So the latest edition of ISTE’s magazine Learning and Leading calls me out by name and wonders if I, in my attempt to “cajole, inspire, persuade and demand, sometimes with righteous indignation that readers bring forth radical change in education, might unwittingly discourage the very educators who are fighting the good fight, often unsuccessfully.”
Fair question, and one that I think about all the time, actually. I absolutely mean to provoke the conversation around change in schools and in ourselves; anyone who has read this blog for any stretch over the last nine years knows that’s the case. But I also try to do so in a way that doesn’t demean teachers, a way that challenges their thinking about the profession and their roles in the classroom while at the same times honors the realities of the classroom. The vast majority of the time, I think I strike that balance. And on the rare occasion that I might miss, the comments usually set me straight.
The ISTE article is worth the read, and since there’s no way to engage these ideas on the Leading and Learning site, I’ll offer it up here by proxy. Take a minute to read it, and feel free to let loose here. How hard is too hard to push for change?
A couple of points for the record first. Since the link to my blog post cited in the magazine is incorrect, you can read it here for context. As you’ll see, I’m not chastising “teachers who are also parents” in the post; I’m pretty much throwing all parents under the bus. And while it’s correct that I’m not currently in the classroom, I think it’s worth pointing out that for three years I actually did “Try That in My Classroom,” blogging and wiki-ing with my students, bringing authors and experts in virtually, asking my kids to problem-solve, collaborate, sift information and use technology to connect with others around the world around their passions. I also spent a number of the rest of my 21 years in a school struggling with technology integration in general, and I’ve also had the opportunity over the last four years to work with thousands of teachers close up through PLP. So it’s not like I have zero context for what teachers are dealing with in their own attempts to shift.
Finally, let me just point out that while I was in the classroom, my blogging was about the classroom. My book was written when I was still there as well. But as my work has evolved, so has my writing. It’s been a long time since I’ve done a “30 Ways to Use (insert your new tech tool here) in the Classroom” post here, not that those types of posts can’t have great value; they can. But that’s no longer my main interest. As I tell just about everyone one of the audiences I speak with, at the end of the day, this is less about technology and more about learning, less about schools and classrooms and more about individuals experiencing these shifts deeply for themselves so they can then bring them into their curricula and conversations with real context and meaning. That’s been the focus of our work in PLP, and it will continue to be my focus here; how are you changing as a learner and connecting with the world despite the barriers you may be up against in your classrooms, your schools and your districts? It all flows from that.
I’m sincerely interested to hear your thoughts.
Hi Will, I think it all stems from passion. You’re passionate about what you do, and that comes through in your work. This passion is contagious and is often the motivating factor for so many of the teachers you have worked with.
I don’t think feeling discouraged is necessarily a bad thing, it is often what brings about change. As educators we often get paranoid about turning off a student that we don’t think hard enough about what will get them excited about learning. The same goes for adults. Thanks again for all of your insights, and pushing my thinking about the potential of these technologies.
Diana’s logic was not clear to me as a reader. Is her point that you might discourage some educators? Or, is the problem that you are not in the classroom? Maybe her hope is that we all have the attitude “We just live in different worlds, that’s all.” How are those arguments supported by the comparison of your post and Kolbert’s?
I have never yet been singled out in a article which pointed a finger directly at me with such a challenge that was presented to you……so I understand your need to clarify a few issues and also to defend yourself.
Because of this, I am especially glad that you did not chew and spit the author up — but addressed this rationally.
I know you will get many comments here that will come to your side and pat your back and give you the affirmations which (in actuality) I really don’t think you are seeking.
I learned a lot from BOTH of your writings — you both had some excellent thoughts to ponder for quite a while.
Jen
Will,
I am a principal who physically left the classroom (ugh) 15 years ago, but whose heart has never left. I find your writing to be in that same spirit — the writing of a perpetual educator.
I have learned more from you since I discovered your blog and book (about 3.5 years ago) than I have from any other source during that time. I thank you for sharing your thoughts in an attempt to make educators better. I certainly feel you have done that for me.
The question whether you have discouraged those intending to fight the good fight is an interesting one to me. I do not feel as if that is the case at all; however, there have been times when I have sensed that you are discouraged with progress that education in the US has made. I can certainly see how empathetic readers could take on some of that discouragement, but I see no validity in an argument that educators should feel discouraged by your criticism. Unless, of course, the one feeling discouraged wasn’t fighting the good fight to begin with.
Keep pushing, Will.
I read the article, and I notice a couple of things.
The article is roughly half comments from other people. This is a change that technology brought us. Ten years ago, I don’t think anyone would have dared calling it an article when it is 50% from other people’s comments. Now, we have been enlightened, and realize that conversations are MUCH more important than monologues.
Some of the comments can be read several ways. Does “I’d like to see you try that in my classroom” mean “no way that would work with my students” or does it mean “could you do that on Tuesday, so I can learn how to do it”. Even if they didn’t mean it that way, it could be read that way.
I’m tempted to look up the quote that goes something like “when the small-minded people are against you, you know you are on the right track”, but I think that would be demeaning, so I’m not going to use it.
Children today do learn differently than they did fifty years ago. They need a different system that meets their needs. About four years ago, I attended an EdPress/AEP conference in D.C., at which a brain researcher presented a strong case for the use of collaborative learning and creative problem solving through the Internet that relies on today’s children’s increased ability to focus on more than one thing at a time (multitask). If they sit at home listening to an Ipod, IM-ing each other, texting, and writing a paper at the same time, how can we expect them to sit still in a quiet classroom and focus on one person in the front of the room? It doesn’t work as well as it used to. They are used to stimulus overload and able to filter through it all to focus on one thing at a time. Their brains are different–evolution. That doesn’t mean there should be chaos, but it does mean we need to present material and assess it differently–using media other than a dry lecture and a Scantron sheet. Personally, I prefer to learn in a traditional classroom, but it’s pretty unfair for me to try to make my students my clones, isn’t it? In the end, it’s not what makes me comfortable, it’s what makes them successful.
Getting over my personal barrier was easier than securing funding for technology in the classroom, but the greatest barrier is assessment. When the high schools accepting my students require high GPAs and exceptional scores on entrance exams, and colleges still require SAT or ACT scores, letter grades, quality points, and GPAs, how can I justify a “problem solved sufficiently” grade? There are also a great number of parents who demand tests with letter and number grades at the top. There is a societal and governmental expectation regarding testing that won’t budge, even when society and the government are demanding that schools change completely. Definitely a Catch-22.
Will,
You are being generous. The article makes no sense and makes no coherent point. That’s even if you can call it an article since it’s 90% other people’s words.
The “meat” of the article says:
1. She usually likes your blog posts (Nice pat on the back as she throws you under the bus)
2. She’s not in the classroom, nor are you (Inferring that perhaps she is doubting her own thoughts? Or that you don’t know what you are talking about? Who knows, it doesn’t say)
3. That another post by someone in the classroom “gave me pause” (What does that mean? Nothing! It’s the ultimate in weasel words.)
That’s it – no ideas, no connection, no conclusion.
And since Jen is obviously nicer than I – I would have been happy to see you chew the author up and spit her out. You have every right (and the expertise and credentials) to call this piece of so-called journalism what it is – a cut and paste job designed to fill column inches between ads.
Leading and Learning is usually better than this.
*sigh*
I’m going to put my response to all of this here, since running down through the comments, this was the first one in my opinion that really called that hit a foul ball.
That page was barely even worth comment, other than to point out the fact that it delivers nothing and yet does so in a rather demeaning (though incoherent) way. I write a blog. I have few works in print. They are completely different genres. That said, if there is anywhere a basic copy-paste of the ideas of others (along with a provocative question or two) belongs… it is on a blog. That’s not really my style, but if your purpose is to drum up some conversation, it’s a formula that works.
Print media (even electronic copies of such) are not the sort of media where I expect this type of journalism. Even on my blog I try to do more than just ask questions. I don’t generally sit down to type until I have something organized to say. If I were submitting to a print journal, you’d better believe it would be even more important that I contribute something in the way of content.
The L&L article addressed above is little more than an uncomfortable and disorganized insinuation followed by a series of quotes that seem to construct little point in the scheme of the page.
I simply don’t get it.
Will –
When I last ran into you at IU 13 in PA, you made similar statements (I believe your statements ended with “so what are you going to do about it.”). I must admit, that seemed harsh to me at first – after all – I am working hard in the trenches and I have only so much time and energy! I then read the book The Oz Principle in which the author’s talk about the ‘victim culture’ in our country and how operating as a ‘victim’ does absolutely nothing to move one (or an organization) forward. The reference to Oz was connected to theme that Dorothy, the tin man, lion, and scarecrow had within themselves what they thought they needed from the great Oz.
I still struggle with how to work to make the true shifts and changes so desperately needed in education while at the same time operating within the system SO resistant and SO committed to the status quo. I am becoming more comfortable, though, with the understanding that this is not an ‘either/or’ situation or an ‘all right/all wrong’ situation. I do need to keep asking myself – and allow others to ask – what am I doing EACH day to move myself, my organization, and others with whom I interact – closer to what we need to be. I often go back to a Vaclav Havel quote for inspiration: “Hope is definitely not the same thing as optimism. It is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out.”
I am hopeful, but hope is not sufficient; we must also ACT and our actions must be focused, thoughtful, and purposeful and we need voices like yours to remind us that if we are not willing to move forward in spite of the challenges we face, who will? We must also be willing to challenge you and others in similar positions to ask what are YOU doing to support us, encourage us, inspire us!
It’s funny you mention that presentation, Sue, because of all the ones I’ve given of late, that was the one that I thought I may have pushed a bit too hard. I remember seeing a lot of disgruntled faces. Maybe it was because it was leadership, maybe because it was because of a nagging headache I had, maybe something else, but I remember thinking that I had dialed it up too high that day. Sometimes it’s really hard to judge.
I do think that we run the risk of educators, especially with the rhetoric out there now, of succumbing to that victim role. You and your teachers educate at a unique moment in time, I think, one filled with lots of change and disruption and uncertainty. I’ve been saying that 20 years ago we weren’t having this conversation and we (hopefully) won’t be having it 20 years from now. But right now, we’re stuck in it. And I don’t think the choice to not change is an option if we’re in education. We have to be willing to look at our own practice and judge it against where the world is going. For many, that’s really, really hard. But I just don’t see how “no” is acceptable when it comes to the question of trying to see the world as it is as opposed to where it was.
I, also, was at the IU 13 conference in PA. You didn’t push too hard. You addressed a community of leaders who, historically, due to cultural influences or whatever, are a bit “set in their ways.” (I have never before been the sole blogger in a roomful of people!) The points you were raising were panic-inducing to some. They felt completely unprepared to take your message and implement even one piece of it into action.
“Urgency without hysteria” was our district’s mantra last year. We have a lot of work to do – and we don’t want to alarm anyone- but it HAS to get done. For kids. Because, as you stated, we’re enveloped in “the shift”, and we won’t be able to escape it. If we do, we’re doing a disservice to students.
Hi Lyn –
I agree that Will was not pushing too hard at IU 13; some times it is just more difficult to hear the message. I also agree that educators in Central PA tend to be extremely resistant to change of any kind and that creates some of the tension and frustration. You were not the only blogger in attendance that day, however. I had the pleasure of having Will (along with Alan November) as teachers in one of the courses in my doctoral programs and began blogging then. It was one of the most beneficial classes I had and I am grateful for all I learned and from the pushing and challenging Will did then!
Thank you Sue for your comment. I teach in a highschool science classroom and work as a mentor in my district. I find often teachers have a list of excuses of why they can not change their practice (usually do with the amount of content in the curriculum or the lack of effort on the part of students). I had thought it had to do primarily with insecurity but I can see how it could be something much deeper — teacher as a victim.
I need to read “The Oz Priniciple”.
1. No one’s going to be passionate about what we’re espousing if we’re not passionate ourselves.
2. Once created, the #1 goal of any organization is self-preservation.
We ALL need to keep pushing, resisters be damned. What’s the alternative? Give up? Keep ignoring the vast disparities between what schools do and what they should be doing? No thanks.
At last- someone willing to say what I was thinking. Thanks Sylvia.
Here is my take-
1. There are at least two kinds of educational leaders- reconstructionists and deconstructionists.
Deconstructionists lean towards creating a new system. They want to transform education in a new and different way, not reform it from the existing clay.
Reconstructionists lean toward figuring out what’s working and from those same ingredients fashioning a new approach.
2. Visionaries see things that are not and ask why. That happens whether they are in the classroom or not. Visionaries do not use safety nets. We have far too few visionaries.
3. Implementers see things that are and seek to improve in safe and incremental ways. They help people understand how — one step at a time.
4. Why can’t we have both? Powerful Learning Practice, the PD company I co-founded with Will, has visionaries that take folks out of their comfort zone and implementers who help them understand how to take that cognitive dissonance they feel and use it to push them through the creation of an action research project that results in transformational change in their local context.
5. The author is saying change is scary. Educators are overwhelmed. And it makes sense to her not freak them out by overwhelming them even more by suggesting we might have to unlearn everything we have vested ourselves in for the last 100 years.
Where she went wrong-
1. Never make it personal — make your point using ideas and concepts and be critical of those not people. Her point could have been made just as well without using names.
2. Since lots of people are giving similar messages to Will– I wonder about her motivation for calling out Will. Was she hoping by being controversial and using someone who is visible to do it she would get more play? Hope not.
3. Karl’s quote in her article supports Will’s perspective, the very one she is criticizing, so what was the motive there? I became confused at that point.
Bottom line- Yes Will Richardson overwhelms educators– he does it by design. He even says if you are not feeling uncomfortable then perhaps you are not paying attention. For those who want to change and do not know how there’s are lots of us out here who are willing to help.
Will creates a sense of urgency and makes a compelling case for why we should change. It’s up to those feeling the disequilibrium to dig for how they will change things in their own local culture.
What struck me in the article was that the author and you are not in a classroom. I guess Mrs. Fingall is implying that only teachers that are actually “in a classroom” have the right to have an opinion or the ability to make astute observations about education. Education “leaders” like Arne Duncan and Michelle Rhee do tend to make that a compelling argument. 😉
The problem with this thinking is everyone is effected by our education system. It should be something that all of us have conversations about, not just teachers. A passion for educating our youth is the only prerequisite one needs to have.
Wow- talk about contradicting oneself. I think- and I’m not really sure- that her point is we need to bridge a gap somehow between the visionaries and the practitioners. Calling out one particular blogger is surely not a very effective way of doing that. Either way- I’ll take the argument head on.
I think we should frighten teachers that are not changing the ways they teach. I think teachers should be frightened by the future of our students and what education is providing — or not providing them. We should “cajole, inspire, persuade and demand.. with righteous indignation” educational reform.
Yes, Will’s messages, along with many other brilliant, talented, and visionary educators are scary and sometimes discouraging. Teachers and practicing educational leaders need to be inspired to have the courage to change. We are inspired to have that courage- even when we are discouraged at times- by Will and the many other phenomenal educational bloggers that suggest we need to change how we teach.
I for one am still a teacher- nope, I am not in the classroom although I was for many years- I am a Director of Technology and a District level administrator. Yep- the blogs sometimes discourage me- but they inspire me to make the changes that need to be made.
Thanks Will and all the others- the list is long and full of talented, brilliant, and insightful minds.
As a non-native speaker I had to re-read the T&L piece of “cut&paste” trying to figure out if there was any support to her initial argument in the quotes. Well, my effort yielded no results! (Should have read Sylvia’s analysis instead!)
The best wake-up call I had while working in our PLP team project came from your unrelenting challenging our proposal. I cannot be more grateful!
Our journey as educators having you and Sheryl provoking our sometimes dated premises add immense value to what we are able to bring back to our colleagues and students.
Can’t hardly wait for what’s coming ahead in our new PLP cohort!
As I begin this, I am not sure what it is I want to comment on here. I did this backwards, reading your post and the comments first, and then the article. I am not sure I read the article with any objectivity.
I taught secondary English for 34 years. I am now on my fifth year as an Adjunct Professor of Education. I think that qualifies me to comment on what works in the classroom. Since I first discovered you and listened to what you had to offer, you reached me(you had me at hello). I always find value in what you offer. I tell others that you are an individual who enables educators to find a way to make a difference.
There are so many reasons why teachers are resistant to change. Moreover, parents are even more resistant to change. Politicians are steadfastly resistant to change. The whole culture is resistant to change. A big problem is that all those same factions are demanding that changes be made. Your voice and the voices of other reformers simply underscore the fact that the more we demand change the more we stay the same. Staying the same is no longer status quo it is now moving backwards. The technology which will dominate the lives of our students as it and we move forward is not stopping for educators to accept it. Today’s students will best be served by having the skills to master the technology. That is not a focus of education.
I always wonder when a teacher says, “that would never work in my class”, does he/she really understand what he/she is presently doing in his/her class is not working. They cling to it, because it is their belief that it is a tried and true way to educate. They are supported by administrators who were educated the same way and parents who are familiar with the very same model and politicians who pander to the polls.
We are now teaching kids in a 19th century system using 20th century methods trying to teach them 21st century skills. Under these conditions educators are expected to have students attain a goal in education that is not defined or agreed upon in any clear terms to anyone’s satisfaction.
Under these conditions, how can you expect your clear view of where we need to go, and what we need to do to get there, to be anything but an resented indictment of some individuals. Others need to come to their defense, because the offended individuals are still in the majority.
I know this is making sense to me, but I am not sure others will see it the same way. I know that, if we are ever going to move from where we are to where we need to be, we need voices like yours questioning and challenging us at every opportunity. There will be opposition to change in education, but if those voices were correct why is not our educational system a model for all the world? Please keep speaking out.
ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM
Hey Tom…thanks for the comments. They cling to it because they believe that is what is expected of them. Until those expectations change…
we’re a funny lot.
people are hungry for what you stand for Will Richardson.
i see it in their eyes everyday.
every
day.
give us more.
Beware people telling you that you are right.
Sometimes a visionary can get so far upstream from those he is trying to lead that he may lose sight of them and they may lose sight of him at times. I don’t think that’s where you are generally but I do think that this is where occasionally you and others drift (really I think the author was using you as more of an example than the object of the piece).
There is a certain fog that you need to be aware of that obscures how your audience sees your message and how you see your audience; I fundamentally believe that the classroom and the school are very different than even five years ago (the dynamics, the tensions), it really is a whole different world and not in a good way. These dynamics and tensions from outside forces combined with the stress that those inside schools and classrooms put on themselves, create this fog.
Ultimately, if a visionary is presenting a vision and someone misunderstands the vision or how it is presented than the visionary has to own it and allow it to inform his/her interactions going forward.
I appreciate this comment by Joe. Like many of us, I often set up some kind of backchannel area for participants in my workshops and institutes. Lately that’s often taken the form of a shared, openly-editable Google Doc where anyone can put their thoughts, notes, etc. As is quite evident sometimes, what people take away from their time with you is often not what you hoped or intended…
I agree Scott. I’ve been using a back channel as well when I can. It is a great way to capture the thinking and for speakers, a great way to reflect later on. And, obviously, it’s a good way to gauge the message. But, unfortunately, most often those in the audience don’t have technology in hand. When I ask why, they say they didn’t think it was appropriate or no one told them to bring it. Double sigh.
@joe I wonder if it’s a two steps forward, one step back kind of thing sometimes. But I absolutely agree with you that the current conversation around teaching and education is not in a good place from a national perspective. I recently spoke at an opening day and was struck by the “rallying the troops” messages that were coming from both the union president and the superintendent (to some extent.) I actually felt compelled to mention it in my own remarks. This is a complex time (to say the least) to be a teacher/educator. But I do think it’s also on some level, a good sign. Serious change never happens without serious resistance, and up until now, I don’t think the fundamental ideas of schooling have ever been challenged in this way. It’s a natural response to hunker down and push back by those who see the foundations shifting.
We’ll see. Either way, thanks for the reminder.
Visionaries realize that the situation for learners in classrooms is dire. Is there one ‘tone’ that has yet proven effective at lighting a fire under those with the power to radically alter the learning lives of young people?
As one who has walked the talk, and as one who continues to act as a model networked learner, I have no doubt that your work as facilitator, author, and speaker, continues to make a big difference.
Thanks to the flames you’ve ignited, I know of many parents and educators who will continue to listen, Will Richardson.
I’ll be honest, I re-read the article about three times and I’m still not exactly sure what her point is. That’s perplexing to say the least, and I agree that this is more of a blog post than an article. And not even a stellar one at that.
However, I do think that the original premise, in the first paragraph does have at least one good point. At times many presenters, myself included, make this stuff seem almost too easy, too obvious, and educators in the audience can feel overwhelmed and simply shut down.
@Will, in the comment above, you mention that “unfortunately, most often those in the audience don’t have technology in hand. When I ask why, they say they didn’t think it was appropriate or no one told them to bring it. Double sigh.” Believe me when I say I’m not trying to point fingers, but did you tell them to ask the audience to bring laptops? In a traditional ‘lecture’ the audience isn’t expected to participate. We’re trying to enact change. But sometimes we seem to be surprised that the audience hasn’t embraced the change even before we’ve gotten there.
I vividly remembering leaving a workshop once and being a little disappointed that not one person tweeted anything about it. But why on earth should that have surprised me, when the vast majority had never created a podcast, participated on a wiki or done anything else in this realm?
I’ve taken to asking teachers in the audience whether they feel that they’re behind the technology curve. Without fail, about 95% raise their hands. It that feeling breeds a sense of helplessness. That they can never catch up. Not realizing that the change we’re pushing for is a mental shift, a shift in policy more than anything. And that everything comes from that.
I do agree with that first paragraph. That’s why I make a concerted effort to try to make my presentations empowering if nothing else. To help push the attendees forward with a sense of confidence that they aren’t as far behind as they feel and that the change that needs to be made can be done at an individual level. Otherwise, I worry that it just feels too big. Obviously this varies from event to event depending on audience. But I’ve seen some speakers in the past that did go over the top, and the net result is that they did their own message a disservice.
Will – I love your way of things. Don’t stop being you. I love your style and what you have to say. You speak for a lot of us out here who think change needs to come now – every year means more kids go through an antiquated system.
Thanks for all you do.
As I read through the comments, I found myself wishing this was more of a conversation.
I think the point that keeps surfacing for me is something that Will and I have talked about many times. Drive by conferences will not scratch the itch. They will not get the job done. We can spend a day with folks and share what we know and see coming and yes, the result will be to overwhelm them. But that isn’t a speaker or workshop problem- that is a PD issue.
The truth is that the only PD that is going to work when you are talking about a reculturation of the educational system is ongoing, job-embedded PD where there is year long support for the change desired. Traditional PD is not going to work. Bring someone in like Will– let them do the shock and awe and then follow-up with strong support. I love what David Logan says, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” If you are going to reculture you have to have a strong systemic strategy for how you are going to do it.
The problem has been- keynoters come–they do what keynoters do– make people uncomfortable and push their thinking and then what? Nothing follows. That is why teachers shut down.
Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999a) describe three ways of knowing and constructing knowledge that align closely with PLP’s philosophy and are worth mentioning here.
Knowledge for Practice is often reflected in traditional PD efforts when a trainer shares with teachers information produced by educational researchers. This knowledge presumes a commonly accepted degree of correctness about what is being shared. The learner is typically passive in this kind of “sit and get†experience. This kind of knowledge is difficult for teachers to transfer to classrooms without support and follow through. After a workshop, much of what was useful gets lost in the daily grind, pressures and isolation of teaching. (This is the typical workshop experience)
Knowledge in Practice recognizes the importance of teacher experience and practical knowledge in improving classroom practice. As a teacher tests out new strategies and assimilates them into teaching routines they construct knowledge in practice. They learn by doing. This knowledge is strengthened when teachers reflect and share with one another lessons learned during specific teaching sessions and describe the tacit knowledge embedded in their experiences. (This happens in schools that actually reflect and try to implement what the workshop taught.)
Knowledge of Practice believes that systematic inquiry where teachers create knowledge as they focus on raising questions about and systematically studying their own classroom teaching practices collaboratively, allows educators to construct knowledge of practice in ways that move beyond the basics of classroom practice to a more systemic view of learning. (This is the job-embedded piece that is missing and we try and provide by what we do.)
I believe that by attending to the development of knowledge for, in and of practice, we can enhance professional growth that leads to real change. Not one time keynotes.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (1999a). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teaching learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-305.
Sheryl
Thanks for this. It really makes sense to me. This post and its comments are so much more meaningful than the Article that set this in motion.
Aww. thanks Tom. I appreciate that. I really do.
Will,
First off, I’d like to say, thanks for doing what you do–taking a conversation that is challenging, and opening it up for discussion on your blog. That furthers the learning and discussion for all of us, and that’s why I admire your mindful, thoughtful leadership. I’m not saying this as a “techno-fan-geek-groupie” but because I truly feel that you are a mindful speaker/writer/leader who will use this as an opportunity to reflect and grow.
That being said, what I find most unpleasant about the article, and what I feel threw it into ‘ugly’ mode for me, was her last sentence. I found that very off-putting — As if you aren’t conversing and listening and talking to the very people whose blog excerpts she posted(which is absurd).
And the author’s point about you being or not being in the classroom seems irrelevant to the post of yours(about parents) that she includes.
Certainly I agree, as would most of us, that there is a balance between challenging teachers and schools to move forward and providing support and encouragement for them to make that movement. There are times/moments/places where it can backfire, and if you are in the midst of being a change leader yourself and agree with the speaker, it may not resonate with you how other teachers feel. But then again sometimes we all need to be challenged and inspired and stretched.
However, your daily work with PLP is evidence of that balance you strike–it’s not just words from a podium–you and Sheryl have made it actionable and taken it to teachers in a mindful, constructive, supportive program that helps them grow and embrace change.
When you spoke at our school long ago, not only did you speak generally in a way that inspired and provoked change, but then you spent the entire day teaching my staff about blogs and wikis, and the nitty gritty of what was out there. You shared your passion and enthusiasm for what these tools could provide in terms of student understanding and how we could ramp up the learning for them. You were open to questions and conversation, and we all walked away better teachers.
I share these examples because I honestly believe you aren’t just standing at the podium challenging us with a message of passionate change, you are also ‘on the ground’ working directly with teachers to help them grow.
Last of all, your post about parents challenged my thinking. (and also had very little to do with Lee Kolbert’s excellent post, by the way).
I’d just been speaking last night with my sister whose children who are in first and sixth grades, and she was struggling with her impressions of her first grader’s teachers methods. Posts like yours have made me wish I had been more demanding of my son’s school, and so I encouraged her to talk to the teacher, to talk to the principal who she knows well and to voice her concerns.
I think you were spot on when you wrote that we sort of just “hope” and have this implicit trust that the schools know what they are doing. And as parents we do bear responsibility in this picture as well.
I digress- but lastly and most importantly I want to say, keep doing what you are doing. You rock.
Hey… I don’t think you push hard enough. But that’s just me. 🙂
I thought that the article also had a “You aren’t in the classroom, so you don’t know” tilt, and while that is something that I know concerns you, it can’t drive you. You have a perspective that is unique to who you are and what you are doing at this time in your life right now. That’s an important viewpoint, and you should speak from what you know. You are seeing a broader picture than most folks in the classroom, and while there is nothing wrong with teachers pushing back and saying, “Yes, but here’s my view from where I sit,” that doesn’t make your vantage point any less valid.
We need robust debate. We need people who push. We should be questioning just about everything these days. That does mean people may be uncomfortable. Making people comfortable isn’t your job.
Ok, while I keyed in on just that opening paragraph, what you’re pointing out here really did piss me off. Your ‘credentials’ are beyond reproach. And regardless of the resume’, the points you’re making are valid enough to stand on their own. Yeesh. We all have our own frame of reference. And that’s why we need so many voices in the conversation. The idea that because you aren’t in the classroom, you don’t have the right to push people forward is complete crap.
Just a quick note of thanks for all of the kind comments. As Jen said above, that really wasn’t my intent in posting this. But it’s still much appreciated.
I just find it hilarious and ironic that a magazine entitled “Teaching and Learning With Technology” is published in a non-web friendly format.
For example, a search for the opening line of the article returns NO results.
ISTE: there’s this thing called Google. It helps make you relevant. Nice work leading and learning with technology.
Cheers,
Bill
Shoot.
Here’s an actual working link to the search for the opening line that returns no results.
This technology stuff is hard. ISTE: I feel your pain.
First I think this thread of comments reminds us all why we blog … and makes me wish somehow blogs were re-energized and well … but also realize some that there are other outlets now and it’s complicated. This is a bit of an aside to comment on a few points made about not having to be a teacher to comment about things. I agree completely – I have increasingly though, been making comments of late about how much of the teacher voice is under-represented in general … there is plenty of “blame” for that, and teachers themselves shoulder a good chunk of it. I would remind all however that teachers (and I’m speaking here from my own experience realizing it is not everyones’ – and also I teach elementary and so my comments are shaded from that perspective as well), but speaking as someone that has been at times mad as hell at the achingly slow adoption of my colleagues at my own school, I also experience so many of the reasons that happens.
Every classroom at my K-6 school now has an Activeboard and a teacher laptop connected to a fairly robust network. We have digital cameras, scanners, printers are easily available and access is open to just about everything other than YouTube and FaceBook. There are classrooms where the teacher has never used their laptop, or used their ActivBoard except to run their Lumens as an overhead projector on. Some, to increase the amount of display space in their classrooms tape student work, artwork, vocab lists and so on to their Activeboard. Training on using this tech is available in the school district at $20 a class, but teachers are frankly overwhelmed by the reading, writing, math … and now, Edusoft and Infinite Campus trainings that are mandatory, AND they are and will be held accountable on. The university ed department is still mostly locked in the overhead projector era and doesn’t have a clue about wikis, blogs, etc. outside of hearing about them at conferences. No admin or curriculum staff mention or promote anything to do with educational technology or pedagogy outside of our required programs, no one wins awards or is singled out by admin for doing a great job with technology or a different pedagogy and in fact we are supposed to be following the “approved pedagogy.” (I’ve never even had the head of educational technology for our district – who designated our classroom the district model tech class (or any other administrator visit our classroom), and we are the model ed tech class for the district – the only one in a district of 63,000 students – a class that wins awards almost every year and the district puts in its report as one of the highlights.
Should teachers be noting and becoming aware of these changes and learning about them and even using them? Absolutely! But why? Most know next to nothing about any of this, and they are not encouraged to learn it now other than in the most general way – they are pushed hard to not question what they are told to do, and media tends to reinforce that notion. I feel strongly that we need to make these changes and I frankly have to beat my head against a wall and take the chance of being reprimanded most days. This is not an environment that fosters innovation. I know this is NOT what everyone’s experience is and that there are many places that are more open … but how many aren’t? How many are worse than what teachers in my district experience? So I agree that you don’t have to be a teacher to comment, but where are we going to get a stronger, vital teacher voice? Where are the full-time classroom teachers in this community – there are not many. Will and others are right to push teachers and administrators and politicians and society in general if for no other reason, to make them cognizant of what there is and could be.
ISTE once more striving for mediocrity. Glad someone is, as it makes the rest of us look great.
I’m well aware of not having been in a classroom, teaching, for two years now. But the world needs both: we need people who taught in a classroom last week, and have the urgency of “you can do this tomorrow”, and we need people who’ve spent time not teaching, but thinking about learning and teaching for longer, deeper than we can allow ourselves when we’re otherwise embroiled in the daily speed, hubbub and routine of the classroom.
The problem lies in the fact that there are plenty of people in the latter camp who fail to show the depth of thought that the time out of the classroom permits – this editorial betrays that. It’s either that they waste their precious out-of-classroom time or that they have trouble communicating what it is they think they’ve uncovered.
Whatever the reason, the beauty of writing on a blog rather than in print, is that we’re not provoked into writing a piece for a deadline. If it’s not any good, or needs more work, we can let it simmer. And, as you say, when we get it wrong we find out pretty sharpish.
I’m going to be very happy, for one, to continue pushing and provoking. Given most people will go 20% of the way one might suggest, we have to push at 100% to achieve any form of movement.
I think making a general statement that Will Richardson might get some people’s backs up is valid and probably true. So what? When I heard him, I felt very inspired and also a little bad that I hadn’t been keeping up technologically as I should have. I heard him openly criticizing the very administrators that had hired him to come(he made a general comment that administrators are least interested in change or something like that.)
Canada’s own David Suzuki takes the same approach of being almost angry at people for their attitudes toward the environment. He certainly gets people’s backs up. So what?
Point: I have been inspired by Will Richardson and some people may have been offended.
But, here’s the kicker question: Did people get cajoled to join facebook or get an email account or join the next social media Diaspora? There is also a ground swelling that teachers and students can and will ride because it is where western society is heading. You can help lead it or you get get on board, but you can’t get your back up and expect to be a part of it.
Will,
Once, in a PLP Elluminate session, you said to me, “Now, I’m going to push you a little bit to think about…” I remember thinking at the time, “That has to be the gentlest push-back I’ve ever received.” And I actually warmed to the challenge (I say this knowing I can be one of those prickly, over-sensitive teachers at times).
You have always challenged me in a kind and respectful way, and I thank you for that. I also think of your “web-side manner” as cajoling, yes, but respectfully so. Not a bad thing.
I have two things to add to this discussion. First, I think that when we find ourselves saying the same things in 2010 that we were saying in 2000-whatever, a sense of urgency sometimes creeps into our voices. Some will hear that sense of urgency and prick up their ears. Others will hear it and crawl into their caves.
Second, I think there is something in the air this year. Maybe it’s that our new teachers are just one year more familiar with the things that tend to unsettle the rest. The numbers have shifted; the tone of the discourse is different somehow. But even in my little school in the middle-of-nowhere Texas, there’s a shift in the force. Some of the cave-dwellers are beginning to come out of hiding. I have some hope where I have despaired in the past.
Keep challenging us. We need you.
Susan
I read the articles and was surprised by the information. I enjoyed it,,,,,,, i liked it.
Will,
Where’s The Food? Teachers, God love them, need someone who is in touch with the real world to push them. Far too many, as all of us who work daily with teachers know, are extraordinarily proficient in out-dated models of pedagogy.
Rock the Casbah!
è·¯è¿‡ï¼Œè¸©ä¸€ä¸‹ã€‚æ„¿ä½ æ¯å¤©æœ‰ä¸ªå¥½å¿ƒæƒ…