2a. The Inquiry question
My Inquiry question:
How can gamification strategies improve student engagement and confidence in text-based programming (Python) among a mixed-ability Year 8 Digital Technologies class?
Why and how I chose my Inquiry question
This question emerged directly from a recurring challenge I have observed in teaching Year 8 Digital Technologies. The programming unit represents a significant transition point for students, as they move from the visual, block-based coding environments they experience in Year 7 and in robotics to text-based programming in Python. This shift is not only conceptually demanding but also emotionally challenging: many students arrive at the unit already anticipating difficulty, expressing anxiety about coding and reacting negatively to the syntax errors and setbacks that are a natural part of learning to program.
Having taught this cohort in Year 7, I was aware of these apprehensions before the unit began. I frequently encountered students — even informally around the school — who expressed a sense of dread about programming. I became concerned that this mindset was creating a barrier to learning before students had genuinely engaged with the content, and that disengagement and low confidence were limiting their willingness to persist through the productive struggle that programming requires.
I chose to focus on gamification because it offered a research-informed strategy for reframing this experience. By embedding game-based elements — such as challenges, immediate feedback, incremental progression and a lower-stakes relationship with failure — into the programming unit, I aimed to shift students' experience of coding from something intimidating to something engaging and achievable. My intention was that improved engagement and confidence would, in turn, support stronger participation and learning outcomes across a class with a wide range of abilities and needs, from students requiring significant modification through to those requiring extension.
The question was refined in consultation with my mentor and colleagues to ensure it was specific, measurable within the scope of a single unit, and grounded in the genuine needs of my learners.
2b. Professional learning
Observation 1
| Date of observation | 19/07/2024 |
|---|---|
| Who I observed | Fatima Nazar |
| VIT registration no. | 311221 |
| Signature | Fatima Nazar |
What I saw / heard / experienced
I observed my mentor, Fatima, deliver a lesson to a senior class in which she introduced students to a programming environment (Anvil) that they had not used before. I had arranged to observe this lesson specifically because I was due to introduce the same software to my own Year 9 class and had not taught it previously.
The lesson was delivered to a small group, and Fatima used what she describes as a "monkey see, monkey do" approach — a modelling strategy in which the teacher works through each step of the software live while students follow along in real time on their own devices. Rather than explaining the interface in the abstract, she demonstrated each action explicitly ("click here, then click here"), with the class working alongside her. I observed that the large majority of students were able to follow along successfully, which significantly reduced the need for individual re-explanation. A small number of students required additional support, as is typically the case, but the modelling approach allowed the class to move forward together and kept students engaged with an unfamiliar tool.
What I learned
This observation strongly reinforced the value of live, step-by-step modelling when introducing new software — particularly in a subject like Digital Technologies, where our teaching is entirely software-based, we do not use a textbook, and each new program can carry an element of intimidation for students. Watching students move from uncertainty to "ah, that's where we click" confirmed for me how powerful explicit modelling is in lowering the barrier to engaging with new and potentially daunting technology.
How this helps me address my Inquiry
This strategy became directly relevant to my Inquiry, where a central challenge was reducing student anxiety around the unfamiliar, text-based Python interface. I adapted Fatima's modelling approach for my junior cohort: I first asked students to close their laptops and watch as I demonstrated the interface once in full, allowing them to see the whole process without the pressure of keeping up. I then returned to the beginning and invited them to open their laptops and work alongside me, with the explicit instruction that anyone confident with the steps could work ahead. This allowed me to manage the pacing of the class for a mixed-ability group — supporting students who needed to follow closely while extending those ready to move on. This modelling technique has consistently proven effective across all of my units, including programming, Excel and SPIKE robotics, and it became a foundational strategy for introducing the gamified Python tasks in my Inquiry in a way that felt approachable rather than overwhelming.
2c. Professional conversations
Discussion 1
| Date of discussion | 05/03/2026 |
|---|---|
| Who I talked with | Rob Mercer |
| VIT registration no. | 326597 |
| Signature | Rob Mercer |
What we discussed and what I learned
Rob Mercer is a colleague who also teaches Year 8 Digital Technologies, and as fellow teachers of the same year level we discussed our shared experience of the programming unit coming into the year. We agreed on a common observation: that students tend to overcomplicate programming, and that if they begin the unit feeling discouraged or convinced that coding is "hard," this mindset becomes a significant barrier to their progress.
We reflected on the strategies previously used in the unit — short, self-contained mini-activities such as a "grade checker" task — which had worked well for engagement. However, we also identified a persistent tension in a mixed-ability setting: stronger students moved through these discrete activities quickly and needed further extension (often generated on the go using platforms such as Grok), while other students struggled with even foundational concepts, such as writing a simple print statement, and required considerable individual support.
It was through this conversation that I developed and tested my central Inquiry idea: rather than teaching programming concepts through disconnected activities, we could frame the entire unit around students building their own game or text-based adventure. Concepts such as output statements, input, conditionals and loops would each be taught and then immediately applied by students to progressively build their own game. Rob strongly supported this idea. From his perspective — teaching a class weighted more towards students needing extension — he saw significant value in the framework's flexibility: capable students could extend themselves by making their games more interactive and sophisticated (adding images, effects and additional features), while the shared goal of creating a personalised game provided a strong motivational hook for reluctant or struggling students.
How this helps me address my Inquiry
This discussion was pivotal in shaping the direction of my Inquiry. It confirmed that the challenge I had identified — low confidence and engagement in programming — was shared and genuine, and it was the point at which the gamification concept crystallised into a concrete, unit-long framework: teaching Python through the creation of a student-designed game. Crucially, the conversation also confirmed the framework's suitability across the full ability range, giving me confidence that a single gamified approach could both support my learners requiring modification and extend my highest-achieving students — a core requirement of my mixed-ability Inquiry.
Discussion 2
| Date of conversation | 06/03/2026 |
|---|---|
| Who I talked with | Fatima Nazar |
| VIT registration no. | 311221 |
| Signature | Fatima Nazar |
What we discussed and what I learned
This conversation with my mentor, Fatima, focused on a challenge common to the assessment of programming across all year levels, from Year 8 through to Year 11: how to authentically assess programming tasks in an environment where generative AI tools are readily available to students. We discussed how, given the sophistication of current AI, a student can enter a programming question and receive a working solution almost instantly — which poses a genuine threat to the authenticity of any assessment that is split across multiple sessions or includes a home-based component.
Through this discussion we reached a shared position on how to safeguard the integrity of programming assessment. We agreed that summative programming tasks should be completed under a time constraint within a single supervised session (in our context, an 80-minute period), and that tasks should be designed to be elaborate and rigorous enough to genuinely test student understanding while remaining achievable within that time. Locking assessment to a single supervised session in this way allows us to be confident that the work students produce is authentically their own.
We also discussed practical strategies for supervising students during these sessions. Fatima described a technique she uses with smaller classes, connecting student laptops to larger screens via HDMI so she can readily view the code each student has open. We also discussed the LANSchools classroom monitoring software that Rob Mercer uses successfully to monitor student screens and web activity. I have been working with the College's IT department to implement LANSchools in my own classes; this is currently a work in progress and has not yet been fully resolved, but in the interim I have relied on active monitoring — ensuring students have only a single browser window open and are not accessing other websites during assessment.
How this helps me address my Inquiry
This discussion directly informed the assessment design within my Inquiry. Because my gamified programming unit culminates in students building and submitting their own game, ensuring the authenticity of that work was essential to being able to make valid judgements about their learning. The agreement to conduct summative assessment under supervised, time-constrained conditions, supported by active monitoring, gave me a clear and defensible framework for assessing my students' programming work. It also strengthened my broader professional understanding of assessment integrity in a digital, AI-rich teaching environment.
Discussion 3 — Child safety and wellbeing
A professional conversation on child safety and wellbeing, including maintaining appropriate professional boundaries, supported by reference to the Victorian Teaching Profession's Code of Conduct and relevant workplace policies.
| Date of discussion | 11/03/2026 |
|---|---|
| Who I talked with | Hasan Talukder |
| VIT registration no. | 736129 |
| Signature | Hasan Talukder |
What we discussed
I had a professional conversation with Hasan Talukder, a senior teaching colleague, focused on child safety, student wellbeing and the maintenance of appropriate professional boundaries — with particular attention to digital and online conduct, given the technology-based nature of my teaching. Our discussion was framed by the Victorian Teaching Profession's Code of Conduct and by Salesian College's Child Safety Framework and associated policies.
A central theme of our conversation was the specific boundary and safety considerations that arise in a Digital Technologies context, where teaching and learning take place almost entirely through devices, software and online platforms. We discussed the importance of ensuring all communication with students occurs through approved College channels rather than personal accounts or messaging services, and of modelling and enforcing the safe, responsible and ethical use of technology in the classroom. We also discussed the teacher's role in actively monitoring students' online activity during lessons — ensuring students remain on appropriate, task-related websites and are protected from exposure to inappropriate content — which connects directly to the classroom monitoring practices I have been working to strengthen in my own teaching.
We further discussed the professional obligations that sit beneath these practices: the duty to maintain clear and appropriate relationships with students at all times, the significance of the College's child-safe culture, and each teacher's responsibilities in relation to recognising and reporting concerns about a child's safety or wellbeing. Hasan reinforced the expectation that any concern, however minor it may appear, should be acted upon promptly and reported through the correct channels in line with the College's policies and the teacher's legal obligations.
This conversation strengthened my understanding of how child-safety and professional-boundary obligations apply specifically within a digital learning environment, and reinforced the practices I maintain to keep students safe both physically and online.
2d. Professional Responsibilities Report
My legal obligations as a teacher in relation to child safety and wellbeing
As a registered teacher in Victoria, I hold significant legal and professional obligations for the safety and wellbeing of the students in my care. Foremost among these is my duty of care — the legal obligation to take reasonable steps to protect students from foreseeable harm while they are under my supervision. I am also bound by the Child Safe Standards and by mandatory and reciprocal reporting obligations, which require me to act upon and report any reasonable concern regarding a child's safety or wellbeing through the appropriate channels. These obligations are reinforced by the Victorian Teaching Profession's Code of Conduct and by Salesian College's Child Safety Framework and associated policies, all of which position the care, safety and wellbeing of young people as a core and fundamental responsibility.
Two examples of how I have met these obligations
1. Maintaining active supervision and duty of care. I consistently ensure that students are supervised at all times and are never left unattended during my classes. I prepare all materials and requirements in advance so that I do not need to leave the room during a lesson. In situations where I must access another space, I ensure that another adult — such as a Learning Diversity officer or colleague — is present to supervise the class, so that students remain under active supervision without interruption. This same principle guides how I manage out-of-class arrangements: when students have attended at lunchtime to complete follow-up assessment tasks, I have ensured this takes place in a visible classroom with more than one student present at any given time, in keeping with child-safety expectations and the Code of Conduct.
2. Responding promptly to a wellbeing concern. On an occasion when a student needed to leave my classroom because they were feeling unwell, I followed up promptly to ensure their welfare: I checked in with reception to confirm the student was being cared for and that the appropriate record was made so that parents could be notified. More broadly, where any concern arises, I make a note of it and liaise with the relevant Level Coordinator so that it can be followed up through the correct channels. Acting promptly and communicating through the proper school structures is a consistent part of my practice.
Reflection on the Victorian Teaching Profession's Code of Conduct
The Code of Conduct provides the professional foundation for how I maintain appropriate relationships and boundaries with my students. A key way I uphold this is through communication: I ensure that all contact with students takes place through approved College channels. For example, where a student has a request or a matter to follow up, I direct them to email me through the College's system rather than any personal account, so that there is a transparent and accountable record of the communication. This is particularly important in my subject area, where teaching and learning occur through digital platforms, and where modelling responsible, ethical and appropriately-bounded use of technology is itself part of keeping students safe.
Reflecting on the Code reinforces for me that maintaining professional boundaries is not a single action but an ongoing practice — evident in how I supervise students, how I communicate with them, how I manage their online environment, and how promptly and appropriately I respond when a safety or wellbeing concern arises. Upholding these standards consistently is central to sustaining the trust that underpins my role as a teacher and to fulfilling my responsibilities within a child-safe school community.
