I finally got around to finishing up Sir Ken Robinson’s new book “The Element” which, for the most part, was a great read. He lays out a pretty compelling case for the power of passion in learning, and the absolute need for schools to help students identify their own passions through which they can learn just about anything they need. I’ve said in the past that the one thing I want from my own kids’ teachers is for them to help them find what they love to do more than anything else and then support them in their learning endeavors around that topic. Unfortunately, that is not something the current public school system was build for.
Toward the end of the book, Sir Ken lays out the case for personalizing our kids’ educations in the context of transforming (not reforming) schools:
The key to this transformation is not to standardize education but to personalize it, to build achievement on discovering the individual talents of the each child, to put students in an environment where they want to learn and where they can naturally discover their true passions (238). The curriculum should be personalized. Learning happens in theĂ‚Â minds and souls of individuals–not in the databases of multiple-choice tests (248).
He argues that we should do away with the hierarchy of subjects and that we should work as hard as we can to customize, not standardize, each student’s experience of schooling. Oh, to dream.
As I thought about those points, I started thinking about how we treat teachers and their learning as well. So much of professional development is throwing everyone in a room and having them learn the same stuff. Maybe there is some choice in the offerings, but by and large there is very little attempt at creating a customized professional development curriculum for teachers. Yes, we have our PIPs, but those usually address deficiencies or weakensses, not passions.
The other day, I was having a conversation along these lines with a good friend who serves as the Director of Technology at a local school. We were talking about change, about how hard it is, and how long it takes. While he’s done a great deal to move his school forward in terms of open source and social tools and technology in general, from a pedagogy standpoint, he had been racking his brain trying to figure out how to support individual teachers in these shifts. Finally, he came to the conclusion that the only way to do it was to create an individualized learning experience for each teacher, to take them where they are and mentor them, individually, to a different place. He’s in the process of surveying each teacher to determine what technologies they currently use, what their comfort levels are, and what they are most passionate about. Then, using those results, he and one other tech educator at the school are going to start going one by one, talking about change, looking at tools, making connections, and shifting the pedagogy.
Whoa.
It echoes Sir Ken:
Too many reform movements in education are designed to make education teacher-proof. The most successful systems in the world take the opposite view. They invest in teachers. The reason is that people succeed best when they have others who understand their talents, challenges, and abilities. This is why mentoring is such a helpful force in so many people’s lives. Great teachers have always understood that their real role is not to teach subjects but to teach students (249).
Teachers are learners. If they’re not, they shouldn’t be teachers. In a world where we can engage in our passions through the affordances of connective technologies online, we need to be thinking about how to personalize the learning of the adults in the room as well as the kids. This is not the easy route, by any stretch, but it’s the best route if we’re serious about moving the education of our kids to a different place.
(Photo “De Profundis” by Midnight-digital Not leaving! Just very busy)
I second that. Evidence of how effective personalised learning is happened in my school this week. I’ve been supporting one of our teachers who felt like using technology in his classes was too great an ask. He has now joined Working together 2 make a difference, has helped his students create their online presence by uploading their reflections in a blog post on the site and we had Laura Stockman skype into the class this week.The students then spent time posting comments on Laura’s blog. He was blown away by this experience and that night introduced the site, the work of our PLP cohort and his experiences to the staff who work in our Junior school. He feels able to do this now and will hopefully be instrumental in transferring the knowledge to others. What he needed was time and assistance to feel like he was capable.
Thanks for sharing that story, Jenny, and for your work to bring Laura’s good ideas to Australia!
I’d love to see the survey your friend used to assess his teachers’ tech experiences.
Yes, Will. If your friend would be willing to share their survey of tech experiences I would like to see it as well.
I’ll see if I can wrestle a copy away from him.
One by one is a good way to go. It’s manageable, satisfying. I always imagine students in a class as if they were my kids (stretch of the imagination). You wouldn’t talk at them as a collective, you’d deal with them as individuals, experiencing them as unique and responding to them individually. Still, that messes up the traditional classroom, doesn’t it? That’s the different place.
PS. I’m coming over to the school of your friend, the Director of Technology for my personalised learning program.
This idea is what was behind the Instructional Technology Guides program at our school. We invited teachers to be part of an empowering experience where they gained the tools needed to feel confident collaborating with their colleagues. The program also provided opportunities for personal professional growth with each individual’s own pedagogy. Once completing a year of the program, each person is encouraged to branch out and work with a group of teachers they determine as collaborators. The “tech guides” as we call them are continually supported by our tech department as well as two technology instructional lead teachers.
I think that just like empowering students can be scary for teachers, empowering teachers can be scary for administrators. It really takes a confident, forward-thinking administration to allow this sort of professional development. Just wondering, what’s out there to help the administrators?
Your school’s concept of the Instruction Technology Guides Program is an excellent one. It is true that so often our professional development is not differentiated to meet the needs of our faculty and staff. Technology instruction is an important part of the curriculum that we currently teach. As teachers, we are expected to deliver this instruction. The ironic thing is that many of us have never been taught how to properly use or navigate the programs that we are required to teach. In every school there are knowledgeable staff members who are able to teach others. As a former technology liaison for my school, I know how difficult it is to complete your required task and then provide professional development. We need to utilize the time that is already built into our schedules to provide this professional development (ie. required faculty meetings, etc). If teachers are expected to integrate technology effectively, we have to give them the tools necessary to complete the task!
What a wonderful idea to utilize the newly acquired skills of the IT Guides to collaborate with the other teachers. By teaching the tech skills to others it reinforces what they have just learned,while “spreading the word” of technology and building a community of teachers who can rely on each other for help. Our tech instructor works very hard to help us implement technology into our lessons, but she is only one person and a team of guides would help her promote the use of technology more effectivly.
Will, I am reading Sir Ken’s book right now as well. And, it is funny that you hit on this point about teachers and moving them along “the shift”: it was just this conversation I was having with our head of school and PLP team yesterday.
The one-on-one mentoring, coaching, consulting is important…and I would add partnership to that list. The most meaningful work we’ve done has been because the “risk” and the “fear” were carried along with someone else. The most rewarding experiences I’ve had as that mentor/coach/consultant have been when the teacher and I really partner together as colearners and coteachers. And this is when I see the teachers starting to really shift and get at some of the changes we’re discussing.
Which brings me to the underlying point that another teacher made clear in a completely separate conversation after school yesterday: Whether we are talking about students in our classrooms or teachers, the place where real learning can occur is where there are healthy relationships that foster the growth. There is nothing expedient or efficient about that kind of model. But it is the free place where we are free to imagine, explore, and create.
As Technology Integrator at my school I am developing online, learning tutorials that I will be using with my staff to help them learn Web 2.0 tools. These online modules will first, expose my staff to the tools they need to consider using with their students. Then, I plan to “hold their hand” and give them 1 on 1 support. As they work to implement these Web 2.0 tools in their classrooms.
Terry,
What a great service you are doing for your teachers! I am so new at this, I would love 1 on 1 support. To have someone that is knowledgeable in this area to guide others along is a valuable key. Maybe as I learn and become proficient, I will be able to do that for my colleagues. Right now it’s the “blind leading the blind”. Good Luck!
I completely agree with the assertion that teachers’ professional development needs to be personalized. Teachers are learners, and if we accept that students must have their own learning profiles addressed in schools, then the same should apply to teachers as they undertake their own learning.
In fact, the approach suggested through Will’s discussion with his friend the Technology Director is exactly the approach that is used in Simon Fraser University’s Teaching and Learning in an Information Technology Environment (TLITE). Teacher-learners spend the first two weeks of the program getting a handle on their learning styles and their learning needs, and then plan out their own learning over the course of the coming term. Throughout the process, they are supervised/supported by other knowledgeable educators who serve as mentors.
All who participate, teacher-learners and mentors included, agree that the transformation within the teachers is extremely powerful over the course of this two-year program.
While we might not always agree with the PD direction of our districts isn’t it their job to decide what direction they feel the staff needs to move? Right now our district is trying to bring its staff up to speed on data analysis. Reading and making sense of assessment data(some formative but mostly summative) in order to direct future instruction. I love using Web 2.0 applications and teaching my teachers how to use these tools personally, professionally and with their classes. But if a teacher doesn’t understand how to make sense of the data we have on hand to guide instruction/raise achievement/increase learning how can we with our limited PD time allow it to be splintered in so many directions. Yes, many teachers will make great progress but many will choose some new learning that has impact on student learning. Perhaps as teachers we haven’t earned the trust of our leadership to pick what we think will best raise achievement.
For those of use who are ahead of the curve making use of data we try our best to help others during PD time and then take care of our own learning outside of school via the wealth of online resources like this very blog.
Well written Will. A personalized education is the beginning of a dignitarian education, and starting with the teachers is the best place to begin.
I agree that educators have to become more engaged in determining their own professional learning needs and pursuing them. However, there has to be a shift in perception about what determines exemplary professional development. We get too hung up on the accreditation, the certificate and lose sight of the learning.
Gaining a better understanding of what a professional learning network looks like and feels like is part of the process.
The reality is that schools are, as Laura puts it, expedient and efficient learning places where we need to teach “the masses” and get everyone over the same standard benchmarks at the same time, in spite of their differences. To embrace their differences, requires, as you admit, Will, a whole re-conceptualization of what “school” is and can be.
However, we can certainly start by personalizing the PD of teachers/adults and create more of a learning community rather than a well-oiled machine unwilling or incapable of doing anything it wasn’t programmed to do. We need to treat teachers the same way we want them to treat their students. The “do as I do” model needs to replace the “do as I say” model. Administrators need to set this tone and make this type of learning safe.
Great post.
I think there needs to be a balance with teacher professional development (PD). Perhaps half the allotted time given to whole school PD, and half to personalised, self directed PD.
I especially like the idea of having a mentor, unfortunately only beginning teachers seem to get this sort of personalised guidance. However the the reality is that the majority of teachers may want PD in areas like ICT, web 2, etc., but they do not have the knowledge to know what PD would be best for them.
I wonder if there are enough teachers/mentors with the necessary skills and knowledge to match up one on one personalised mentoring in the digital arena? At my school there are only three teachers with good ICT and web based knowledge, and two of us are beginning teachers.
The FA PLP cohort was just talking about this one-to-one mentoring idea as a part of our PLP project. One of our biggest areas of concern is how we can get our administration to support this, so Steve Ransom’s comment above caught my eye, too. Ultimately, it’s nice to know that we are not the only ones dealing with these frustrations. I’m putting Element at the top of my reading list.
Shortly before you and Sheryl began leading the WNYPLP, it became crystal clear to myself and a small group of colleagues that if we were to begin supporting teachers and schools in a way that would effect real change, tremendous changes would have to occur in how we approached professional development. Your work with us solidified that realization, and in the months that followed, I became eager to work with teachers as an instructional coach. Our organization wasn’t able to support that at the time–they still aren’t. Our team was very small and the districts we served were many. I eventually resigned.
This was a huge leap, and one I’ve not regretted. I cannot agree with you more here, Will. We need to be heading in this direction for so many different reasons. Many people find workshops irrelevant. They are also costly and tend to effect very little change. I’ve spent this year coaching–80 days in one district with one team at one level. Instead of pulling groups out, I push in to individual classrooms. Instead of setting the schedule, teachers do. And instead of racing through an agenda and getting frustrated when change doesn’t happen fast enough, I get to sit with teachers as they write their first blog posts with students…the work of which is aligned to their standards and which also provides opportunities for formative assessment. This sustained effort and this scaffolded approach is leading to a sort of slow change that is a whole lot faster than what I used to witness.
It’s harder though. A whole lot harder. Wow.
Will,
Interestingly, I do think that not only is individual one-on-one with teachers is more effective–teachers prefer it as well.
The experiences where I have seen teachers be most receptive are those where we are working particularly on a need they have.
One method we are trying on our campus are Book Study groups, which are self-selected. Teachers select the books, the members of their group, the meeting time, and the method of discussion. I think using books as a jumping off point for collegial discussion has been very valuable for them.
I’m hoping to start a book study group using blog posts instead of a book–thinking that is also a way to engage people in the power of blog posts!
I completely agree that we “usually address deficiencies or weaknesses, not passions.” As a classroom teacher committed to integrating technology into my practice, I find that much of the PD provided for all of the teachers in our district does little to inspire me or change my practice. When I can customize the PD to meet my interests, my experience, my goals I am most likely to take that learning with me into my teaching.
Come and get a job in New Zealand 🙂 It seems that we have a better understanding of this with our national ICT PD programme. Still a long way to go but at least the theory is increasingly in place.
“I find that much of the PD provided for all of the teachers ” in the comment above sums up the problem – who knows better than the teacher themselves their needs. Action research for teachers is a great learning tool …. and it makes a really big difference to outcomes for children too.
There is a big difference between professional learning (something teachers do for themselves, inside their own heads) and professional development (something others do TO teachers and may very well make no difference at all to their practice).
cheers
Greg
Personalizing education seems to form part of the increasing overall trend – very positive trend! – of educators who wish to reflect on their teaching approaches and the rapport they establish on a day-to-day basis with their students. Rapport and personalizing lessons go hand in hand. No doubt a teachers’ human, one-to-one rapport with their classes enhances students’ learning and builds a sense of comunity in the classroom. This in turn supports the goal of creating collaborative learning environments. Personalising (and individualizing) play a key role in achieving these pedagogical goals.
That’s a great point about empowering teachers in some ways being threatening. Sad, but true in many cases. It speaks to the complexity of this, how many “things” have to be in place in order for pd to really work.
Agreed, and that echoes Julia’s thoughts as well. In the end, though it may not seem like it on the surface, it might be more efficient to teach teachers one by one and turn them into mentors as well.
Terry, I’d be interested in hearing how you are going to provide the learning context for those tools. One of the things that Sheryl and I really try to drive home in PLP (much to the chagrin of some of the participants) is that this is not a tool based shift; it’s a learning based shift. The tools are easy. Publishing is easy. But the power of the tools lies in understanding the potential of the connections we can make with them and the communities we can build with them. Without a practical understanding of that, most tools just end up being used to give old content new form.
Hey Mark, Thanks for the comment. Great last name. Are we related? ;0)
I think data can be useful, but I have to tell you, I’d give these technologies and the shifts associated with them precedence right now. Data is about teaching; this is about learning. And I just get the sense that at the end of the day, we’re collecting a lot of data that just doesn’t make much sense in the learning contexts provided by the Web. In reality, we’re talking about moving to a very different model of education here, one that is being created without us, by and large. We need to get into this conversation in a big way, now.
Will-
Yes, data is about teaching, but I am a big fan of DuFour and Stiggins and Wiliam and to them data is the proof of learning. Is it the best proof of learning we have or can get, don’t think so, but it is where the schools are right now. I keep reading about new assessments being developed, but they certainly haven’t filtered down into the schools yet. We are still bubbling on tests and determining how much a student has learned but looking at their bubbles.
I have no doubt the people reading and responding to this blog post would choose exemplary self directed PD for themselves. I would say just participating in this discussion is much more engaging PD than most will experience compared to district provided PD.
But for the people I work with I am not sure they would self select PD that would impact student learning which is what we are all aiming for. My greatest fear is that we continue to provide PD that has no impact. We attend PD, add to our knowledge base, and then return to our classrooms. We might know more, but the vast majority of us are doing the same. Same as we did last year, basically the same as we did 5 years ago. Do you think our kids from 5 years ago are the same as today’s kids?!
Conversations such as these are very powerful for me and the others that read this blog….but are the right people reading the blog and having the conversations? Not in my district. As a PD provider I better find a way to correlate my PD (and its associated costs) to raising achievement which unfortunately is only measured by test scores.
Will, you are scheduled to present at our district later this summer and this will be your chance to reach some administrators that don’t see how the “shift” we know is happening relates to the ways we reach and teach kids. Our job, unfortunately as they see it, is to raise scores each year. Our state says value added is not evaluative for teachers. Please, it is only a matter of time until those measures become evaluative is they are not already at least subconsciously evaluative.
Mark,
To quote you: “We attend PD, add to our knowledge base, and then return to our classrooms. We might know more, but the vast majority of us are doing the same. Same as we did last year, basically the same as we did 5 years ago.”
You’ve hit on a huge issue here that is less about professional development and how it is conducted and much more about professionalism and how we live it. The concept of professionalism has as much merit in this conversation, if not more so, than does the ideas behind professional development. For in the end, it takes that characteristic of continued learning and devotion to one’s profession to take any kind of self-directed initiative or to respond by action to good ideas shared/experienced in professional development.
I agree with most of what you say here, but I wonder if he type of data we get right now can really track what kids can do vs. what kids know. Most of the data I see being collected deals more with “do kids know this by this time” not so much can they solve this problem, work with others to create and share, go through a process of vetting information and people, etc. And those things are not “21st Century Skills” (bells going off in the background). Those are skills for any age. Bubbles will not cut it right now, so I hope you are right that the assessments are changing.
Some good thoughts about PD here: “What Research Says About the Continuum of Teacher Learning”
http://ascd.typepad.com/blog/2009/02/in-the-february-issue-of-educational-leadership-tracy-huebner-writes-about.html
Absolutely agree, Deb, which is why it’s difficult to shift the model of professional development without decision makers understanding those larger shifts.
Thanks for the comment, Steve. When you read Sir Ken, you realize he’s advocating for something that looks very little like the current model. Transformation is just that.
I think that is a process, Shaun. You have to plan to develop mentors, people who can provide guidance and support on and offline. So, at your school, the three of you might buddy up with three others for six months, then buddy up with six others, then 12 others, then 24. In a not so long period of time, that change will happen. But it has to be planned, I think. It’s not going to occur simply by waiting for people to figure it out on their own.
Great post, Will, and as I indicated yesterday, I started a reply that was going nowhere. I had a comment yesterday that help me focus my thoughts so I’m going to take another run at it. I actually blogged about that this morning. http://dougpete.wordpress.com/2009/03/01/expbound/
I had mentioned to a colleague that I was going to attend your session. The comment came back that the person had heard you before so why go again? I was reminded of the Yogi Berra quote – “You can hear a lot just by listening.” I’ve been in your sessions a number of times and constantly hear new ideas and get new inspiration.
Why? – The sessions aren’t about “Teacher Training”. They’re about providing insights and inspiration to change the way that we need to fundamentally change our perception of what it takes to grow and learn as a professional. With these skills, I am able to customize what it is that I need to do and I’ve build a network of like minded folks who help me along the way.
Hi Will,
If you haven’t seen Clayton Christensen’s talk on WGBH, I recommend a look. He makes a convincing argument that no amount of change coming from within an older and successful model of business can adapt rapidly enough to compete with a truly disruptive innovation.
Case in point, DEC, Data General, RCA … all successful giants in their day are now extinct.
He predicts that the current system has about 10 years before 50% of learning goes online.
Have a look. I’d love to hear how his ideas might change this discussion.
Greg
Personalizing education is a wonderful concept. It is going to take a lot of effort on the teacher’s part to get to know the students’ best learning approach and to figure out how to incorporate them in the classroom. When it comes to using and incorporating technology in the classroom, PD seems the best way to go but it can’t be just a one time event. I am currently in the process of getting educated in the area of technology and how to use it effectively in the classroom. For now, I am just beginning and having a mentor to guide me along would be wonderful, but not practical. But it is practical for educators to be trained on current technology devices and how to effectively use them. This in-turn would provide a means of keeping students actively engaged and wanting to learn while at the same time providing quality learning time. Collaboration and technology seem to be the way students tend to want to engage in learning. Being the case, educators have to accommodate to the students’ needs and not expect the student to accommodate to them.
Imagine if teachers were given something similar to Google’s 20% Time projects. What would teachers be able to come up with for themselves and their students if they had that much paid time for pursuing their educational/instructional passion?
At a minimum, let teachers make all of the decisions about 20% of their own PD.
nothing could be truer than this statement
The key to this transformation is not to standardize education but to personalize it, to build achievement on discovering the individual talents of the each child, to put students in an environment where they want to learn and where they can naturally discover their true passions (238). The curriculum should be personalized. Learning happens in the minds and souls of individuals–not in the databases of multiple-choice tests (248).
when i was a student i always felt that most teachers do not care about the connection you are making. it’s a shame and when i did get a teacher that wanted to utilize my traits for my character development as well as my school development it lead to me doing better.
Individualized education is clearly a technique that is meaningful to the ones involved, and therefore is one of the most effective tools for teaching. However, the reality is that teachers do not have the flexibility to work one on one with every student completing their own individualized assignments in all counties and curriculums. For example, in my district, formative and summative assessments for each unit are provided as well as specific dates that all of the aforementioned assessments need to be completed by. It is therefore my task to create lessons that will reach as many individuals as possible as often as possible. Additionally, I find that as a teacher I am able to use my passion for a topic to help the students to see the purpose and excitement in the topic. Teaching middle school, many students do not really know what their passion is or what they might want to pursue in their lives. At times, expressing my passion has passed on the fervor and created a passion for some of my students.
In reference to technology, I am currently pursuing a personal study in the integration of technology through a higher learning program. Technology is one facet to help teachers connect with their students. While I might have personal familiarity with new “web 2.0” technologies in my personal life, such as blogs, wikis and podcasts, I am still learning ways to implement them into my classroom. I find with technology, it is most important for teachers to be unafraid to play and explore. Fear of messing up or breaking the technology is what inhibits most educators from using new technology. While a mentor to help with technology would be ideal, it often would not be necessary with a bit of confidence and investigation.
The one complaint that I have encountered so far with the integration of technology in the classroom is having the time available to work with the students on the new technologies and introducing the procedures. It is important to instruct students on how to use the technology properly and safely, and with my severe lack of free time, I struggle to complete this successfully. I know I would only have to introduce the technology once, but the time it takes for instruction is important for our students, but is restricted by my curriculum’s pace and requirements.
Rebecca,
Time always seems to be an issue. While we as educators want to meet the personal needs and learning strategies of students, meeting the curriculum guidelines for standardized testing tends to get in the way. As John mentioned, we need to personalize learning, but where is the time? It is critical that as we incorporate technology in the classroom, we instruct the students properly and stress and reiterate the importance of safety. But first, teachers need to take the time to learn correct procedures and operations before they try to jump in feet first into an unknown or unfamiliar area.
Rebekah,
As you stated in your initial post it is time for teachers to be educated on technology. PD is clearly the only way this can take place, but how can it work successfully? Most teachers have been part of a PD training that was a waste of their time. At my school we have small group technology tranings that have been very effective. One-on-one mentoring, while great, would be impossible to implement. The small group trainings that I have been a part of at my school has more effectively met my needs with the technology than the larger PD trainings. Additionally, interspersed in the trainings, my school has provided work sessions where the trainer is avaialble to answer questions and oversee work. This helps for teachers to develop their skill with support. This has turned into a small group mentoring situation where my small group is also avaialble to assist me on a daily basis as well.
Rebecca,
I too have taken part in many PD classes that have been a waste of time. I love the idea of small group trainings, but where I teach, we don’t have enough personnel knowledgeable in this area at this time. One thought I have that would make PD more efficient in this area is to have a training once a month. My personal children go to school in a different county in which I teach, and they have a early release day the first Thursday of each month. This would be a great time to introduce a new method and give teachers a month to practice and implement the new technique. As we get more faculty trained in this area, I hope we too can implement small group training and mentoring.
There seem to be two threads to this conversation 1) how to best engage students and 2) how to best engage teachers. And, the answer seems to be the same-with direct one-on-one interpersonal interactions and guidance. This is an area that I am always trying to improve in my own teaching practices. And this conversation only solidifies for me its importance. Although time is always an issue, building meaningful connections with other people doesn’t have to take a long time. It’s the little things you do to show interest in the person. When you show that kind of interest more times than not the student reciprocates with giving your subject a more open-minded approach.
The same goes with helping colleagues open up to discovering the many opportunities that web 2.0 has to offer to the learning experience. Reaching out to them where they are, hearing their concerns, and giving them practical help where they need it will make their transition even smoother and hopefully “light the fire” within them which could spread to others. Is this too optimistic? I hope not. I can’t see our institutions changing significantly any other way.
As far as taking time to learn the safe and efficient way to use tech, I’m not sure that’s necessary or if that’s even a luxury that we have at this point. The time to use tech in the classroom is now. The only thing you have to “learn” about using it well is to use it purposefully, not as a gadget or for entertainment value. How do you learn this? Seek out a mentor for yourself, in person or online. The resources for learning are all around you.
We know that students learn best when they are engaged. Engage them and they will be ready for the standardized tests. Engage them by using the resources available to you and to them to light their fire for learning.
If reference to passion-based learning, it of course does not only apply to students. One school in my district has implemented what is informally referred to as “Google Wednesdays.” This relates to Google’s practice of giving their employees around 20% of experimental/exploration/personal passion time in which they pursue projects of their own accord. In this school, teachers teach what they want to teach (imagine that!) in ways that they are passionate about during Wednesday instructional hours.
For example, one teacher created a digital clay-mation project to help her students learn about the rock cycle. This approach was not in the curriculum, yet it has proven to be very effective. And because this teacher was not an expert on digital tools for such work, she sought out the school’s technology integration specialist to grow and learn professionally.
In sum, the teacher used her passion both to learn and to teach, as well as to offer her students an innovative learning experience where their own creativity could shine. All of this was made possible by the principal’s decision to loosen the reigns of division curriculum expectations and to trust her teachers to do the right thing.
As far as taking time to learn the safe and efficient way to use tech, I’m not sure that’s necessary or if that’s even a luxury that we have at this point. The time to use tech in the classroom is now. The only thing you have to “learn” about using it well is to use it purposefully, not as a gadget or for entertainment value. How do you learn this? Seek out a mentor for yourself, in person or online. The resources for learning are all around you.
We know that students learn best when they are engaged. Engage them and they will be ready for the standardized tests. Engage them by using the resources available to you and to them to light their fire for learning.
the teacher used her passion both to learn and to teach, as well as to offer her students an innovative learning experience where their own creativity could shine. All of this was made possible by the principal’s decision to loosen the reigns of division curriculum expectations and to trust her teachers to do the right thing.