The case for agile pedagogy
Learning to program computers can bring unique insights to other fields for both pupils and teachers – Miles Berry on how computational thinking can revolutionise the way we teach and learn
Email
Learning computational thinking also teaches transferable ways of solving problems and exploring situations which stretch way beyond the computer suite. Photograph: Juice Images / Alamy/Alamy
Policy makers, industry and many teachers are eager that pupils should learn more about computing. This includes learning how to write computer programs, but also "computational thinking", a transferable way of solving problems and exploring situations, which has wide applications across and beyond the curriculum. In short, as pupils learn to program computers and the principles of computer science they start to bring the unique insights of algorithms, abstraction and the like to other fields. The same is true for teachers – ideas from computing can dramatically change the way we think about our work, and one of these, agile development, is what I'd like to explore here.
According to many A-level specifications, students are taught that software projects follow the "waterfall" methodology, starting with agreeing requirements, designing and implementing the software, testing it and then keeping things ticking over when it's deployed to clients.
In other words, the sort of approach that has characterised public sector IT projects like the NHS database. Hmm… This doesn't sound that far removed from how we've designed curricula: a top down list of things "children should be taught", schemes of work, implementation in the classroom, plenty of testing, and the "service pack" of INSET as and when needed.
There is, though, another approach to both software development and, I think, curriculum design. In the world of programming, ideas of adaptive design and the lightweight approaches of the 90s were crystallised in 2001 with the publication of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development, which, while acknowledging that while processes and tools, comprehensive documentation, contract negotiation and following a plan all have their value, much more is gained through focusing on individuals and interactions, getting software that works, collaborating with customers and responding to change.
With a little adaptation, these are ideas which many of us would see as important in a more learner centric, flexible approach to teaching: an approach where we teach the pupils and students we work with, not the ring binder we're given.
Focusing on individuals and interactions means, I think, a serious attempt to provide the personalised learning we used to hear so much about, itself a reiteration of the heady days of Plowden's "At the heart of the educational process lies the child". If Gove goes ahead and "disapplies" the ICT programmes of study, we have an opportunity to tailor what we teach as well as how we teach to the needs, enthusiasms and aspirations of each learner – to ask, "What would you like to learn?" and then to help each find ways to teach themselves and one another.
While agile developers concentrate on getting working code rather than writing documentation, the agile teacher concentrates on developing useful, working knowledge, skills and understanding rather than detailed lesson plans. This is about starting at the beginning, rather than the end, making use of what learners know already and building on that rather than taking the next step in a pre-planned sequence to a pre-determined destination. Objectives are important, both in agile development and agile teaching, but they're immediate objectives in a short "time box", and ones which are immediately useful. There are issues here with more formal approaches to assessment; I'll return to these below.
Collaborating with pupils also ought to be part of agile pedagogy: recognising that it's impossible to make the classroom a learning community without pupils' contribution as partners in, rather than mere recipients of, our teaching. Initiatives such as 'digital leaders' go some way towards this, recognising the technological skills and insights which so many pupils already have, but we could go much further: peer to peer knowledge sharing shouldn't only be for the geeky few.
Response to change is vital in technology education, as the secretary of state acknowledges, but a responsive approach to what's happening in and beyond the classroom matters for all subjects. "Master Teachers" will be expected to "respond intelligently and confidently to the unexpected and wide-ranging questions their pupils are encouraged to ask"
Aren't some of our best lessons those where the learning journey takes an unexpected turn, because of pupils' contributions or, indeed, the unanticipated problems they encounter?
I suspect it's not that easy to adopt these sorts of agile approaches to teaching when there are controlled assessments for GCSEs and A-level specifications to contend with, but I have a sneaking suspicion that a more agile approach to learning might well allow students to take these exams in their stride. The portfolios, projects and problems emerging from a more agile approach might well count more, when it comes to winning a place on university CompSci courses or a job in the digital industries, than GCSE ICT.
Gove's plan to disapply the attainment targets mean that we can look beyond levelling and APP to a more granular can-do approach to assessment, reflecting the emphasis on unit testing in agile development and borrowing some of the tight feedback and goal-orientation of video games and applying these to the classroom.
While national strategies and school policies might have been based on a waterfall-like approach, more than a few teachers' practices have had more in common with agile development than they'd perhaps be aware. Assuming Gove carries through his plans, we've a great opportunity to transform what ICT we teach, but let's go further and use this as a chance to make some real changes to how we teach ICT too.
• Miles Berry is the chair of board of management, Naace and senior lecturer in ICT Education, Roehampton University.