Lindfield Learning Village

Game Changers – Series One transcript

The Game Changers podcast is hosted by Associate Professor of Education & Enterprise Dr Philip SA Cummins and prominent educational Thought Leader Adriano Di Prato. The Game Changers podcast aims not only to put a spotlight on the innovative ideas shaping the landscape of 21st century schooling, but to enter into a deep dialogue with those brave pioneers, the true game changers in education. These individuals, these leaders in education, don’t wait for permission. They are courageous enough to make real change in their learning communities as they foster the growth of each young person in their care and equip them with the necessary character, confidence, and competencies to flourish in a new world environment. These pages feature their stories and unedited podcast conversations with Phil and Adriano. The Game Changers podcast is produced by Orbital Productions, powered by a School for tomorrow  

Profiles of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: A person-centered approach to motivation and achievement in middle school

The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations is one of long-standing interest in education. Intrinsic motivation refers to engaging in a task for its own inherent rewards whereas extrinsic motivation refers to engaging in a task in order to attain some separable outcome—such as approval from authority figures or special privileges in the classroom. Researchers have often operationalized these two constructs as mutually exclusive, such that an individual high in intrinsic motivation would necessarily be low in extrinsic motivation. However, recent studies suggest that these two types of motivation can, in fact, coexist and perhaps even work together to motivate task engagement (see Harter 1981; Gillet et al. 2009; Lepper et al. 2005; Ryan et al. 1995). An essential direction for research, then, is to identify naturally-occurring combinations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and their academic consequences. For instance, is it optimal for students to have high levels of both types of motivation, or are they better served by a pattern of high intrinsic motivation coupled with low extrinsic motivation? Understanding how different types of motivation may operate in tandem is a critical issue not only for motivational theorists but also practitioners, who must respond to the complexities of individual students.

The right drivers for whole system success by Michael Fullan

This paper is intended to provide a comprehensive solution to what ails the current public school system and its place in societal development – a system that is failing badly in the face of ever complex fundamental challenges to our survival, let alone our thriving as a species. What follows is a ‘big’ proposal. Once started the ‘four drivers’ feed on each other as a system in motion. Most important, the timing is right.

Autonomy, Competence, and Intrinsic Motivation in Science Education: A SelfDetermination Theory Perspective

The purpose of this study was to examine a proposed motivational model of science achievement based on self-determination theory. The study relied on U.S. eighth-grade science data from the 2007 Third International Mathematics and Science Study to examine a structural model that hypothesized how perceived autonomy support, perceived competence in science, intrinsic motivation, and science achievement related to each other. Mother’s education and student gender were used as controls. Findings showed that the hypothesized model provided a good fit to the data. The strongest direct effect on science achievement was students’ perceived competence in science. Student intrinsic motivation was shown to have a surprisingly negative effect on science achievement.

ATAR’s days numbered, says new report

Earlier this year, a study from the Mitchell Institute found that just 26% of Australian students enter an undergraduate degree based on their ATAR, casting doubts as to the relevance of the system. Now a new report into school leavers’ transition into work or further study has recommended that the ATAR “cannot continue to dominate the education experience”, as the Australian education system adjusts to the longer-term effects of the COVID-19 crisis. One concern has been the impact that the high-stakes assessment is having on students’ mental health at a time when stress and anxiety are markedly high. Currently, one in four Australian students experience a significant mental health issue, and a recent Guardian Essential poll found that 53% of people surveyed are now very concerned about the threat of COVID-19 – a 14-point increase in only a week.  

Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform by Michael Fullan

‘Whole system reform’ is the name of the game and ‘drivers’ are those policy and strategy levers that have the least and best chance of driving successful reform. A ‘wrong driver’ then is a deliberate policy force that has little chance of achieving the desired result, while a ‘right driver’ is one that ends up achieving better measurable results for students. Whole system reform is just that – 100 per cent of the system – a whole state, province, region or entire country. This paper examines those drivers typically chosen by leaders to accomplish reform, critiques their inadequacy, and offers an alternative set of drivers that have been proven to be more effective at accomplishing the desired goal, which I express as … the moral imperative of raising the bar (for all students) and closing the gap (for lower performing groups) relative to higher order skills and competencies required to be successful world citizens.


Why the curriculum should be based on students’ readiness, not their age

Geoff MastersAustralian Council for Educational Research February 18, 2021 

I handed down the final report of a two-year review of the New South Wales school curriculum in June 2020. One of the review’s key recommendations was to introduce what I called “untimed syllabuses”. This is where students who need more time for their learning are given it, and those ready to move on to the next stage are able to do so.

The NSW government has agreed to trial this recommendation over the coming years.

I made this recommendation in response to a problem teachers had identified. They explained the current curriculum lacks flexibility. It expects every student of the same age to learn the same things at the same time. This sounds fair, and it might be if all students began the school year ready for the year’s curriculum.

In reality, as the Gonski report observed, evidence from testing programs shows the most advanced students in each year of school are about five to six years ahead of the least advanced students. Instead of beginning on the same starting line, students begin each school year widely spread on the running track.