on the way as we have started this process. However, our planning, programming and preparation is led by a learning outcomes focus as required by NESA with the Pillars ‘tacked on’. For me, what ‘Review’ can open up the possibilities for us to lead with the 6 Pillars and Capabilities without compromising our rigorous tracking of learning outcomes as required by NESA – and that is very exciting!

As always, questions, comments and insights are more than welcome.


Please note: For more information about Review, you are welcome to visit http://academ.com.au/review/

Literacy isn’t the only capability, it’s one of 7.

In March 2018, a report called Through Growth to Achievement Report of the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools was published. This report was authored by Mr David Gonski AC after the Australian Government established the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools (the Review) in July 2017.

There were 300 submissions from teachers, principals, professional associations, teachers unions, parents and carers, school systems, state and territory governments, researchers, universities, community organisations, and business and industry. One of those to offer a submission was the South Australian Department of Education who wrote,

“Strengthening the development of the general capabilities is critical to the national innovation and skills agenda. Further work to identify effective teaching strategies must be underpinned by sound measures and assessments of the full range of the skills covered by the curriculum is needed.”

The general capabilities figure prominently in both the report, known as #Gonski2 and ensuring discussion since its release. There has been a call from some to explore how best to interweave the general capabilities among subject areas, or thematic studies which combined learning areas. At St Luke’s Catholic College, a preschool to post school learning environment of sixteen months old, this is already happening.

As part of #Gonski2, there has been much criticism of NAPLAN and the intense concentration on Literacy and Numeracy, often at the exclusion of other important learning areas and general capabilities. NSW State Education Minister, Mr Rob Stokes, has used this as an opportunity to consider new ways of assessment; that is, moving from high stakes testing which compares states and schools, to a raft of diagnostic tools which are easily accessed so teachers and students can make real time decisions about ‘next steps’ for their learning.

#Gonski2 has produced great conversation, discussion and dialogue with meaningful leaders offering differing viewpoints, but all healthy discussion nonetheless. One question that keeps coming up is “How do you assess the general capabilities?” More specifically, I have heard, “How do you assess creative and critical thinking when creativity is so contextual?  For example, creativity in the scientific sense is different to creativity in the visual arts area. Yes it is, but that’s the point! To deepen our understanding of how to develop the general capabilities, we need to wrestle with these questions rather than continue to work where the next silver bullet for literacy and numeracy is.

All in all, I have reflect… We have all heard of the saying, “Winning isn’t everything it’s the only thing”. Replace the word ‘things’ with ‘capabilities’ and, one could say,

“Literacy isn’t the only capability, it’s one of seven general capabilities”.



Programming – The Great Game Plan!

Image provided by https://www.pexels.com

As part of its requirements to  our local education authority known as NESA (New South Wales Education Standards Authority), our system of schools CEDP (Catholic Education Diocese of Parramatta) facilitates a process called Peer Review. This process looks specifically at the compliance aspects of schooling. Principals are required to produce documentation about:

  • Timetables for each Year/class from Kindergarten to Year 12, showing allocation of time and teaching staff for each KLA/Course, including system directed Focus 160 requirements; 100 minutes of Literacy and 60 minutes of Numeracy for each child from Early Stage to Stage 3 inclusive.  
  • Attendance processes and protocols.
  • Safe and supportive environments including WWCC, reportable conduct and child protection.
  • Teacher accreditation processes.
  • Complaints and Grievances policies and procedures.

These aspects of my work don’t ignite me with great enthusiasm; however, I understand that they are necessary.

Further to the above, as part of the Peer Review process, each school ensures much time, energy and effort are directed towards quality assurance for learning; most specifically, programming and assessment for the delivery of core curriculum. Why? “Because that’s what NESA is looking for.”  Each school is required to send a team made up of the the principal plus four staff to the Peer Review day. Over the course of the day each school presents their documentation and receives valuable feedback from peers.

To me, programming is important. It is like a ‘game plan’ a coach develops throughout a week before their big weekend ‘game day performance’. However, for teachers, ‘game day’ is each weekday. The ‘game plan’ for teachers is updated each day, often after their own critical reflections from what took place during ‘game day’.

Let’s say Peer Review ‘costs’ the system approximately 5 teachers for the day at $400 for each casual replacement that is $2000 per school. $2000 per school x 80 schools = $160 000. WOW! The ‘game plan’ is important! Whilst it is necessary for system and schools to comply with NESA compliance requirements, I wonder how we could spend the equal amount of money, $160 000, on observing teachers’ ‘game day performance’ for just one day.

We know through schools and system data that “Teacher quality” is a known factor which impacts on student enrolment. If that is the case, why does NESA ask schools and systems to put so much time, effort and energy into ‘game plan’ of programming and assessment for core curriculum, and not ask teachers and schools to delve deeper into ‘game day performance’ for the development of the skills and capabilities required for a changing world?

I know that government asks schools and systems to produce data and evidence about literacy and numeracy. And, at least in our system, there has been great improvement gains made in these areas over the last five years. Whilst those foundations are vitally important,

each young person will not only be required to be literate and numerate, they will be required to have in their ‘kit bag’ the ability to manage themselves, relate with others, communicate, collaborate, think critically and be digital literate as part of a rapidly changing world.

As young adults they will also be required to have endless reservoirs of empathy, resilience and persistence to problem solve with various teams of people in order to respond to the needs of the local community and the capitalise on the opportunities of living in an increasingly global world. How are systems and schools assisting teachers with their ‘game day performance’ to nurture students to develop the necessary skills and capabilities beyond core curriculum, literacy an numeracy?

It seems to me that you can have the best ‘game plan’ in the world, but unless teachers know about their ‘game day performance’, the ‘game plan’ may not be worth that much!

As usual, comments are more than welcome.



‘My Learning’

As a part of the five educational services (Early Learning, Primary, Secondary, Out of Hours Care and High Needs Education commencing in 2020), St Luke’s Catholic College in Marsden Park is registered and accredited to teach the mandated curriculum from Kindergarten to Year 12 as directed by NESA, the New South Wales Education Standards Authority. Whilst NESA is the governing body of most things curriculum, the learning of students should not entirely be imposed by a central authority.

The learning of a young person is theirs, not that of a school nor that of a central curriculum authority. As such, education leaders are obligated to explore ways where we can give back ‘my learning time’ to the learner.  As students progress through their secondary learning years at St Luke’s we will continue to explore ways of providing more and more personalised learning time.

With a focus on secondary schooling from Years 7 to 10, NESA requires all schools to deliver courses within the following eight Key Learning Areas (KLAs):

  • Creative Arts – Music & Visual Arts
  • English
  • HSIE – Human Society and its Environment including History and Geography.
  • LOTE – Language Other Than English.
  • Mathematics
  • PDHPE – Physical Development, Health and Physical Exercise.
  • Science
  • TAS – Technological and Applied Studies.

At St Luke’s we will ensure indicative NESA hours for each KLA; however, we will not oversubscribe hours like most other schools. St Luke’s will also provide formal Religious Education which makes a significant contribution to the education of each child. Hours dedicated to Religious Education and the eight KLAs make up the Core Curriculum at St Luke’s. This Core Curriculum is delivered through an experiential inquiry approach to learning through the integration of KLAs which enables students to apply their knowledge to new situations. Furthermore, students focus on developing their social skills and enterprise skills as expressed through our 6 Pillars of learning.

At St Luke’s, the Core Curriculum will be complemented and connected with each student’s Personalised Curriculum. With our first Year 7 cohort in 2018, the Personalised Curriculum  has commenced with an instructional approach towards post-school pathways. This is led by the Pathways Leader, teacher and coaching industry experts as outlined in this videoThey, along with input from parents and other data sources, assist students to more deeply understand their own talents, and how those talents can be used to inform their purpose in a rapidly changing world. 

As students progress through Years 8, 9 & 10 in the coming years, there will increasingly be more and more time for students to self direct their Personalised Curriculum. This may include, but is not limited to:

  1. Acceleration of core curriculum subjects leading to early commencement of HSC in one or two subjects.
  2. If required, intervention strategies for those students who do not meet minimum national benchmark standards for literacy and numeracy.
  3. Early commencement of VET (Vocational and Educational Training) subjects either at school or through TAFE.
  4. Participation in Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs), completion of digital badge courses or informal internships with local industry experts and ‘start ups’.
  5. Self directed electives and collaborative projects as a result of students working with teachers with the following provocation: Knowing my Strengths, Motivations and Interests (SIM), how can I use my identified talents and affirmed capabilities to ensure a better world?

This approach to learning will overseen by a mix of teachers and personalised learning coaches who will ensure students engage with ongoing communication with parents. The end result will see students authentically engage with post-school pathways as they progress through their secondary school years at St Luke’s. Conceptually, at this stage it looks like this…

Screen Shot 2018-03-10 at 1.56.22 pm

Hours wise, it may possibly look like this…

Screen Shot 2018-03-10 at 1.43.52 pm

If you have any insights, suggestions or questions, please offer a comment.



Australia Day Eve Provocations

Screen Shot 2018-01-28 at 4.17.37 pm

On Thursday 25 January, the day before Australia Day, as a member of the St Luke’s Leadership Team I gathered with over 500 system and school leaders from 80 primary and secondary schools for the #CEDP2018 Leadership Day. The day engages its participants by providing various keynote speakers who provoke our thinking around a central theme.

Bishop Vincent Long threw out the first challenge of the day when he asked if we were Empire Builders – those preoccupied with success, power and ambition, or Kingdom Builders – those who foster and nurture relationships with the powerless poor. In the current climate of testing mandates, leagues tables and data driven discussions to ensure accountability, it resonated with many when Bishop Vincent stated…

Screen Shot 2018-01-26 at 5.46.42 pm

Our Executive Director Mr Greg Whitby, who the very next day was named in the Australia Day Honours list with his appointment as a Member in the General Division of the Order of Australia (AM), followed with his characteristic mix of encouragement, inspiration and challenge. Greg recalled some of his recent learnings as part of a course of study where he engaged with leaders from a cross-section of industries, backgrounds and nationalities. The message was loud and clear…


Greg encouraged us to “be bold enough to do the work” by becoming “curiouser and curiouser”, just like Alice in Wonderland. Later that evening when viewing the Australia Day Awards live on ABC Television, I heard Etienne Masle-Farquar talking about his father and 2018 Senior Australian of the Year, Dr Graham Farquhar when he said,

“He is driven by an insatiable curiosity. He really needs to know the reason why things work the way they do and how they work.” 

Dr Farquhar himself encouraged all of us when he said,

“We can be creative, we can struggle for honesty and we can deal with failures. We are all lucky because of our ability to embrace creativity and hence progress as a nation.”

Bishop Vincent, Greg Whitby AM and Dr Graham Farquhar are all great leaders.

“Great leaders prepare themselves not for the comfortable predictability of yesterday but for the realities of today and the unknown possibilities of tomorrow” – Anne Masterson.

In looking for inspiration for the year ahead as a school leader, maybe I should consider what @hamishcurry  tweeted,

I’d take that quote and replace ‘leaders’ for ‘education’.

I enjoyed listening to the provocations of significant local and national thought leaders on the eve of Australia Day. It was a privilege. Interestingly, not one of them is a politician and not one of them a bureaucrat. Among all of their inspiring words, there was no mention of marks, grades, league tables, testing or benchmarks as the key to their success. I only heard encouragement to engage with discovery, to take on challenges and be curious, all of which will lead to the transformed learning so necessary for a changing world.

Whilst pursuing a transformed learning agenda there will be the inevitable failures; however, when these arise we can remind ourselves of the four mantras of the 2018 Australian of the Year, Professor Michelle Simmons. They are:

Do what’s hard. Place high expectations on yourself. Take risks. Do something that matters.

Screen Shot 2018-01-28 at 5.21.50 pm
2018 Australian of the Year – Professor Michelle Simmons

Professor Simmons’ story is fascinating – a female quantum physicist in a male dominated world. To overcome the barriers she faced in her career she regularly reminded herself that, “It’s is important not to be defined by other people’s expectations of who you are and what you might be.” Professor Simmons especially encouraged young people to pursue what they love, to set their heights high and tackle the hardest challenges in life. One of the hardest challenges in pursuing a transformed learning agenda may be proving to our politicians and the media that…

Screen Shot 2018-01-28 at 4.43.33 pm

Have a great start to the 2018 school year.







Capabilities and Data

One of the privileges for any school is to nurture the curiosity of young people so they  contribute creatively for a better world. There are many who argue that the current school system struggles to do this. I am one of those. Mandated testing, the relentless pursuit for better grades and league-table comparison of results, limits the development of skills and capabilities required for a changing world.

In all the recent media about end of year results, I read about a school’s marks, ranks and where they sat on league-style tables between makes and females, public v private schools, last year to this year, etc.etc. However, I could not find any information a student’s ability to:

  • Manage themselves
  • Relate with others
  • Communicate and collaborate with peers
  • Think creatively and critically with experts
  • Engage with digital platforms to solve a problems
  • Witness in the way of Jesus.

A few days ago, Jenny Allum, principal of SCEGGS Darlinghurst, recently penned an article, As HSC students reflect on their marks, we must reflect on the HSC. In it she wrote, “There are many employers out there looking for people of creativity, strength and purpose, able to demonstrate skills in many different ways. Our society needs people with the most diverse set of skills and attributes possible.”  She also expressed…

“It’s vital that we acknowledge and defend the underpinnings of education-the values we instil in our young people and a broad liberal education that focuses on specific disciplines but also on creativity, innovation, entrepreneurship & divergent thinking.”

I agree. So, how does the HSC inform a student about their demonstrated ability in these areas? It doesn’t. How does the ATAR demonstrate how schools support students to develop these necessary capabilities? It doesn’t.

At St Luke’s Catholic College,  we deeply believe that supporting each student to nurture social skills and enterprise capabilities is what will serve them best for a changing world.  This is demonstrated through our commitment to the St Luke’s 6 Pillars of Learning. Each time we program, each time we assess and the many times we provide feedback to students, we embed references to the the Pillars as a part of the learning. Furthermore, teachers increasingly have students “use Pillar language” when they self reflect and offer peer feedback.

Interestingly, our semester reports have enabled us to develop a ‘capabilities data set’. By comparing first semester feedback and second semester feedback, we have identified patterns, asked questions and formulated ideas to better address and plan for the development of these critical skills in each young person.

We know,

“Assessing capabilities is often not as simple as assessing literacy and numeracy, and may require a triangulated assessment strategy” @Mitch_Inst 2016 report, page 21.

As such, teachers have ‘scanned the data’ using A framework for transforming learning in schools: Innovation and the spiral of inquiry by Helen Timperley, Linda Kaser and Judy Halbert (2014). 

By referring to the data set below,  and in an effort to “get underneath” and understand what these number are actually telling us, teachers reflected on:

  1. What the data shows
  2. What it could mean
  3. And, what it could also mean

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 11.09.58 am

The conversation and reflection, which is in its infancy stages, informs our strategy and planning for 2018. However, the longer term aim is that the class of 2023 leave St Luke’s with a folio of work which serves as evidence about their skills and capabilities to address real world global challenges and real world local problems. A focus on data and evidence stemming from our 6 Pillars of Learning will achieve this aim far more authentically than a fixation with marks and grades.

As always, comments, feedback and questions are welcome.



A unique role and different appointment process

Next Monday signals an interesting moment in the short life of St Luke’s Catholic College. The unique role of Pathways Leader commences. This role has been confused for a Career’s advisor role. It has also been seen as similar to a Pathways Liaison or Manager type role which more progressive schools have recently added to their staffing. However, the role of Pathways Leader at St Luke’s is neither.

St Luke’s has taken the stance that, from Year 7 onwards, we will cover all mandated subjects and hours to the NESA indicative requirements. That means in Year 7 next year we will have 7 hours per fortnight to design, establish and commence a personalised Pathways Plan for each student. Over time that increases to 10 hours per fortnight in Year 8, 20 hours (or 4 days) in Year 9 and 23 hours per fortnight in Year 10. That’s a great deal of time!

To ensure students properly develop their Personal Plan, they need to understand who they are, what they can do and how their talents and strengths can purposefully and meaningfully contribute towards solutions to local problems or global challenges. To do so, we will delve into new data sets to complement current academic data. Those new data sets will possibly include:
• Emerging patterns obtained from assessing, reflecting and reporting on general capabilities as expressed in our 6 Pillars of Learning.
• Wellbeing data obtained through current attendance rates and mental health indicators.
• Survey tools including the Clifton StrengthsFinder for youth.
• Input from students and families about their perceived strengths obtained from when the student is ‘in the flow’.

These new sets of data, both quantitative and qualitative, will broaden the definition of success for students at St Luke’s. Furthermore, it will mean students will make informed decisions about personalised learning which aligns with their personal interests, social skills, enterprise skills, academic strengths, technical skills and personal dispositions.

Searching for the best applicant to lead this new initiative proved to be extensive and successful. In fact, by the end of the appointment process we were in the enviable position of being able to offer the role to three people; however, as we know, 3 into 1 does not go. From advertising to appointment took 3 months; in part because the role is so unique and, in part, because there is no clear traditional educational appointment pathway for such a unique role. Maybe this is a sign on the times for school and education roles in the future.

On Wednesday 2 August, applications closed for the above mentioned position. After the initial shortlisting on Thursday 10 August, we expressed interest in two applicants; however, the panel was wishing for a greater depth to the field.  As a result, we adopted a strengths based approach to the appointment process. We engaged recruitment and coaching industry experts who highlighted the inherent strengths required for the role as per ‘Gallup Language’.

To broaden and deepen the field of applicants we engaged with their networks. Furthermore, I wrote to recently appointed St Luke’s personnel asking them to highlight the role within their networks. This process resulted in more applicants, each of whom completed the Clifton StrengthsFinder survey. From here, we interviewed five people for our first round of interviews. Three persons arose from the interviews and proceeded to the next phase.

I wrote to all three applicants inviting them to meet with the panel for a second time. As well, I asked each of them to review the updated Pathways Leader Role. Also, they were asked to read the most recent FYA Work Order Reports – The New Work Smarts and The New Work Mindset. All three applicants were informed that our 90 minute conversation would look like this:

  • 0-15 minutes: The Principal to provide initial thinking about the Pathways Program.
  • 15-30 minutes: Panel to leave the room for the applicant to have preparation time to respond to a lead question.
  • 30-45 minutes: Applicant to provide response to the panel.45-50 minutes: With reference to The New Work Smarts and The New Work Mindset reports applicants to be given a challenge.
  • 50-65 minutes: Panel to leave the room for the applicant to have preparation time to respond to the challenge.
  • 65-80 minutes: Applicant to provide response to the panel.
  • 80-90 minutes: Final discussion/questions from the applicant to the panel.

One lead question, one challenge, 90 minutes x 3 persons later, and all three could have appointed to the role. We were able to facilitate a process which allowed each person to put their best foot forward in a way where they developed their understanding of the role and confidence about what they would bring to the role. Whilst this made it extremely difficult to make an appointment, the discerning conversation between panel members at the end of the day and again the next day, ensured excellent alignment between the role and preferred applicant.

‘The appointed’ is ready for this great challenge after a process which was focused on how their strengths, talents and capabilities would best serve the role. There is no doubt it will be a challenge for the Pathways Leader and their team to work with College Leadership to both support and challenge students of St.Luke’s to fully utilise learning time which is self directed and free from mandates. I know there will be many challenges moving forward; however, I am strong in the belief that inspiring and committed colleagues will make this work because it is work centred on the best interests of our students.

Any questions, comments of feedback will be welcomed.