Good morning everyone, I hope you all had a lovely half term and aren’t feeling too disheartened after the England rugby result.
The U13 & U12 netball teams are both through to the County Finals. Well done and good luck at the finals!
There have been some fantastic rowing results from the last two weeks…
Last Saturday at Molesey Junior Head…
J17 double won gold
J14 octuple won gold
J14 quad won gold
(Special mention to Jess Bryden, Izzy Staples, Havaani Blase and Emily Richardson who doubled up and raced and won both events)
J16 quad finished 3rd
Also last Saturday at Henley Head
J15 4 came 2nd
J158 came 3rd
The J15 rowers managed a friendly Vs Putney High and despite PHS having 2 of their coaching team on board their 8, they couldn’t get near WHS J15 Squad!
Finally, Saskia Brewster attended Great Britain Trials this weekend and finished 13th fastest in the double. This was a great result at round 2 out of a possible 4 sets of trials.
After a short break over half term and some busy weeks of A-levels the Sports Blog is up and running! There have been some fantastic results over the last few weeks so please check out the sport notice section for more information.
I hope you all had a lovely half term and for those who went skiing, I hope the weather was lovely and the skiing conditions good. I went to Samoëns with my family and on most days travelled across to Flaine and skied down the run which we raced at the British School Girls. I don’t know if it was the glorious weather or the perfect snow condition but it is a lovely run although, it might not seem that way when you are racing down! In the last weekend in January for a second year running Wimbledon High took a team to race in the British School Girls Races. They all skied with skill and determination and our youngest member came away with a bronze in the U14 unregistered. A huge success considering it was our second time competing and it marks a positive light for the future of Wimbledon High Ski racing!
As always, the spring term brings exciting netball fixtures and even more success in the rowing team. The rowers are currently competing in the National Schools Competition and we wish them the best of luck!
On Friday 15th March a group of year 5, 6, 7 and 8 pupils travelled to Birmingham to attend the Big Bang Fair. The Big Bang UK Young Scientists and Engineers Fair is the largest celebration of science, technology, engineering and maths for young people in the UK. The various shows, stalls, exhibits and workshops certainly did bring science and engineering to life. We watched a show on Deadly Diseases, took part in the Shell Salt Water Car Challenge, carried out riveting with the RAF next to a Red Arrow, raced robots round a maze and held cockroaches. That is just a flavour of the very varied activities! You can see more information about the event here.
Kira, Year 13, looks at the Turing test and how criticisms of it bring new ideas and concepts into the philosophy of mind.
Alan Turing
As emerging areas of computer science such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) continue to grow, questions surrounding the possibility of a conscious computer are becoming more widely debated. Many AI researchers have the objective of creating Artificial General Intelligence: AI that has an intelligence, and potentially a consciousness, similar to humans. This has led many to speculate about the nature of an artificial mind, and an important question arises in the wake of this modern development and research: “Can computers think?”
Decades before the development of AI as we know it today, Alan Turing attempted to answer this question in his 1950 paper Computing Machinery and Intelligence. He developed the famous Turing test as a way to evaluate the intelligence of a computer. Turing proposed a scenario in which a test subject would have two separate conversations: one with another human, and one with a machine designed to give human-like responses. These conversations would take place through a text-channel so the result would not be affected by the machine’s ability to render speech. The test subject would then be asked to determine which conversation took place with a machine. Turing argued that if they are unable to reliably distinguish the machine from the other human, then the machine has ‘passed the test’, and can be considered intelligent.
At the start of his essay, Turing specifies that he would not be answering “Can computers think?”, but a new question that he believed we are able to answer: “Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game?” However, Turing did believe that a computer which was able to succeed in ‘the imitation game’ could be considered intelligent in a similar way to a human. In this way, he followed a functionalist idea about the mind – identifying mental properties though mental functions, such as determining intelligence through the actions of a being, rather than some other intrinsic quality of a mental state.
Many scholars have criticised the Turing test, such as John Searle, who put forward the Chinese Room Argument and the idea of ‘strong AI’ to illustrate why he believed Turing’s ideas around intelligence to be false. The thought experiment looks at a situation where a computer is produced that behaves as though it understands Chinese. It is, therefore, able to communicate with a Chinese speaker and pass the Turing test, as it convinces the person that they are talking to another Chinese-speaking human. Searle then asks whether the machine really understands Chinese, or if it is merely simulating the ability to speak the language. The first scenario is what Searle calls ‘strong AI’, referring to the latter as ‘weak AI’.
In order to answer his question, Searle illustrates a situation in which an English-speaking human is placed in a room with a paper version of the computer program. This person, given sufficient time, could be handed a question written in Chinese and produce an answer by following the program’s instructions step-by-step, in much the same way as a computer does. Although this person is hence able to communicate with somebody speaking Chinese, they do not actually understand the conversation that is taking place, as they are simply following instructions. In the same way, a computer able to communicate in Chinese cannot be said to understand the language. Searle argues that without this understanding, a computer should not be described as ‘thinking’, and as a result should not be said to have a ‘mind’ or ‘intelligence’ in a remotely human way.
Searle’s argument has had a significant impact on the philosophy of mind and has come to be viewed as an important argument against functionalism. The thought experiment provides opposition to the idea that the mind is merely a machine and nothing more: if the mind were just a machine, it is theoretically possible to produce an artificial mind that is capable of perceiving and understanding all that it sees around it. According to Searle, this is not a possibility. However, many people disagree with this belief – particularly as technology develops ever further, the possibility of a true artificial mind seems more and more likely. Despite this, Searle’s Chinese Room argument continues to aid us in discussions around how we should define things such as intelligence, consciousness, and the mind.
In this way, both the Turing test and Searle’s critique of it shed new light onto long-standing philosophical problems surrounding the nature of the human mind. They serve to help bring together key areas of computer science and philosophy, encouraging a philosophical response to the modern world, as well as revealing how our new technologies can impact philosophy in new and exciting ways.
Ms Mari Nicholas, Head of Academic Scholarship at WHS, looks at how WHS is scholarly and why we should be lifelong learners.
Judith Butler, Science Philosopher
From Thales of Miletus, Zarathustra and Confucius to Nancy Cartwright, Kwame Anthony Appiah and Judith Butler, over the centuries, philosophers have debated and cogitated the big questions. According to the University of Oxford, the study of Philosophy develops analytical rigour and the ability to criticise and reason logically. These skills can be applied to questions ranging from how we acquire knowledge and form moral judgements to central questions in the philosophy of religion. (Ox.ac.uk, 2019)
An expert is a person who is knowledgeable about or skilful in a particular area. Being scholarly means having or showing knowledge, learning, or devotion to academic pursuits. One could argue, therefore, that one does not need to be a philosopher in order to be an expert or indeed scholarly. We can all develop knowledge, become skilful and devote ourselves to academic pursuits without having to give up the day job!
Work hard, pass exams and get a job?
There are myriad benefits of lifelong learning, not least the joy of discovering something new. Every day is a school day, perhaps more for teachers than most, as rarely a day goes by when one does not learn something new from the girls we are fortunate enough to educate.
Major advantages of continued learning include improving our mental and physical health: it fosters a sense of identity, an ability to cope and a sense of purpose. Studies have shown that learning leads to a greater sense of wellbeing and continued education in life contributes to a ‘cognitive footprint’, which may delay the onset of dementia. Physical health is also improved and longitudinal studies have shown a lower risk of coronary heart disease, higher probability of cervical screening and improved nutrition. In fact, learning as a whole has an impact on mortality, although one can attribute this evidence to both early as well as adult education.
Adult learning has a positive effect on your employability, raising aspirations, increasing earnings and improving job satisfaction. Adult learning fosters a capacity to be assertive and to collaborate with others in the workplace (Billett, 2014). It is beneficial for your employer too, increasing productivity, employee commitment and resulting in a slower turnover of staff.
Community learning and vocational training are associated with improved community engagement, local involvement and volunteering (Bosche and Brady, 2013; Feinstein et al., 2008). In particular, adult literacy and numeracy have a positive impact on communities, leading to greater tolerance of others and increased trust in people of different nationalities and religions. Finally, adults who participate in learning themselves are more likely to engage in their children’s education, improving outcomes. Where levels of inequality are high, this effect is particularly pronounced (OECD, 2016).
What does Scholarship look like at WHS?
Alongside high-quality provision in lessons, the academic stretch programme challenges our learners throughout the school.
Girls in Years 7 and 8 attend Wonderers sessions where departments take their education beyond the curriculum and enjoy learning for its own sake. This academic year, a diverse range of subjects has been covered, from Classics “The link between myth, poetry and art”; Product Design “Principles behind designing and the utility of products” and Maths “The Maths behind knitting”.
Tea and T’inking is an informal discussion group where older students come together to hash out the big ideas. Topics covered so far this year include: politics “what we might consider as an ideal political system and the deficiencies in our system”; general knowledge “what do we mean by general knowledge, how is it useful and how might it be applied?”; modern linguistic and visual culture “Why are young people attracted to memes, what do they mean and what is their importance?”.
Our robust Explore and Rosewell lecture series welcomes external speakers to challenge and provoke those girls in Years 9 to 13 to think more deeply both within and without their subject specialism. Parents, teachers and partner schools are welcome at these lectures. Our external speakers have included: Janet Henry, Chief Global Economist for HSBC, “Diverging fortunes”; “In conversation with” Gillian Clark, poet, playwright, editor, broadcaster; Prof Vicky Neale, Whitehead lecturer at the Mathematical Institute, “Closing the Gap, the quest to understand prime numbers”; Dr Guy Sutton, “Mind and brain in the 21st Century”.
An integral part of being a member of staff at WHS is continual study and the development of expertise in their field. Regular training from Trust or external providers to in-house Twilight sessions cover a range of topics from “How to become a Head of Department” to “Giving feedback on exams, tests and assessments” and allow staff to develop professionally, leading to benefits for themselves, the students and the school.
In addition, a group of staff from across the school make up a professional reading group, Brain Books. Every half term they discuss books in education that relate to their role within the school. These discussions inform their teaching, feed into departmental discussions and might eventually change the way we teach and learn at WHS. “Teaching Backwards” by Andy Griffith will be the next book to challenge preconceived notions of how excellent teaching and learning should look.
A discussion of “The Lazy Teacher’s Handbook” by Jim Smith drew the following comments:
His ideas cover a variety of pedagogical areas i.e. differentiation, lesson structure, plenaries, assessment, planning and pupil self-esteem.
It is good to dip into and provides inspiration for different ways of doing something.
One suggestion that I used today with some success is the think-pair-square-share idea for sharing ideas within the class. It doesn’t involve any pre-planning or moving of furniture and develops a range of skills for pupils.
I read the book in its entirety and was entertained; I picked up lots of useful strategies. It lacked a rigorous evidence base and that was a sticking point for me as his own particular style dominated. Having said that, in the past couple of weeks I have utilised a number of things and have made note of more. I use continuums or opinion lines in lessons at all levels to help students develop arguments and have experimented with his suggestions of mixing up different points of view in different ways to get individuals differentiating their interpretations in a more nuanced way.
“Independent Thinking” by Ian Gilbert elicited the following:
Great for dipping into: the very structure of this book is creative and anti-linear, juxtaposing the author’s observations, ‘thunks’, witticisms, poems, stories, mini-essays, all to spark the reader’s own ‘out of the box’ thought processes.
His short observations or perceived wisdoms could work really well to spark interdisciplinary debate and to develop flexible growth mind-sets although ‘profound’ wisdoms slip into cliché and become a bit grating.
The book was unscientific, presenting anecdotal evidence as fact; not only that, but at times it seemed to be anti-science, evidenced in the chapter ‘How to know whether you’re a humanist or a scientist’ which lists a series of damning indictments on scientists.
The emphasis on building a child’s positive self-image was great – nurturing a feeling of ‘can do’, even if not ‘yet’.
It is not immediately relevant to my classroom teaching, but pastorally and more widely the ideas he had about creating opportunities to engage intellectually with the work of charities as well as support them with action were valuable.
“30 things exams don’t test” works very well with my ‘being human in an AI age’ agenda. It had a “Good school checklist” – are we walking the walk with our vision and values? Perhaps leave the poetry to other people?
It has made me reflect on my teaching and question, ‘How am I preparing today’s children for life in tomorrow’s world?’ Are my actions helping the girls in my class or school to in the future, have a positive effect on the world?
I would like to think that a copy of this book was given to all those who work at the Department of Education!
In summary, is it the end for experts? No. Lifelong learning has a huge impact on our health, wealth and happiness. I believe we should be scholarly and become experts despite what others may think.
Bibliography
Billett, S., 2014. Learning in the circumstances of practice. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 33(5), pp. 674-693.
Bosche, B. and Brady, B., 2013. Benefits des community learning: Ergebnisse aus Irland, in Benefits of lifelong learning. DIE Journal for Adult Education, 1, pp. 30-34.
Feinstein, L., Budge, D., Vorhaus, J. and Duckworth, K., 2008. The social and personal benefits of learning: A summary of key research findings, London: Institute of Education, University of London.
Jessica, Year 13, explores military medical advancements in recent conflicts, discussing their impact and whether the nature of war acts as an inspiration for innovation.
In 2001, the conflict in Afghanistan began, continuing until a majority of British troops withdrew in the final months of 2014. During these years, 6,386 British personnel were injured, with 28 fatalities, leaving the survival rate at 99.6%.
This was unheard of in previous wars and a major success story for military medicine. However, the injuries and trauma to the soldiers during this period of time increasingly involved haemorrhaging and amputations due to gunshot wounds and IEDs (also known as improvised explosive devices – a type of unconventional crude homemade bomb). These IEDs cause extensive blood loss which has been attributed to 50% of combat deaths since World War Two. In order for these soldiers to survive, a change had to be made in the form of military medicine to preserve life and limb. There are three major advancements in military trauma medicine which all arose from the need to problem-solve solutions to the new injuries personnel and the medics were now witnessing.
The first is haemostatic dressings. During the period of the Afghanistan conflict, two new dressings were developed: XSTAT and QuickClot powder which contain components such as fibrinogen and thrombin catalysing the natural coagulation response. XSTAT uses 92 medical sponges in a pocket-sized injector to pack an open wound and halt bleeding within fifteen seconds. XSTAT increases the chance of survival and holds pressure until the patient can reach a medical centre. They also contain a molecule which is visible on an X-ray to ensure all sponges are removed later to prevent infection.
Secondly, there was a development in the traditional tourniquet. A tourniquet is a constricting or compressing device used to control venous and arterial blood flow to a portion of an extremity for a period of time. This is possible because it creates pressure equal to or higher than the patient’s systolic blood pressure. The single hand tie tourniquet is a development from the original tourniquet used by army medics which had to be applied by the medic and thus were only carried by them. Without the patient being able to apply their own tourniquet, crucial time and blood was lost whilst the medic reached the injured individual, reducing their chance of survival as well as increasing the complexity of their treatment and injuries. This is when the Clinical Application Tourniquet (CAT) was developed and introduced into the US Army in 2005. It was the first single-hand tie tourniquet, allowing the soldiers to treat their own injuries immediately until the medic could attend and provide more advanced care. The tourniquet distributes pressure over a greater area which is advantageous because it reduces the underlying tissue and nerve damage, preventing it from becoming ischemic, a deficient supply of blood, whilst remaining effective. This decrease in time before a tourniquet is used has decreased the mortality rate due to haemorrhaging by 85%.
A third category of advancements is in the use of blood and the way it is transported. Blood and blood products, such as platelets, are crucial in the treatment of haemorrhaging and amputations. However, in order for it to be viable for transfusion, it must be maintained in a cool, constant environment, far from the natural one in Afghanistan. This was previously a significant disadvantage and contributed to the low survival rates for haemorrhaging but improved with the development of the blood container. The Golden-Hour mobile blood container stores up to four units of blood and platelets at[1]the required temperature of six and two degrees Celsius respectively, for 72 hours without electricity, batteries or ice to aid emergency medics. Crucially, this enabled blood to be brought forward to the battlefield rather than stored at the field hospital.
The environment of the military and the nature of its role means that trauma medicine needs to evolve to deal with the style of injuries it is experiencing: invention through desperation. However, it is important that the care not only reflects the immediate treatment of the patient but also considers their long-term care to ensure they can achieve a high quality of life post-conflict.
Richard White, School Consultant teacher and Head of Year, explores the benefits of an integrated and centralised behaviour system in schools and why they are so important.
Why?
When I first started discussing the need for a whole school behaviour system ‘why’ was ostensibly a very sensible question. Generally, pupils at WHS are well behaved and there are not a great deal of problems with disruptive behaviour in lessons. On the whole, they treat each other well and show respect towards adults.
Yet this ignores a number of very good reasons, perhaps most importantly that children need clear boundaries. I am sure that most 11-18 year olds would like to say that they do not want boundaries to be put in place, but it is those boundaries that help to develop a safe secure environment and a sense of respect when they are consistently applied. It is also important to help allow teenagers to understand the responsibility they have for their behaviour and subsequent consequences.
The need to have parity of consequences for both positive and negative behaviour, and to have the behaviour of the individual as the focus rather than the teacher’s response to this. This has an impact on staff wellbeing as well, rather than having to chase pupils for detentions or dealing with differing expectations between members of staff the behaviour can be dealt with more objectively at a later point.
By having a behaviour system we are much more able to log patterns of behaviour and help us to build a better picture of the students we teach, as well as having more informed discussions with them and, if necessary, with their parents. This could help us discover when there are issues for pupils faster and allow us to put strategies in place to help them quicker. Whether positive or negative, a behaviour system can allow staff to focus on the behaviour of the pupil rather than potentially making it personal.
Linking back to the initial question of why do this (as the students are not, on the whole, badly behaved), we want to reward the girls more, particularly those who might normally go unnoticed. We wanted to see if we could find a way to recognise a range of girls – those who excel academically and those who publicly achieve – but also those who come to school and work to the best of their ability day in day out, who hold doors open or do small things to try and improve the lives of those around them. Both are of equal importance.
How?
When creating a system from scratch it became apparent very quickly that having buy-in from staff, SMT and pupils were going to be the biggest challenge from the outset.
I have been lucky enough to work in a range of schools with varying behaviour policies, so I took the broad idea of a three strikes rule and a diamond. One side of the diamond would be positive and the other negative, as you move to the tip of the diamond on either side this should represent either more serious consequences or rarer and more sought-after rewards.
After presenting the idea to SMT with the positives that I have outlined above we formed a strategy group that was available to all members of staff. I seem to remember that we ran 5 after-school sessions, each reviewing suggestions of the last subject and how the ideas would work for each different subject.
We also met with the student counsel as well to have their views on the broad idea and what areas of behaviour needed to be recognised and reprimanded. It would have to be said that of the three interest groups that were approached the students were by far the keenest and have always been happy to see those of their peers not representing their community positively dealt with accordingly.
We rolled the system out to a single year group in the final term of the year and were able to iron out any issues with the system ready to launch to all staff and pupils in the following September. This has been reviewed periodically to allow staff and pupils a voice on how the behaviour system is working, allowing for changes and improvements to be made.
What is our system?
We use a system that works on house points and negative behaviour points. The pupils receive house points (this was to try and raise the profile of the house system when we first launched our behaviour system) for model behaviour, class and homework effort, great contributions, excellent achievement and postcards home. We have a range of rewards from half-termly breakfasts put on for those who receive the most model behaviour points in each house and in each year group, which is led on by the House Captains and attempts to further inter-year bonding in the school. We have trips to a local coffee shop, different levels of certificates for accumulative achievement, a cinema trip for the winning house, a range of prizes in the end of term assemblies and in our end of year speech day we have a host of awards that recognise student’s achievements of an academic and personal nature.
The negative behaviour is precisely focused on with detentions being issued when 3 points are collated in a specific category in any 2-week period. Pupils will be told when they are receiving points, but there is not a requirement for staff to get involved in prolonged discussions there and then. The cumulative behaviour is dealt with by the year team, and if they decide detention is warranted then one is issued after a discussion with the pupil regarding their behaviour that led them there.
Every form tutor has a screen that allows them to see when their tutees have two points in any given category so that they can be involved in discussions with their tutees before their behaviour escalates into detention. This allows for the tutor team to step in before the situation has become an established pattern of behaviour.
Depending on the seriousness of offence this can then escalate into further consequences. The intent is to stop this though, particularly if behaviour is recurrent, and after 2 detentions in the same term for the same behaviour type the student would be placed on a report, not as a further punishment but to try and help them alter the negative pattern of behaviour and give them a greater sense of ownership of this. It also allows for more immediate praise when things go well which can have a far bigger impact than repeatedly punishing pupils.
Problems?
As has been alluded to above having buy-in from all interest groups is the biggest challenge. Staff training, in particular, has been particularly important, and we are very lucky that we have a staff body that has embraced the system. That isn’t to say that there weren’t teething problems, particularly when staff had for so long had their own independent systems for dealing with their pupils. However, with regular training initially and with training new staff in how the system works as part of their induction training sessions has helped it become a part of daily life at school.
Another issue has been age bias. I hold my hands up as a guilty party here. As the pupils get older we often assume that they care less about getting positive points, but as my Year 11s recently showed me when they took me to the task of my tardiness at given them points, they do still care; of course, they do! When they work as hard as our students do they want, and deserve recognition for their efforts.
Technical training and reporting was also initially an issue, and ensuring that there is parity between year groups in approach and staff more generally will always be something the school needs to be mindful of. As with any system that relies on people things will always be subjective, and therefore never without its problems.
Impact?
We often see that the younger year groups have issues with organisation and homework at first, but we also see these behaviour patterns change. These behaviours were not confined younger year groups at first, but are much more so now. When boundaries are consistently enforced, and discussions centre around the behaviour and what can be done to change it they have appeared to have had a much bigger impact.
Behaviour is not perfect, and in a school, I do not believe it ever will be. However, our pupils learn to be more responsible for their behaviour and we are able to have much more informed conversations with them and their parents about both the positive and negative behaviour we see in school.
Mrs Jane Lunnon, Head of WHS, looks at the impact of digital learning on education, linking this to recent examination reforms at GCSE and A Level.
Imagine this: you are watching a production of Hamlet online. Gertrude is betraying her son, Ophelia is going mad. Claudius is hiding things and Hamlet is doing (or rather, not doing) his thing. And you, the viewer, are not only watching this on your computer, you are also, right there, in the show, a reflection in a gilded mirror – daubed with blood and looking pretty ropey. (Your part is the ghost of Old Hamlet.)
And so, you are there and not there. You can see yourself – as watched and watcher. How brilliant, how extraordinary, how game-changing is that? This is happening, right now. In the US, the Commonwealth Shakespeare Company have teamed up with Google: so VR tech teamed with great creativity, enabling viewers to inhabit the text – to literally become part of it. That’s what’s happening in learning today.[1]
‘Hamlet 360: Thy Father’s Spirit’ – a virtual reality film combining traditional Shakespeare with modern VR technology
And it’s not just some exotic, transatlantic experiment. The impact of technology on the way we learn is seminal and astonishing. In our last staff meeting, our Director of Innovation and e-learning (imagine even having such a job title in a school ten years ago), was heralding the arrival of a brand new set of VR Headsets. As a school, we adopted BYOD (bring your own device) several years ago and this, when combined with the headsets and Google Expeditions, means that our pupils can journey to Africa, to Jerusalem, to Tudor England, to the inside of a black hole, to the inside of their own bodies… The impact on our students, when they do, is immediate and palpable. It’s not just gimmicks and game-playing; this is sentient, dynamic, visual learning in ways those of us who became excited by the potential of power-point in the late 1990s, could barely have imagined.
But the technological revolution in education is not just about the flashy, painting with coloured light sort of stuff (although it’s very hard not to get terribly excited by all of that). As a Microsoft Showcase school, we have adopted wholesale software like Microsoft Teams (useful baskets to keep all our meeting/lesson/admin resources), Onenote – seamless collaborative working/library spaces, and Onedrive – shared document folders. Like many schools, we have found that the truly revolutionary and transformative development in education IT was the Cloud and the way it has made accessing and sharing learning seamless and straightforward. The learning environment is no longer just in the classroom or the library. It is now, quite simply, everywhere: in the playground, on the bus, at your mate’s house, in the kitchen…and this has made a real difference to the way children learn and the way we all teach. My Year 7 English students, for example, work online – using their class TEAM. They do their homework in their own folders stored in that TEAM basket and I can then mark it (using the clever pen that writes on the screen) as soon as they do it. That means, that I can see at once if they are not quite getting the point about enjambment or the impact of verse form on the meaning of a poem – and I can adapt my next lesson plan accordingly. No more waiting around for a week for the work to be done, the books to come in and the homework to be marked. So nothing radical there; just more efficiency, more pace, more targeted planning. Which of course leads to more opportunity for stretch and fun and better outcomes all round.
We are not simply operating as advertisers for Microsoft products here, although earlier this term we were thrilled to find ourselves acting as a SW London outpost for the BETT Conference, with 40 or so delightful Swedish educators, joining us, keen to find out what we were doing and how we were doing it. I suspect that’s the largest number of Swedes we have entertained in this building at any one time in the 140-year history of the school! It was a real pleasure to share our experiences, to learn what they are doing and to celebrate together the range, power and versatility which technology has brought into the classroom and beyond it.
And this is important because technology doesn’t just allow us to do things in a more colourful or more efficient way. It also, clearly, changes the way that children approach learning. Much of their work in the classroom, for example, is collaborative. It is as much about team-building and communication, about effective listening, careful research and powerful articulation of ideas, as it is about the causes of the First World War, or how to integrate fractions. The skills our world now requires (as the Hamlet example above suggests) is not just technical expertise and versatility, not simply the acquisition and application of key facts, analytical thinking and problem solving but creative flair, the ability to connect and link ideas and fields of knowledge and curriculum areas often in surprising, unexpected ways. And then there’s the capacity to communicate all this persuasively and effectively both in person and on paper. These are the skills necessary for a dynamic, technological, connected and highly protean workplace and it matters that our young people are encouraged to develop them in school.
That’s why we are developing our STEAM programme so enthusiastically at WHS. Our Steam Room, staffed by scientists in residence (SiRs), is not just the base for our girls to engage in scientific research and inquiry (with external partners
as well as internally) it is also a symbol of our cross-curricular approach. The job of our SiRs, is to facilitate inter-disciplinary connections. (RS meets Science when Year 7s try to make the dyes in Joseph’s dream-coat, English meets Psychology when A Level English students engage in the psychological exploration of the characters in ‘To The Lighthouse’, Geography, Physics and Technology combine when Year 9s design wind turbines… the list goes on.)
Facility with all of this, the ability to think flexibly, imaginatively and with resilience and integrity when confronted with tough problems, this feels like the urgent pedagogical focus for us now and it feels like the best way to prepare our children for the future. I had the great good fortune of hearing Sophie Hackford speak at the GDST Summit last summer[2]. Sophie is a Futurist (which strikes me as one of the best job titles ever). Her job is to look at trends and projections and the dreams of techno-enthusiasts everywhere and work out what is likely to be coming next – and then to advise government and anyone else who will listen. She described a world in which fake and real blend imperceptibly, where the world becomes our screen and we become computers, where space is our playground and our new hang out. A world where asteroids could be bought and mined, Mars could be inhabited. All alarming and deliberately provocative perhaps, but also, exciting and reflective of the urge to think differently and to imagine the hitherto unimaginable. This again, is what the future requires of us.
What it doesn’t need, I feel sure, is for our children to show that they can sit in rows of desks and write, on paper, with a pen, regurgitating facts they have carefully learnt, for three hours at a time. And yet that, of course, is what our examination system currently requires our children to do. And indeed, has done, to a greater or lesser extent, for the last hundred years or so. Learn this, commit it to memory, show me you’ve done so by writing it out on paper. How absolutely extraordinary, that in a world which has made so much progress and right in the middle of a technological revolution, here we are, still fundamentally assessing our students’ talent and achievements at school, with a pen, paper and serried rows of desks.
We might, perhaps, take comfort from the fact that there has been significant reform in our exam system recently. More academic rigour has been brought in at A Level and at GCSE. And yes, A Levels and GCSEs are new(ish) – more rigorous, fatter – the modules you can endlessly resit are gone, so is the huge emphasis on coursework. They have, indeed, been reformed. But reform is not revolution. These specifications, these exams, this assessment system is not a radical re-think for a new(ish) century. It’s not even a radical re-think for the old century. These exams are not modern – as those of us who are old enough to remember the very old O Levels and A Levels can testify. Indeed, it’s all there, as it always was: little or no coursework, significant emphasis on learned material, assimilation of key facts and the ability to remember and apply those facts in writing, to time, in big exam halls with your entire cohort sitting around you, using (mostly) a pen. There’s not much there that we don’t recognise. Indeed, not much that we wouldn’t recognise if we went back to when our parents were young. Perhaps there’s more rigour, but in the context of Sophie Hackford and the Google school of innovation and reform, it feels more like rigor mortis than bracing, academic stretch and dynamic aspiration for our young people in a new century.
So, let’s not wonder (along with Hamlet) “why yet [we] live, to say this thing’s to do”. The assessment of our children need not be a tragedy if we can find ways to prepare them for examinations that require them to think and act differently and which make as much use as possible of the amazing new technological tools at our disposal. There are, indeed, “more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in [our] philosophy”. Time to embrace them, I think.
Emily, Year 12, explores why there is a stigma around mental illnesses, how we can get rid of this stigma, and what effect the stigma has on society.
Mental illness is not just one disorder – and many people know that – but what they don’t understand is quite how expansive the list of disorders is. As young girls, we are taught about anxiety, body dysmorphic disorder, depression, addiction, stress, and self-harm but the likelihood is that we know – from personal experience, through friends, family or even social media – that many more mental illnesses exist. For example: bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, autism and ADHD. Chances are, we all know someone with mental illness whether we know or not – the majority of the time these people function the same way that people with no mental illness do. So why is there such a stigma around mental illness and how can we get rid of the stigma?
When the AIDS epidemic started in the early 1980s, the disease was only affecting minority groups of people who already faced criticism. The disease only furthered this and made the patients virtual pariahs until advocacy groups and communities protested to expand awareness and pressured the U.S. government to fund research for the disease and its cure. In only seven years, scientists were able to: identify that the cause of AIDS was the Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), create the ELISA test to detect HIV in the blood and establish azidothymidine (AZT) as the first antiretroviral drug to help those suffering from HIV/AIDS. This is a prime example of how public knowledge can lead to science pushing the boundaries of their knowledge and finding treatments. Along with treatments eliminating symptoms, they also eliminate the stigma as more and more people are learning about the disease. So why can’t this be the case for mental illness?
In a time when science wasn’t breaking new boundaries every day, and knowledge wasn’t being distributed properly, it is easy to see why those with such complicated illnesses were feared and had such a stigma surrounding them. However, now when the greatest barrier is access to treatments and not the science, and the education about the subject is as high as it has ever been, it is hard to see why there is still such shame in having these illnesses.
But what if there was no stigma? We would have early identification and intervention in the form of screening mechanisms in primary care settings such as GP, paediatric, obstetrics, and gynaecological clinics and offices as well as schools and universities. The goal would be to screen those who are at risk for or are having symptoms of mental illness and engage the patients in self-care and treatment before the illness severely affects their brains, and lives. We would also have community-based comprehensive care for those who are in more advanced stages of illness. This will support people who are unable to care for themselves and who may otherwise end up homeless, in jail or in mental hospitals.
For example: victims of trauma would be treated for PTSD along with any physical injuries while in the hospital to target PTSD before any symptoms started occurring and the patient could hurt themselves or others; first responders would have preventative and decompression treatments routinely administered to treat PTSD before waiting to see who may or may not show symptoms; mothers would be treated for pre/post-partum depression as a part of pre/post-natal check-ups instead of waiting and potentially harming themselves or their baby. Children with learning disabilities would be identified early on so they could get cognitive training, and emotional support to prevent counterproductive frustration due to something they cannot control.
Medical economists have shown that this method of proactive mental healthcare will actually reduce the cost of delivering it. It will also relieve emotional stress (for the patient and their family), financial burden for treatment, and will reduce the occurrence of many of the very prevalent social problems. We all know about the many mass shootings that occur regularly and a great deal of these crimes have been perpetrated by young males who have an untreated mental illness which have presented symptoms for long before the crime was committed – not that I am excusing their behaviour in any way.
As a worldwide community, we must be able to recognise mental illness for what it is – a medical condition that can be treated, be that with behavioural or cognitive therapy or with medication. In order to dissolve the stigma, we must be involved, ask questions, be kind, be compassionate, and make it our own business. There is only so much science can do if people are not willing to take the help they are being given – they need to want to get better. The only way this will happen is if we all help to make it known that having a mental illness is not a bad thing, and that it is easily treatable, and that they are no different from anyone else.
On Monday the SatelLife 2019 competition was launched with the help of year 13, Viv and Greta from year 6, and Mrs Farrer as part of International Women and Girls in Science day. The UK Space Agency is offering young people expert advice and a share of a £50,000 prize for their ideas in answer to the question
How could satellites improve life on Earth?
The closing date for the competition is 3rd March and all the details of how to enter are here.
Remember to utilise satellite data from one of the websites recommended and present your ideas in a report (no more than 2000 words), a video clip (no more than 5 minutes), or some other way.
Alongside high-quality provision in lessons, the academic stretch programme challenges our learners throughout the school.
Our robust Explore and Rosewell lecture series welcomes external speakers to challenge and provoke those girls in Years 9 to 13 to think more deeply both within and without their subject specialism. Parents, teachers and partner schools are welcome at these lectures. Our external speakers have included: Janet Henry, Chief Global Economist for HSBC, “Diverging fortunes”; “In conversation with” Gillian Clark, poet, playwright, 
editor, broadcaster; Prof Vicky Neale, Whitehead lecturer at the Mathematical Institute, “Closing the Gap, the quest to understand prime numbers”; Dr Guy Sutton, “Mind and brain in the 21st Century”.
A discussion of “The Lazy Teacher’s Handbook” by Jim Smith drew the following comments:
“Independent Thinking” by Ian Gilbert elicited the following:
