“This domain is where most system-level transformations focus.  As such, it can become the place where the change process gets stuck--especially when the other domains are not considered.”

Making Change: Policy, Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment

The “making change” domain name refers to the actual changes that occur in the educational system. Four key areas common to all educational systems fit in this domain: policy, curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Each is briefly reviewed from the perspective of system change.

Policy

The literature reveals that key areas to consider in policy development are sequence and engagement (consistency with global competencies and competency-based education principles are assumed)**. See Owning the Change domain for importance of engagement in the change process; sequencing is reviewed within this domain. “Top-down” reform, in which legislation and policy are the stimuli for all other changes, can and has worked in some regions. Policy in these cases has created the conditions under which successful reform can occur (Intel Education, 2017). Policy can follow immediately after leadership to set the stage for all other change or it can be the pivot point to change. It can also remove barriers to reform and to sustain desired changes (Phillips & Schneider, 2016; Sturgis, 2016). Policy can provide levers to change as well. Policy, however, does not guarantee change. Conversely, different regions have also initiated change well before or in the absence of associated policy. These cases show that change can occur without policy.

Curriculum

There are many ways to thoughtfully approach a shift toward global competencies in education and this work will require careful design within curriculum-development processes. Simply overlaying global competencies on existing curricula as an addition will almost certainly fail. In this scenario, every teacher is responsible for global competencies and no teacher is. The global competencies are advanced sets of abilities that draw upon knowledge, skills, competencies, and attitude; they need to be taught differently than “content” knowledge alone. This affects how curricula are developed, recognizing that the nature of long-standing approaches to curricula structures and development can immediately work against the development of global competencies.

Recommended changes to how curriculum is developed to fully adopt global competencies include:

·         Make theory of knowledge and learning explicit (Milton, 2015).

·         Focus on the key or “big” ideas within each academic discipline (Milton, 2015).

·         Limit outcomes or expectations to these “big” ideas (Milton, 2015).

·         Embrace interdisciplinary learning (Milton, 2015) and know that everything that occurs within the school or in connection with the school contributes to the development of global competencies (i.e., there is nothing that is “extracurricular” when it comes to global competencies).

The literature review’s analysis of a range of Canadian provinces and territories, countries and American states attempting to integrate global competencies suggested that Nunavut seemed to be the example with the most visibly integrated core or global competencies with traditional curricular areas. Nunavut Education’s (2007) description of its Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Education Framework makes it very clear that the set of core competencies (e.g., Avatimik Kamattiarniq or global environmental stewardship) is the fundamental aim of the system, and that curriculum strands (e.g., Iqqaqqaukkaringniq—math, science, analytical thinking, technology, practical arts) serve these competencies.

Pedagogy

The central pedagogical features of competency-based education inclusive of global competencies are personalized, student-centred, and student-directed learning; authenticity and significance of the learning experience to support greater learner engagement and motivation; strengths-based starting points; learning embedded in context; the use of assessment for learning purposes; self-evaluative; flexible; inclusive of many “teachers” (e.g., peer teachers, Elders, employers); and experiential (e.g., Alberta Education, 2016; Bristow & Patrick, 2014; Nunavut Education, 2018; NWT Education, Culture & Employment, 2018; Patrick et al., 2018). This kind of approach is often set against the polarized view of the “sage on the stage” where the teacher transmits knowledge to the learner.

It is highly likely that strong educators in Canadian provinces and territories already make every effort to incorporate the central pedagogical features listed here. Recognizing the expertise of Canadian educators, it will still be a significant adjustment for most to adapt to a more personalized, student-led approach, with or without structural changes. For many, this will be a significant shift away from traditional classroom instruction toward a pedagogical approach that focuses on more than academically preparing students.

Assessment

Assessment related to global competencies is meaningful to students, contributes to their learning, is based on criteria rather than comparison, is often student-led, is individualized, and can rely on multiple forms of evidence (e.g., Bristow & Patrick, 2014; Patrick et al. 2018). An emphasis on formative assessment, with students engaged in the process, relates and therefore contributes to the development of the competencies (e.g., critical thinking, self-directed learning). Education systems may still engage in system-wide summative assessments (e.g., Programme for International Student Assessment [PISA]) that provide information about student learning which, in combination with other data sources and in local context, contributes to informed decision making regarding educational programming and priorities.

Assessments of global competencies should include cognitive, social-emotional, and behavioural dimensions, and occur in a variety of contexts from student portfolios, profiles, work placements, experiential learning, projects, research initiatives, papers, presentations, observations of behaviour, and (self) reports. According to Nunavut Education, assessment must be authentic, “grounded in real life experiences. Students need to participate actively in connecting the learning outcomes from the curriculum to their personal realities. Effective assessment must be real as well as developmentally and culturally appropriate” (Nunavut Education, 2008, p. 23).

Making Change Worksheet

For more information, and to consult the references indicated above, please click here to download the pan-Canadian systems-level framework on Global Competencies.

**Policy is not universally seen as critical to system reform. For example, the word “policy” is rarely used in Fullan’s (2010) “All Systems Go,” a comprehensive description of educational system change methods. To Fullan, policy does not seem to be important in and of itself; rather, it codifies elements of the new system that are important. He cites Barber and Mourshed’s (2007) three critical components of policy: “(1) getting the right people to become teachers, (2) developing effective instructors (including leaders who can do this), and (3) ensuring every student performs well” (p. 89).