My second EdCamp in the past six months, I guess I'm hooked. EdCamp Waterloo Region was, like EdCamp Toronto, a chance to break the mold on how PD is done to us.
I volunteered before hand to do a first round session mainly because, after seeing the nerves and reticence at EdCampTO, I thought I could bring some experience to it and help it start a bit smoother. I started off with an excerpt from a TEDtalk looking at how future technology could become more interactive and intuitive in the class room, and how we could access and present data more seamlessly while teaching. Everyone seemed content enough to be lectured at, so I made it difficult for them.
Being an edcamper means being a good listener too, something else we've learned not to do in PD. I made a point of listening closely to comments from the audience, and tried to reply with a question that refocused the discussion on them rather than trying to get them back to what I want them to know (standard PD protocol). It took about 20 minutes, but they started to realize that EdCamp was all about the US, not the 'expert'. A few of the bolder people spoke up, but by the end I think everyone in the room had said something at some point, and we went 15 minutes over. That doesn't happen too often in PD, but then PD doesn't happen on Saturday mornings too often either (unless you've got a PLN).
About half an hour in I said, "there are no rules in EdCamp, but I'm going to make one anyway, no more hands." It became a running joke, but the conversation began to flow after we got that nineteenth century convention of teacher control put behind us.
***
As a survival mechanism, many of us have developed the habit of, at best, being passive in PD in order to make it end sooner, or worse, have found ways to wander off in our minds while it's happening so the condescension, repetitiveness and/or latest poorly performing American EduFad which we have no interest in, doesn't make us angry.
Edcamp throws all that on its ear. It's all about you being there. It assumes your experiences in your profession, which are current and unique, are as valuable as an entrepreneurial guest speaker's (who hasn't been in a classroom in decades and when they were tried to get out of it as soon as they could to become a paid speaker and sell their latest book on a fad they've invented). It assumes that teachers talking to teachers and valuing each others experiences are what professionalism and developing it are all about.
***
For me this EdCamp started with teachers showing and telling what they are doing to make the future in technology available to their students. I then wandered into a group talk on the nature of professional development that evolved into a deeply nuanced philosophical discussion about the subtle, individually powered profession of teaching. After lunch I watched a bit on Edmodo then finished listening to a talk on technology use across k-12 curriculum. The last one was on how to continue EdCamp ideas beyond EdCamp. By that point I was intellectually fried; something that doesn't happen too often in PD. I found the focus on how to cater to the disinterested tedious, but if you don't get where it's going, you can leave!
EdCamp is, by its nature, an experimental process. After doing a couple, I still wonder at the blocking of time, like classes. Some of the discussions still had a lot of steam, others were ready to end (or should have earlier). A more flexible schedule might be interesting to try. Perhaps having spill-off areas where groups that want to finish a discussion can go would offer an out there, or having enough rooms that they aren't booked one after the other might work; built in extra time if you need it.
The other trick is to ensure that it's easy for people to slip in and out of classes. Regular classrooms are designed around the opposite idea (keep them contained and accountable). There were a couple of times where rooms were full enough that getting out would have been overly disruptive. The classroom seating arrangements of rows facing a central board also cater to the sage on the stage, something EdCamps ideals don't seem thrilled with.
If you've never done an EdCamp, I highly recommend the experience. You'll find it personal, meaningful, intense and empowering. You'll have to break through many of those learned PD habits, but it'll be nice to let your chained inner-professional out to see the sun for the first time in years.
The only PD experience I've ever had that came close was (is) ECOO conference, which is very teacher driven as well, and Barrie Bennett's Beyond Monet workshop, which was career changing. The vast majority of the rest feel like an infomercial admin demands that you sit through.
The next time I'm grinding my teeth as another professional presenter with a new book to hawk is telling me how I have to revolutionize my practice by doing exactly what they suggest (and nothing else, until the next book comes out), and who has been flown up to us (business class), and paid thousands of dollars that could have gone into classrooms instead, I'll think back on EdCamp and wonder why administration is so afraid to trust us with our own PD.
EdCamp Waterloo Region Twitter Doc
Showing posts with label personal learning network. Show all posts
Showing posts with label personal learning network. Show all posts
Monday, 2 April 2012
Thursday, 16 February 2012
The State of Educational Hashtags, FEB 2012
I've become quite habitual in my use of hashtags, and haven't really been exploring the edges. At conferences I'm diligent about following and using the correct hastag, but when it comes to topic specific ideas, I tend to resort to the basics (#edchat #edtech).
I thought it time to look into the current state of edu-hashtags and try and dig up some new resources for them.
An interesting post on the reach of various Education hashtags. Personal favs from those lists: #edchat #edtech
Twitter U: lists of Education hashtags with explanations. Hashtags of interest:
Anyone got any Ontario educational hashtags or other Canadian specific ones? Not that I get that wound up about geographically specific tags - they tend to not get the point of the internet (common interests matter more that geographical proximity).
Reply with any I missed! I want to poach your hashtag knowhow!
I thought it time to look into the current state of edu-hashtags and try and dig up some new resources for them.
An interesting post on the reach of various Education hashtags. Personal favs from those lists: #edchat #edtech
Twitter U: lists of Education hashtags with explanations. Hashtags of interest:
- #TUfuture: future trends... sounds interesting (and up my alley)
- #TUtin: tech integration in specific teaching areas
- #mlearning: mobile learning using mobile tech
- #vitalcpd: effective use of tech in the classroom
- #elearning: dedicated to... fish! No, just kidding, it's about elearning
Some Canadian specific hashtags... #cdned: general Canadian education tag. There are some BC ones that I don't follow too much, such as #bced, though I should.
Anyone got any Ontario educational hashtags or other Canadian specific ones? Not that I get that wound up about geographically specific tags - they tend to not get the point of the internet (common interests matter more that geographical proximity).
Reply with any I missed! I want to poach your hashtag knowhow!
Monday, 12 December 2011
The Most Underused Resource In Education
*** in Ontario teachers have to undergo an in-class review every five years by one of the school administration ***
The other day our six month pregnant one contract/LTO teacher was running around in a panic trying to get dodgey board laptops to work with dodgey board projectors on the dodgey board network. Her panic was the result of a VP coming into her class for her review. I've seen this happen with many teachers, young and old; the panic over admin coming in to review their teaching practices.
The stress of poor board technology practices aside, this review of teaching practices by admins bothers me on a couple of levels.
Back in the day, when I was in millwright training, my old Jamaican mentor told me the story of our department boss. He had a mechanical background, but he was incredibly lazy. His fame came from being able to slide under a truck and fall asleep on night shift for hours at a time. He was so bad at the work that the company had no choice but to promote him into management. I've since come to realize that this was a pretty pessimistic view of how managers become managers, but as an impressionable nineteen year old listening to a man who never told me a lie, it seemed the truth. I've always been cautious about management as a result, never assuming that they are somehow superior because of their title.
There is no doubt that leadership in education is a vital component, and we all hope that the people playing those administrative parts do it for all the right reasons (and not because they were such a disaster in the classroom that it was better for them to manage). What I don't understand is why admin are mandated to come into a teacher's class and somehow assess their ability to teach. What makes an administrator qualified to meaningfully review classroom teaching? Whether an administrator opted out of the classroom because they found it tedious, difficult or simply wanted a change, the simple truth is that they aren't teaching, and in many cases didn't for very long before they stepped into a management role. Asking them to review something they dropped after a short period of time seems... odd. Administrators are generally not master teachers.
I have no trouble with sharing my practice and would encourage teachers to experience each other's classrooms at every possible opportunity, this isn't about advocating for a closed classroom, and I'm not advocating for the removal of teacher in-class review, just who is doing it.
In most cases vice principals and principals take on these roles not because they were expert teachers, but because their interests lie elsewhere. This would suggest that teaching was never their strong suit. Taking on school leadership roles is a very heavy load, and I can appreciate the fact that some teachers want to put the classroom behind them and take that on; it's important work and a great challenge. What I can't understand is why those same people are now mandated to sit in on a teacher's classes and review their teaching skills.
In the case of a new teacher, it seems like it might help and offer them a bit of mentorship in the process, but what about the case of the twenty five year veteran of the classroom? The master teacher who has not only survived but thrived in the role of teacher? How does a VP with five years in-class experience assess that? Do they even know what they're looking at?
Those same veteran teachers are the most underused resource in education. Department headships, like VP and principal positions, are administrative, they offer little in the way of teaching focused career enhancement. Telling a senior teacher that this should be their focus isn't honouring the expertise they have developed from years working with students actually teaching.
It might seem like a rather simple idea, but why don't those senior teachers take on this role of in-class review and mentorship? Having a senior teacher from my own department drop in for a lesson and a talk would be instructive for me, demonstrate respect for their skills and allow expert teachers to express their mastery. It would also create a continuous sense of valid professional development within departments. Instead of a fairly pointless and closely monitored five year review by people who don't even want to work in a classroom any more, how about an ongoing senior teacher review (20+ years in the classroom in order to take on that role).
The administrative arm of things does important work, but to say they have the experience and skill to determine what a front line teacher is doing right or wrong in a classroom is ridiculous. Instead of driving our senior teachers into administration as if that is the only opportunity for 'advancement', why not recognize mastery in a very challenging environment, and encourage those with that expertise to share what they know?
The other day our six month pregnant one contract/LTO teacher was running around in a panic trying to get dodgey board laptops to work with dodgey board projectors on the dodgey board network. Her panic was the result of a VP coming into her class for her review. I've seen this happen with many teachers, young and old; the panic over admin coming in to review their teaching practices.
The stress of poor board technology practices aside, this review of teaching practices by admins bothers me on a couple of levels.
Back in the day, when I was in millwright training, my old Jamaican mentor told me the story of our department boss. He had a mechanical background, but he was incredibly lazy. His fame came from being able to slide under a truck and fall asleep on night shift for hours at a time. He was so bad at the work that the company had no choice but to promote him into management. I've since come to realize that this was a pretty pessimistic view of how managers become managers, but as an impressionable nineteen year old listening to a man who never told me a lie, it seemed the truth. I've always been cautious about management as a result, never assuming that they are somehow superior because of their title.
There is no doubt that leadership in education is a vital component, and we all hope that the people playing those administrative parts do it for all the right reasons (and not because they were such a disaster in the classroom that it was better for them to manage). What I don't understand is why admin are mandated to come into a teacher's class and somehow assess their ability to teach. What makes an administrator qualified to meaningfully review classroom teaching? Whether an administrator opted out of the classroom because they found it tedious, difficult or simply wanted a change, the simple truth is that they aren't teaching, and in many cases didn't for very long before they stepped into a management role. Asking them to review something they dropped after a short period of time seems... odd. Administrators are generally not master teachers.
I have no trouble with sharing my practice and would encourage teachers to experience each other's classrooms at every possible opportunity, this isn't about advocating for a closed classroom, and I'm not advocating for the removal of teacher in-class review, just who is doing it.
In most cases vice principals and principals take on these roles not because they were expert teachers, but because their interests lie elsewhere. This would suggest that teaching was never their strong suit. Taking on school leadership roles is a very heavy load, and I can appreciate the fact that some teachers want to put the classroom behind them and take that on; it's important work and a great challenge. What I can't understand is why those same people are now mandated to sit in on a teacher's classes and review their teaching skills.
In the case of a new teacher, it seems like it might help and offer them a bit of mentorship in the process, but what about the case of the twenty five year veteran of the classroom? The master teacher who has not only survived but thrived in the role of teacher? How does a VP with five years in-class experience assess that? Do they even know what they're looking at?
Those same veteran teachers are the most underused resource in education. Department headships, like VP and principal positions, are administrative, they offer little in the way of teaching focused career enhancement. Telling a senior teacher that this should be their focus isn't honouring the expertise they have developed from years working with students actually teaching.
It might seem like a rather simple idea, but why don't those senior teachers take on this role of in-class review and mentorship? Having a senior teacher from my own department drop in for a lesson and a talk would be instructive for me, demonstrate respect for their skills and allow expert teachers to express their mastery. It would also create a continuous sense of valid professional development within departments. Instead of a fairly pointless and closely monitored five year review by people who don't even want to work in a classroom any more, how about an ongoing senior teacher review (20+ years in the classroom in order to take on that role).
The administrative arm of things does important work, but to say they have the experience and skill to determine what a front line teacher is doing right or wrong in a classroom is ridiculous. Instead of driving our senior teachers into administration as if that is the only opportunity for 'advancement', why not recognize mastery in a very challenging environment, and encourage those with that expertise to share what they know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)